The Last Planner System as an Emergent Production Planning and Control Method: The Role of Multiple Representations

The positive outcomes associated with the Last Planner System (LPS) of production control are usually interpreted as stemming from the application of LPS-as-theorized in the seminal publications about this method. However, the use of LPS in real settings is subjected to contextual influences and involvement of actors with varying perspectives of what counts as an effective implementation. This suggests that LPS-as-theorized may not be the only valid and sufficient representation to explain its success. This paper investigates how the different representations of LPS contribute to its effectiveness and adaptation to local conditions. It is based on a case study on the implementation of LPS in a refurbishment project. Four representations are compared: LPS-as-theorized (literature based), LPS-as-prescribed (handbook based), LPS-as-disclosed (interviews based), and LPS-as-done, i.e., what happened in reality, according to different sources of evidence. Findings set the basis for proposing a model that frames LPS-as-done as an emergent phenomenon unique to each construction project. This new perspective contributes to the recognition of the role of informal practices, the development of more accurate assessments of LPS implementation, the analysis of trade-offs when using LPS, and the alignment of expectations on the adoption of LPS.