The future of lean construction: a brave new world

Lean construction is considered from a human resource management (HRM) perspective. It is contended that the UK construction sector is characterised by an institutionalised regressive approach to HRM. In the face of rapidly declining recruitment rates for built environment courses, the dominant HRM philosophy of utilitarian instrumentalism does little to attract the intelligent and creative young people that the industry so badly needs. Given this broader context, there is a danger that an uncritical acceptance of lean construction will exacerbate the industry's reputation for unrewarding jobs. Construction academics have strangely ignored the extensive literature that equates lean production to a HRM regime of control, exploitation and surveillance. The emphasis of lean thinking on eliminating waste and improving efficiency makes it easy to absorb into the best practice agenda because it conforms to the existing dominant way of thinking. 'Best practice' is seemingly judged by the extent to which it serves the interests of the industry's technocratic elite. Hence it acts as a conservative force in favour of maintaining the status quo. In this respect, lean construction is the latest manifestation of a long established trend. In common with countless other improvement initiatives, the rhetoric is heavy in the machine metaphor whilst exhorting others to be more efficient. If current trends in lean construction are extrapolated into the future the ultimate destination may be uncomfortably close to Aldous Huxley's apocalyptic vision of a Brave New World. In the face of these trends, the lean construction research community pleads neutrality whilst confining its attention to the rational high ground. The future of lean construction is not yet predetermined. Many choices remain to be made. The challenge for the research community is to improve practice whilst avoiding the dehumanising tendencies of high utilitarianism.

The DYMECS project: a statistical approach for the evaluation of convective storms in high-resolution NWP models

A new frontier in weather forecasting is emerging by operational forecast models now being run at convection-permitting resolutions at many national weather services. However, this is not a panacea; significant systematic errors remain in the character of convective storms and rainfall distributions. The DYMECS project (Dynamical and Microphysical Evolution of Convective Storms) is taking a fundamentally new approach to evaluate and improve such models: rather than relying on a limited number of cases, which may not be representative, we have gathered a large database of 3D storm structures on 40 convective days using the Chilbolton radar in southern England. We have related these structures to storm life-cycles derived by tracking features in the rainfall from the UK radar network, and compared them statistically to storm structures in the Met Office model, which we ran at horizontal grid length between 1.5 km and 100 m, including simulations with different subgrid mixing length. We also evaluated the scale and intensity of convective updrafts using a new radar technique. We find that the horizontal size of simulated convective storms and the updrafts within them is much too large at 1.5-km resolution, such that the convective mass flux of individual updrafts can be too large by an order of magnitude. The scale of precipitation cores and updrafts decreases steadily with decreasing grid lengths, as does the typical storm lifetime. The 200-m grid-length simulation with standard mixing length performs best over all diagnostics, although a greater mixing length improves the representation of deep convective storms.