Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Islamic University – Gaza
Research and Postgraduate
Affairs Faculty of Engineering
Construction Management
غشة- انجبيؼت االساليت
شئى انبحث انؼه وانذراسبث انؼهب
كهت انهذست
ادارة انشزوػبث انهذست
The Applicability of Increasing Transparency
Principle within Lean Construction in Gaza Strip
دراست يذي لببهت تطبك يبذأ سبدة انشفبفت ض االشبء انز
ف لطبع غشة
Anas M. Abu Daqqa
Supervised by:
Dr. Khaled Al-Hallaq
Assistant Professor in Construction Management
A thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement for
Degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering - Construction Management
November /2017
إقــــــــــــــرار
أنا الموقع أدناه مقدم الرسالة التي تحمل العنوان:
دراسة مدى قابلية تطبيق مبدأ زيادة الشفافية ضمن االنشاء المرن في قطاع غزة
The Applicability of Increasing Transparency Principle within Lean Construction in Gaza Strip
أقر بأن ما اشتممت عميو ىذه الرسالة إنما ىو نتاج جيدي الخاص، باستثناء ما تمت اإلشارة إليو منيا لم يقدم من قبل اآلخرين لنيل درجة أو لقب حيثما ورد، وأن ىذه الرسالة ككل أو أي جزء
عممي أو بحثي لدى أي مؤسسة تعميمية أو بحثية أخرى. وأن حقوق النشر محفوظة لمجامعة غزة. –اإلسالمية
Declaration
I hereby certify that this submission is the result of my own work, except
where otherwise acknowledged, and that this thesis (or any part of it) has
not been submitted for a higher degree or quantification to any other
university or institution. All copyrights are reserves to IUG.
:Anas M. Abu Daqqa Student's name اسم الطالب:
:Signature التوقيع:
:Date 2017 / 11 / 02 التاريخ:
I
Abstract
Wastes have been recognized as a major problem in construction industry in Gaza
Strip, and the level of material waste is higher than the nominal figures due to
managerial problems (Al-Maghony, 2006). Despite that, Lean Construction is still
not applied in construction projects and limited researches have studied this crucial
management approach in Gaza Strip (GS). Therefore, the basic research aim was to
enhance transparency of construction projects throughout lean construction approach,
which has been achieved through evaluating the current status of transparency
practices, identifying benefits, challenges and success factors of transparency
principle, and investigating the proper Lean tools those enhance transparency in GS.
Intensive literature review was done and a questionnaire was designed and then
(SPSS) was used to analyze results obtained from 130 received questionnaires out of
170 distributed copies to the target group, professional engineer work in contracting
companies in GS, with a response rate = 76.5%. Results of data analysis obtained
from the conducted survey showed that factors of transparency principle and LC
tools are limitedly applied in construction projects in GS and 5-S tool is the most
applied one. Further, there is a relationship between the importance and the
application of transparency factors indicating that contracting companies in GS have
a concern to apply what they believe in its importance for projects management; also
they approved the benefits of increasing transparency in construction projects and its
reciprocal relationship with lean construction. The obtained results of success factors
and challenges indicated that projects management in GS should be supported by
managers with higher knowledge and better understand of transparency principle,
techniques and importance. Consequently, it was concluded that building capacities
of project managers is a crucial issue to allow increasing transparency in construction
projects in GS. Also, it was concluded that construction projects in GS need to be
enhanced regarding the communication between different parties, and give attention
to the tidiness and orderings of work place through applying LC tools; Huddle
Meeting, 5-S, and Increased Visualization.
II
يهخـص انذراست
خالي ظ االشبء اش، ف لطبع غضحاشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ رؼض٠ض اشفبف١خ ف جؾش األعبع اغشع
طجبع اؼب بسعبدرم١١ اػغ اؾب اال (1: األذاف ازب١خ رؾم١ك خاليزا اغشعلذ ر رؾم١ك
رؾذ٠ذ ( 3. رؾذ٠ذ افائذ ازؾذ٠بد ػا غبػ جذأ اشفبف١خ( 2. ف لطبع غضحاالشبءاداشفبف١خ ف لطبع
. اشفبف١خ ف لطبع غضحزؼض٠ض جذأ ابعجخ أداد االشبء اش
ألثؾبس اغبثمخ ازؼمخ ثغبي اذساعخ، ىضفخ ث١بد، دساعخ شاعؼخ ألدر ػ فك اعزجبخ رظ١ ص
ذع١ ٠ؼ ف ششوبد مبالد، ف ؽ١ اعزؼبد اعزجبخ 170 ػذد رص٠غ س . اى ام١بط ظ
ر دل١مخ؛ ل١خ زبئظ اؾظي ػ أع ، %76.5 ثغذ اعزغبثخ ثغجخ باجبؽضبئخ صالص غخخ
..اإلؽظبئ ازؾ١ ثشبظ ثبعزخذا اى ازؾ١ ثطشق اؾظخ ج١ببد ارؾ١
ف االشبء ف شبس٠غ ؾذد رطجك ثشى اشفبف١خ أداد االشبء اشأظشد زبئظ رؾ١ اج١ببرأ ػا
غ ره فا ع١غ ػا أداد اشفبف١خ ال رضاي ثؾبعخ ئ . رطج١مبا األوضش S-5، األداح لطبع غضح
ب ٠ش١شبن ػاللخ ث١ أ١خ رطج١ك ػا اشفبف١خ وب أ . ص٠بدح رؼض٠ض ف شبس٠غ اجبء ف لطبع غضح
أثذ ئداسح اشبس٠غ؛ وب ف ثأ١زرطج١ك ب ٠ؼزمذ ازب ةف لطبع غضح ذ٠ب ششوبد امبالد ئ أ
اغ١ج ػ االعزج١ب اافمخ ػ فائذ ص٠بدح اشفبف١خ ف شبس٠غ اجبء حػاللزب ازىب١خ غ ظ االشبء
.اش
أشبسد ازبئظ از ر اؾظي ػ١ب ػا اغبػ ازؾذ٠بد ئ أ ئداسح اشبس٠غ ف لطبع غضح ٠غت
ثبء ػ ره، اعززظ. ، أ١ز رطج١مبر ف أفؼ جذأ اشفبف١خ٠ دػب ثبداسح راد ؼشفخ ػب١خأ
. أ ثبء لذساد ذ٠ش اشبس٠غ غأخ ؽبعخ رغؼ ثض٠بدح اشفبف١خ ف شبس٠غ اجبء ف لطبع غضحاجبؽش
ث١ خزف ثبالرظبي ازاط ف لطبع غضح رؾزبط ئ رؼض٠ض ف١ب ٠زؼك االشبءاعززظ أ٠ؼب أ شبس٠غ
Huddle: األداد ىب اؼ خالي رطج١ك رظ١فاألؽشاف، ئ٠الء ض٠ذ االزب زشر١ت
Meeting, 5-S, and Increased Visualization.
III
Dedication
This research is dedicated to all people who supported and encouraged me...
To my Father Prof. Mousa Abu daqqa for his endless support, and encouragement
To my Mother Basma Baraka for her constant inspiration and endless love
To my Wife Eng. Fidaa Fayad who makes my life special and have never left my
side.. To my Daughter Basma who brightens my life
To my brothers and sisters
Last but not least, to my friend and my Sheikh, The martyr Abdel Hamid Al
Moghrabi
To all people who inspire my life.
Eng. Anas Abu Daqqa
IV
Acknowledgement
These acknowledgements presented to sincerely thank people who supported,
guided, and encouraged me along the way to complete this research. Without their
assistance, encouragement, suggestions and commitment, this dissertation would not
have been a reality.
From the depth of my heart I would like to express sincere gratitude and appreciation
to my supervisor Dr. Khaled Al-Hallaq for his continued support, generous academic
advice, discussions, suggestions, and his incredible assistance, I would like to pass
him special thanks.
Also, I would like to thank all experts especially Dr. Samir Safi and Mr. Ali Sonallah
for their contribution at statistical analysis, and valuable opinions in the
questionnaire design.
Eng. Anas Abu Daqqa
V
Table of Content
Abstract ...................................................................................................................I
انذراست يهخـص ............................................................................................................ II
Dedication .............................................................................................................III
Acknowledgement ................................................................................................ IV
Table of Content .................................................................................................... V
List of Abbreviations ......................................................................................... VIII
List of Tables ........................................................................................................ IX
List of Figures ....................................................................................................... XI
Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem Statement .......................................................................................... 2
1.3 Research Aim and Objectives ......................................................................... 2
1.4 Research Questions ......................................................................................... 3
1.5 Research Hypotheses ...................................................................................... 4
1.6 Research Scope ............................................................................................... 5
1.7 Research Structure .......................................................................................... 5
Chapter 2: Literature Review ................................................................................ 7
2.1 Wastes ............................................................................................................ 7
2.1.1 Wastes in Construction Industry ............................................................... 8
2.1.2 Wastes in Gaza Strip .............................................................................. 10
2.2 Lean Philosophy ........................................................................................... 11
2.2.1 Evolution of Lean Concept ..................................................................... 11
2.2.2 Lean Definition ...................................................................................... 12
2.2.3 Lean Principles ...................................................................................... 13
2.2.4 Controversy on Lean Approaches........................................................... 14
VI
2.2.5 Implementation of Lean Concept ........................................................... 15
2.3 Lean Construction......................................................................................... 18
2.3.1 Adopt Lean to Construction Industry...................................................... 18
2.3.2 Lean Construction Definition ................................................................. 19
2.3.3 Lean Construction Principles ................................................................. 20
2.3.4 Implementation of Lean Construction .................................................... 21
2.3.5 Lean Construction Techniques ............................................................... 22
2.4 The principle of Transparency ...................................................................... 24
2.4.1 Definition of Transparency .................................................................... 24
2.4.2 Transparency within Lean Construction ................................................. 26
2.4.3 Visual Management Approach ............................................................... 27
2.4.4 Benefits of Increasing Process Transparency .......................................... 32
2.4.5 Challenges of Increasing Process Transparency...................................... 34
2.4.6 Success Factors to Increase Process Transparency .................................. 34
Summary ........................................................................................................ 36
Chapter 3: Methodology ...................................................................................... 37
3.1 Research Design ........................................................................................... 37
3.2 Research Period ............................................................................................ 39
3.3 Research Location ........................................................................................ 39
3.4 Research Population ..................................................................................... 39
3.4.1 Sample Elements.................................................................................... 40
3.4.2 Sample Size ........................................................................................... 40
3.4.3 Sampling Procedure ............................................................................... 40
3.5 Questionnaire Design .................................................................................... 41
3.6 Questionnaire References ............................................................................. 43
3.7 Questionnaire Content Validity ..................................................................... 46
3.8 Pilot Study .................................................................................................... 47
3.8.1 Questionnaire Validity ........................................................................... 48
VII
3.8.2 Questionnaire Reliability ........................................................................ 54
3.8.3 Questionnaire Normality ........................................................................ 55
3.9 Statistical Analysis Tools .............................................................................. 56
Summary ............................................................................................................ 56
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results ................................................................. 58
4.1 Data Analysis of Questionnaire Sections ....................................................... 58
4.1.1 Organizational Background of Respondent ............................................ 58
4.1.2 Transparency Factors ............................................................................. 60
4.1.3 Lean Construction Tools ........................................................................ 63
4.1.4 Transparency Effect on LC Principles .................................................... 70
4.1.5 Benefits of Transparency ....................................................................... 71
4.1.6 Success Factors of Transparency ............................................................ 72
4.1.7 Challenges of Transparency ................................................................... 73
4.2 Test of Research Hypothesis..................................................................... 75
Summary ............................................................................................................ 86
Chapter 5: Conclusion.......................................................................................... 87
5.1 Outcomes Related to Objective One.............................................................. 87
5.2 Outcomes Related to Objective Two ............................................................. 88
5.3 Outcomes Related to Objective Three ........................................................... 90
5.3 Research contribution to previous studies ..................................................... 90
5.4 Research value .............................................................................................. 91
References ............................................................................................................. 93
Appendix ............................................................................................................... 99
VIII
List of Abbreviations
Abbreviation The Interpretation Of Abbreviation
GS Gaza Strip
LC Lean Construction
VM Visual Management
TPS Toyota Production System
JIT Just In Time
TQC Total Quality Control
Five S's 5S
CPM Critical Path Models
IGLC International Group for Lean Construction
LCI Lean Construction Institute
IX
List of Tables
Table (2.1): T.F.V theory of production…………………………………………….21
Table (2.2): Tools of Lean Construction…………………………………………….24
Table (2.3): Functions of Visual Management……………………………………...29
Table (3.1): Rating Scale for data measurement…………………………………….56
Table (3.2): References of LC tools in the questionnaire…………………………...43
Table (3.3): References of Benefits in the questionnaire……………………………45
Table (3.4): References of Success Factors in the questionnaire……………………45
Table (3.5): References of Challenges in the questionnaire…………...……………46
Table (3.6): Notes gathered from the consultants………………………………...…47
Table (3.7): Correlation coefficient of each item of "Transparency Factors" and the
total of this section…………………………………………………………………..48
Table (3.8): Correlation coefficient of "Lean Construction Tools" and total……….49
Table (3.9): Correlation coefficient of "LC Principles" and total…………..……….51
Table (3.10): Correlation coefficient of each item of The Benefits…………….…...51
Table (3.11): Correlation coefficient of each item of Success Factors..….…..….….52
Table (3.12): Correlation coefficient of each item of The Challenges…………..….53
Table (3.13): Correlation coefficient of each field and the whole questionnaire…...54
Table (3.14): Cronbach's Alpha for each field of the questionnaire………………...55
Table (3.15): Kolmogorov-Smirnov test………………………………………….…56
Table (4.1): Classification of Contracting Company………………………………..58
Table (4.2): Organizational background of respondents…………………….............59
Table (4.3): Means and Test values for “Transparency Factors- Degree of
application”………………………………………………………………………….61
Table (4.4): Means and Test values for “Transparency Factors - Degree of
importance”………………………………………………………………………….62
Table (4.5): Means and Test values for “Lean Construction Tools- Degree of
application”………………………………………………………………………….64
X
Table (4.6): Means and Test values for “Lean Construction Tools - Degree of
Importance”………………………………………………………………………….68
Table (4.7): Means and Test values “Effect of Transparency on LC Principles”…...71
Table (4.8): Means and Test values for “Benefits of Transparency”……………….72
Table (4.9): Means and Test values for “Success Factors of Transparency”……….73
Table (4.10): Means and Test values for “Challenges of Transparency”…………...74
Table (4.11): ANOVA test of fields and their p-values for "Job title"…..………….76
Table (4.12): ANOVA test of fields and their p-values for years of experience……77
Table (4.13): ANOVA test of fields and their p-values for place of company…..….78
Table (4.14): ANOVA test of fields and p-values years of company experience…..79
Table (4.15): ANOVA test of fields and p-values for number of permanent
employees………………………………………………………………..………….80
Table (4.16): ANOVA test of the fields and their p-values for number of projects
implemented in the last 5 years…………………………………………..………….81
Table (4.17): ANOVA test of the fields and their p-values for annual average value
of projects in the last 5 years………………………………………..……………….83
XI
List of Figures
Figure (1.1): Hypothesis Model………………………………………………..……..5
Figure (2.1): Waste percentages of time in construction………………………...…...8
Figure (2.2): „„4P‟‟ of the lean way…………………………………………………16
Figure (2.3): The model of visual work place………………………………..……...31
Figure (3.1): Flowchart of research methodology……………………………..……39
Figure (4.1): Familiarity of respondents to LC approach…………………………...60
Figure (4.2): Degrees of importance and application of transparency factors………63
Figure (4.3): Degrees of importance and application of "5S tool" factors……….....64
Figure (4.4): Degrees of importance and application of Huddle Meetings………...66
Figure (4.5): Degrees of importance and application for "LC Tools"…………...….70
Figure (4.6): Means of "Challenges of Transparency" due to "Years of
experience"……………………………………………………………….………....76
Figure (4.7): Means of "Lean Construction Tools - Degree of application" due to
"place of company office"………………………………………………………......78
Figure (4.8): Means of "Benefits of Transparency" due to "Annual average value of
projects"……………………………………………………………..………………82
Figure (4.9): Means of "Challenges of Transparency" due to "Annual average value
of projects" …………………………………………………………………….……82
Chapter 1
Introduction
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter presents a general introduction to the research; introduces
background about the construction industry in Gaza Strip, and Lean Construction
approach. It also provides problem statement, research objectives, questions and
hypothesis, research limitations and research structure.
1.1 Background
Construction industry plays major role in world‟s business. The environment of
construction tends to complexity rapidly and continuously due to increasing users'
requirements, environmental awareness, limited resources, and high competition in
construction business marketplace (Enshassi et al., 2009).
In Gaza Strip (GS), the construction sector has been affected by Israeli aggressions
and blockade for years, which made it susceptible to the political situation and trends
of international donations. Besides that, projects in Gaza Strip are characterized by:
low productivity, errors, poor co-ordination, bad reputation, high accident rates,
insufficient quality and overruns in cost and schedule (Yahia, 2004).
However, the country is moving towards reconstruction and rehabilitation processes
which will reactivate the construction sector in Gaza Strip, so that increase the need
for better planning of construction projects and better management of limited
building resources. So that, the construction industry in Gaza Strip needs great
efforts to apply new culture of management instead of traditional management
thinking in order to prevent or mitigate wastes in construction projects.
Lean Construction (LC) is a new culture of projects management in construction
industry that means eliminating all wastes and non-added value activities of the
construction project through all phases in order to get a profitable delivery. Reducing
wastes in process, time and costs, and maximizing the value added are considered a
crucial strategy to be implemented in construction projects. This practice is
applicable throughout lean construction principles. LC approach raised on the
deficiencies of traditional project management techniques to keep up with lack of
2
resources, the huge growth, and increasing demands in the construction industry
(Russell et al., 2014).
Increasing process transparency is one of lean thinking criteria adapted by Koskela
(1992) which means to disclose information which is understandable, relevant,
accessible and useful to all project' stakeholders. Despite the importance of
transparency as a remarkable factor affecting the construction sector, there are
limited researches and evidences available to explain it.
Lean construction generally has not been implemented in Gaza Strip construction
industry yet, also the lean principles are unfamiliar for both contractors and
consultant engineers (Enshassi & Abu Zaiter, 2014).
1.2 Problem Statement
Wastes have been recognized as a major problem in construction industry in Gaza
Strip, and the level of material waste is higher than the nominal figures due to
managerial problems (Al-Maghony, 2006). He revealed that the top main cause of
both time and material wastes in Gaza Strip is reworks that do not comply with
drawings and specifications, which are highly related to poor communication
between project's parties; engineers, contractor and workers, which is also one of the
direct causes to time waste in GS's construction industry.
Despite all of that, innovative management approaches such as LC is still not applied
in GS's construction projects and limited researches have been done to investigate the
applicability of this crucial management approach in GS.
Therefore, transparency concept of lean construction is spotlighted in this research to
add valuable contribution to construction industry in GS and to enhance the sector's
performance. This research is the milestone for applying transparency concept and to
gives attention to lean construction approach in Gaza Strip.
1.3 Research Aim and Objectives
The basic research aimed to enhance transparency of construction projects in Gaza
Strip throughout lean construction approach.
3
The aim of this research can be achieved through the following objectives:
1. To evaluate the current status and general perceptions of transparency
practices in construction industry of Gaza Strip.
2. To identify benefits, challenges and success factors supporting the
implementation of transparency principle.
3. To investigate the proper Lean tools/techniques those enhance transparency
in Gaza Strip.
1.4 Research Questions
Question (1): What is the level of knowledge of lean construction approach in
contracting firms in GS?
Question (2): What is the current status of transparency practices in construction
industry?
Question (3): Is there a significant relationship between the profile of contracting
company and degree of transparency practicing?
Question (4): What is the ranking of transparency tools according to their degree of
importance?
Question (5): Which are the most suitable and applicable LC techniques/tools to
improve transparency in construction firms in Gaza Strip?
Question (6): What are success factors, benefits, and challenges from the point view
of construction firms in Gaza Strip in order to apply transparency concept?
Question (7): What is the ranking of success factors according to their degree of
importance?
Question (8): Are their differences among respondents toward success factors,
benefits, and challenges of transparency concept due to the place of resident,
organization type, projects size and years of experience.
4
1.5 Research Hypotheses
Research questions were answered by testing the following hypothesis through a
structured questionnaire, the hypothesis model is shown in Figure (1.1).
Hypothesis (1): There are statistically significant differences attributed to the profile
of contracting company at α≤ 0.05 between the averages of their views on the
subject of the application of increasing transparency concept within LC in Gaza
Strip.
Hypothesis (2): There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05
between the existing status of applying transparency factors and existing status of
applying lean construction tools supporting transparency principle in GS.
Hypothesis (3): There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05
between importance of transparency factors and importance of lean construction
tools supporting transparency principle.
Hypothesis (4): There is statistically significant positive at α ≤ 0.05 between
importance of increasing transparency factors and benefits of increasing transparency
principle.
Hypothesis (5): There is statistically significant at α ≤ 0.05 between importance of
lean construction tools supporting transparency principle and benefits of increasing
transparency principle.
Hypothesis (6): There is statistically significant at α ≤ 0.05 between importance of
lean construction tools supporting transparency principle and the effect of
transparency on lean construction principles.
Hypothesis (7): There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05
between benefits of increasing transparency principle and the effect of transparency
on the lean construction principles.
5
Figure (1.1): Hypothesis Model
1.6 Research Scope
The research targeted contracting companies in Gaza Strip.
The research targeted the construction experts who work in contracting
companies.
The research based on quantitative analysis using the results of questionnaire.
1.7 Research Structure
The thesis consists of five chapters as follows:
Chapter (1) Introduction: This chapter contains a general introduction to the
subject of the thesis. It describes research background, statement of the problem,
research aim and objectives, research questions, hypothesis, scope and research
structure.
Chapter (2) Literature review: This chapter introduces a general view on wastes
and its types in construction industry, the evolution of lean concept, developing of
lean construction and its techniques, and the applicability of transparency; benefits,
challenges, and success factors, also the previous studies in this field.
6
Chapter (3) Methodology: This chapter describes the detailed adopted methodology
of research including the primary research framework for the study, details of
research period, location, population, and sample size. The questionnaire design was
detailed including the modifications and reviews done through experts' consultation.
Chapter (4) Data Discussion and Results: This chapter presents the analysis of
obtained data and discusses them in details. It includes quantitative analysis for each
section in the questionnaire, as well as the summary framework of the results.
Chapter (5) Conclusions: This chapter summarizes outcomes of the research under
each objective through the findings of the analyzed collected questionnaires, and
provides conclusions of the research.
References
Appendixes
Chapter 2
Literature Review
7
Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter presents a literature review of relevant areas under investigation in
this research work. The chapter begins with a brief view about construction wastes.
Then, literature of Lean concept, history, definition, and approaches were reviewed.
Afterward, visual management is presented as a lean approach that plays a significant
role in transparency of construction projects. An important focus of the literature
review is to understand the principle of transparency, also to integrate the principle
with lean construction, and why it is important for improving construction
transparency specifically in Gaza Strip as well as previous research work in this
context.
2.1 Wastes
The common sense understanding of waste is anything has no value. According to
the new production philosophy (LC), waste should be understood as any inefficiency
that results in the use of equipment, materials, labor, or capital in larger quantities
than those considered as necessary in the production of a building. Waste includes
both the incidence of material losses and the execution of unnecessary work, which
generates additional costs but do not add value to the product( Koskela, 1992).
Another simple way to define waste is "that which can be eliminated without
reducing customer value". It can be activities, resources, rules, etc (Polat & Ballard,
2004).Similarly, Alarcon (1997) defined waste as "Anything different from the
absolute minimum amount of resources of materials, equipment and manpower,
necessary to add value to the product". More precisely, waste is the expenditure of
effort or the using-up of resources without producing value (Howell et al., 2004).
Hence, in general, any losses generate direct or indirect costs but do not add value to
the product can be called „„waste‟‟, so that waste is measured in terms of costs; other
types of waste are related to the efficiency of the processes, equipment or personnel
are more difficult to be measured because the optimal efficiency is not always known
(Alarcón, 1997).
8
Accordingly, based on the above definition, wastes are also called Non value adding
activities, so Non-value adding activities are those activities; time, resource, or space
consuming, but do not add value to the product. In contrast, value adding activities
are those activities which convert materials and/or information to produce the end
product (Alarcón, 1997).
2.1.1 Wastes in Construction Industry
Not only does waste have an impact on the efficiency of the construction industry
but also on the overall state of the economy of the country (Polat & Ballard,
2004).Furthermore, construction material waste has proved to have a negative impact
on the national economy and on the environment(Garas, Anis, & El Gammal, 2001).
Several studies from various countries have emphasized that wastes in construction
industry represent relatively large percentage of production cost. Faniran and Caban
(1998) informed that construction industry is a major generator of waste. As well as
Ekanyake and Ofori (2000) who reported that construction sector is generating
unacceptable levels of material waste. Construction activity generates an enormous
amount of waste (Teo & Loosemore, 2001).According to Lean Construction
Institute, the time waste in construction projects is 57 per cent; the following Figure
(2.1)shows the percentages of time waste in manufacturing and construction (Aziz &
Hafez, 2013).
Figure (2.1): Waste percentages of time (Aziz & Hafez, 2013)
9
A case study of construction site in Sweden revealed through interviews, time study,
and observations that only 43% of work is value adding and gives value to the
customer, and the value-added work was approximately 44% of the workers' time.
This has financial implications not only on each individual project but also on the
industry as a whole and the entire national economy (Arleroth & Kristensson, 2011).
Taiichi Ohno, the mastermind of the Toyota Production System (Lean Production),
formed the seven wastes model in his book. These seven wastes were devised in the
context of production, and listed in this order; overproduction, time on hand,
transportation, processing itself, stock on hand, movement, and making defective
products (Ohno, 1988).
Koskela et al., (2013) argued that, ohno's list of wastes should be conceptually
compatible with construction, and empirically justified (i.e. focusing on the most
significant wastes). Such a list would be instrumental in creating awareness on the
major waste types occurring in construction, as well as mobilizing action towards
stemming, reducing and eliminating them. Also, many researchers have added
various types of waste to Ohno's model. These types of wastes were found to be
useful addition in practice; however, the wastes model is usually mentioned in its
origin seven types. At the 7th conference of IGLC in 1990, (Lee, Diekmann, Songer,
& Brown, 1999) proposed the following construction wastes:
1. Defects
2. Over-production
3. Unnecessary Processing
4. Unnecessary People Moves
5. Unnecessary Movement of Material
6. Waiting
7. Inventories
8. Designing Something that Does Not Meet the Client‟s Needs
10
Ohno (1988) argued that the elimination of seven wastes will reduce the cost of
production, thus increasing profit.
2.1.2 Wastes in Gaza Strip
Waste has been recognized as a major problem in the construction industry in
Gaza Strip, and the level of material waste is higher than the nominal figures due to
managerial problems(Al-Moghany, 2006).
Al-Moghany identified the main waste causes in Gaza Strip construction industry,
and determined the level of waste within the sector through eighty questionnaires
received from construction firms operating in Gaza Strip. It was reported that the
main causes of material waste are: reworks that don't comply with drawings and
specifications, rework due to workers‟ mistakes, conversion waste from cutting
uneconomical shapes, ordering of materials that do not fulfill project requirements
defined on design documents, and waiting for replacement, inappropriate storage
leading to damage or deterioration, use of incorrect materials that require
replacement, poor workmanship, burglary, theft and vandalism and lack of workers
or tradesmen or subcontractors‟ skill.
While the main causes of time waste are: reworks that don't comply to drawings and
specifications, lack of materials(closure), rework due to workers‟ mistakes, effects of
social and political conditions, owner‟s poor communication with the construction
parties and government authorities, equipment frequent breaking down, slow in
making decisions, ambiguities, mistakes, and inconsistencies in drawings and using
untrained labors.
The above study in Gaza strip revealed that poor communication is one of the direct
causes to time waste in construction industry. The first main cause of both time and
material wastes in Gaza Strip is rework that do not comply with drawings and
specifications, which is highly related to poor communication between project's
parties; engineers, contractor and workers.
The model of the root causes of rework declares that leadership and communications
is one of the five main sources of rework (Fayek et al., 2003). Another study of the
11
root causes of rework recommended firms to improve communication among owner,
designers and constructors to create a guiding coalition, and a shared objective and
mutual trust (McDonald & Leed, 2015).
Furthermore, a survey of 277 Chinese construction industries revealed that project
communication management is one of the main eleven rework factors.
Communication provides a significant means of exchanging information between
project managers and other stakeholders, also important for the contractor to
coordinate effectively with the owner to avoid misunderstandings or conflicts. The
study recommended enhancing project communication efficiency to reduce rework
caused by communication mistakes, and regular meetings should be beneficial for
information sharing and updating to reduce the possibility of rework (Ye et al.,
2014).
2.2 Lean Philosophy
2.2.1 Evolution of Lean Concept
The New Production philosophy or Toyota Production System (TPS) was created
in 1950'sby Engineer Taiichi Ohno in order to enhance productivity of the Japanese
company Toyota. Engineer Ohno, the father of the New Production System,
published his book "Toyota Production System" in 1978 to explain the new system
and his experiences. Afterward the name was changed into “Lean Production” by
Womack, Jones and Roos (1990) in the U.S as the previous name seemed unsuitable.
The core of the new production philosophy is in the observation that there are two
kinds of activities in all systems; conversions and flows. While all activities expend
cost and consume time, only conversion activities add value in the process.
Traditional managerial principles treat all activities as conversion activities though
they are all considered as value-adding activities, therefore flow processes have not
been controlled or improved in an orderly fashion. This led to complex, uncertain
and confused flow processes, expansion of non-value-adding activities, and reduction
of output value (Koskela et al., 2002).
12
Thus, flow activities "wastes or no value added" should be eliminated or reduced to
minimum, whereas conversion activities "value adding activities" should be made
more efficient in the production system, which is the basic idea of lean thinking. The
outstanding success of this new management system in car manufacturing induced
others to adapt "Lean Thinking" at new fields like services, administration, product
development, and construction industry.
Koskela (1992) who leaded the adaption of Lean Thinking principles for
Construction industry, reported that "The conception of the new production
philosophy has evolved through three stages: it has been viewed as a tool (like
kanban or quality circles), as a manufacturing method (like JIT) and as a general
management philosophy (referred to, for example, as world class manufacturing).
Further, the theoretical and conceptual understanding of the new production
philosophy is still incomplete."
However, Lean Thinking is still growing and diffusing today all over the world and
many researchers work on adapting and developing techniques of lean production at
various fields and on different levels of practices.
2.2.2 Lean Definition
The underlying idea of LEAN concept is to minimize process wastes in order to
increase the value of results, however there is no unified definition for this
management approach and there is apparent controversy on the meaning since the
concept is used to refer to a phenomenon on several levels of applications, and it is
not clear where to place the boundaries between related approaches. Koskela and
Vrijhoef (2000) refer this to the newness of the field as it has not reached a degree of
maturity yet.
The idea of Toyota production system, the origin of lean concept, is the elimination
of inventories and other waste through small lot production, reduced set-up times,
semiautonomous machines, co-operation with suppliers, and other techniques (Ohno,
1988). Hence, Lean could be simply defined as a way to design production systems
to minimize waste of materials, time, and effort in order to generate the maximum
possible amount of value ( Koskela et al., 2002)
13
Likewise, Lean Thinking concept is a way to do more and more with less and less;
less human effort, less equipment, less time and less space while coming closer and
closer to provide customers with exactly what they want (Womac & Jones, 1996).
The term “New production philosophy” refers to an evolving set of methodologies,
techniques and tools, the genesis of which was in the Japanese Just in Time (JIT) and
Total Quality Control (TQC) efforts in car manufacturing. Several alternative names
are presently used to refer to this philosophy; lean production, JIT/TQC, world class
manufacturing, time based competition (Koskela, 1992).
The two pillars of the TPS; JIT and Jidoka, are focused on creating transparency in
information so that the process participants have access to the important information
that they need to answer the six fundamental questions in a workplace which are
what, how many, who, when, how and where (Galsworth, 2005). The roof of the TPS
house represents the goals of an organization: best quality, lowest cost, shortest lead-
time (Brady, 2014).
2.2.3 Lean Principles
There are five fundamental principles for lean thinking, which have to be
followed step by step to achieve the goal of Lean, increase the value and minimize
wastes, and to gain the maximum benefit. Koskela et al. (2002)reported that there is
ample evidence that through the following principles, the efficiency of flow
processes can be considerably and rapidly improved.
1. Value: Specify value is the starting point for the application of Lean
Thinking, determining the main characteristics of the product from
customer‟s own definition and needs, and identify the value of activities
which generate value to the end product.
2. The Value Stream: Identify the value stream by elimination of everything,
which does not generate value to the end product. This means, stop the
production when something is going wrong and change it immediately.
Wastes or non-value adding activities should be eliminated or minimized to
the minimum value.
14
3. Flow: Ensure that there is a continuous flow in the process by focusing on the
entire supply chain; reducing variability and irregularity so that material and
information may move in a predictable way within the supply chain. So that
focus has to be on the process and not at the end product. However, the flow
will never get optimal until customer value is specified, and the value stream
is identified.
4. Pull: Use pull in the process instead of push which means produce exactly
what the customer wants at the time the customer needs it. The idea is to
reduce unnecessary production and to use the management tool „„Just In
Time‟‟ that keeps inventory at a minimum.
5. Perfection: Strive constantly for perfection and continuous improvement in
the processes. Deliver a product which lives up to customer‟s needs and
expectations within the agreed time schedule and in a perfect condition
without mistakes and defects. The only way to do so is by having a close
communication with the customer/client as well as managers, and employees.
Simply, perfection principle means work continuously on the first four
principles to get better and better.
(WOMAK, 2003) and (Aziz & Hafez, 2013)
2.2.4 Controversy on Lean Approaches
Originally, lean thinking practices have been developed in the production context;
however, it extended far beyond the production sphere. Lean concept has widened
from tools and method at car manufacturing into management philosophy, and this
evolution involved developing various approaches and techniques to describe a range
of practices within the idea of Lean. Boundaries between these approaches are not
always clear and fairly often there is an overlapping among the main idea underlying
them ( Santos, 1999).
"New concepts emerged and the content of old concepts changed. The same concept
is used to refer to a phenomenon on several levels of abstraction. It is not clear
where to place the boundaries between related concepts."( Koskela, 1992)
15
Koskela referred the majority of approaches on two historically important terms; Just
in Time (JIT) and Total Quality Control (TQC), as many new concepts have surfaced
from JIT and TQC efforts. These approaches have been rapidly elaborated and
extended, starting a life of their own e.g. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM),
Employee involvement, Continuous improvement, Benchmarking, Time based
competition, Concurrent engineering, Visual management, Re-engineering,
Lean production, and world class manufacturing.
Consequently, there is no consensus in the literature on whether Lean Production
ideas can be used to fully describe the new production management paradigm as
many researchers argue that the mass production paradigm has been replaced by a
wide range of solutions, applicable to different contexts, which cannot be brought
down to Lean Production model (Formoso et al., 2002). Furthermore, the field is still
young and in constant evolution. Therefore, it is difficult to present a coherent clear
overview of the ideas and techniques of the new production philosophy.
2.2.5 Implementation of Lean Concept
All over the world, many companies have made effort to adopt lean practices on
various levels. Even though there are numerous examples of successful
implementation of lean philosophy; there are also examples of failures and false
starts due to emotional and conceptual barriers of implementation.
Ashton et al. (1990) argued that many managers derive their perceived knowledge
from their position in the organization and they fear that their actual lack of
knowledge would be exposed. Also, there are conceptual barriers related to the
difficulty of abandoning the conventional management system concerning organizing
and controlling companies( Koskela et al., 2002). So researchers in different fields
have been working hard to formulate models of new philosophy and develop
techniques to help in implementing lean ideas.
Aziz and Hafez (2013) argued that lean implementation begins with leadership
commitment and is sustained with a culture of continuous improvement. When the
principles are applied properly; dramatic improvements in safety, quality, and
efficiency can be achieved at the project level.
16
Implementation of Lean concept may be started with different levels of ambition. It
is a multidimensional change and learning process, which can be launched by
picking up just a few principles and techniques. If these are successfully
institutionalized, adoption of further principles more easily accepted.
A road map for Lean Implementation mentioned the "4P of lean way" in which
fourteen principles of implementation organized in four categories. (Ballard et al.,
2007)
1. Philosophy: the foundation of lean,
2. Process: application of lean tools,
3. People/Partners: developing internal and external people, and
4. Problem Solving: the evolution to lean enterprise through continuous
improvement.
Figure (2.2): „„4P‟‟ of the lean way (Ballard et al., 2007)
17
Koskela (1992) organized four key factors that have to be balanced in implementing
the new philosophy. He reported that lack of balance among these four factors leads
usually to a dead end. The following is a brief about the four key factors of success
implementation as presented in Koskela framework.
1. Management commitment
Leadership is requisite to realize a fundamental shift of philosophy, with the goal
of improving every activity in the organization. Without an active initiative from the
management, change will stop at all natural barriers. Management must understand
and internalize the new philosophy and create an environment which is conducive to
change. As Deming (1986) says, there must be constancy of purpose.
2. Focus on measurable and actionable improvement
The focus should be on actionable and measurable improvement, rather than just
on developing capabilities. Originally in JIT, the overarching goal was to reduce or
eliminate inventories. However, reduction of inventories uncovers all problems.
Cycle time, space and variability also have to be used as drivers. Especially cycle
time provides an excellent, easy to understand driver, which can be improved
continually.
3. Involvement
Employee involvement happens naturally, when organizational hierarchies are
dismantled, and the new organization is formed with self-directed teams, responsible
for control and improvement of their process (Stewart, 1992). On the other hand,
involvement can be stimulated through problem solving teams. However employee
involvement is necessary, but not sufficient for realizing the full potential of
continuous improvement since Shingo (1988) and Imai (1986) stress that
management and staff specialists have a dominant role in targeting and realizing the
improvement.
18
4. Learning
Implementation requires a substantial amount of learning and there are three
stages of learning; firstly, learning should be directed at principles, tools and
techniques of process improvement. The second source of learning is the empirical
learning and using pilot projects for testing new ideas on a limited scale so that
formal reviews of progress and experiences are useful. The last phase of learning is
made up by external information, which can be tapped through benchmarking.
2.3 Lean Construction
2.3.1 Adopt Lean to Construction Industry
After having the "production" characteristics, lean concept has taken some steps
to adapt into construction industry which has sought a new foundation for
construction project management. Traditionally, construction is viewed and modeled
only as a series of conversion activities so called value-adding activities while waste
activities such as waiting, storing inventory, moving material, and inspection are not
generally modeled by Critical Path Models (CPM) or other control tools. Thus,
construction could realize dramatic improvements simply by identifying and
eliminating non value-adding activities. So that actual construction should be viewed
as flow processes consisting of both waste and conversion activities, not just
conversion processes. Concisely, exploratory studies concluded that construction
should adopt the new production philosophy ( Koskela, 1992).
Koskela is the first researcher who studied the applicability of lean concept in
construction in 1992 after the great gains of lean in manufacturing. It was introduced
in his seminal report(Koskela, 1992). He also hosted the first conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC) in Espoo, Finland in 1993
whereas a group of researchers at the conference adopted the name “Lean
Construction” ( Tezel et al., 2008). The International Group for Lean Construction
(IGLC) and Lean Construction Institute (LCI) are the most notable organizations
have been working for the development of the lean thinking in the construction
industry.
19
Nowadays lean construction holds differences in the interpretations of the approach,
and there is a lack of clarity surrounding the concept of lean due to differences in the
environment and processes between lean manufacturing and lean construction,
concurrently their techniques share many common elements. There are two slightly
differing interpretations of Lean Construction; one interpretation views lean
construction as adapting and applying lean production methods and tools to
construction sector. In contrast, the other interpretation views lean production as a
theoretical inspiration for the formulation of a new, theory-based methodology for
construction, called lean construction. The later interpretation has been dominant in
the work of the IGLC(Koskela et al., 2002).
In manufacturing, a considerable number of specific principles and techniques have
been developed for process improvement. To a perhaps considerable extent, they are
also usable in construction. IGLC has led research on the application of lean
techniques and has provided tools for operational planning and control, supply,
visualization, and continuous improvement. Lean construction techniques are gaining
popularity, however many tools and elements are still in an embryonic state (Salem
et al., 2006).
2.3.2 Lean Construction Definition
Koskela et al., (2002) defined Lean Construction “a way to design production
systems to minimize waste of materials, time, and effort in order to generate the
maximum possible amount of value”. (Yahya & Mohamad, 2011)proposed that
“Lean Construction is about managing and improving the construction process to
profitability deliver what the customer needs by eliminating waste in the construction
flow due to construction contract, specification and agreement between client and
other parties by using the right principle, resources and measure to deliver things
right first time”. Macomber and Howell(2003) stated that Lean Construction
management should be understood as a series of conversations between parties
involved and their plans therefore may be seen as promises or commitments made by
the participants to each other, the principles of making and keeping reliable promises
and point at the importance of the person making a promise being also capable of
fulfilling it.
20
However, there is no existing definition is yet satisfactory to describe lean
construction in a rigorously testable method. This is a major obstacle to the
successful deployment of lean construction especially when the industry does not
have a standard benchmark of “what a lean site looks like”( Leong, Ward, &Koskela,
2015).Whilst this is not an excuse for sticking to the old routines, and construction
companies should not wait for a consolidation of construction specific
implementation methodology but take the change steps since notable gains may be
achieved in most organizations even by well-directed initial efforts (Koskela et al.,
2002).
2.3.3 Lean Construction Principles
Koskela (1992), the mastermind of LC, proposed eleven principles or criteria for
practicing the new production philosophy to improve the flow process in various
fields, the following heuristic principles was evolved as an implementation guideline:
1. Reduce the share of non-value-adding activities.
2. Increase output value through systematic consideration of customer
requirements.
3. Reduce variability.
4. Reduce the cycle time.
5. Simplify by minimizing the number of steps, parts and linkages.
6. Increase output flexibility.
7. Increase process transparency.
8. Focus control on the complete process.
9. Build continuous improvement into the process.
10. Balance flow improvement with conversion improvement.
11. Benchmark.
21
Thereafter, Koskela and Vrijhoef (2000)proposed the T.F.V approach for a wider
understanding of construction and to improve its performance in which the new
production management paradigm has been conceptualized in three complementary
ways; Transformation, Flow, and Value generation "T.F.V theory of production".
They argued that the current practice in construction heavily emphasizes the
transformation view and should be expanded to cover the other two views as well.
The principles of T.F.V approach are shown in Table (2.1) from (Tezel et al., 2008).
Table (2.1): T.F.V theory of production
Concept
P R I N C I P L E S
Conversion (Transformation)
Flow Value
Decomposition:
The transformation Process can
be decomposed into sub
processes which are also
transformation processes.
Cost minimization:
The Cost of total process can be
minimized by minimizing the
cost of each sub process.
Buffering:
It is advantageous to insulate the
production process from external
environment through physical
and organizational buffering.
Value:
The value of the output of a
process is associated with the
cost of inputs to that Process.
Reduce the share of non-
value adding activities:
Try to eliminate the reasons of
waste that were defined by
Shingo Womack and Jones.
Reduce the lead time:
Basically, eliminating non-
value activities will cause a
reduction in the lead times.
Reduce variability:
Variability increases the lead
time.
Simplify:
Reduce the number of
components in a product or the
number of steps and linkages
in a material and/or
information flow.
Flexibility: Increase mix
flexibility volume.
Requirements Capture:
Ensure that all customer
requirements, both explicit and
latent, have been captured.
Requirement flow-down:
Ensure that relevant customer
requirements are available in all
phases of production, and that
they are not lost when
progressively transformed into
design solutions, production
plans and products.
Comprehensive requirements:
Ensure that customer
requirements have a bearing on
all deliverables for all roles of
customer.
Source: (Tezel et al., 2008)
2.3.4 Implementation of Lean Construction
LC implementation effort can be divided into three different stages, with
increasing degree of sophistication. Stage one focuses on waste elimination from
technical and operational perspective. The second stage focuses on eliminating
adversarial relationships and enhancing cooperative relationships and teamwork
among supply chain actors. The essential parts are cooperation, long term framework
agreements, workshops, and facilitator. The third stage identified is the most
22
sophisticated, involving a structural change of project governance in which essential
parts are: Information technology, pre-fabrication, last planner, bottom-up activities
and emphasis on individuals, a rethink of design and construction, decreased
competitive forces, long-term contracts, training at all staff levels, and a system
perspective of both processed and product (Green & May, 2005).
Also, Eriksson (2010)studied how to increase the understanding of implementing
various aspects of Lean Thinking in construction projects and grouped these various
aspects of lean into six core elements: waste reduction, Process focus in production
planning and control, End costumer focus, Continuous improvement, Cooperative
relationships, and System Perspectives. Ross and Associates (2004) mentioned LC
elements in different order as follows: LC six core drivers are waste elimination,
process control, flexibility, optimization, people utilization, continuous and efficient
improvement, and value to customer.
In practice, every organization in construction already can initially apply the new
production philosophy. Getting started is often the toughest problem. It might be
wise to adopt a proven, even if narrow, methodology for getting started, also it is
important to select and systematically use appropriate principles, techniques and
tools. There are successful experiences in implementing lean construction have been
achieved. For example, Conte & Gransberg (2001) examined the principles used in
applying lean construction by over 20 construction companies in Brazil as they
succeeded in implementing lean construction principles.
2.3.5 Lean Construction Techniques
In manufacturing, a considerable number of specific principles and techniques
have been developed for process improvement. To a perhaps considerable extent,
they are also usable in construction. Implementation of LC may be started with
different levels of ambition. It is a multidimensional change and learning process,
which can be launched by picking up a few principles and techniques to be
implemented successfully and gain profits so that waiting for a consolidation of
construction specific implementation methodology is no excuse for sticking to the
old routines.
23
Salem et al. (2005) reported that lean construction is composed of these techniques;
Concurrent Engineering, Last planner, Daily huddle meetings, The Kanban System,
Plan Conditions and Work Environment in the Construction Industry, Quality
Management Tools, and Visual Inspection.
Salem et al. (2005) proposed a new lean assessment tool to quantify the results of
lean implementations. The assessment tool evaluates six lean construction elements
including: Last Planner; increased visualization; huddle meetings; first-run studies;
five S‟s; and fail safe for quality. Meanwhile, the impact of lean on sustainability
was observed and discussed. He tested the effectiveness of some lean construction
tools, in particular, those tools that can be applied in medium size construction firms.
The effectiveness of the lean construction tools was evaluated through the lean
implementation measurement standard and performance criteria. It was found that
last planner, increased visualization, daily huddle meetings, and first-run studies
achieved more effective outcomes than expected. However, the results of
implementation of 5S process and fail safe for quality did not meet the expectations
of the tool champions and the research team. It was found that there is a need for
behavioral changes and training for effective use of lean tools. Most of the lean
construction tools, selected for the project, are either ready to use or are
recommended with some modifications.
Also, Salem et al. (2006) studied the transformation of lean manufacturing
techniques into LC through four scopes illustrated in the following Table (2.2).
24
Table (2.2): Tools of Lean Construction
Source: (Salem et al., 2006)
2.4 The principle of Transparency
2.4.1 Definition of Transparency
The principle of transparency is a core element of Lean Production, the lack of
transparency on construction sites appears to contribute to the fact that production
systems in construction often operate well below their full potential (Formoso et al.,
2002). He defined transparency as “the ability of a production process (or its parts) to
communicate with people”.
Criteria/Change Requirements Technique Scop
Pull approach
Quality
Knowledge
Communication
Relation with other tools
Reverse phase
Scheduling
Six-week look-ahead
Weekly work plan
Reasons for variance
PPC Charts
Last Planner Flow
variability
Actions on the job site
Team effort
Knowledge
Communication
Relation with other tools
Cheak for quality
Cheak for Safety
Fail safe for
quality
Process
variability
Actions on the job site
Team effort
Knowledge
Communication
Relation with other tools
Sort
Straighten
standardize
Shine
Sustain
Five S's
Transparency Visualization
Team effort
Knowledge
Communication
Relation with other tools
Commitment charts
Safety signs
Mobile Signs
Project milestiones
PPC Charts
Increased
visualization
Time spent
Review work to be done
Issues covered
Communication
Relation with other tools
All foreman meeting
Start of the day meeting Huddle meetings
Continuous
improvement Actions on the job site
Team effort
Knowledge
Communication
Relation with other tools
Plan
Do
Check
Act
First-run studies
25
It is needed to make the main process flows visible and comprehensible from start
to finish by measuring and public displaying of information (Koskela & Vrijhoef,
2000). The "process" represents the flow of materials from the delivery of raw
materials to the end product ( Koskela, 1992).
Other researchers have described transparency as way to provide people with a clear
understanding of different aspects of the current system performance and status,
giving them feedback on performed activities and helping in making decisions,
letting them recognize interdependencies and as a result, enabling higher levels of
improvements(Bauch, 2004). Transparency provides insights into matters that are
relevant for all parties involved in a common process who with the right information,
can make well-founded decisions with regard to the transactions that they agree on
with one another (Nijhof et al., 2009).
In a traditional work environment, control and knowledge tends to be centralized and
managers tend to know more about the process than operators however transparency
means a separation of the information network and the hierarchical structure of order
giving (Greif, 1991). The goal is thus to substitute self control rather than formal
control (Brady, 2014).
The principle of transparency represents a substantial change in the production
management of construction since it aims to transform the traditional “silent”
processes into ones that communicate in an active manner (Oliveira et al., 2012).
If process transparency is successfully implemented, most problems, abnormalities,
and types of waste that exist can be easily recognized in order to allow remedial
measures to be taken(Igarashi, 1991). While lack of process transparency increases
the propensity to err, reduces the visibility of errors, and diminishes motivation for
improvement. Thus, it is an objective to make the main flow of operations from start
to finish visible and comprehensible to all employees for facilitation of improvement
and control.
It can be concluded that a key characteristic of transparent processes is that they
radiate relevant information in a physical way, facilitating communication, decision-
26
making and promoting self-management. With the transparency of processes, trust
among parties is built and value is generated (Brady, 2014).A process reaches
excellent in terms of transparency when everyone, even those with relatively
little technical knowledge, understands the process without asking (Santos,
1999).
2.4.2 Transparency within Lean Construction
Transparency is a key lean principle as Increasing Process Transparency is the
seventh principle of lean construction by (Koskela, 1992) which mentioned at section
(2.3.3) in this chapter. In Lean construction theory, insufficient process transparency
increases the chance for errors, reduces the visibility of errors, and decreases
motivation for improvement. Processes that are directly observable, standardized,
and measured can help prevent this lack of transparency (Koskela & Vrijhoef, 2000).
(Koskela, 1992)discussed the notion of increasing transparency principle and
presented some ideas on how to create transparency in the construction process, he
proposed six practical approaches to increase process transparency include the
following:
Establishing basic housekeeping to eliminate clutter: the method of 5-S7
Making the process directly observable through appropriate layout and
signage
Rendering invisible attributes of the process visible through measurements
Embodying process information in work areas, tools, containers, materials
and information systems
Utilizing visual controls to enable any person to immediately recognize
standards and deviations from them
Reducing the interdependence of production units (focused factories
Salem et al. (2006) identified transparency as one of the main four scope of LC, and
specified the techniques of LC that achieve each scope. They reported that Five S's
27
(5S) and Increased Visualization are the LC tools that increase the process
transparency in construction projects. As shown in Table (2.2) at section (2.3.5) in
this chapter.
Salem et al. (2006) reported the requirements of 5S tool are; Sort, Straighten,
Standardize, Shine, and Sustain, while the requirements of Increased Visualization
tool are; Commitment Charts, Safety Signs, Mobile Signs, Project milestones, and
PPC charts). Also, both (Galsworth, 1997)and (Igarashi, 1991) emphasized the use
of 5S as a well-known method for keeping a clean and orderly workplace, originally
developed in Japan.
Even though(Salem et al., 2006) identified Huddle Meetings tool under the
Continuous Improvement Scope, the researcher concluded from the in-depth
readings that Huddle Meetings tool is also enhance the transparency of the project,
since the all foreman meeting and Start of the day meeting definitely strengthen the
communication and disseminate information.
2.4.3 Visual Management Approach
Limited researches of Lean Construction Management in Gaza addressed the
primary meaning of lean construction aiming generally to increase process value and
reduce wastes using a number of practical LC tools. While lean construction
management has been branched into many approaches each addresses a specific goal
at project management in a holistic view and within lean context; such as Just in
Time (JIT), Total Quality Management (TQM), Re-engineering, Total Productive
Maintenance (TPM), Time Based Competition, Concurrent Engineering, and Visual
Management. Visual Management is the lean approach which focuses on the
transparency of construction projects. Therefore, this research work highlighted
Visual Management as a technique of transparency within LC.
Visual management is not well known within the construction industry; however, the
importance of visualization is well recognized (Tjell &Sijtsema, 2015). "As the work
environment becomes more and more complex, the need for connecting human
efforts with processes and the organization‟s strategic goals become more important.
Visual management and its elements offer this link through transparency" (Koskela
28
& Vrijhoef, 2000). According to the T.F.V. approach, transparency is an important
aspect of production flow and it is realized through visual management.
Definition of VM
Visual Management (VM) can be defined as a management system that attempts to
improve organizational performance through connecting and aligning organizational
vision, core values, goals and culture with other management systems, work
processes, workplace elements, and stakeholders, by means of stimuli, which directly
address one or more of the five human senses; sight, hearing, feeling, smell and taste.
These stimuli render transparency through providing immediately necessary quality
information which helps people make sense of the organizational context at a glance
(Liff and Posey, 2004).
Tjell and Sijtsema (2015) defines VM as a system that enables the employees to
better understand their role and contribution in relation to both their own
organizational values and costumer needs. Visual management aims at creating an
information field from which people can immediately pull information when they
need it (Greif, 1991). Visual management influences, directs, limits and guarantees
human behavior (Galsworth, 1997).
Tezel et al., (2008) views VM as a communication system that tries to eliminate the
short-comings of the classical organizational communication model. It provides
necessary, true, relevant, immediate answers to the questions of people at work, so
that eliminate their dependence on other identities for information.
The above understanding helps people attribute themselves to the organization
through strengthened awareness. People can understand what the right way to do a
task is, what kind of impacts their efforts create on the organizational performance,
what performance measures are used to assess their efforts, where the correct places
of the materials, equipment and the machinery are, what skills the people in the
organization possess, and many more, by merely looking around, just at a glance. So
that normal and abnormal conditions should be distinguished by anyone, even in
experienced or newly hired employee (Tezel et al., 2008).
29
Functions of VM
Visual Management is a highly practical approach with numerous visual solutions for
different management practices. The general understanding of VM mainly
concentrated on its transparency and/or discipline functions, particularly in the lean
production literature. (Tezel et al., 2009) argued that a complete understanding of the
term is necessary for the unified exploitation of these functions so that he identified
nine functions from different resources and resulted in taxonomy of VM functions;
transparency, discipline, continuous improvement, job facilitation, on the job-
training, creating shared ownership, management by facts, simplification and
unification (Tezel et al., 2009). VM functions are illustrated in details in Table (2.3).
Table (2.3): Functions of Visual Management
Function Definition Alternative Practice
Transparency
The ability of production process (or its
Parts) to communicate with People
(Formoso et al, 2002).
Information held in people's
minds and on the shelves
Discipline Making a habit of properly maintaining
correct procedures (Hirano, 1995).
Warning, scolding, inflicting
Punishments, dismissing etc.
Continuous
Improvement
An organization-wide Process of focused
and sustained incremental innovation
(Bessant and Francis, 1999).
Static organization or big
improvement leaps through
considerable investment
Job Facilitation
Conscious attempt to physically and/or
mentally ease people's efforts on routine,
already known tasks by offering various
visual adis*.
Expecting people to perform
well at their jobs without
providing them any aids.
On-the-Job
Training
Learning from experience (Mincer,
1962) or integrating working with
learning (Sumner el al., 1999)
Conventional training
practices or offering no
training.
Creating Shared
Ownership
A feeling of possessiveness and being
psychologically tied to an object
(material or immaterial) (Pierce et al., 2001)
Managements dictation for
change efforts, vision and culture creation
Managements by
facts
Use of facts and data based on statistics
(Gunasekaran et al., 1998)
Managements by subjective
judgment or vague terms
Simplification
Constant efforts on monitoring,
processing, visualizing and distributing
system wide information for individuals
and terms*.
Expecting people to monitor,
process and understand the
complex system wide
information on their own.
Unification
Partly removing the four main
boundaries (vertical, horizontal, external
and geographic) (Ashkenas, 1995) and
creating empathy within an organization
through effective information sharing*.
Fragmentation or " this is not
my job" behavior
Source: (Galsworth, 1997).
30
Visual Systems (Visual Workplaces)
Visual Management is realized by visual systems that consist of one or more visual
elements to achieve visual workplace structured with information giving, signaling,
limiting or guaranteeing to allow communicate with “doers”, so that places become
self-explanatory, self-ordering, self-regulating and self-improving (Galsworth,
1997).This visual place which speaks the language of lean production means that
what is supposed to happen does happen, on time, every time, day and
night(Galsworth, 2004).
Visual control systems can be gradually implemented by dividing it in clusters,
named by (Galsworth, 1997)as mini-systems. There are sub-sets of visual devices
that work together to create an information field for people in order to pull the
necessary information at a glance by merely looking around (Greif, 1991). A number
of mini-systems (Visual elements) can be chosen for the initial stages of
implementation, when it is necessary to convince people about the benefits of
process transparency. These mini-systems (Visual elements) are consciously
designed to structure human behavior with different power index depends on the
extent to which the message they send is likely to be obeyed and the potential risk or
loss if we decide to ignore it. Visual elements, in ascending order of their power
indexes as reported in (Galsworth, 1997) and (Tezel et al., 2008), are as follows:
Visual Indicator: Gives only information. It only tells and tries to influence. The
human control of disobedience is high. The consequence of disobedience is minimal.
The commonly used visual indicators in a lean environment are team boards,
departmental boards, charts, logs, photos, films, electronic visual models, value
stream maps etc.
Visual Signal: Signals and grabs your attention with visual stimuli. It expects people
to listen and directs their behavior. The human control of disobedience is moderate.
The consequence of disobedience may be high. In the lean environment, quality
control tools such as the andon and autonomation can be good examples for the
visual signal. The andon signals visually and audibly to call a team leader in case of
an abnormality in a line or at a workstation. When a machine stopped, it is a direct
31
and effective visual signal for action. The culture of stopping production is the
strength of lean production.
Visual Control: Controls and limits human response in terms of height, size,
quantity, volume, weight, width, length and breadth. Human control of disobedience
is almost none. Generally it integrates the message into the physical environment,
leaving people not many options for response. Bordering, outlining, marking, color-
coding, the safety, the production, and the maintenance kanban (signaling cards) are
some of the tools utilized for the visual control in lean production.
Visual Guarantee: Guarantees and allows the correct response only. No intentional
or unintentional errors. Human control of disobedience is none. It adds high
discipline. All the information one needs is built through mechanically or
electronically into the machine, material or environment itself (Poka-Yoke devices –
Zero Quality Control).
(Galsworth, 2004)proposed a hierarchical framework to model the visual workplace
that can be seen in the following Figure (2.3).
Figure (2.3): The Model of Visual Work place (Galsworth, 2004)
32
2.4.4 Benefits of Increasing Process Transparency
"There is a need for increased transparency in construction to deal with the
uncertainty that exists, to better understand the complicated relationship between
activities and interfaces, thus anticipating and resolving problems earlier"(Brady,
2014)
Klotz (2008) studied the effect of process transparency on the project cost, several
note worthy implications are derived from this study; Stakeholders delivering
sustainable building projects should understand the value of process transparency;
the majority of costs related to a lack of process transparency appeared during the
construction phase of project delivery and could have been avoided during design;
efforts to enhance process transparency represent a fraction of the costs related to
rework and other costs resulting from a lack of process transparency; delay costs
make up a significant proportion of costs related to a lack of process transparency;
and cost impacts result from a lack of process transparency both between stakeholder
groups and also within these groups.
Facilitate a holistic view of the entire process and to implement flow: In order to
observe the construction process as a flow of activities and to achieve a holistic view
of the overall process, a high capability of handling vast amounts of information is
required. In order to overcome the difficulties associated with this additional
information, production activities in construction must become more transparent. The
application of the principle of transparency is a key concept for making the flow
model viable (Santos et al., 1998).
Reduce time waste: There is a strong link between the incidence of non-value
adding activities and information deficits in the workplace. Instead of carrying out
value adding activities, very often people spend precious time searching, wandering,
or waiting for the tools, materials, and information they need in order to do their
work (Galsworth, 1997). In workplaces where the layout changes frequently, it is
necessary to provide effective location information so that everyone identifies
workstations and pathways easily (Greif, 1991).
33
Enhance control process: The amount of information displayed at the workplace
has strong influence on the effectiveness of the production planning and control
process(Formoso et al., 2002). Control is simplified, reducing the propensity to errors
and most certainly increasing the visibility of errors (Koskela, 1992).
Defects become visible: If process transparency is successfully implemented, most
problems, abnormalities, and types of waste that exist can be easily recognized in
order to allow remedial measures to be taken(Igarashi, 1991).
Support continuous improvement: In order to identify higher levels of
improvements and understand what effect those improvements have on the overall
process, it is necessary to make the process and information flow between the
different interfaces transparent(Brady, 2014).Visual communication also tends to
increase the involvement of workers in continuous improvement efforts, since it
allows rapid comprehension of and response to problems(Igarashi, 1991).
Build trust and motivate process participants: construction companies usually
have few visual mechanisms to inspire, instruct or motivate workers to carry out their
jobs more effectively, efficiently and safely ( Santos et al., 1998). Process
transparency has a very important impact on motivation. In the absence of facts,
assumptions are all too pervasive. The more scarce information becomes, the fewer
employees trust each other. A sense of disempowerment may follow, leading people
to start worrying about making mistakes (Galsworth, 1997).
A support principle: that enables other LC principles to be effectively implemented
(Formoso et al., 2002).
The practical impacts resulting from transparency on a working environment can be
summarized in the following manner: simplification and increased coherence
indecision making, stimulation of informal contact between the different
hierarchical positions, contributions towards introducing decentralization policies,
assistance in extending workers‟ involvement and management autonomy, increased
efficiency in production programming, simplification of the production control
systems, quicker understanding and response to problems, and finally, greater
34
motivation among workers towards improving being able to visualize errors (de
Oliveira et al., 2012).
2.4.5 Challenges of Increasing Process Transparency
(Formoso et al., 2002) studied the applicability of process transparency and
identified barriers for its implementations in construction based on a literature
review, and on six exploratory case studies carried out in Brazil and England. The
study indicated that it is feasible and worthwhile to apply the principle of
transparency in construction sites and can bring direct benefits for the performance
of production systems. However, some difficulties related to the implementation of
visual systems are inherent to construction sites or problems in management.
Changeable work environment as site layout modified several times
throughout the project. This may demand to update and reallocate the
necessary set of visual devices, especially location addresses and borders.
Large place of work site where large numbers of crews spread out and move
continuously.
Lack of knowledge as managers are not aware of process transparency
benefits.
Low level of participation of workers in improvement process has negative
impact on transparency.
Poor degree of transparency in construction sites contribute for operating below the
full potential of production system; precious time wasted in searching…etc as well as
wastage and unneeded materials obstruct pathways and reduce process visibility.
2.4.6 Success Factors to Increase Process Transparency
It is necessary to establish strong management, structured and systematic plan to
implement visual systems as well as training and hands-on experience in order to
make managers fully knowledgeable about benefits of transparency principle and its
impact on production system (Formoso et al., 2002).
35
Although visualization programs can support process improvements in terms of
reducing inventories and waste, an opposite cause-effect relationship also exists. If
production pans are vague and large inventories are kept, it is very likely that the
production system will have many hidden problems and waste. In this situation, even
if visual devices are used, some problems will still be difficult to be identified.
Therefore, it is necessary to implement some basic improvements in production
systems, such as forcing the reduction of inventories to some extent, and tightening
production plans, in order to increase the positive impact of visual systems (Igarashi,
1991).
It is also important to consider the two-way influence between transparency and
process variability. So that reducing process variability also facilitates the
implementation of visual control systems, as well as drawing visual mechanism is
necessary to inspire or motivate workers to carry out their jobs efficiency and
effectively (Formoso et al., 2002).
36
Summary
Poor communication was recognized as a main cause of time and material wastes in
construction industry of Gaza Strip; so that transparency in construction projects
should be enhanced as a way to communicate with people in the system, provide
them a clear understanding of different aspects of performance and status, and
enabling higher levels of improvements. Koskela (1992) who adopted Lean Thinking
into Construction industry defined Lean Construction as a way to design production
systems to minimize waste of materials, time, and effort in order to generate the
maximum possible amount of value. Also, he reported eleven criteria of LC;
Increasing Process Transparency is one of these main criteria.
Increasing Process Transparency allows great benefits to construction industry; its
reduce time waste, enhance control process, support continuous improvement, build
trust and motivate process participants, and defects become visible. However, there
are many factors supposed to be achieved formerly in order to enable the success of
transparency principle such as; strong management, structured and systematic plans,
fully knowledgeable managers, reduction of inventories to some extent, and reducing
process variability. On the other hand, changeable work environment, large place of
work site, lack of managers' knowledge, and low level of participation of workers in
improvement process, are all main challenges facing transparency applicability.
5S's, Huddle Meetings, and Increased Visualization are LC tools that support
transparency in construction projects, as well as, Visual Management approach
which enhance transparency in the process. Therefore, this research focused on those
techniques, and related its factors and aspects to study the applicability in
construction industry in GS.
Chapter 3
Methodology
37
Chapter 3: Methodology
This research was designed to investigate the applicability of increasing
transparency principle within lean construction approach in Gaza Strip. This chapter
describes the methodology that was used in this research and was selected to achieve
the research aims and objectives. The adopted methodology involved the following
techniques; research design, research population, questionnaire design, statistical
data analysis, content validity and pilot study.
3.1 Research Design
The research followed the analytical/descriptive approach in addition to the
statistical analysis. The data were collected from the primary and secondary
resources. The secondary resources include the use of books, journals, statistics and
web pages. The primary data were collected using a questionnaire that was
developed specifically for this research purpose. Many of measurement tools
“questionnaires” used by other researchers were adapted, translated, combined and
modified to fit the purpose of this research ended up in developing the research
questionnaire. The researcher designed the research by seven main steps as described
below and shown in Figure (3.1).
First step: Theme identification (Problem definition)
It was initiated to define the problem, set the objectives and develop the research
plan.
Second step: Literature review
Dozens of published articles were reviewed from different international journals in
order to study various topics needed for this research; evolution of lean principle,
lean construction adoption besides its techniques, and the principle of increasing
transparency as well as the visual management approach. Literature review study
produced the deriving of 19 factors of 4 chosen lean construction tools that achieve
the transparency, as well as 6 factors of increasing transparency principle.
38
Also 12 benefits, 7 success factors and 6 challenges were derived and collected from
research articles.
Third step: Questionnaire development
The pilot study includes two parts; the first part was undertaken by consulting 5
experts, academic doctors, to pre-test the survey and subsequently modified before a
final version was produced. The second part was accomplished by making analysis
trial using some of the population sample for validation before the main survey. The
questionnaire was modified based on the results of the pilot study so that the final list
of questions was adopted to be used for the study.
Fourth step: The Field survey
This research targeted contracting companies work in construction field in Gaza Strip
in order to examine their transparency practices, and the applicability of increasing
transparency principle in construction projects. In order to obtain reliable and
representative quantitative data, questionnaires were distributed to engineers work in
contracting companies at various positions (Company director, project manager, site
engineer, office engineer) as they know the best in this regard. Moreover, the
targeted companies are from different governorates, nature of works, sizes and years
of experiences.
Fifth step: Results and discussion
Data collected and then analyzed using statistical software, Statistical Package for
Social Science (SPSS 24). Specialized expert in SPSS and statistical analysis assist
the researcher to analyze and extract results from the program.
Sixth step: Conclusion and recommendations
This phase included the conclusion and recommendations of this research.
Seventh step: documentation
The final phase of the research included editing the final text, formatting, spelling
and grammatical review.
39
3.2 Research Period
The study started in January 2016 after the proposal was approved. The literature
review completed at the end of September 2016. The validity testing, piloting and
questionnaire distribution and collection completed at the end of April 2017. The
analysis, discussion, conclusion and recommendation were completed in August
2017.
3.3 Research Location
The research was conducted in the five governorates; North, Gaza, Middle, Khan
Younis, and Rafah in Gaza Strip, Palestine.
3.4 Research Population
This part explains sample elements, size, and sampling procedures.
Topic Selection
Literature Review
Theme
identification
Define the
Problem
Establish aim
and objectives
Develop
Research Plan
Field Survey
Results and Data
Analysis
Conclusion &
Recommendation
Questionnaires Design
Thesis Proposal
Literature Review
Pilot Questionnaires
Questionnaires Validity
Questionnaires
Reliability
Figure (3.1): Flowchart of research methodology
40
3.4.1 Sample Elements
The research sample elements consist of construction engineers who can defined
in this study as; civil or architectural engineers who are company directors, project
managers, site engineers or office engineers and work at contracting companies in
construction projects in Gaza Strip.
3.4.2 Sample Size
Study sample is a subset of population selected to participate in a research study
and its size refers to the number of the elements included in a study, that can be
individuals, groups or organizations (Tezel, Koskela, & Tzortzopoulos, 2010). The
aim of determining an adequate sample size is to estimate the population prevalence
with a good precision (Naing, Winn, & Rusli, 2006). It is less costly and less time to
collect data from a sample rather than collect it from all population.
However, the selected sample may not adequately represent the population and the
obtained results cannot be generalized (Marczyk et al., 2005). The principles of
statistical sampling that guarantee representative sample are used for the sake of
speed and economy (Fellows & Liu, 2008). Several factors can influence the size of
the required sample for a study, including the purpose of the study, population size,
sample sizes used in similar studies, the risk of selecting a “bad” sample, and the
allowable sampling error and resource constraints (Israel, 2013). A statistical
calculation approach has been used in this study to calculate the required sample
size.
Israel (2013) reported that, many researchers commonly increased the sample size
about 10% to 30%, to compensate for persons that the researcher is unable to contact
and for nonresponsive. Thus, the number of distributed questionnaires is larger than
the number required for a desired level of precision and confidence.
3.4.3 Sampling Procedure
A sample design “sampling procedure” refers to the procedure or the technique
that researcher may adopt in selecting items of the sample (Kothari, 2004).
41
A convenience sampling was used in this research which is a type of no
probability sampling as respondents are sampled simply because of their convenient
accessibility and proximity to the researcher.170 copies of the questionnaires were
distributed to the targeted elements, while only 130 copies were returned from
respondents and completed for quantitative analysis since many of targeted elements
had no enough time to response. So that the total returned percent is nearly 76.5%
which is acceptable.
3.5 Questionnaire Design
A significant amount of work has already been done on LC tools, items of
increasing transparency principle, its benefits, success factors and challenges.
According to the review of literature related to LC and transparency, a well designed
questionnaire was developed. After consulting, modifying and reviewing by the
supervisor and experts, the final version of the questionnaire was established and
ready for distribution. The questionnaire was designed in both English and Arabic
languages in order to facilitate the understanding of content for the concerned
population sample. The questionnaire consisted of multiple choice (close-ended)
questions. Close-ended questions are more difficult to design than open-ended
questions; however they allow much more efficient data collection, processing and
analysis (Bourque, 2003). The rating scale (0-10) was used for data measurement in
which 0 is the lowest point and 10 is the highest point.
Table (3.1): Rating Scale for data measurement
Item Strongly Disagree
Strongly
agree
Scale 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
The researcher utilized the following procedures to develop the questionnaire:
The questionnaire was designed by the researcher, and was reviewed and
modified by the research's supervisor.
42
The modified copy was given to a number of 5 academic referees from
different universities.
The questionnaire was then modified based on the referee's comments.
Next, a pilot study sample of 30 questionnaires was distributed to help test
the validity and reliability of the questionnaire; this provides a trial for the
questionnaire, which involves testing the wordings of questions, and
identifying ambiguous questions.
Based on the pilot phase findings, it was concluded that the questionnaire is
ready to be distributed as a final copy.
The first page in the questionnaire was a cover letter that explained the study
purpose, aim and the information security. While the questionnaire body divided into
five parts;
1. Organizational background of respondent.
This part aimed to give information about the position and years of
experiences of the respondent as well as the contracting company; its
location, size, years of experiences, and work field.
2. Evaluate factors of increasing transparency concept in Gaza Strip.
Increasing transparency concept has six main factors proposed by Koskela,
the master mind of LC, and agreed by many researchers. Therefore, this part
aimed to evaluate the current status of applying these factors in Gaza Strip as
well as the views of respondent's on the importance of these factors.
3. Evaluate LC tools for improving transparency.
Lean Construction approach involves many application tools, this part
examined factors of four main tools of LC that serve and assist in achieving
transparency; the degree of application in the current situation as well as the
importance of these tools and factors from the view of contracting companies
in Gaza Strip.
4. Investigate the effect of increasing transparency on application of LC
principles.
Lean Construction, also, has eleven criteria proposed by Koskela, this part
examined the two direction relationship between lean construction and
43
transparency principle. The respondents gave their views on the importance
of transparency to facilitate the application of LC criteria.
5. Evaluate benefits, success factors and challenges of applying the concept of
increasing transparency.
The last but not least, this part studied benefits, success factors of
transparency and challenges facing the applicability of transparency principle
in Gaza Strip.
3.6 Questionnaire References
Part II: Evaluation of the current practices of transparency in
construction
Six practical approaches to increase process transparency (Transparency Principles)
proposed by Koskela (1992), the mastermind of Lean Construction.
Part III: Investigate the applicability of LC tools for transparency
This part involved four of lean construction tools that enhance transparency process;
each tool has many factors from different resources. The reference of each factor is
shown in the following Table (3.2).
Table (3.2): References of LC tools in the questionnaire
No. Lean Construction Tools Reference
1.
Seiri/Sort: Throw away all rubbish and unrelated materials, and
make sure that all broken stuff is in a special place. (No good and
bad stuff set together)
(Chi, 2011)
2.
Seiton/Straighten: Tools and materials were piled in a regular
pattern in the site store, and keep the orderliness of the store
content.
( Salem, et al., 2006)
3. Place devices and tools close to work areas in the site. ( Salem et al., 2006)
4. Place materials in the work place with consideration of safety and
crane movement. ( Salem et al., 2006)
5. Each subcontractor takes responsibility of tools and orneriness of
his work area. ( Salem et al., 2006)
6. Seiso/Shine: Hire sufficient numbers of cleaners who maintain the
cleanliness of the workplace permanently and continuously. Researcher
44
No. Lean Construction Tools Reference
7. Everyone should be a janitor in the workplace as everyone cleans
his area after finishing the activity. (Nazir, 2012)
8.
Seiketsu/Standardize: Standardize the way of maintaining
cleanliness, and design a checklist to apply all standards of
cleanliness and required tidiness.
(Chi, 2011)
( Salem et al., 2006)
9. Shitsuke/Sustain: Maintain all previous practices daily throughout
the project and make it a way of life. "Commitment" ( Salem et al., 2006)
10.
Conducting a workshop for all employees to sign on a commitment
to comply with all safety and security requirements, and attach the
pledge to the caravan wall.
Researcher
11. Use colorful signage, especially for the application of security and
safety guidelines. (Salem et al., 2006)
12. Use billboards to explain the implementation of project stages and
the delivery dates. (Salem et al., 2006)
13. Calculate Plan Percent Complete (PPC) periodically and attach
results charts on the caravan walls. (Salem et al., 2006)
14. Weekly meeting of all foremen; to discuss the weekly plan and all
issues and potential problems. (Salem et al., 2006)
15. A quick day-to-day meeting of the project staff to discuss the work
carried out the day before and what is planned for the current day. (Salem et al., 2006)
16. Give information about the activities to affect workers' behavior
(without obliging). Ex: boards, charts, logs, photos, maps etc.
( Galsworth, 2004) and
(Tezel et al., 2008)
17. Grab workers' attention visually to give them a guide and obligate
them to follow. Ex: light boards and safety signage.
( Galsworth, 2004) and
(Tezel et al., 2008)
18.
Control workers' behaviors physically by determining how to work
correctly in compulsory way. Example: Set a border defines the
area of work.
( Galsworth, 2004) and
(Tezel et al., 2008)
19. Control processes electronically or mechanically to guarantee the
right response with zero risk.
( Galsworth, 2004) and
(Tezel et al., 2008)
Part IV:Investigate the effect of increasing transparency on LC
principles.
The eleven principles of lean construction were proposed by (Koskela, 1992).
Part V: Evaluate benefits, success factors and challenges of applying
the concept of increasing transparency.
The following tables (3.3), (3.4), and (3.5) show references of benefits, success
factors, and challenges respectively.
45
Table (3.3): References of Benefits in the questionnaire
No. The Benefits Reference
1.
Save time spent in searching, wandering, or waiting
for the tools, materials, and information needed to do
work.
(Galsworth, 1997) and (Formoso et
al., 2002)
2. Increase the efficiency of workers as reduce wastage
in efforts. (Santos et al., 1998)
3. Increase the effectiveness of the production planning
and control process. (Formoso et al., 2002)
4. Increase the visibility of errors (Defects are more
visible and easier to recognize)
( Koskela, 1992) and (Formoso et al.,
2002) and (Igarashi, 1991)
5. Reduce the propensity to errors. ( Koskela, 1992) and (Formoso et al.,
2002)
6. Facilitate a holistic view of the entire process and to
implement flow. (Brady, 2014).
7. Build trust and motivation of participants. (Brady, 2014).
8. Support and involve workers at continuous
improvement. (Brady, 2014).
9. Stimulation of informal contact between the different
hierarchical positions. (Oliveira et al., 2012)
10. Contributions towards introducing decentralization
policies. (Oliveira et al., 2012)
11. Simplification of the production control systems. (Oliveira et al., 2012)
12. Reduce reworks that don't comply with drawings and
specifications.
Table (3.4): References of Success Factors in the questionnaire
No. Success Factors Reference
1. Establish strong management, structured and systematic plan
to implement visual systems. (Formoso et al., 2002)
2. Establish a visual mechanism to inspire or motivate workers
to carry out their jobs efficiency and effectively. (Formoso et al., 2002)
3.
Training and hands-on experience in order to make managers
fully knowledgeable about benefits of transparency principle
and its impact on production system.
(Formoso et al., 2002)
4. Forcing the reduction of inventories to some extent. (Igarashi, 1991) and
(Formoso et al., 2002)
5. Tightening production plans. (Igarashi, 1991) and
(Formoso et al., 2002)
6. Reducing process variability to facilitate the implementation
of visual control systems. (Formoso et al., 2002)
46
Table (3.5): References of Challenges in the questionnaire
No. The Challenges Reference
1. Misunderstanding of Lean systems approach as
organizations tend to confuse “Lean thinking” with the
application of a tool or a set of tools in practice.
(Liker, 2004)
2. Lack of knowledge as managers are not aware of process
transparency benefits.
(Formoso et al., 2002)
3. Restrict to traditional conversion model and manager's fear
to changes into unknown approach to them.
(Brady, 2014).
4. Difficulties in communication in construction. (Brady, 2014).
5. Changeable work environment as site layout modified
several times throughout the project.
(Formoso et al., 2002)
6. Large place of work site where large numbers of crews
spread out and move continuously.
(Formoso et al., 2002)
7. Low level of participation of workers in improvement
process.
(Formoso et al., 2002)
Refer to Appendix I and Appendix II for the final questionnaire design in English and
Arabic respectively.
3.7 Questionnaire Content Validity
The content validity of the questionnaire was conducted through the supervisor
review in order to assure that the content is consistent with the research objectives,
and evaluate whether the questions reflect the research problem or not. Besides that,
5professional engineers have academic background reviewed the questionnaire and
provided valuable notes to improve its validity so that their comments were taken
into consideration. Each expert got a copy of the questionnaire for revision, each
expert developed his own notes for modification and some notes were confirmed by
more than one expert. Each note was carefully considered in preparing the final
questionnaire. Table (3.6) shows in details notes gathered from experts.
47
Table (3.6): Notes gathered from the consultants
No. Specialization Notes gathered from experts
Expert A PhD Construction Engineering,
University of Cambridge, UK.
- Add examples for transparency factors to
allow more understanding. (Done)
- Many notes involved wording of the
questions. (Done)
- Suggested to put the company profile section
at the end of the questionnaire. (Ignored)
Expert B PhD Construction Engineering,
UK
- Many notes involved wording of the
questions. (Done)
- Summarize some questions and delete
unnecessary sentences. (Done)
Expert C
M.Sc. Water Engineering
Management, Brunel
University, UK.
- Rearrange sections of questionnaire and make
the section of transparency factors the second
section after company profile, so that allow
the respondent to understand the approach
well before assessing the benefits and
challenges. (Done)
Expert D
M.Sc. Construction
Management, Islamic
University of Gaza, Palestine
- Make separate section for the effect of LC
tools on transparency rather than merging it
with success factors. (Done)
- Merge many factors in one question as they
could have the same meaning. (Done)
Expert E PhD Statistics, Islamic
University of Gaza, Palestine.
- Change the measuring scale from (low,
medium or high) to point's scale from 0 to10
for more accurate results. (Done)
- Rebuilding of questionnaire based on the new
understanding of hypothesis and relations
between questionnaire sections. (Done)
3.8 Pilot Study
In order to test the appropriateness, validity and reliability of the questionnaire
before committing to the complete sample population, a pilot study for the
questionnaire was conducted. It provides a trial run for the questionnaire, which
involves testing the wordings of question, identifying ambiguous questions, testing
the techniques that used to collect data, and measuring the effectiveness of standard
deviation to respondents. The questionnaire was conducted to limited group of the
targeted population by distributing the questionnaire conveniently to 30 respondents
selected randomly.
48
After the researcher collected the 30 questionnaire data analyzed using SPSS (24) in
order to test the validity and the reliability of the questionnaire. The validity tested
using Pearson correlation coefficient for both criterion and structural validity of the
questionnaire. However, the reliability tested using Cronbach‟s Alpha Coefficient.
3.8.1 Questionnaire Validity
Validity refers to the degree to which an instrument measures what it is supposed
to be measuring. Validity has a number of different aspects and assessment
approaches. Statistical validity is used to evaluate instrument validity, which include
internal validity and structure validity.
3.8.1.1 Internal Validity
Internal validity of the questionnaire is the first statistical test that used to test the
validity of the questionnaire. It is measured by a scouting sample, which consisted of
30 questionnaires through measuring the correlation coefficients between each item
in one field and the whole field.
Table (3.7) clarifies the correlation coefficient for each item of the "Transparency
Factors" and the total of the section. The p-values (Sig.) are less than 0.05, so the
correlation coefficients of this section are significant at α = 0.05, so it can be said
that items of this section are consistent and valid to be measure what it was set for.
Table (3.7): Correlation coefficient of each item of "Transparency Factors" and the
total of this section
No. Item
Degree of application Degree of importance
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
1.
Reducing the interdependence of
project activities in time,
materials, and work area.
.386 0.008 .601 0.000
2.
Utilizing visual devices to
immediately recognize mistakes
and problems. Ex. Andon
system: light board to notify the
management to any problem
immediately as lacks in
materials.
.518 0.000 .792 0.000
49
No. Item
Degree of application Degree of importance
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
3.
Making the process visible and
observable by appropriate site
layout, visible fencing, signage
for safety equipment location,
good lighting.
.732 0.000 .384 0.008
4.
Incorporating information in the
work place about project
activities by display boards,
statistics, or videos.
.623 0.000 .725 0.000
5.
Establishing basic housekeeping
to eliminate clutter, maintaining
orderly and clean workplace.
.701 0.000 .429 0.003
6.
Using measurements to reveal
the work quality and efficiency.
Ex: Measurements for
performance indicators,
completion and delay
percentage.
.629 0.000 .366 0.011
The following Table (3.8) clarifies the correlation coefficient for each item of the
"Lean Construction Tools" and the total of the section. The p-values (Sig.) are less
than 0.05, so the correlation coefficients of this section are significant at α = 0.05, so
it can be said that the items of this section are consistent and valid to measure what it
was set for.
Table (3.8): Correlation coefficient of "Lean Construction Tools" items and its total
No. Item
Degree of application Degree of
importance
Correlation
Coefficient
P-
Value
(Sig.)
Correlation
Coefficient
P-
Value
(Sig.)
Applying 5 S tool (Sort – Straighten – Shine – Standardize - Sustain(
1.
Seiri/Sort: Throw away all rubbish and
unrelated materials, and make sure that all
broken stuff is in a special place. (No good
and bad stuff set together)
.687 0.000 .767 0.000
2.
Seiton/Straighten: Tools and materials were
piled in a regular pattern in the site store, and
keep the orderliness of the store content.
.781 0.000 .799 0.000
3. Place devices and tools close to work areas in
the site. .642 0.000 .684 0.000
4. Place materials in the work place with
consideration of safety and crane movement. .684 0.000 .664 0.000
50
5. Each subcontractor takes responsibility of
tools and orneriness of his work area. .576 0.000 .595 0.000
6.
Seiso/Shine: Hire sufficient numbers of
cleaners who maintain the cleanliness of the
workplace permanently and continuously.
.769 0.000 .878 0.000
7.
Everyone should be a janitor in the
workplace as everyone cleans his area after
finishing the activity.
.705 0.000 .849 0.000
8.
Seiketsu/Standardize: Standardize the way of
maintaining cleanliness, and design a
checklist to apply all standards of cleanliness
and required tidiness.
.566 0.000 .474 0.001
9.
Shitsuke/Sustain: Maintain all previous
practices daily throughout the project and
make it a way of life. "Commitment"
.718 0.000 .679 0.000
Applying Increased Visualization tool
10.
Conducting a workshop for all employees to
sign on a commitment to comply with all
safety and security requirements, and attach
the pledge to the caravan wall.
.802 0.000 .834 0.000
11. Use colorful signage, especially for the
application of security and safety guidelines. .781 0.000 .727 0.000
12. Use billboards to explain the implementation
of project stages and the delivery dates. .842 0.000 .717 0.000
13.
Calculate Plan Percent Complete (PPC)
periodically and attach results charts on the
caravan walls.
.655 0.000 .693 0.000
Applying Huddle Meeting tool
14.
Weekly meeting of all foremen; to discuss
the weekly plan and all issues and potential
problems.
.867 0.000 .918 0.000
15.
A quick day-to-day meeting of the project
staff to discuss the work carried out the day
before and what is planned for the current
day.
.877 0.000 .913 0.000
Applying Visual Management
16.
Give information about the activities to affect
workers' behavior (without obliging). Ex:
boards, charts, logs, photos, maps etc.
.850 0.000 .787 0.000
17.
Grab workers' attention visually to give them
a guide and obligate them to follow. Ex: light
boards and safety signage.
.872 0.000 .855 0.000
18.
Control workers' behaviors physically by
determining how to work correctly in
compulsory way. Example: Set a border
defines the area of work.
.606 0.000 .725 0.000
19.
Control processes electronically or
mechanically to guarantee the right response
with zero risk.
.823 0.000 .670 0.000
51
The following table (3.9) clarifies the correlation coefficient for each item of the "LC
Principles" and the total of the section. The p-values (Sig.) are less than 0.05, so the
correlation coefficients of this section are significant at α = 0.05, so it can be said that
the items of this section are consistent and valid to be measure what it was set for.
Table 3.9: Correlation coefficient of each item of "LC Principles" and its total
No. Item
Pearson
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
1. Reduce of non-value-adding activities. .716 0.000
2. Increase output value through systematic
consideration of customer requirements. .666 0.000
3. Reduce project variability. .342 0.015
4. Reduce project cycle time. .712 0.000
5. Simplify by minimizing the number of steps,
parts and linkages between activities. .740 0.000
6. Increase flexibility in work and output. .752 0.000
7. Focus control on the complete process. .731 0.000
8. Build continuous improvement into the
process. .741 0.000
9. Balance flow improvement with conversion
improvement. .688 0.000
10. Conduct reference studies, and lesson learnt
(Benchmarking) .702 0.000
The following table (3.10) clarifies the correlation coefficient for each item of the
"The Benefits" and the total of the section. The p-values (Sig.) are less than 0.05, so
the correlation coefficients of this field are significant at α = 0.05, so it can be said
that the items of this field are consistent and valid to be measure what it was set for.
Table (3.10): Correlation coefficient of each item of "The Benefits" and its total
No. Item
Pearson
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
1.
Save time spent in searching, wandering, or waiting
for the tools, materials, and information needed to do
work.
.563 0.000
2. Increase the efficiency of workers as reduce wastage
in efforts. .586 0.000
52
3. Increase the effectiveness of the production planning
and control process. .699 0.000
4. Increase the visibility of errors (Defects are more
visible and easier to recognize) .578 0.000
5. Reduce the propensity to errors. .620 0.000
6. Facilitate a holistic view of the entire process and to
implement flow. .749 0.000
7. Build trust and motivation of participants. .707 0.000
8. Support and involve workers at continuous
improvement. .753 0.000
9. Stimulation of informal contact between the different
hierarchical positions. .497 0.001
10. Contributions towards introducing decentralization
policies. .475 0.001
11. Simplification of the production control systems. .425 0.000
12. Reduce reworks that don't comply with drawings and
specifications. .556 0.000
The following table (3.11) clarifies the correlation coefficient for each item of the
"SuccessFactors"and the total of the section. The p-values (Sig.) are less than 0.05,
so the correlation coefficients of this section are significant at α = 0.05, so it can be
said that the items of this field are consistent and valid to be measure what it was set
for.
Table (3.11): Correlation coefficient of each item of "Success Factors" and its total
No. Item
Pearson
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
1. Establish strong management, structured and systematic
plan to implement visual systems. .673 0.000
2. Establish a visual mechanism to inspire or motivate workers
to carry out their jobs efficiency and effectively. .814 0.000
3.
Training and hands-on experience in order to make
managers fully knowledgeable about benefits of
transparency principle and its impact on production system.
.826 0.000
4. Forcing the reduction of inventories to some extent. .505 0.000
5. Tightening production plans. .590 0.000
6. Reducing process variability to facilitate the implementation
of visual control systems. .838 0.000
53
The following table (3.12) clarifies the correlation coefficient for each item of the
"The Challenges" and the total of the section. The p-values (Sig.) are less than 0.05,
so the correlation coefficients are significant at α = 0.05, so it can be said that the
items of this section are consistent and valid to be measure what it was set for.
Table (3.12): Correlation coefficient of each item of "The Challenges" and its total
No. Item
Pearson
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
1.
Misunderstanding of Lean systems approach as organizations
tend to confuse “Lean thinking” with the application of tools
in practice.
.671 0.000
2. Lack of knowledge as managers are not aware of transparency
benefits. .726 0.000
3. Restrict to traditional conversion model and manager's fear to
changes into unknown approach to them. .708 0.000
4. Difficulties in communication in construction. .667 0.000
5. Changeable work environment as site layout modified several
times throughout the project. .796 0.000
6. Large place of work site where large numbers of crews spread
out and move continuously. .731 0.000
7. Low level of participation of workers in improvement
process. .464 0.001
3.8.1.2 Structure Validity
Structure validity is the second statistical test that used to test the validity of the
questionnaire structure by testing the validity of each section and the validity of the
whole questionnaire. It measures the correlation coefficient between one section and
all section of the questionnaire that have the same level of liker scale.
Table (3.13) clarifies the correlation coefficient for each section and the whole
questionnaire. The p-values (Sig.) are less than 0.05, so the correlation coefficients of
all sections are significant at α = 0.05, so it can be said that all the questionnaire
sections are valid to be measured what it was set for to achieve the main aim of the
study.
54
Table (3.13): Correlation coefficient of each field and the whole of questionnaire
No. Field
Pearson
Correlation
Coefficient
P-Value
(Sig.)
1. Transparency Factors- Degree of application .603 0.000
2. Transparency Factors- Degree of importance .666 0.000
3. Applying 5 S tool (Sort – Straighten – Shine –
Standardize Sustain(- Degree of application .917 0.000
4. Applying Increased Visualization tool-
Degree of application .858 0.000
5. Applying Huddle Meeting tool- Degree of
application .779 0.000
6. Applying Visual Management- Degree of application .882 0.000
7. Lean Construction Tools - Degree of application .779 0.000
8. Applying 5 S tool (Sort – Straighten – Shine –
Standardize Sustain(- Degree of importance .942 0.000
9. Applying Increased Visualization tool- Degree of
importance .746 0.000
10. Applying Huddle Meeting tool- Degree of
importance .644 0.000
11. Applying Visual Management- Degree of importance .814 0.000
12. Lean Construction Tools - Degree of importance .727 0.000
13. LC Principles .693 0.000
14. The Benefits .832 0.000
15. Success Factors .748 0.000
16. The Challenges .706 0.000
3.8.2 Questionnaire Reliability
The reliability of an instrument is the degree of consistency which measures the
attribute; it is supposed to be measuring (George and Mallery, 2006). The less
variation the instrument produces in repeated measurements of an attribute, the
higher its reliability. Reliability can be equated with the stability, consistency, or
dependability of a measuring tool. The test is repeated to the same sample of people
on two occasions and then compares the scores obtained by computing a reliability
coefficient (George and Mallery, 2006). To insure the reliability of the questionnaire,
Cronbach‟s Coefficient Alpha should be applied.
55
Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha
Cronbach‟s alpha (George D. and Mallery P, 2006) is designed as a measure of
internal consistency. The normal range of Cronbach‟s coefficient alpha value
between 0.0 and + 1.0, and the higher values reflects a higher degree of internal
consistency. The Cronbach‟s coefficient alpha was calculated for each section of the
questionnaire.
Table (3.14) shows values of Cronbach's Alpha for each section of the questionnaire
and the entire questionnaire. For the questionnaire sections, values of Cronbach's
Alpha were in the range from 0.583 and 0.919. This range is considered high; the
result ensures the reliability of each field of the questionnaire. Cronbach's Alpha
equals 0.949 for the entire questionnaire which indicates an excellent reliability of
the entire questionnaire.
Table (3.14): Cronbach's Alpha for each field of the questionnaire
No. Field Cronbach's Alpha
1. Transparency Factors- Degree of application 0.638
2. Transparency Factors- Degree of importance 0.583
3. Lean Construction Tools - Degree of application 0.919
4. Lean Construction Tools - Degree of importance 0.915
5. LC Principles 0.872
6. The Benefits 0.828
7. Success Factors 0.802
8. The Challenges 0.804
9. All items of the questionnaire 0.949
Therefore, it can be said that the researcher proved that the questionnaire was valid,
reliable, and ready for distribution for the population sample.
3.8.3 Questionnaire Normality
Table (3.15) shows results for Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality. The p-
value for each variable is greater than 0.05 level of significance, and then the
distributions for these variables are normally distributed. Consequently, parametric
tests should be used to perform the statistical data analysis.
56
Table (3.15): Kolmogorov-Smirnov test
Field Kolmogorov-Smirnov
Statistic P-value
Transparency Factors- Degree of application 0.676 0.750
Transparency Factors- Degree of importance 0.563 0.909
Lean Construction Tools - Degree of application 0.434 0.992
Lean Construction Tools - Degree of importance 0.866 0.441
LC Principles 0.870 0.435
The Benefits 0.564 0.909
Success Factors 0.844 0.474
The Challenges 0.800 0.544
All items of the questionnaire 0.464 0.983
3.9 Statistical Analysis Tools
The researcher used data analysis both qualitative and quantitative data analysis
methods in this research. The Data analysis made utilizing (SPSS 24). The researcher
utilized the following statistical tools:
1. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality.
2. Pearson correlation coefficient for Validity.
3. Cronbach's Alpha for Reliability Statistics.
4. Frequency and Descriptive analysis.
5. One-sample T test.
6. Independent Samples T-test.
7. Analysis of Variance.
Summary
This chapter described in detail the adopted methodology of research. It included
the primary research framework for the study, details of research period, location,
population, and sample size. The questionnaire design was detailed including the
modifications and reviews done through experts' consultation. Quantitative data
analysis techniques, which include validity tests, reliability test, normality test and
Pearson correlation analysis, were designed to be applied by the instrument of SPSS
and explained in details.
57
Chapter 4
Results and Data
Analysis
58
Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results
This chapter includes analysis and discussion of the results that have been
collected from field surveys. Data was analyzed using SPSS including descriptive
and inferential statistical tools. In this study, total of a hundred and thirty
questionnaires respondents from the study sample were considered. This chapter
includes quantitative analysis of questionnaire field survey for each section in the
questionnaire.
4.1 Data Analysis of Questionnaire Sections
4.1.1 Organizational Background of Respondent
This section designed to understand the background of respondents and
contracting companies, in order to study the impact of company profile on their
transparency practices. Table (4.1) shows the classification of contracting companies.
Table (4.2): Classification of Contracting Company
Work field First Class Second Class Third Class
N % N % N %
Building 95 74.8 23 18.1 9 7.1
Roads 63 56.3 28 25.0 21 18.8
Water and Sewer 64 57.1 28 25.0 20 17.9
Electro-mechanic 55 50.0 29 26.4 26 23.6
Results in Table (4.2) shows that majority of respondents (83.1%) are site engineers
and project managers who work in the field and have good experiences in practical
construction. About half of respondents have experience years from 5 to less than 10
years while 22.3% have less than 5 years experiences.
Most of companies who filled the questionnaires are from Gaza and the South
governorates; however the response level from Middle Area and the North
governorates were the least. Two-thirds of companies have experiences 10 years and
more, one-fifth of them have experiences 5 to less than 10 years while others have
less than 5 years experiences. So that the responds have good variety to examine the
59
effect of experience years on transparency practices. The same at the size of
companies (number of employees, number of projects, and annual budget); results
distributed on different categories so that allowed diverse in respondents.
Table (4.2): Organizational background of respondent (N=130)
No. Organizational background of respondent Frequency Percent
1.
Job title
Company director 8 6.2
Project manager 40 30.8
Site engineer 68 52.3
Office engineer 14 10.8
2.
Years of respondent experience
Less than 5 years 29 22.3
5 – less than 10 years 64 49.2
10 – less than 20 years 33 25.4
20 years, and above 4 3.1
3.
The place of company office
(Governorate)
The South 31 23.8
The Middle area 9 6.9
Gaza 83 63.8
The North 7 5.4
4.
Years of company experience
Less than 5 years 23 17.7
5 – less than 10 years 24 18.5
10 – less than 20 years 39 30.0
20 years, and above 44 33.8
5.
Number of permanent employees
Less than 5 employees 13 10.0
5 - 10 employees 47 36.2
11 - 20 employees 43 33.1
Over 20 employees 27 20.8
6.
Number of projects implemented
in the last 5 years
Less than 10 projects 34 26.2
10 – 20 projects 54 41.5
21 - 30 projects 16 12.3
Over 30 projects 26 20.0
7.
Annual average value of projects
in the last 5 years
(U.S. $)
Less than 1 M 17 13.1
1 M – less than 5 M 45 34.6
5 M - less than 10 M$ 36 27.7
10 M, and over 32 24.6
8. The respondent degree of
knowledge of LC approach, and
familiarity with the concept and
tools
High 20 15.4
Medium 71 54.6
poor 30 23.1
None 9 6.9
60
Last question at Organizational background aimed to test the general knowledge of
respondents to lean construction approach. Figure (4.1) show the respondents
percentages on the degree of knowledge of LC approach, and familiarity with the
concept and tools.
Figure (4.1): Familiarity of respondents to LC Approach
4.1.2 Transparency Factors
This section of questionnaire aimed to evaluate factors of increasing transparency
concept to investigate the current condition of transparency practices in construction
projects in Gaza Strip and the contracting company's attitude toward the principle.
Respondents scored the degree of application of the six transparency factors in
construction projects. Obtained results show that the mean value of the
“Transparency Factors- Degree of application” equals 6.11 (61.08%), Test-value =
8.09, and P-value =0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 .
The sign of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than
the hypothesized value 5.It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the section
“Transparency Factors- Degree of application”.
The factor no.5 (Establishing basic housekeeping to eliminate clutter, maintaining
orderly and clean workplace) obtained the highest degree of application which is
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
High Medium poor None
Pe
rce
nta
ge (%
)
Familiarity of Respondents to LC Approach
61
72.17%, and factor no.3 (Making the process visible and observable) get the second
degree, while the factor no.2 (Utilizing visual devices to immediately recognize
mistakes and problems) obtained the lowest degree of application that is 44.88%.
Ranking of the transparency factors, in terms of the degree of current application,
shows in the following Table (4.3).
Table (4.3): Means and Test values for “Transparency Factors- Degree of
application”
No. Item
Degree of application
Mean (%) Test
value
P-
value Rank
1.
Reducing the interdependence of project
activities in time, materials, and work
area.
6.10 60.97 5.73 0.000 4
2.
Utilizing visual devices to immediately
recognize mistakes and problems. Ex.
Andon system: light board to notify the
management to any problem immediately
as lacks in materials.
4.49 44.88 -2.06 0.021 6
3.
Making the process visible and
observable by appropriate site layout,
visible fencing, signage for safety
equipment location, good lighting.
6.90 68.99 9.17 0.000 2
4.
Incorporating information in the work
place about project activities by display
boards, statistics, or videos.
5.17 51.71 0.71 0.239 5
5.
Establishing basic housekeeping to
eliminate clutter, maintaining orderly and
clean workplace.
7.22 72.17 12.33 0.000 1
6.
Using measurements to reveal the work
quality and efficiency. Ex: Measurements
for performance indicators, completion
and delay percentage.
6.67 66.74 8.54 0.000 3
All items of the field. 6.11 61.08 8.09 0.000
Also, respondents evaluated "Transparency Factors- Degree of importance" to find
out their views on the importance of increasing transparency principle in
construction. The mean of this field equals 7.81 (78.14%), Test-value = 23.26, and P-
value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 .
62
The sign of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than
the hypothesized value 5. It was concluded that the respondents agreed to field of
"Transparency Factors- Degree of importance".
The factor no.5 (Establishing basic housekeeping to eliminate clutter, maintaining
orderly and clean workplace) obtained the highest degree of importance that is
88.06%, and factor no.3 (Making the process visible and observable) get the second
degree while the factor no.3 (Utilizing visual devices to immediately recognize
mistakes and problems) obtained the lowest degree of importance that is 69.76%.
Ranking of transparency factors in terms of importance is shown in the following
Table (4.4).
Table (4.4): Means and Test values “Transparency Factors - Degree of importance”
No. Item
Degree of importance
Mea
n (%)
Test
value
P-
value
Ran
k
1. Reducing the interdependence of project
activities in time, materials, and work area. 7.31 73.06 12.79 0.000 4
2.
Utilizing visual devices to immediately
recognize mistakes and problems. Ex. Andon
system: light board to notify the management to
any problem immediately as lacks in materials.
6.98 69.76 9.39 0.000 6
3.
Making the process visible and observable by
appropriate site layout, visible fencing, signage
for safety equipment location, good lighting.
8.26 82.64 18.27 0.000 2
4.
Incorporating information in the work place
about project activities by display boards,
statistics, or videos.
7.20 71.95 10.69 0.000 5
5.
Establishing basic housekeeping to eliminate
clutter, maintaining orderly and clean
workplace.
8.81 88.06 30.09 0.000 1
6.
Using measurements to reveal the work quality
and efficiency. Ex: Measurements for
performance indicators, completion and delay
percentage.
8.24 82.40 18.74 0.000 3
All items of the field 7.81 78.14 23.26 0.000
From the previous results, it was noticed that ranking of transparency factors in terms
of importance and current application is the same which means the contracting
companies have a concern to apply what they believe in its importance for project
management.
63
However, figure (4.2) shows that the importance of all transparency factors were
given higher degrees than its current application, which means the respondents
believe that the transparency principle still needs to be enhanced in construction
projects.
Figure (4.2): Degrees of Importance and Application of Transparency Factors
4.1.3 Lean Construction Tools
This section of questionnaire aimed to evaluate LC tools for improving
transparency. Respondents scored degrees of application and importance of LC tools
for increasing transparency principle in construction projects.
Applying 5S tool (Sort – Straighten – Shine – Standardize–Sustain)
For the degree of application; the mean of the field "Applying 5S tool" equals 6.70
(67.04%), Test-value = 11.66, and P-value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of
significance 0.05 . The sign of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is
significantly greater than the hypothesized value 5.It was concluded that the
respondents agreed to the field. Detailed results are shown in table (4.5).
For the degree of importance; the mean of the field “Applying 5 S tool" equals 8.29
(82.91%), Test-value = 29.41, and P-value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of
significance 0.05 .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6
Pe
rce
nta
ge (%
)
No. of Transparency Factors
Degree of Importance
Degree of Application
64
The sign of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than
the hypothesized value 5. It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
Detailed results are shown in Table (4.6).
As shown in Figure (4.3); 5S tool involves five factors, "Straighten" and "Sort"
factors obtained highest degree of application while "Standardize" obtained the
lowest degree of application in the construction companies in Gaza Strip. On the
other hand, "Straighten" and "Sustain" factors obtained the highest degree of
importance while the factor "Standardize" obtained the lowest degree of importance
however it is still significant (77.75%).
Figure (4.3): Degrees of Importance and Application of "5S tool" Factors
Applying Increased Visualization tool
For the degree of application as shown in table (4.5); the mean of the field
“Applying Increased Visualization tool” equals 6.06 (60.61%), Test-value = 5.25,
and P-value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign
of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than the
hypothesized value 5.It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Sort Straighten Shine Standardize Sustain
Per
cen
tage
(%)
Factors of 5S tool
Degree of Importance
Degree of Application
65
The item (Use billboards to explain the implementation of project stages and the
delivery dates) obtained the highest degree of application that is 65.74%, while the
item (Conducting a workshop for all employees to sign on a commitment to comply
with all safety and security requirements, and attach the pledge to the caravan wall)
obtained the lowest degree of application that was 50.16%.
For the degree of importance as shown in Table (4.6); the mean of the field
“Applying Increased Visualization tool” equals 8.22 (82.23%), Test-value = 25.22,
and P-value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign
of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than the
hypothesized value 5.It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
The item (Use colorful signage, especially for the application of security and safety
guidelines) obtained the highest degree of importance that is 86.90%, while the item
(Calculate Plan Percent Complete –PPC- periodically and attach results charts on the
caravan walls) obtained the lowest degree of importance that is 79.22%.
Applying Huddle Meeting tool
For the degree of application as shown in Table (4.5); the mean of the field
“Applying Huddle Meeting tool” equals 6.23 (62.29%), Test-value = 5.19, and P-
value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign of the
test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than the hypothesized
value 5.It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
For the degree of importance as shown in Table (4.6); the mean of the field
“Applying Huddle Meeting tool” equals 8.33 (83.26%), Test-value = 19.86, and P-
value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign of the
test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than the hypothesized
value 5.It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
As shown in Figure (4.5); "Weekly meeting of all foremen" was given a higher
degree of application but less degree of importance than the "Quick day-to-day
meeting". Generally, degrees of importance are higher than degrees of application,
66
indicating that respondents believe that applying huddle meetings need to be
enhanced in construction projects.
Figure (4.4): Degrees of Importance and Application of Huddle Meetings
Applying Visual Management
For the degree of application as shown in Table (4.5); the mean of the field
“Applying Visual Management” equals 5.36 (53.60%), Test-value = 1.86, and P-
value=0.032 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign of the
test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than the hypothesized
value 5.It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
The item (Control workers' behaviors physically by determining how to work
correctly in compulsory way) obtained the highest degree of application that is
64.19%, while the item (Give information about the activities to affect workers'
behavior) obtained the lowest degree of approval that was 47.75%.
For the degree of importance as shown in Table (4.6); the mean of the field
“Applying Visual Management” equals 7.28 (72.77%), Test-value = 15.12, and P-
value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign of the
test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than the hypothesized
value 5.It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
82.71 83.8
62.64 61.94
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Weekly meeting Daily meeting
Pe
rce
nta
ge (%
)
Degree of Importance
Degree of Application
67
The item (Control workers' behaviors physically by determining how to work
correctly in compulsory way) obtained the highest degree of importance that is
76.74%, while the item (Control processes electronically or mechanically to
guarantee the right response with zero risk) obtained the lowest degree of importance
that is 69.69%.
Table (4.5): Means and Test value “Lean Construction Tools-Degree of application”
No. Item
Degree of application
Mean (%) Test
value
P-
value
Factors
Rank
Tools
Rank
1.
Sort: Throw away all rubbish and unrelated
materials, and make sure that all broken stuff is
in a special place.
7.12 71.24 10.42 0.000 4
2.
Straighten: Tools and materials were piled in a
regular pattern in the site store, and keep the
orderliness of the store content.
6.93 69.30 9.74 0.000 5
3. Place devices and tools close to work areas in
the site. 7.38 73.80 14.74 0.000 1
4. Place materials in the work place with
consideration of safety and crane movement. 7.36 73.57 14.78 0.000 2
5. Each subcontractor takes responsibility of tools
and orneriness of his work area. 7.26 72.56 13.14 0.000 3
6.
Seiso/Shine: Hire sufficient numbers of
cleaners who maintain the cleanliness of the
workplace permanently and continuously.
6.09 60.93 4.73 0.000 7
7. Everyone should be a janitor in the workplace
and cleans his area after finishing the activity. 5.98 59.84 4.51 0.000 8
8.
Standardize: Standardize the way of
maintaining cleanliness, and design a checklist
to apply all standards of cleanliness and
required tidiness.
5.74 57.36 3.06 0.001 9
9.
Sustain: Maintain all previous practices daily
throughout the project and make it a way of
life. "Commitment"
6.47 64.73 7.17 0.000 6
Total of Applying 5 S tool 6.70 67.04 11.66 0.000 1
10.
Conducting a workshop for all employees to
sign on a commitment to comply with all safety
and security requirements, and attach the
pledge to the caravan wall.
5.02 50.16 0.06 0.477 4
11. Use colorful signage, especially for the
application of security and safety guidelines. 6.38 63.80 5.29 0.000 2
12. Use billboards to explain the implementation of
project stages and the delivery dates. 6.57 65.74 6.24 0.000 1
13. Calculate Plan Percent Complete periodically
and attach results charts on the caravan walls. 6.16 61.55 4.53 0.000 3
Total of Applying Increased Visualization tool 6.06 60.61 5.25 0.000 3
68
No. Item
Degree of application
Mean (%) Test
value
P-
value
Factors
Rank
Tools
Rank
14.
Weekly meeting of all foremen; to discuss the
weekly plan and all issues and potential
problems.
6.26 62.64 4.92 0.000 1
15.
A quick day-to-day meeting of the project staff
to discuss the work carried out the day before
and what is planned for the current day.
6.19 61.94 4.45 0.000 2
Total of Applying Huddle Meeting tool 6.23 62.29 5.19 0.000 2
16.
Give information about the activities to affect
workers' behavior (without obliging). Ex:
boards, charts, logs, photos, maps etc.
4.78 47.75 -0.91 0.182 4
17.
Grab workers' attention visually to give them a
guide and obligate them to follow. Ex: light
boards and safety signage.
4.91 49.07 -0.37 0.357 3
18.
Control workers' behaviors physically by
determining how to work correctly in
compulsory way. Example: Set a border defines
the area of work.
6.42 64.19 6.25 0.000 1
19.
Control processes electronically or
mechanically to guarantee the right response
with zero risk.
5.32 53.20 1.29 0.099 2
Total of Applying Visual Management 5.36 53.60 1.86 0.032 4
All items of the field 6.24 62.36 7.92 0.000
Table (4.6): Means and Test value “Lean Construction Tools-Degree of Importance”
No Item
Degree of importance
Mean (%) Test
value
P-
value
Factors
Rank
Tools
Rank
1. Sort: Throw away all rubbish and unrelated
materials. 8.32 83.18 18.73 0.000 5
2.
Straighten: Tools and materials were piled in
a regular pattern in the site store, and keep
the orderliness of the store content.
8.26 82.64 18.55 0.000 6
3. Place devices and tools close to work areas
in the site. 8.50 85.04 27.09 0.000 2
4. Place materials in the work place with
consideration of safety and crane movement. 8.73 87.29 28.06 0.000 1
5. Each subcontractor takes responsibility of
tools and orneriness of his work area. 8.45 84.50 24.94 0.000 3
6.
Shine: Hire sufficient numbers of cleaners
who maintain the cleanliness of the
workplace permanently and continuously.
7.96 79.61 16.36 0.000 8
7.
Everyone should be a janitor in the
workplace and cleans his area after finishing
the activity.
8.17 81.71 21.00 0.000 7
69
No Item
Degree of importance
Mean (%) Test
value
P-
value
Factors
Rank
Tools
Rank
8.
Standardize: Standardize the way of
maintaining cleanliness, and design a
checklist to apply all standards of cleanliness
and required tidiness.
7.78 77.75 14.83 0.000 9
9.
Sustain: Maintain all previous practices daily
throughout the project and make it a way of
life. "Commitment"
8.44 84.42 24.35 0.000 4
Total of Applying 5 S tool 8.29 82.91 29.41 0.000 2
10.
Conducting a workshop for all employees to
sign on a commitment to comply with all
safety and security requirements, and attach
the pledge to the caravan wall.
8.06 80.64 14.14 0.000 3
11. Use colorful signage, especially for the
application of security and safety guidelines. 8.69 86.90 24.08 0.000 1
12. Use billboards to explain the implementation
of project stages and the delivery dates. 8.19 81.94 19.93 0.000 2
13.
Calculate Plan Percent Complete (PPC)
periodically and attach results charts on the
caravan walls.
7.92 79.22 16.54 0.000 4
Total of Applying Increased Visualization
tool 8.22 82.23 25.22 0.000
3
14.
Weekly meeting of all foremen; to discuss
the weekly plan and all issues and potential
problems.
8.27 82.71 17.34 0.000 2
15.
A quick day-to-day meeting of the project
staff to discuss the work carried out the day
before and what is planned for the current
day.
8.38 83.80 19.04 0.000 1
Total of Applying Huddle Meeting tool 8.33 83.26 19.86 0.000 1
16.
Give information about the activities to
affect workers' behavior (without obliging).
Ex: boards, charts, logs, photos, maps etc.
7.21 72.09 12.76 0.000 3
17.
Grab workers' attention visually to give them
a guide and obligate them to follow. Ex:
light boards and safety signage.
7.23 72.33 11.61 0.000 2
18.
Control workers' behaviors physically by
determining how to work correctly in
compulsory way. Example: Set a border
defines the area of work.
7.67 76.74 13.10 0.000 1
19.
Control processes electronically or
mechanically to guarantee the right response
with zero risk.
6.97 69.69 9.20 0.000 4
Total of Applying Visual Management 7.28 72.77 15.12 0.000 4
All items of the field 8.07 80.66 28.59 0.000
70
Comparing Results of LC tools
5-S tool obtained the highest degree of application in construction projects in Gaza
Strip (67.04%), while Visual Management tool obtained the least degree of
application (53.6%). On the other hand, degrees of importance are significantly
higher than degrees of application with highest point (83.26%) for Huddle meeting
tool and least point (72.77%) for Visual Management tool. The following Figure
(4.5) shows the degrees of application and importance for lean construction tools.
Figure (4.5): Degrees of Importance and Application for "LC Tools"
4.1.4 Transparency Effect on LC Principles
Increasing Transparency is one of LC eleven criteria proposed by Koskela and
agreed by many researchers; these criteria have a comprehensive interrelationship.
This section of questionnaire aimed to investigate the effect of increasing
transparency principle on the application of other LC principles and examined the
two direction relationship between lean construction approach and transparency
principle. Respondents gave their views on the importance of increasing transparency
to facilitate the application of LC criteria.
As shown in Table (4.7), the mean of the field “Effect of increasing transparency on
application of LC principles” equals 7.53 (75.27%), Test-value = 23.90, and P-
82.91 82.23 83.26
72.7767.04
60.61 62.29
53.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
5-S Increased Visualization
Huddle Meeting
Visual Management
Per
cen
tage
(%)
Degree of Importance
Degree of Application
71
value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign of the
test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater than the hypothesized
value 5. It was concluded that the respondents agreed to the field.
Results of different items at this section slightly change and range from 71.88%
(lowest point) to 78.31% (highest point) which indicates the respondents believe that
increasing transparency has a significant effect on the application of all LC
principles. Ranking of LC criteria according to the effect of transparency principle on
its application is shown in the following Table (4.7).
Table (4.7): Means and Test values for “Effect of Transparency on LC Principles”
No. Item Mean (%) Test
value P-value Rank
1. Reduce of non-value-adding activities. 7.19 71.88 11.90 0.000 10
2. Increase output value through systematic
consideration of customer requirements. 7.83 78.31 17.80 0.000 1
3. Reduce project variability. 7.38 73.85 14.78 0.000 8
4. Reduce project cycle time. 7.45 74.46 14.90 0.000 7
5.
Simplify by minimizing the number of
steps, parts and linkages between
activities.
7.72 77.15 17.31 0.000 3
6. Increase flexibility in work and output. 7.48 74.85 16.32 0.000 6
7. Focus control on the complete process. 7.79 77.92 17.29 0.000 2
8. Build continuous improvement into the
process. 7.58 75.85 16.11 0.000 5
9. Balance flow improvement with
conversion improvement. 7.22 72.17 13.84 0.000 9
10. Conduct reference studies, and lesson
learnt (Benchmarking) 7.60 76.00 14.58 0.000 4
All items of the field 7.53 75.27 23.90 0.000
4.1.5 Benefits of Transparency
From results shown in Table (4.8), the mean of the field “Benefits of
transparency” equals 7.55 (75.49%), Test-value = 24.03, and P-value=0.000 which is
smaller than the level of significance 0.05 . The sign of the test is positive, so the
mean of this field is significantly greater than the hypothesized value 5.It was
concluded that the respondents agreed to this field.
72
The benefits of transparency which obtained highest degree are; Increase the
effectiveness of the production planning and control process / Increase the efficiency
of workers since reduce wastage in efforts / Save time spent in searching, wandering,
or waiting for the tools, materials, and information needed to do work / Build trust
and motivation of participants. On the other hand, these two benefits obtained the
lowest degree; Contributions towards introducing decentralization policies/
Stimulation of informal contact between the different hierarchical positions.
Table (4.8): Means and Test values for “Benefits of Transparency”
No. Item Mean (%) Test
value P-value Rank
1.
Save time spent in searching, wandering,
or waiting for the tools, materials, and
information needed to do work.
7.94 79.38 17.71 0.000 3
2. Increase the efficiency of workers since
reduce wastage in efforts. 7.95 79.46 19.98 0.000 2
3. Increase the effectiveness of the
production planning and control process. 7.95 79.54 18.90 0.000 1
4. Increase the visibility of errors (Defects
are more visible and easier to recognize) 7.35 73.54 11.83 0.000 9
5. Reduce the propensity to errors. 7.75 77.54 17.12 0.000 5
6. Facilitate a holistic view of the entire
process and to implement flow. 7.68 76.85 15.61 0.000 6
7. Build trust and motivation of
participants. 7.92 79.15 20.78 0.000 4
8. Support and involve workers at
continuous improvement. 7.55 75.46 15.27 0.000 8
9. Stimulation of informal contact between
the different hierarchical positions. 6.87 68.69 8.82 0.000 11
10. Contributions towards introducing
decentralization policies. 6.76 67.62 7.80 0.000 12
11. Simplification of the production control
systems. 7.29 72.92 11.62 0.000 10
12. Reduce reworks that don't comply with
drawings and specifications. 7.58 75.77 13.01 0.000 7
All items of the field 7.55 75.49 24.03 0.000
4.1.6 Success Factors of Transparency
The mean of the field “Success Factors of Transparency” equals 7.80 (78.00%),
Test-value = 26.13, and P-value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance
0.05 .
73
The sign of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly greater
than the hypothesized value 5.It was concluded that respondents agreed to the field.
Results of this field are shown in Table (4.9).
Respondents found that “Establish strong management, structured and systematic
plan to implement visual systems” and "Training and hands-on experience in order to
make managers fully knowledgeable about benefits of transparency principle and its
impact on production system" are the most important success factors for increasing
transparency in construction projects. On the other hand, “Forcing the reduction of
inventories to some extent” is the least important success factor, however it is still a
significant item for increasing transparency (70.85%).
Table (4.9): Means and Test values for “Success Factors of Transparency”
No. Item Mean (%) Test
value P-value Rank
1.
Establish strong management, structured
and systematic plan to implement visual
systems.
8.80 88.00 30.01 0.000 1
2.
Establish a visual mechanism to inspire or
motivate workers to carry out their jobs
efficiency and effectively.
7.84 78.38 15.94 0.000 3
3.
Training and hands-on experience in order
to make managers fully knowledgeable
about benefits of transparency principle
and its impact on production system.
7.97 79.69 18.55 0.000 2
4. Forcing the reduction of inventories to
some extent. 7.08 70.85 12.87 0.000 6
5. Tightening production plans. 7.66 76.62 17.25 0.000 4
6.
Reducing process variability to facilitate
the implementation of visual control
systems.
7.45 74.46 12.85 0.000 5
All items of the field 7.80 78.00 26.13 0.000
4.1.7 Challenges of Transparency
The mean of the field “Challenges of Transparency” equals 7.14 (71.42%), Test-
value = 17.60, and P-value=0.000 which is smaller than the level of significance
0.05 . The sign of the test is positive, so the mean of this field is significantly
greater than the hypothesized value 5. We conclude that the respondents agreed to
this field.
74
Table (4.10) shows that itemsNo.1 and No.2; Misunderstanding of Lean systems
approach as organizations tend to confuse Lean thinking with the application of a
tool or a set of tools in practice / Lack of knowledge as managers are not aware of
process transparency benefits, are the biggest challenges facing the transparency
principle (78% and 76.69%, respectively) . While items No.4 and No.5; Difficulties
in communication in construction / Changeable work environment as site layout
modified several times throughout the project, are the least important challenges
facing the transparency principle however they are still significant (65.08% and
66.85%, respectively)
Table (4.10): Means and Test values for “Challenges of Transparency”
No. Item Mean (%) Test
value P-value Rank
1.
Misunderstanding of Lean systems approach
as organizations tend to confuse “Lean
thinking” with the application of a tool or a set
of tools in practice.
7.80 78.00 16.47 0.000 1
2. Lack of knowledge as managers are not aware
of process transparency benefits. 7.67 76.69 16.73 0.000 2
3.
Restrict to traditional conversion model and
manager's fear to changes into unknown
approach to them.
7.15 71.54 10.32 0.000 4
4. Difficulties in communication in construction. 6.51 65.08 7.24 0.000 7
5. Changeable work environment as site layout
modified several times throughout the project. 6.68 66.85 7.95 0.000 6
6. Large place of work site where large numbers
of crews spread out and move continuously. 6.95 69.54 9.69 0.000 5
7. Low level of participation of workers in
improvement process. 7.22 72.23 12.84 0.000 3
Total of all items of the field 7.14 71.42 17.60 0.000
75
4.2 Test of Research Hypothesis
Hypothesis Model
Hypothesis (1)
There are statistically significant differences attributed to the profile of contracting
company at α ≤0.05 between the averages of respondents' views on the subject of
increasing transparency concept within LC in Gaza Strip.
Job title:
Table (4.11) shows that the p-value (Sig.) is greater than the level of significance
= 0.05 for each field, then there is insignificant difference among the respondents
toward each field due to job title. It was concluded that the personal characteristics‟
job title has no effect on each field. Therefore, job title does not affect the
applicability of increasing transparency principle in construction projects in Gaza
Strip.
76
Table (4.11): ANOVA test of the fields and their p-values for "Job title"
No. Field
Means Test
Value Sig.
Company
director
Project
manager
Site
engineer
Office
engineer
1. Transparency Factors –
Degree of application 6.00 6.60 5.91 5.71 2.065 0.108
2. Transparency Factors –
Degree of importance 7.06 8.22 7.73 7.49 2.394 0.072
3. Lean Construction Tools
– Degree of application 6.20 6.46 6.09 6.33 0.388 0.762
4. Lean Construction Tools
– Degree of importance 7.31 8.29 8.04 7.98 1.517 0.213
5. Effect of Transparency
on LC Principles 7.42 7.78 7.38 7.59 0.920 0.433
6. Benefits of Transparency 6.89 7.70 7.49 7.79 1.258 0.292
7. Success Factors of
Transparency 7.75 8.14 7.56 8.02 2.096 0.104
8. Challenges of
Transparency 6.13 7.24 7.12 7.54 1.924 0.129
All items of the questionnaire 6.83 7.51 7.14 7.31 1.576 0.199
Years of experience:
Table (4.12) shows that the p-value (Sig.) is smaller than the level of significance
= 0.05 for the field “Challenges of Transparency”, then there is a significant
difference among the respondents toward this field due to years of experience. It was
concluded that years of experience has an effect on this field. Figure (4.6) shows that
5 to less than 10 years of experiences have the highest mean.
Figure (4.6): Means of "Challenges of Transparency" due to "Years of experience"
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
< 5 yrs 5 to < 10 yrs 10 to < 20 yrs >= 20 yrs
Per
cen
tage
(%)
77
For the other fields, the p-value (Sig.) is greater than the level of significance =
0.05, then there is insignificant difference among the respondents toward these fields
due to years of experience. It was concluded that years of experience has no effect on
these fields.
Table (4.12): ANOVA test of the fields and their p-values for years of experience
No. Field
Means
Test
Value Sig. Less
than 5
years
5 – less
than 10
years
10 – less
than 20
years
20 years
and
above
1. Transparency Factors –
Degree of application 5.99 6.20 5.94 6.88 0.578 0.630
2. Transparency Factors –
Degree of importance 7.58 7.99 7.80 6.88 1.260 0.291
3. Lean Construction Tools
– Degree of application 5.91 6.34 6.30 6.47 0.425 0.735
4. Lean Construction Tools
– Degree of importance 7.87 8.17 8.20 6.70 2.303 0.080
5. Effect of Transparency
on LC Principles 7.56 7.50 7.60 7.10 0.219 0.883
6. Benefits of Transparency 7.33 7.62 7.66 7.13 0.635 0.594
7. Success Factors of
Transparency 7.63 7.76 7.91 8.75 1.123 0.343
8. Challenges of
Transparency 6.92 7.49 6.71 6.79 2.820 0.042
All items of questionnaire 7.07 7.34 7.30 6.93 0.577 0.631
The place of company office:
Table (4.13) shows that the p-value (Sig.) is smaller than the level of significance
= 0.05 for the field “Lean Construction Tools - Degree of application”, then there
is a significant difference among the respondents toward this field due to the place of
company office. We conclude that the place of company office has an effect on this
field.
78
Figure (4.7): Means of "Lean Construction Tools - Degree of application" due to"
place of company office"
For the other fields, the p-value (Sig.) is greater than the level of significance =
0.05, then there is insignificant difference among the respondents toward these fields
due to the place of company office. It was concluded that the place of company
office has no effect on the other fields.
Table (4.13): ANOVA test of the fields and p-values for the place of company office
No. Field
Means
Test
Value Sig. The
South
The
Middle
area
Gaza The
North
1. Transparency Factors-
Degree of application 6.18 7.13 5.92 6.62 2.000 0.117
2. Transparency Factors-
Degree of importance 7.78 7.78 7.82 7.88 0.013 0.998
3. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of application 6.56 7.55 5.88 7.29 4.225 0.007
4. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of importance 8.16 8.36 8.00 8.01 0.301 0.825
5. Effect of Transparency on
LC Principles 7.57 7.31 7.46 8.41 1.475 0.224
6. Benefits of Transparency 7.47 7.72 7.52 7.96 0.383 0.765
7. Success Factors of
Transparency 7.63 7.65 7.84 8.31 0.660 0.578
8. Challenges of Transparency 7.23 7.27 7.09 7.24 0.123 0.947
All items of the questionnaire 7.35 7.69 7.13 7.74 1.568 0.200
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
The South The Middle area Gaza The North
Pe
rce
nta
ge (%
)
79
Years of company experience:
Table (4.14) shows that the p-value (Sig.) is greater than the level of significance
= 0.05 for each field, then there is insignificant difference among the respondents
toward each field due to years of company experience. We conclude that the years of
experience has no effect on each field.
Table (4.14): ANOVA test of the fields and p-values for years of company experience
No. Field
Means
Test
Value Sig. Less
than 5
years
5 – less
than 10
years
10 – less
than 20
years
20
years,
and
above
1. Transparency Factors-
Degree of application 6.15 6.66 6.09 5.80 1.609 0.191
2. Transparency Factors-
Degree of importance 7.98 7.89 7.94 7.58 0.661 0.578
3. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of application 6.25 6.33 6.36 6.06 0.222 0.881
4. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of importance 8.08 8.10 8.20 7.91 0.384 0.765
5. Effect of Transparency on
LC Principles 7.80 7.46 7.66 7.30 1.091 0.356
6. Benefits of Transparency 7.39 7.80 7.71 7.35 1.073 0.363
7. Success Factors of
Transparency 7.72 7.83 7.87 7.77 0.083 0.969
8. Challenges of Transparency 6.86 6.96 7.45 7.12 1.090 0.356
All items of the questionnaire 7.27 7.35 7.40 7.06 0.857 0.466
80
Number of permanent employees:
Table (4.15) shows that the p-value (Sig.) is greater than the level of significance
= 0.05 for each field, then there is insignificant difference among the respondents
toward each field due to number of permanent employees. It was concluded that the
number of permanent employees has no effect on each field.
Table (4.15): ANOVA test and p-values for number of permanent employees
No. Field
Means
Test
Value Sig. Less than
5
employees
5 - 10
employees
11 - 20
employees
Over 20
employees
1.
Transparency
Factors- Degree of
application
6.14 5.93 6.22 6.22 0.327 0.805
2.
Transparency
Factors- Degree of
importance
7.62 8.03 7.79 7.58 0.732 0.535
3.
Lean Construction
Tools - Degree of
application
6.65 5.79 6.41 6.53 1.624 0.187
4.
Lean Construction
Tools - Degree of
importance
8.25 8.07 8.12 7.89 0.299 0.826
5.
Effect of
Transparency on
LC Principles
7.59 7.35 7.87 7.26 1.992 0.119
6. Benefits of
Transparency 7.98 7.58 7.60 7.21 1.288 0.281
7. Success Factors of
Transparency 7.64 7.91 7.76 7.75 0.220 0.882
8. Challenges of
Transparency 7.12 7.26 7.04 7.10 0.202 0.895
All items of the
questionnaire 7.44 7.13 7.36 7.20 0.531 0.661
81
Number of projects implemented in the last 5 years:
Table (4.16) shows that the p-value (Sig.) is greater than the level of significance
= 0.05 for each field, then there is insignificant difference among the respondents
toward each field due to number of projects implemented in the last 5 years. It was
concluded that the number of projects implemented in the last 5 years has no effect
on each field.
Table (4.16): ANOVA test of the fields and their p-values for number of projects
implemented in the last 5 years
No. Field
Means Test
Value Sig. Less than 10
projects
10 – 20
projects
21 - 30
projects
Over 30
projects
1. Transparency Factors-
Degree of application 6.07 6.07 6.71 5.87 1.024 0.385
2. Transparency Factors-
Degree of importance 7.93 7.76 7.75 7.81 0.109 0.955
3. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of application 5.87 6.02 7.08 6.63 2.452 0.066
4. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of importance 7.81 8.03 8.29 8.33 1.096 0.353
5. Effect of Transparency on
LC Principles 7.35 7.35 7.87 7.92 2.026 0.114
6. Benefits of Transparency 7.44 7.55 7.83 7.53 0.380 0.768
7. Success Factors of
Transparency 7.68 7.77 8.23 7.74 0.787 0.503
8. Challenges of
Transparency 7.03 7.15 7.63 6.97 0.857 0.465
All items of the questionnaire 7.15 7.69 7.42 1.695 0.171
Annual average value of projects in the last 5 years:
Table (4.17) shows that the p-value (Sig.) is smaller than the level of significance
= 0.05 for the fields “Benefits and Challenges of Transparency”, then there is a
significant difference among the respondents toward these fields due to annual
average value of projects in the last 5 years. It was concluded that the personal
characteristics‟ annual average value of projects in the last 5 years has an effect on
these fields.
82
Figure (4.8): Means "Benefits of Transparency" due to "Annual average of projects"
Figure (4.9): Means of "Challenges of Transparency" due to "Annual average value
of projects"
For the other fields, the p-value (Sig.) is greater than the level of significance =
0.05, then there is insignificant difference among the respondents toward these fields
due to annual average value of projects in the last 5 years. It was concluded that the
personal characteristics‟ annual average value of projects in the last 5 years has no
effect on the other fields.
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
< 1 M$ 1 M to < 5 M$ 5 M to < 10 M$ >= 10 M$
Per
cen
tage
(%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
< 1 M$ 1 M to < 5 M$ 5 M to < 10 M$ >= 10 M$
Per
cen
tage
(%)
83
Table (4.17): ANOVA test of the fields and their p-values for annual average value of
projects in the last 5 years
No. Field
Means
Test
Value Sig. Less
than 1
M
1 M –
less
than 5
M
5 M -
less
than 10
M$
10 M,
and
over
1. Transparency Factors-
Degree of application 5.40 5.98 6.17 6.60 2.478 0.064
2. Transparency Factors-
Degree of importance 7.57 7.69 7.65 8.30 1.835 0.144
3. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of application 5.47 6.31 6.07 6.71 1.994 0.118
4. Lean Construction Tools -
Degree of importance 7.78 7.94 7.96 8.51 2.019 0.115
5. Effect of Transparency on
LC Principles 7.84 7.32 7.32 7.88 2.102 0.103
6. Benefits of Transparency 7.13 7.50 7.54 7.86 1.434 0.236
7. Success Factors of
Transparency 7.24 7.67 7.83 8.24 2.927 0.036
8. Challenges of Transparency 5.83 7.42 7.04 7.56 7.774 0.000
All items of the questionnaire 6.79 7.22 7.12 7.69 3.381 0.020
Hypothesis (2)
There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05 between the existing
status of applying transparency factors and existing status of applying lean
construction tools supporting transparency principle in GS.
The correlation coefficient between the existing status of applying transparency
factors and existing status of applying lean construction tools supporting
transparency principle in GS equals 0.694 and the p-value (Sig.) equals 0.000 less
than 0.05, so the correlation coefficient is statistically significant at α = 0.05. It was
concluded that there exists a significant relationship between the existing status of
applying transparency factors and existing status of applying lean construction tools
supporting transparency principle in GS.
84
Hypothesis (3)
There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05 between importance
of transparency factors and importance of lean construction tools supporting
transparency principle.
The correlation coefficient between importance of transparency factors and
importance of lean construction tools supporting transparency principle equals 0.697
and the p-value (Sig.) equals 0.000is less than 0.05, so the correlation coefficient is
statistically significant at α = 0.05. It was concluded that there exists a significant
relationship between importance of transparency factors and importance of lean
construction tools supporting transparency principle.
Hypothesis (4)
There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05 between importance
of increasing transparency factors and benefits of increasing transparency principle.
The correlation coefficient between importance of increasing transparency factors
and benefits of increasing transparency principle equals 0.397 and the p-value (Sig.)
equals 0.000is less than 0.05, so the correlation coefficient is statistically significant
at α = 0.05. It was concluded that there exists a significant relationship between
importance of increasing transparency factors and benefits of increasing transparency
principle.
Hypothesis (5)
There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05 between importance
of lean construction tools supporting transparency principle and benefits of
increasing transparency principle.
The correlation coefficient between importance of lean construction tools
supporting transparency principle and benefits of increasing transparency principle
equals 0.545 and the p-value (Sig.) equals 0.000is less than 0.05, so the correlation
coefficient is statistically significant at α = 0.05. It was concluded that there exists a
85
significant relationship between importance of lean construction tools supporting
transparency principle and benefits of increasing transparency principle.
Hypothesis (6)
There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05 between importance
of lean construction tools supporting transparency principle and the effect of
transparency on lean construction principles.
The correlation coefficient between importance of lean construction tools
supporting transparency principle and the effect of transparency on lean construction
principles equals 0.540 and the p-value (Sig.) equals 0.000is less than 0.05, so the
correlation coefficient is statistically significant at α = 0.05. It was concluded that
there exists a significant relationship between importance of lean construction tools
supporting transparency principle and the effect of transparency on lean construction
principles.
Hypothesis (7)
There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05 between benefits of
increasing transparency principle and the effect of transparency on the lean
construction principles.
The correlation coefficient between benefits of increasing transparency principle
and the effect of transparency on the lean construction principles equals 0.586 and
the p-value (Sig.) equals 0.000is less than 0.05, so the correlation coefficient is
statistically significant at α = 0.05. It was concluded that there is exist a significant
relationship between benefits of increasing transparency principle and the effect of
transparency on the lean construction principles.
Hypothesis (8)
There is statistically significant positive relationship at α ≤ 0.05 between benefits of
increasing transparency and success factors supporting the application of the
concept.
86
The correlation coefficient between benefits of increasing transparency and
success factors supporting the application of the concept equals 0.557 and the p-
value (Sig.) equals 0.000is less than 0.05, so the correlation coefficient is statistically
significant at α = 0.05. It was concluded that there exists a significant relationship
between benefits of increasing transparency and success factors supporting the
application of the concept.
Summary
Analysis of results showed that, generally, the company profile does not have a
significant effect on the applicability of transparency principle, few items showed
little influence but it is very limited and inconsiderable.
Results showed that several factors of transparency principle are applied well in
construction projects in Gaza Strip while some of them are still weak and need to be
enhanced since the results of means values range from 44.88% to 72.17%. The same
for the application of LC tools that supporting transparency, results range from
53.60% to 67.04%, which are relatively weak values and need to be enhanced. On
the other hand, all factors of transparency principles and LC tools are considered to
be important from respondents' viewpoint since the means are all above 69%. Also,
degrees of importance for all factors are higher than degrees of application, therefore
transparency principle needs to be increased and enhanced in construction projects in
Gaza Strip within lean construction tools.
There is a significant effect of Increasing Transparency principle on applying other
principles of LC whereas all means values are above 71%. Thus, there is a reciprocal
relationship between transparency principle and lean construction.
Results showed that transparency has worthy advantages from respondents'
viewpoint since the total mean of benefits is 75.49%, however there are also
considerable challenges facing the application of transparency principle (Total means
= 75%). Furthermore, there are many factors need to be applied well to allow the
success of increasing transparency principle, respondents gave these success factors
75.49% importance.
Chapter 5
Conclusion
87
Chapter 5: Conclusion
This chapter summarizes the objectives and outcomes of the research and
provides conclusions of the research. In achieving the aim of the research, three main
objectives have been outlined and achieved through the findings of the analyzed
collected questionnaires. These objectives are related to the research questions that
were developed to increase knowledge and familiarity with the subject. The
outcomes were found as follows:
5.1 Outcomes Related to Objective One
"To evaluate the current status and general perceptions of
transparency practices in construction industry of Gaza Strip"
This research studied the transparency concept within lean construction approach
in Gaza Strip so that it was necessary to evaluate the current status of transparency
practices in construction industry and the general perceptions of contracting
companies on the applicability of this concept. Therefore, the conducted survey
investigated the degree of application of transparency factors and lean construction
tools that support the transparency. Results showed that factors of transparency
principle are applied in construction projects in Gaza Strip however they are still
weak and need to be enhanced since the results of means values range from 44.88%
to 72.17%.
Contracting companies in Gaza Strip do some efforts to apply factors of
transparency; Establishing the basic housekeeping in the workplace, Make the
process visible and observable by appropriate site layout, and Using measurements
to reveal the work quality and efficiency. While the following three factors of
transparency obtained low degrees of application and less than 60% means;
Reducing the interdependence of project activities in time, materials, and work area,
Incorporating information in the work place about project activities, and Utilizing
visual devices to immediately recognize mistakes and problems.
Likewise the application of LC tools that supporting transparency, results range from
53.60% to 67.04%, which are relatively weak values and need to be enhanced.
88
Results of LC tools are correspond to results of transparency factors since the 5-S
tool (Sort – Straighten – Shine – Standardize–Sustain) obtained highest degree of
application, while Visual Management tool obtained the lowest degree of application.
On the other hand, all factors of transparency principles and LC tools are considered
to be important from respondents' viewpoint since the means of all factors are about
70% or above. Respondents gave these factors higher degrees of importance;
Establishing the basic housekeeping in the workplace, Make the process visible and
observable by appropriate site layout, and Using measurements to reveal the work
quality and efficiency.
It was found that degrees of importance of all factors are higher than degrees of
application, therefore it was concluded that transparency principle needs to be
increased and enhanced in construction projects in Gaza Strip. Further, results
showed that there is a relationship between the importance and the application of
transparency factors indicating that contracting companies have a concern to apply
what they believe in its importance for projects management.
5.2 Outcomes Related to Objective Two
"To identify benefits, challenges and success factors supporting the
implementation of transparency principle"
Lists of benefits, challenges, and success factors were gathered from literature
reviews and various researches, and then the questionnaire tool was used to
investigate views of contracting companies on these lists regarding transparency
principle in Gaza Strip.
Results analysis of 12 benefits of transparency showed that transparency has worthy
advantages from respondents' viewpoint since the total mean of benefits is 75.49%.
Increase the effectiveness of the production planning and control process, Increase
the efficiency of workers since reduce wastage in efforts, Save time spent in
searching, wandering, or waiting for the tools, materials, and information needed to
do work, and Build trust and motivation of participants, are the most agreed benefits
by respondents and all about 80% mean value, which indicates that respondents are
89
well aware on the benefits of increasing transparency in construction projects in
Gaza Strip.
However, Stimulation of informal contact between the different hierarchical
positions, and Contributions towards introducing decentralization policies, are the
least agreed benefits of transparency that less than 70% mean values.
On another level, respondents approved that Increasing Transparency principle
significantly influences the applicability of other LC principles whereas all means
values regarding the effect of transparency on LC principles are above 71%. Thus,
there is a reciprocal relationship between transparency principle and lean
construction.
However, there are many factors should be applied properly in construction projects
to allow the success of increasing transparency principle; respondents gave these
success factors 75.49% importance. Results found that Establish strong
management, structured and systematic plan to implement visual systems, Training
and hands-on experience in order to make managers fully knowledgeable about
benefits of transparency principle and its impact on production system, and Establish
a visual mechanism to motivate workers to carry out their jobs efficiency and
effectively, are the most important success factors for increasing transparency in
construction projects in Gaza Strip.
Furthermore, results showed that there are considerable challenges facing the
application of transparency principle, total means of all 7 listed challenges equals
75%. Misunderstandings of Lean systems approach, Lack of knowledge as managers
are not aware of process transparency benefits, Low level of workers participation in
improvement process, and Restrict to traditional conversion, are the most approved
challenges facing the application of transparency principle with means values above
70%.
The obtained results of success factors and challenges indicated that projects
management in Gaza Strip should be supported by managers with higher knowledge
and better understand of transparency principle, its techniques and importance.
90
Project managers need to understand benefits of the new managements approach to
convince its applicability. Consequently, it was concluded that building capacities of
project managers is a crucial issue to allow increasing transparency in construction
projects in Gaza Strip.
These results are harmonized with the conduction obtained by (Ismaiel, 2013)who
studied the applicability of Lean Construction in the Gaza Strip Construction
Industry, and he found that team work and leadership management are the main
factors affect the applicability of lean construction principles in the Gaza strip.
5.3 Outcomes Related to Objective Three
"To investigate the proper Lean tools/techniques those enhance
transparency in Gaza Strip"
Previous literatures and published articles were reviewed from different
international journals in order to study lean construction, its techniques and tools. It
was found that there are four main tools that support increasing transparency
principle; 5-S, Increased Visualization, Huddle Meeting, and Visual Management.
The conducted survey was used to investigate the most proper techniques needed for
construction projects in Gaza Strip; respondents gave the most importance degrees to
Huddle Meeting, 5-S, Increased Visualization respectively, at means values above
82%. It was concluded that construction projects in Gaza Strip need to be enhanced
regarding the communication between different parties, and pay more attention to the
tidiness and orderings of work place.
While Visual Management tool obtained the least importance degrees at means value
72.77%. It was concluded that preferred simple tools preferable on tricky techniques
in construction projects in Gaza Strip.
5.3 Research contribution to previous studies
This research aimed to enhance transparency of construction projects throughout
lean construction approach, explore the present transparency practices in
construction projects, and identify the proper LC tools that enhance transparency in
Gaza Strip. An extensive review of literature was conducted to achieve this aim.
91
Generally, there are limited studies researched on lean construction approach while
there is no any researches study the principle of increasing transparency in Gaza
Strip. Further, the field of study is relatively recent approach therefore there are
limited researches on worldwide. In this research, the applicability of increasing
transparency principle within lean construction approach was examined.
Most previous studies investigated the applicability of lean construction approach or
specific tools of LC in generally, without focusing on transparency principle and its
different aspects. Also previous studies did not investigate the relationship between
increasing transparency principle and other LC principles. In this research the
relation between increasing transparency principle and other LC principles was
investigated.
Different instruments were conducted by previous studies such as case studies and
brain storming in the field of study, however there is no any researches used the tool
of questionnaire to study the applicability of increasing transparency principle in
construction projects so that the questionnaire of this research was built originally for
the purpose of this research drawing on literatures and case studies.
The outcomes of this research can be used to enhance projects success by give
attention to the mentioned factors, tools, and conclusions.
5.4 Research value
Construction projects in Gaza Strip are characterized by low productivity, errors,
poor co-ordination, bad reputation, high accident rates, insufficient quality and
overruns in cost and schedule (Yahia, 2004). Furthermore, wastes have been
recognized as a major problem in construction industry in Gaza Strip, and the level
of material waste is fairly high and higher than the nominal figures due to managerial
problems (Al-Moghany, 2006). Therefore, this research can be used to promote the
knowledge of lean construction as a new innovative management approach, and to
enhance projects ability to face challenges and problems through applying the
increasing transparency principle, this work reveals an important concept and paves
the path for future research.
92
Therefore, transparency concept within lean construction was spotlighted in this
research to add valuable contribution to construction industry and to enhance the
sector's performance. Also, this research is considered the milestone for applying
transparency concept and to start paying more attention to lean construction approach
in Gaza Strip. It is concerned with construction professionals and project managers
work in contracting firms to optimize the success of construction projects. It is hoped
that the obtained factors and tools in this study to be applied and examined
practically in construction projects in Gaza Strip.
Furthermore, this research will be added value to the current body of knowledge
about Increasing Transparency principle all over the world. Rarely researchers
studied this principle within lean construction, so that this research is considered as
one of these limited researches that study the applicability of transparency principle
in construction industry. Moreover, it is the first study that contributes significantly
to increase transparency within LC in Palestine. This study can provide a
documentation of reference for researchers who are interested in this field.
References
93
References
Al-Moghany, S. (2006). Managing and minimizing construction waste in Gaza
Strip. M.Sc. Thesis, Islamic University of Gaza, Palestin.
Alarcón, L. (1997).Lean construction.Catholic University of Chile,
Santiago.Book: CRC Press.
Arleroth, J., & Kristensson, H. (2011). Waste in Lean Construction–A case study
of construction site and the development of a Lean Construction Tool. M.Sc.
Thesis, Chelmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Aziz, R. F., & Hafez, S. M. (2013). Applying lean thinking in construction and
performance improvement. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 52(4), 679-695.
Ballard, G., Kim, Y., Jang, J., & Liu, M. (2007). Roadmap for lean
implementation at the project level. Research report: Construction Industry
Institute.
Ballard, G., Koskela, L., Howell, G., & Zabelle, T. (2001). Production system
design in construction. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction, Singapore.
Bauch, C. (2004).Lean product development: making waste transparent. Diploma
Thesis: TUM & MIT.
Bourque, L. (2003). How to conduct self-administered and mail surveys.
University of California at Los Angeles, USA. Book(Vol. 3): Sage.
Brady, D. A. (2014). Using visual management to improve transparency in
planning and control in construction. PhD Thesis, University of Salford.
Chi, H. (2011). 5S implementation in Wan Cheng Industry Manufacturing
Factory in Taiwan. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Stout.
Conte, A. S. I., & Gransberg, D. (2001). Lean construction: From theory to
practice. AACE International Transactions, CS101.
Oliveira, T. R., Costa, D. B., Ilse, N., & Thomas, R. (2012). Transparency in
Construction Sites. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction, San Diego, USA
Deming, W. (1986).Out of the Crisis. Book.Massachusetts Institute of
Technology Press, Cambridge.
94
Santos, A. (1999). Application of flow principles in the production management
of construction sites. University of Salford.
Santos, A., Powell, J., Sharp, J., & Formoso, C. (1998). Principle of transparency
applied in construction. Paper presented at the Process Of the Annual
Conference (IGLC-6), Brazil.
Enshassi, A., & Abu Zaiter, M. (2014). Implementation of Lean Tools on Safety
in Construction Projects in Palestine. Paper presented at the 22nd annual
conference Proceedings IGLC, Oslo, Norway.
Enshassi, A., Mohamed, S., & Abushaban, S. (2009). Factors affecting the
performance of construction projects in the Gaza strip. Journal of Civil
Engineering and Management, 15(3), 269-280.
Eriksson, P. (2010). Improving construction supply chain collaboration and
performance: a lean construction pilot project. Supply Chain Management:
An International Journal, 15(5).
Faniran, O., & Caban, G. (1998). Minimizing waste on construction project sites.
Engineering, construction and architectural management. 5(2), 182-188.
Australia: MCB UP Ltd.
Fayek, A. R., Dissanayake, M., & Campero, O. (2003). Measuring and
classifying construction field rework: A pilot study. Research Rep.
Fellows, R. F., & Liu, A. M. (2008). Research methods for construction: John
Wiley & Sons.
Formoso, C. T., Santos, A. D., &Powell, J. A. (2002). An exploratory study on
the applicability of process transparency in construction sites. Journal of
construction Research, 3(01).
Galsworth, G. (2004). The value of vision: the language of lean production is
self-ordering and self-improving. Industrial engineer, 36(8), 44-50.
Galsworth, G. (2005). Visual workplace: visual thinking. Visual-Lean Enterprise
Press, Portland.
Galsworth, G. D. (1997). Visual systems: harnessing the power of the visual
workplace: American Management Association.
Garas, G. L., Anis, A. R., & El Gammal, A. (2001). Materials waste in the
Egyptian construction industry. Proceedings IGLC-9, Singapore.
95
Green, S. D., & May, S. C. (2005). Lean construction: arenas of enactment,
models of diffusion and the meaning of „leanness‟. Building Research &
Information, 33(6).
Greif, M. (1991). The visual factory: building participation through shared
information: CRC Press.
Howell, G., Macomber, H., Koskela, L., & Draper, J. (2004). Leadership and
project management: time for a shift from Fayol to Flores. Paper presented at
the Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the International Group for
Lean Construction (IGLC-12).
Igarashi, R. (1991). The big picture. Visual control systems. Productivity Press,
Cambridge.
Ismaiel, M. I. A. (2013). The Applicability of Lean Construction in the Gaza
Strip Construction Industry. The Islamic University-Gaza.
Klotz, L. (2008). Process transparency for sustainable building delivery. (PhD),
The Pennsylvania State University.
Koskela, L. (1992). Book. Application of the new production philosophy to
construction: Stanford University.
Koskela, L., Bølviken, T., & Rooke, J. (2013). Which are the wastes of
construction? Paper presented at the Proceedings for the 21st Annual
Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction.
Koskela, L., Howell, G., Ballard, G., & Tommelein, I. (2002). The foundations of
lean construction. Design and construction: Building in value, 211-226.
Koskela, L., & Vrijhoef, R. (2000). The Prevalent Theory of Construction a
Hindrance for Innovation. Paper presented at the Proceedings for 8th Annual
Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Brighton, UK.
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Book. Research methodology: Methods and techniques:
New Age International. 2nd
Edition: New Age.
Lee, S.-H., Diekmann, J. E., Songer, A. D., & Brown, H. (1999). Identifying
waste: applications of construction process analysis. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Conference of the International Group for
Lean Construction. Berkeley, USA.
Liff, S., & Posey, P. A. (2004). Seeing is believing: how the new art of visual
management can boost performance throughout your organization:
AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn.
96
Macomber, H., & Howell, G. (2003). Foundations of Lean Construction:
Linguistic Action. Paper presented at the IGLC.
Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D., & Festinger, D. (2005). Essentials of research design
and methodology: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Masaaki Imai, K. (1986). The Key to Japan's Competitive Success: New York,
NY: Random House.
Naing, L., Winn, T., & Rusli, B. (2006). Practical issues in calculating the sample
size for prevalence studies. Archives of orofacial Sciences.
Nijhof, A., Graafland, J., & de Kuijer, O. (2009). Exploration of an agenda for
transparency in the construction industry. Construction Innovation.
Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota production system: beyond large-scale production: crc
Press.
Polat, G., & Ballard, G. (2004). Waste in Turkish construction: need for lean
construction techniques. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 12th
Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction IGLC-
12, August, Denmark.
Russell, M. M., Liu, M., Howell, G., & Hsiang, S. M. (2014). Case studies of the
allocation and reduction of time buffer through use of the last planner system.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(2), 04014068.
Salem, O., Solomon, J., Genaidy, A., & Luegring, M. (2005). Site
implementation and assessment of lean construction techniques. Lean
Construction Journal, 2(2).
Salem, O., Solomon, J., Genaidy, A., & Minkarah, I. (2006). Lean Construction:
From Theory to Implementation. Journal of management in engineering,
22(4).
Salem, O., Solomon, J., Genaidy, A., & Minkarah, I. (2006). Lean construction:
From theory to implementation. Journal of management in engineering,
22(4).
Shingo, S. (1988). Non-stock production: the Shingo system of continuous
improvement: CRC Press.
Sjögren Leong, M., Ward, S., & Koskela, L. (2015). Towards an Operational
Definition of Lean Construction Onsite: IGLC. net.
Stewart, T. A. (1992). The search for the organization of tomorrow. Fortune,
125(10), 92.
97
Teo, M., & Loosemore, M. (2001). A theory of waste behaviour in the
construction industry. Construction Management & Economics, 19(7).
Tezel, A., Koskela, L., & Tzortzopoulos, P. (2008). Visual management in lean
construction. Conference Paper at 8th International Built and Human
Environment Research : Czech Technical University, Prague
Tezel, B., Koskela, L., & Tzortzopoulos, P. (2009). The functions of visual
management. Conference Paper, University of Salford, Manchester.
Tezel, B., Koskela, L., & Tzortzopoulos, P. (2010). Visual management in
construction: Study report on Brazilian cases. University of Salford,
Manchester.
Tjell, J., & Bosch-Sijtsema, P. M. (2015). Visual Management in Mid-sized
Construction Design Projects. Procedia Economics and Finance, 21, 193-200.
Womac, J., & Jones, D. (1996). Lean thinking: New York: Simon and Schuster.
Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Roos, D. (1990). Book. Machine that changed the
world: Simon and Schuster.
Womak, J. Jones, Daniel. (2003) Book. Lean thinking: Free Press.
Yahia, A. (2004). Time Schedule Preparation By Predicting Production
RateUsing Simulation. M.Sc. Thesis, Islamic University of Gaza, Palestine.
Yahya, M. A., & Mohamad, M. I. (2011). Review on lean principles for rapid
construction. Jurnal Teknologi, 54.
Ye, G., Jin, Z., Xia, B., & Skitmore, M. (2014). Analyzing causes for reworks in
construction projects in China. Journal of management in engineering, 31(6).
98
Appendixes
99
Appendix (I): The Questionnaire "English"
Questionnaire about:
The Applicability of Increasing Transparency Principle within Lean Construction in
Gaza Strip
Dear participant:
We thank you for contribution in some of your time and effort to participate in the
filling of this questionnaire, which aim to improve and enhance the awareness and
understanding about the applicability of lean construction and transparency
practices in the Gaza Strip’s construction industry. Your contribution in the filling of
this questionnaire is for the purpose of obtaining the master degree in Construction
Management, Islamic University of Gaza therefore the information will be
contributed for the purpose of scientific research only, while ensuring full
confidentiality.
Lean Construction (LC) is a new culture of management of projects in construction
industry that means eliminating all wastes and non-added value activities of the
construction project through all phases in order to get a profitable delivery. This
research is studying LC tools which improve transparency of construction projects.
Transparency means a separation of the information network and the hierarchical
structure of order giving. A process reaches excellent in terms of transparency when
everyone, even those with relatively little technical knowledge, understands the
process without asking.
The questionnaire consists of five parts:
1. Organizational background of respondent.
2. Evaluate factors of increasing transparency concept in Gaza Strip
construction projects.
3. Evaluate LC tools for improving transparency.
4. Investigate the effect of increasing transparency on application of LC
principles.
5. Evaluate benefits, success factors and challenges of applying the concept of
increasing transparency.
Researcher: Anas M. Abu daqqa
Supervisor: Dr. Khaled Hallaq
100
Part I: Organizational background of respondent
1. Job title:
Company director Project manager Site engineer Office engineer
2. Years of respondent experience:
Less than 5 years 5–less than 10 years 10–less than 20 years
20 years, and above
3. The place of company office, which governorate:
The South The Middle area Gaza The North
4. Years of company experience:
Less than 5 years 5–less than 10 years 10–less than 20 years
20 years, and above
5. Number of permanent employees:
Less than 5 5 - 10 employees 11 - 20 Over 20
6. Number of projects implemented in the last 5 years:
Less than 10 10 – 20 projects 21 - 30 projects Over 30 projects
7. Annual average value of projects in the last 5 years (U.S. $):
Less than 1 M 1 M – less than 5 M 5 M - less 10 M$ 10 M, and over
8. Company Classification:
Classification Nature of Work
First Class Second Class
Third Class
Building
Roads
Water and Sewer
Electro-mechanic
9. The respondent degree of knowledge of LC approach, and familiarity with the concept and tools:
High Medium poor None
Part II: Evaluate factors of increasing transparency concept in Gaza Strip
construction projects
The following factors in the table represent the factors of transparency in the
construction projects. Please choose degree of application of these factors in the
work field, in which the 10 is the highest degree and the factor is always applied,
the degree gradually decrease to 0 as the factor is not applied at all.
101
Please choose degree of importance of each factor in order to improve the
transparency of construction projects in Gaza Strip in which 10 is the highest
importance, and gradually decrease to 0 as the factor has no importance.
No. Transparency Factors Degree of Applying (0 - 10)
Degree of Importance (0 - 10)
1. Reducing the interdependence of project activities in time, materials, and work area.
2.
Utilizing visual devices to immediately recognize mistakes and problems. Ex. Andon system: light board to notify the management to any problem immediately as lacks in materials.
3. Making the process visible and observable by appropriate site layout, visible fencing, signage for safety equipment location, good lighting.
4. Incorporating information in the work place about project activities by display boards, statistics, or videos.
5. Establishing basic housekeeping to eliminate clutter, maintaining orderly and clean workplace.
6. Using measurements to reveal the work quality and efficiency. Ex: Measurements for performance indicators, completion and delay percentage.
Part III: Evaluate LC tools for increasing transparency.
The following factors in the table represent lean construction tools that increase
transparency. Please choose degree of application of these tools in the work field,
in which the 10 is the highest degree and the tool is always applied, the degree
gradually decrease to 0 as the tool is not applied at all.
Please choose degree of importance of each tool in order to increase transparency
of construction projects in Gaza Strip in which 10 is the highest importance, and
gradually decrease to 0 as the tool has no importance.
102
No. Lean Construction Tools Degree of Applying (0 - 10)
Degree importance (0 - 10)
Applying 5 S tool (Sort – Straighten – Shine – Standardize Sustain(
1. Seiri/Sort: Throw away all rubbish and unrelated materials, and make sure that all broken stuff is in a special place. (No good and bad stuff set together)
2. Seiton/Straighten: Tools and materials were piled in a regular pattern in the site store, and keep the orderliness of the store content.
3. Place devices and tools close to work areas in the site.
4. Place materials in the work place with consideration of safety and crane movement.
5. Each subcontractor takes responsibility of tools and orneriness of his work area.
6. Seiso/Shine: Hire sufficient numbers of cleaners who maintain the cleanliness of the workplace permanently and continuously.
7. Everyone should be a janitor in the workplace as everyone cleans his area after finishing the activity.
8.
Seiketsu/Standardize: Standardize the way of maintaining cleanliness, and design a checklist to apply all standards of cleanliness and required tidiness.
9. Shitsuke/Sustain: Maintain all previous practices daily throughout the project and make it a way of life. "Commitment"
Applying Increased Visualization tool
10.
Conducting a workshop for all employees to sign on a commitment to comply with all safety and security requirements, and attach the pledge to the caravan wall.
11. Use colorful signage, especially for the application of security and safety guidelines.
12. Usebillboardsto explain the implementation of project stages and the delivery dates.
13. Calculate Plan Percent Complete (PPC) periodically and attachresults charts on the caravan walls.
103
Applying Huddle Meeting tool
14. Weekly meeting of all foremen; to discuss the weekly plan and all issues and potential problems.
15. A quick day-to-day meeting of the project staff to discuss the work carried out the day before and what is planned for the current day.
Applying Visual Management
16. Give information about the activities to affect workers' behavior (without obliging). Ex: boards, charts, logs, photos, maps etc.
17. Grab workers' attention visually to give them a guide and obligate them to follow. Ex: light boards and safety signage.
18. Control workers' behaviors physically by determining how to work correctly in compulsory way. Example: Set a border defines the area of work.
19. Control processes electronically or mechanically to guarantee the right response with zero risk.
Part IV: Investigate the effect of increasing transparency on LC principles. The following table shows lean construction principles. Please choose degree of
effect of increasing projects transparency on supporting and facilitating the
application of these principles, in which 10 is the highest effect, and gradually
decrease to 0 as there is no effect.
Degree of Applying (0 - 10)
LC Principles No.
Reduce of non-value-adding activities. 1.
Increase output value through systematic consideration of customer requirements. 2.
Reduce project variability. 3.
Reduce project cycle time. 4.
Simplify by minimizing the number of steps, parts and linkages between activities.
5.
Increase flexibility in work and output. 6.
104
Degree of Applying (0 - 10)
LC Principles No.
Focus control on the complete process. 7.
Build continuous improvement into the process. 8.
Balance flow improvement with conversion improvement. 9.
Conduct reference studies, and lesson learnt (Benchmarking) 10.
Part V: Evaluate benefits, success factors and challenges of applying the concept of increasing transparency. The following is a list of benefits of increasing projects transparency. In your
experience, please choose the degree of your consent for each mentioned benefit,
in which 10 is totally agree and gradually decrease to 0 as you do not agree at all.
No. The Benefits Degree of consent (0 - 10)
1. Save time spent in searching, wandering, or waiting for the tools, materials, and information needed to do work.
2. Increase the efficiency of workers as reduce wastage in efforts.
3. Increase the effectiveness of the production planning and control process.
4. Increase the visibility of errors (Defects are more visible and easier to recognize)
5. Reduce the propensity to errors.
6. Facilitate a holistic view of the entire process and to implement flow.
7. Build trust and motivation of participants.
8. Support and involve workers at continuous improvement.
9. Stimulation of informal contact between the different hierarchical positions.
10. Contributions towards introducing decentralization policies.
11. Simplification of the production control systems.
12. Reduce reworks that don't comply with drawings and specifications.
105
The following is success factors for applying transparency in Gaza Strip. In your
experience, choose the degree of your consent for each mentioned success factors,
in which 10 is totally agree and gradually decrease to 0 as you do not agree at all.
No. Success Factors Degree of consent (0 - 10)
1. Establish strong management, structured and systematic plan to implement visual systems.
2. Establish a visual mechanism to inspire or motivate workers to carry out their jobs efficiency and effectively.
3. Training and hands-on experience in order to make managers fully knowledgeable about benefits of transparency principle and its impact on production system.
4. Forcing the reduction of inventories to some extent.
5. Tightening production plans.
6. Reducing process variability to facilitate the implementation of visual control systems.
The following is a list of challenges facing the application of increasing projects
transparency in Gaza Strip. In your experience, please choose the degree of your
consent for each mentioned challenges, in which 10 is totally agree and gradually
decrease to 0 as you do not agree at all.
No. The Challenges Degree
of consent (0 - 10)
1. Misunderstanding of Lean systems approach as organizations tend to confuse “Lean thinking” with the application of a tool or a set of tools in practice.
2. Lack of knowledge as managers are not aware of process transparency benefits.
3. Restrict to traditional conversion model and manager's fear to changes into unknown approach to them.
4. Difficulties in communication in construction.
5. Changeable work environment as site layout modified several times throughout the project.
6. Large place of work site where large numbers of crews spread out and move continuously.
7. Low level of participation of workers in improvement process.
Thanks for cooperation.
106
Appendix (II): The Questionnaire "Arabic"
:إستببت حىل
دراست يذي لببهت تطبك يبذأ سبدة انشفبفت ف إطبر االشبء انز ف لطبع غشة
The Applicability of Increasing Transparency Principle within Lean Construction in
Gaza Strip
اغال ػ١ى سؽخ هللا ،، / اغبدح اىشا
شىش ى غبزى ف لزى عذو زؼجئخ ز االعزجبخ؛ از رذف ئ دساعخ ذ شفبف١خ اشبس٠غ
زا ٠شع ؽؼشارى رؼجئخ . االشبئ١خ ف لطبع غضح، ػا رؾغ١ اشفبف١خ خالي ظ االشبء اش
اإلعزجبخ ثذلخ طي ئ ازبئظ اشعح ز اذساعخ، وب أ اؼبد از عف رم ثزوشب
. عزغزخذ ألغشاع اجؾش اؼ فمؾ
ظ ؽذ٠ش غج١اب ف غبي اداسح اشبس٠غ ٠ذف ا رم١ و١خ : Lean Construction))االشبء اش
ر ازشو١ض ف زا اجؾش . افبلذ ف الذ ااد اطبلخ اجشش٠خ ب٠إد ا رم١ رىفخ اششع االشبئ
ػ أداد االشبء اش از رخذ شفبف١خ اشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ ؽ١ش رؼزجش ص٠بدح اشفبف١خ أؽذ أ أذاف
. االشبء اش، از رإد ا رم١ و١خ افبلذ ثبشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ
رف١ش شجىخ اؼبد اخبطخ ثبششع ثؾ١ش رى زبؽخ غ١غ، : (Transparency)اشفبف١خ
رؾغ١ ازاط ث١ ع١غ االؽشاف راد اؼاللخ ثبششع؛ زغ١ ؼشفخ أبو اخطأ رم١ افبلذ
رؼزجش اؼ١خ االشبئ١خ شفبفخ ػذب ٠غزط١غ اغ١غ ؽز ر اخجشح . ؼشفخ اػغ افبلذ ف لغ اؼ
. اؾذدح ف خؾ ع١ش األشطخ اظشح األ لغ اؼ
أعضاء؛ خغخرزى ز االعزجبخ
. ؼبد ػبخ ػ ششوخ امبالد اذط ذخ اج١ببد: اغضء األي
. ف اشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ ف لطبع غضحػا رؾغ١ اشفبف١خدساعخ : اغضء اضب
. رم١١ أداد االشبء اش ابعجخ زطج١ك اشفبف١خ ف اشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ:اغضء اضبش
.رأص١ش رطج١ك جذأ ص٠بدح اشفبف١خ ػ جبدب االشبء اش: اغضء اشاثغ
.رم١١ فائذ ػا اغبػ ازؾذ٠بد ف رطج١ك جذأ ص٠بدح اشفبف١خ: اغض اخبظ
أظ ع أث دلخ : اجبؽش
خبذ اؾالق . د: اششف
2017اثش٠
.شبوش٠ ى ؽغ رؼبى
107
(√ )٠شع اخز١بس اإلعبثخ ابعجخ ثػغ ئشبسح: يؼهىيبث ػبيت حىل شزكت انمبوالث ويذخم انبببث: أوالال
: انس انىظف نهشخص انجب .1
ذ٠ش اششوخ ذ٠ش ششع ذط لغ ذط ىزت
: ػذد سىاث انخبزة انخبصت ببنشخص انجب .2
عاد 5أل 5 - 10أل
عاد
10 - عخ 20أل 20فأوضش عخ
يكب يمز انشزكت .3
اؾبفظبد
اغث١خ
اؾبفظخ اعط ؾبفظخ غضح اؾبفظخ اشب١خ
: ػذد سىاث انخبزة انخبصت ببنشزكت .4
عاد 5أل 5 - 10أل
عاد
10 - عخ 20أل 20عخ فأوضش
: ػذد انىظف انذائ ف انشزكت .5
5أل
ظف١
5 -10 ظف 11 -20 ظف 20أوضش
ظف : ػذد انشبرغ انت تى تفذهب خالل انخس سىاث انبضت .6
10أل
شبس٠غ
10 -20 ششع 21 -30 ششع 30أوضش
ششع : (ببنذوالر األيزك)انؼذل انسى نمت انشبرغ انت تى تفذهب خالل انخس سىاث انبضت .7
١ 1أل 1 - ١ 5أل 5 أل - ١
10 ١
10١ فأوضش
:تصف شزكت انمبوالث .8
صبضخ صب١خ أ ازظ١ف / ؽج١ؼخ اؼ
يبب
طزق ويىاصالث
يب ويجبر
كهزويكبك
: ، وػه درات ببنفهىو واألدواثLean Construction يؼزفت بهج االشبء انز أيتهك .9
ثذسعخ ػب١خ ثذسعخ زعطخ ثذسعخ ػؼ١فخ ثذسعخ ؼذخ
انشفبفت ف انشبرغ االشبئت تحس دراست ػىايم : ببال
اششوخ درجت تطبكاؼا اشفمخ ثبغذي ازب رض ػا اشفبف١خ ثبشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ، ثشعبء اخز١بس
ؽ١ش 0 أػ دسعخ رض رطج١ك اؼب دبا، رم اذسعخ ثبزذس٠ظ ا 10ز اؼا ف االغ ؽ١ش
و ػب زؾغ١ شفبف١خ اشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ ثمطبع غضح درجت أهتوب شع اخز١بس /ال٠ز رطج١ك اؼب ثزبربا
. ١خرؼذ األؽ١ش 0 رض أ١خ ػب١خ، رم ثبزذس٠ظ ا 10ؽ١ش
108
ػىايم انشفبفت نزلىا
درجت
انتطبك
(10 – 0)
درجت
األهت
(10 – 0)
. رم١ اإلػزبد٠خ ث١ أشطخ اششع ف الذ ااد ىب اؼ .1
2. بدسان األخطبء إلاعزخذا أداد ازؾى اشئ اؽخ : اشبو عش٠ؼا
.اإلداسح ثغشػخ ػ أ خ ٠ؼشل اؼ ومض اادرج١ اؼئ١خ ي
3.
خالي(ف١ض٠بئ١با )عؼ أظخ أشطخ اششع شئ١خ اػؾخ
ػغ خبسؽخ لغ، : ازخط١ؾ ابعت لغ اعزخذا االفزبد
ألبو، ع١بط شئ ؽي الغ ٠غؼ ثشؤ٠خ الغ رػؾبالفزبد
. اخبسط، اػبءح وبف١خ ف و صا٠ب الغ
4. خالي ؽي أشطخ اششع رغغ١ذ رؼ١ ؼبد ف ىب اؼ
. ؽبد ػشع، اؽظبئ١بد، ف١ذ٠بد ؽي اششع األشطخ افزح
رشر١ت رظ١ف لغ اؼ ثبعزشاس، اؾشص ػ اصاخ افػ .5
. اىب
6. إششاد األداء : ضبي. اعزخذا امب١٠ظ ىشف ػ وفبءح عدح اؼ
Performance Indicators ،ل١بط غجخ اإلغبص ازأخ١ش.
تمى أدواث االشبء انز انبسبت نتطبك انشفبفت ف انشبرغ االشبئت : بنلبال
اششوخ دسعخ رطج١كف١ب ٠ لبئخ ثأداد االشبء اش از رؾمك شفبف١خ اشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ، ثشعبء اخز١بس
ؽ١ش ال٠ز 0 أػ دسعخ رض رطج١ك األداح دبا، رم اذسعخ ثبزذس٠ظ ا 10ز األداد ف االغ ؽ١ش
رض 10شفبف١خ ؽ١ش أع رطج١ك جذأ ص٠بدحاي و أداح دسعخ أ١خوب شع اخز١بس/ رطج١ك اي أداح ثزبربا
. رؼذ األ١خ ؽ١ش 0أ١خ ػب١خ، رم ثبزذس٠ظ ا
أدواث االشبء انز انزلى
درجت
انتطبك
(10 – 0)
درجت
األهت
(10 – 0)
S ( Sort – Straighten – Shine – Standardize Sustain ) 5: تطبيق أداة
1. ػشس٠خ ثبلغ، ازأوذ ايازخض امبخ و ااد غ١ش : ػهت انفزس
افظ ث١ ) أ ع١غ األداد اؼطثخ عدح ف ىب خظض ب
.(ااد االصخ غ١ش االصخ
2. اؾفبظ ، رغ١غ ااد األداد ف طبد٠مؼ ظ ؼ١:ػهت انتزتب
.ػ رشر١ت خض
3. ػغ األعضح األداد ف أبوب اظؾ١ؾخ لش٠جاب أبو اعزخذاب ف
. الغ
4. شاػبح ؽشوخ اؼبي ػا اغالخ األب ػذ رشر١ت رظ١ األداد
. األعضح ثبلغ
5. ٠ؼ و مبي ثبؽ ػ رشر١ت أدار رؾ غئ١خ اظب ف اطمخ
. اخبطخ ثؼ ف الغ
6. رظ١ف ػذد وبف ػبي اظبفخ ؾفبظ ػ اظبفخ ثشى : ػهت انتظف
. دائ غزش
109
أدواث االشبء انز انزلى
درجت
انتطبك
(10 – 0)
درجت
األهت
(10 – 0)
اىب ٠ؼ و شخض ػ ظبفخ ار ، ثظبفخ الغازب ع١غ اؼب١ .7
. ثغشد االزبء اشبؽ
8.
رظ١ رط ٠ؾز ػ ؼبد أعبع١خ ػ و شبؽ ف و : وضغ انؼبز
زطج١ك و ؼب١٠ش اظبفخ ازشر١ت checklistلغ اؼ لبئخ رذل١ك
.اطثخ
9.
االؼجبؽ اؾفبظ ػ ع١غ ابسعبد اغبثمخ ١٠با د امطبع : االستذايت
. ؽاي فزشح اششع ف ع١غ أؾبء الغ، عؼب أعة ؼزذ ف اؼ
"ازضا"
Increased Visualizationتطبيق أداة
10. رل١غ ع١غ اؼب١ خالي سشخ ػ ػ رؼذ ثبالزضا ثىبفخ زطجبربغالخ
.األب، رؼ١ك ازؼذ ػ وشفبخ الغ
خ عبرثخ الزجب خبطخ ثزطج١ك اسشبداد األ - زمخ-اعزخذا الفزبد .11
.اغالخ
.رؼ١ك ؽبد خبطخ ثشاؽ رف١ز اششع ، اػ١ذ ازغ١ اطثخ .12
13. ثشى دس رؼ١ك خططبد ازبئظ (PPC) ؽغبة غجخ االغبص خطؾ
.ػ وشفبخ الغ
The Huddle Meetingتطبيق أداة
14. اعزبع أعجػ غ١غ شالج اؼبي؛ بلشخ اخطخ األعجػ١خ ع١غ امؼب٠ب
.اشبو اؾزخ
15. بلشخ األػبي اغضح ثب١ اغبثك، ب ٠ عش٠غ طبل اششع؛اعزبع
١ اؾب خطؾ ي
Visual Managementتطبيق الادارة املرئية
16. دو )رمذ٠ ؼبد شئ١خ ؽي األشطخ زأص١ش ػ رظشفبد اؼب١ ثبلغ
. (انشاو
. ؽبد، سع ث١ب١خ، طس، خشائؾ: ضبي
17. ٠ظبي ؼخ خالي اظد أ اظسح العزة ازجب اؼب١
. الفزبد اغالخ االب، اؼئ١خاؽبد: ضبي. انشايهى بهبوؼ١خ
18. رؾذ٠ذ ؽش٠مخ اؼ اظؾ١ؾخ ثشى اضا ةفشبئالب ثزظشفبد اؼب١ انتحكى
.ػغ ع١بط ٠ؾذد غبي اؾشوخ: ضبي. ال غبي ؾ١بد ػ
19. ؼب اؼ اظؾ١ؼ ثذ أ انكتزوبال أو يكبكبال ازؾى ثغ١ش اؼ١بد
.غجخ خطأ
تأ ز تطبك يبذأ سبدة انشفبفت ػه يببدئ االشبء انز: رابؼبال
ص٠بدح اشفبف١خ ف دػ رغ١ رطج١ك اجبدب رأص١ش دسعخ االشبء اش، ثشعبء اخز١بس جبدبف١ب ٠ لبئخ
ؽ١ش ٠ؼذ رأص١ش ص٠بدح اشفبف١خ ف دػ رطج١ك 0، رم اذسعخ ثبزذس٠ظ ا رأص١ش أػ دسعخ 10 ؽ١ش ازب١خ
.اجذأ
110
انتأ زدرجت يببدئ االشبء انزانزلى
(10 – 0)
.ياؾذ عد أشطخ ال رؼ١ف ل١خ ؼ .1
ص٠بدح ل١خ عدح اخشط ابئ ششع خالي دساعخ غخ زطجبد .2
. طبؽت اؼ
.عثبششازغ١ش رم١ اززثزة .3
.رم١ دسح اششع اض١خ .4
.رجغ١ؾ اب خالي رم١ ػذد اخطاد أعضاء اشاثؾ ث١ األشطخ .5
. ص٠بدح اشخ ثبؼ اخشعبد .6
. ازؾى اىب اشوض ثبششع وى .7
. ػ رؾغ١بد غزشح ثبششع .8
. رؾم١ك ازاص ث١ ازؾغ١بد ازذفمخ ازؾغ١بد ازؾ١٠خ .9
.اعشاء دساعبد شعؼ١خ، االعزفبدح اخجشح ازشاوخ .10
تمى فىائذ وػىايم انجبح وانتحذبث ف تطبك يبذأ سبدة انشفبفت : خبيسبال
ػ و فبئذح افمزىدسعخ ثشعبء اخز١بس خالي خجشرى ، خ فائذ ص٠بدح شفبف١خ اشبس٠غف١ب ٠ لبب
.غ١ش افك اجزخ0 دسعخ ، رم ثبزذس٠ظ اافمخ أػ دسعخ 10ؽ١ش زوسح
انفــىائـــــــذانزلى يىافمتكىدرجت
(10 – 0)
رف١ش الذ از ٠ؼ١غ ف اغإاي اجؾش ازظبس األداد ااد اؼبد .1
. االصخ م١ب ثبؼ
. ص٠بدح وفبءح اؼبي ار أب رؾذ ذس اغد .2
. ص٠بدح فؼب١خ ػ١خ ازخط١ؾ اشالجخ، ازؾى ثشى أفؼ ثبششع .3
. ص٠بدح ػػ األخطبء، ار رظجؼ ػ١ة اؼ أوضش اىشبفبا غخ ادساوب .4
. رم١ ١ اؼب١ ؾ اخطأ .5
. رغ١ سؤ٠خ شبخ ؼ١خ ثأوب رف١ز األشطخ ثزذفك ٠غش .6
. ثبء اضمخ اذافؼ١خ ذ ع١غ اؼب١ .7
دػ ئششان ع١غ اؼب١ ف ازط٠ش اغزش ؼ، ار رظجؼ ػ١خ ازط٠ش .8
. عبؼخ رخض اى
. اش١خ اخزفخاالغرؾف١ض االرظبي غ١ش اشع ث١ .9
.الشوض٠خاغببد ف رطج١ك ع١بعبد .10
.اشالجخأظخ رغ١ رجغ١ؾ .11
. طبثك خططبد ااطفبداي٠م اػبدح اؼ اغ١ش .12
111
و ػب ٠غب ف رطج١ك جذأ اشفبف١خ أهت درجت ، ثشعبء اخز١بس خ ػا غبػ ض٠بدح اشفبف١خف١ب ٠ لبب
.رؼذ أ١خ ؽ١ش 0 دسعخ ، رم ثبزذس٠ظ اأ١خ أػ دسعخ 10ؽ١ش
ػــىايـــــم انـجـــــبحانزلى درجت األهت
(10 – 0)
. عد ئداسح ل٠خ، خطخ ظخ غ١خ زطج١ك األظخ اشئ١خ ف الغ .1
. ئشبء آ١خ شئ١خ اػؾخ إلب رؾف١ض اؼب١ ػ رف١ز ظبئف ثىفبءح فؼب١خ .2
3. ازذس٠ت اؼ رجبدي اخجشاد زضم١ف اذساء ثضا٠ب جذأ اشفبف١خ أصش ػ غبػ
. اششع
. رخف١غ و١بد ااد ف اخبص ا ؽذ ب .4
. ػغؾ خطخ اؼ زى راد أشطخ ؾذدح فؼبخ .5
. رم١ ازغ١١شاد ف خش٠طخ الغ لذس اغزطبع زغ١ رف١ز أظخ ازؾى اشئ١خ .6
، ثشعبء اخز١بس خ ازؾذ٠بد از لذ راع رطج١ك ص٠بدح اشفبف١خ ف اشبس٠غ االشبئ١خ ثمطبع غضحف١ب ٠ لبب
.رؼذ األ١خ ؽ١ش 0، رم ثبزذس٠ظ ا أ١خ أػ دسعخ 10ؽ١ش و ػب أهتدرجت
درجت األهت انتحــذــــــبثانزلى
(10 – 0)
(10 – 0) 1. ػؼف اؼشفخ ثظ االشبء اش أصش ػ لطبع االشبءاد، ع اششوبد
.ثبجبدب األداد
. افائذ اؾم١م١خ زطج١ك جذأ اشفبف١خ ف اشبس٠غاؼشفخ ةػذ .2
. ازم١ذ ثبرط ازم١ذ الداسح ، اخف ازغ١١ش ظ اداس عذ٠ذ .3
.طؼثبد االرظبي ازاط ث١ اؼب١ ف طبػخ االشبء ثشى ػب .4
. ؽج١ؼخ ث١ئخ اؼ ازغ١شح، ار ٠زغ١ش شى الغ ػذح شاد خالي رف١ز اششع .5
6. عد أػذاد وج١شح اطال اؼبخ اخزفخ رزشش رزؾشن ثشى غزش ف غبؽخ
. اعؼخ
. اخفبع غز شبسوخ اؼب١ ف ػ١خ ازط٠ش .7
لحسن تعاونكم ،،شكرا
