The American University in Cairo
School of Sciences and Engineering
Construction and Architectural Engineering
Improving Project Performance Using Lean
Construction in Egypt: A Proposed Framework
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in
Construction Engineering
Marwa Gamal Swefie
Fall 2013
Supervisor
Dr. A. Samer Ezz El-Din
Acknowledgments
This thesis would not have been possible without the guidance and the help of several
individuals who in one way or another contributed and extended their valuable assistance
in the preparation and completion of this study.
First and foremost, I would like to express my deep appreciation and gratitude to my
supervisor, Dr. A. Samer Ezz El-Din, for his guidance, understanding, patience, and
continuous support throughout my graduate studies at AUC. Without his guidance and
persistent help, this thesis would not have been possible.
I would also like to express my deep gratitude to my family for the support they provided
me through my entire life and in particular, I must acknowledge my parents for their
continuous support, encouragement, love, and patience.
Furthermore, I would like to thank my friends for their support, in particular, my best
friend and sister, Eiman El Banhawy, for her support, love and patience.
Finally, I would like to thank all my colleagues at work for their continuous support,
patience and encouragement, in particular, Dr. Engy Serag and Eng. Nima Shirazi.
II | P a g e
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- II
Table of Contents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- III
Appendix --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- V
List of Tables --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VI
List of Figures ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ VIII
List of Abbreviations------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ XI
Abstract--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- XII
Chapter One ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
1. Introduction & Background ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1
1.1 Lean Construction versus Traditional Construction Project management approach ------------- 2
1.2 Brief Background on Lean Production ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3
1.3 From Lean Manufacturing to Lean Construction ----------------------------------------------------------- 3
1.4 Problem Statement------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6
1.5 Objective ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
1.6 Research Methodology ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
1.7 Thesis Overview -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
Chapter Two --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12
2. Literature Review ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12
2.1 Deficiencies in Traditional Project Management Method --------------------------------------------- 13
2.2 Lean construction – a project approach-------------------------------------------------------------------- 18
2.2.1 Waste Elimination------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 20
2.2.2 Lean Project Delivery System --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
2.2.3 Lean Construction Principles ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22
2.2.4 Application of Lean in Construction Industry ------------------------------------------------------- 31
2.2.5 Assessing and Evaluating Lean techniques ---------------------------------------------------------- 34
Chapter Three ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35
3. Questionnaire---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35
Section A: Project Information ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 36
Section B: Factors affecting project performance in construction projects in Egypt----------------- 38
III | P a g e
Section C: Respondents’ awareness about lean techniques and their applications in the Egyptian
construction industry ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 44
Questionnaire Results and Findings ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 55
Chapter Four -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 59
4. Lean Construction Framework ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 59
4.1 Benefits realized by Lean Construction implementation in different Countries ----------------- 59
4.2 Proposed Lean Construction Management Framework------------------------------------------------ 61
4.2.1 Framework Foundation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 61
4.2.1 Framework Limitation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 66
4.3 Lean Construction Framework Verification: A Case Study --------------------------------------------- 69
4.3.1 Application of Lean Construction Framework on the Case Study ------------------------------ 71
4.4 Simulation for the Execution phase ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 135
Chapter Five -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 138
5. Results and discussions--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 138
5.1 Results of applying the proposed Framework on Case Study ---------------------------------------- 138
5.1.1 Results of the Future state – Ongoing projects ---------------------------------------------------- 139
5.1.2 Results of the Ideal State – New/Future projects ------------------------------------------------- 145
5.1.3 Summary of the future and ideal state results----------------------------------------------------- 153
5.2 Results of Simulation------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 159
5.3 Framework Validation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 166
Chapter Six ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 168
6. Conclusion ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 168
6.1 Research Summary --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 168
6.2 Research Findings ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 168
6.3 Future research-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 172
Bibliography -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 173
Appendix A - Questionnaire ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 179
Appendix B – Assessment of the Proposed Construction Framework ------------------------------------- 187
IV | P a g e
Appendix
Appendix A - Questionnaire on “Implementing Lean Construction Techniques in
Egypt”………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…..179
Appendix B - Assessment of the Proposed Lean Construction Framework........................187
V|Page
List of Tables
Table 2. 1 - Factors causing construction cost and time overrun ...................................................... 12
Table 2. 2 - The ingredients of the new and underlying theories of project management ............... 15
Table 2. 3 - Differences between the traditional approach and the Lean approach ......................... 16
Table 2. 4 - Lean Construction Principles and techniques (O. Salem, et al. 2006) (Refaat H. AbdelRazek 2007) (Sacks, et al. 2010) (Eriksson 2010) ............................................................................... 30
Table 3. 1 – The frequency of factors impacting the project performance in Egypt ......................... 38
Table 3. 2– Ranking of the causes of Time overrun ........................................................................... 56
Table 3. 3 – Lean Principles/technique/tools to be efficiently deployed........................................... 57
Table 3. 4 – Lean Principles/technique/tools Semi/fully implemented ............................................. 58
Table 4. 1 Countries Using Lean Approach in Construction & the realized benefits (performance
Improvement)..................................................................................................................................... 60
Table 4. 2 – Case Study data ............................................................................................................... 69
Table 4. 3 – Value Stream Mapping Symbols ..................................................................................... 72
Table 4. 4 - Durations for the preparation phase activities................................................................ 74
Table 4. 5 – Durations for the material delivery/on-site transportation phase................................. 75
Table 4. 6 – Durations for the activities of the execution phase........................................................ 77
Table 4. 7 – Types of wastes and its descriptions .............................................................................. 82
Table 4. 8 - Waste Identification for preparation phase (planned, actual & disrupted durations) ... 84
Table 4. 9 - Waste Identification for material delivery phase (planned, actual & disrupted dur.) .... 86
Table 4. 10 - Waste Identification for execution phase (planned, actual & disrupted durations) ..... 87
Table 4. 11 – Lean techniques and the associated actions & benefits............................................... 97
Table 4. 12 –Procedures for Future Map development (ongoing project) for preparation works
process.............................................................................................................................................. 110
Table 4. 13 - Procedures for Future Map development (ongoing project) for material delivery
process.............................................................................................................................................. 112
Table 4. 14 - Procedures for Future Map development (ongoing project) for execution process .. 113
Table 4. 15 - Procedures for Ideal Map development (new project) for preparation works process
.......................................................................................................................................................... 124
Table 4. 16 - Procedures for Ideal Map development (new project) for material delivery process 126
Table 4. 17 - Procedures for Ideal Map development (new project) for execution process ........... 127
Table 4. 18 – Durations of the ready mix concrete activities (after 30 replications) ....................... 136
Table 4. 19 - Simulated Principles .................................................................................................... 136
Table 5. 1- Overall duration of the preparation works process after adopting Lean approach ...... 139
Table 5. 2 - Duration of the material delivery process after adopting the Lean approach .............. 141
VI | P a g e
Table 5. 3 - Duration of the execution process after adopting Lean approach ............................... 144
Table 5. 4 - Duration of the preparation works after adopting Lean approach ............................... 146
Table 5. 5 - Duration of the material delivery process after adopting Lean approach .................... 148
Table 5. 6 - Duration of the execution process after adopting Lean approach ............................... 151
Table 5. 7- Time saved per cycle after imposing the proposed framework ..................................... 153
Table 5. 8 - Number of activities after applying the proposed Framework ..................................... 154
Table 5. 9 - Contribution of activity type after applying lean in the future State ............................ 155
Table 5. 10 - Contribution of activity type after applying lean in the ideal State ............................ 156
Table 5. 11 – Process efficiency after applying Lean ........................................................................ 158
Table 5. 12 – Duration at Non-added value activities equals zero ................................................... 160
Table 5. 13 – Durations at Essential Non-added value activities equals zero .................................. 161
Table 5. 14 – Durations at ENVA and NVA activities equals zero ..................................................... 162
Table 5. 15 – Summary for simulation results of step 1 ................................................................... 163
Table 5. 16 – Impact of Quality right first time on the durations .................................................... 164
Table 5. 17 – Summary for the interviews results............................................................................ 166
VII | P a g e
List of Figures
Figure 1. 1 - Scope Triangle ...................................................................................................... 1
Figure 1. 2 - Price Changes in Construction Material (CAPMAS n.d.) ...................................... 2
Figure 1. 3 - Research Methodology .......................................................................................... 7
Figure 2. 1 - Project Management Triangle ........................................................................................ 13
Figure 2. 2 – Project Management Life cycle (PMI 2008)................................................................... 14
Figure 2. 3 – Quality Control Process in the traditional method........................................................ 18
Figure 2. 4 – Project Control Process in the traditional method ........................................................ 18
Figure 2. 5 - Project Problems (Howell and Lichtig 2008) .................................................................. 18
Figure 2. 6 - Production as a flow process and the shaded boxes are the non-value adding activities
(Koskela, An exploration towards a production theory and its application to construction 2000) ... 20
Figure 2. 7 – Lean Project Delivery System (G. Ballard, Lean Project Delivery System 2000) ........... 22
Figure 2. 8 – The 5 Guide Principles of Lean (Bertelsen 2002) ........................................................... 23
Figure 2. 9 – Last Planner System (Zettel 2008) ................................................................................ 26
Figure 2. 10 - 5S approach (the left picture store before 5S & the left picture after 5S) (O’Connor
and Swain 2013) ................................................................................................................................. 29
Figure 2. 11 - Site communication centre for all parties to access vital project information
(O’Connor and Swain 2013) ............................................................................................................... 29
Figure 2. 12 - Proposed 3D visualization for past, present and future work status for a trade (Sacks,
Treckmann and and O. Rozenfeld 2009) ............................................................................................ 30
Figure 3. 1 - Experience of the Respondents...................................................................................... 37
Figure 3. 2 - Project Values ................................................................................................................. 37
Figure 3. 3 - Respondents’ professions .............................................................................................. 38
Figure 3. 4 - Factors impacting the project cost ................................................................................. 41
Figure 3. 5 - Factors Impacting Project Time ...................................................................................... 42
Figure 3. 6 - Factors impacting project quality ................................................................................... 43
Figure 3. 7 - Factors impacting project productivity .......................................................................... 44
Figure3. 8- Potential of using new management techniques in construction ................................... 45
Figure3. 9 - Respondents’ awareness about lean techniques ............................................................ 45
Figure3. 10 - Percentage of respondents using computer-aided tools .............................................. 46
Figure3. 11- Computer aided tool used.............................................................................................. 46
Figure 3. 12 – Waste Reduction ......................................................................................................... 47
Figure3. 13 - Mean Scores for waste reduction ................................................................................. 47
Figure3. 14 – Reduce Variability ......................................................................................................... 48
Figure 3. 15 – Mean score for Reduce Variability .............................................................................. 48
Figure3. 16 – Increase Transparency .................................................................................................. 49
VIII | P a g e
Figure 3. 17 – Mean score for Increase Transparency ....................................................................... 49
Figure 3. 18 – Flow Variability ............................................................................................................ 50
Figure3. 19 – Mean score for Flow Variability.................................................................................... 51
Figure3. 20 – Continuous Improvement............................................................................................. 52
Figure 3. 21 – Mean score for Continuous Improvement .................................................................. 52
Figure 3. 22 – Process Variability........................................................................................................ 53
Figure 3. 23 – Mean score for Process Variability .............................................................................. 53
Figure 3. 24 – Customer Focus ........................................................................................................... 54
Figure 3. 25 – Mean score for Customer Focus .................................................................................. 54
Figure3. 26 – Visual Management ...................................................................................................... 55
Figure 4. 1 - Countries Using Lean Approach in Construction & the realized performance
Improvement ...................................................................................................................................... 61
Figure 4. 2 – Lean Framework Foundation ......................................................................................... 63
Figure 4. 3– Traditional Project Control process (PMBOK® Guide, 4th Edition) ................................ 63
Figure 4. 4 - Proposed Lean Construction Framework ....................................................................... 68
Figure 4. 5 – Case Study Layout (Garage Area) .................................................................................. 70
Figure 4. 6 – Original process map for the different work phases ..................................................... 78
Figure 4. 7 - Current State Map for preparation Phase (I) ................................................................. 79
Figure 4. 8 – Current Sate Map for the material delivery phase ........................................................ 80
Figure 4. 9 - Current state Map for the execution phase ................................................................... 81
Figure 4. 10 – Activities contribution in the preparation works (no. of activities) ............................ 90
Figure 4. 11 – Activities contribution in the preparation works (durations)...................................... 90
Figure 4. 12 – Activities contribution in the material delivery/transportation (No. of Activities) ..... 92
Figure 4. 13 – Activities contribution in the material delivery/transportation (durations) ............... 92
Figure 4. 14 – Activities contribution in the Execution phase (no. of activities) ................................ 94
Figure 4. 15 – Activities contribution in the Execution phase (durations) ......................................... 94
Figure 4. 16 – Causes of disruptions for preparation phase .............................................................. 95
Figure 4. 17– Causes of disruptions for execution phase................................................................... 96
Figure 4. 18 - Future Map (ongoing project) for preparation works process .................................. 117
Figure 4. 19 - Future Map (ongoing project) for material delivery process ..................................... 118
Figure 4. 20 - Future Map (ongoing project) for execution process ................................................ 119
Figure 4. 21- Ideal Map (new project) for preparation works process ............................................ 132
Figure 4. 22 - Ideal Map (new project) for material delivery process .............................................. 133
Figure 4. 23 - Ideal Map (new project) for execution process ......................................................... 134
Figure 5. 1- Percentage of decrease in each type of activity ........................................................... 140
Figure 5. 2 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity........................................................... 143
Figure 5. 3 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity........................................................... 145
Figure 5. 4 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity of the preparation works ................. 147
IX | P a g e
Figure 5. 5 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity of the material delivery .................... 150
Figure 5. 6 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity of the execution ............................... 152
Figure 5. 7 - No. of activities of Future map before & after Lean .................................................... 154
Figure 5. 8- No. of activities of Ideal map before & after Lean ........................................................ 154
Figure 5. 9 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the future State of the
preparation process ......................................................................................................................... 155
Figure 5. 10 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the future State of the
Material delivery process ................................................................................................................. 156
Figure 5. 11 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the future State of the
Execution process ............................................................................................................................. 156
Figure 5. 12 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the ideal State of the
preparation process ......................................................................................................................... 157
Figure 5. 13 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the ideal State of the
Material delivery process ................................................................................................................. 157
Figure 5. 14 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the ideal State of the
Execution process ............................................................................................................................. 158
Figure 5. 15 - Duration after eliminating NVA activities................................................................... 160
Figure 5. 16 – Durations after eliminating ENVA activities only....................................................... 161
Figure 5. 17 – Durations after eliminating ENVA and NVA activities ............................................... 162
Figure 5. 18 – Duration of each activity type after introducing “Get quality right first time” ......... 165
Figure 5. 19 - Total Duration after introducing “Get quality right first time” .................................. 165
X|Page
List of Abbreviations
Lean Construction
LC
Lean Construction Institute
LCI
Lean Project Delivery System
LPDS
Last Planner System
LPS
Value Added
VA
Non Value Added
NVA
Essential Non Value Added
ENVA
Integrated Project Delivery
IPD
Just-in-Time
JIT
Collaborative Master Target Programme
CMTP
XI | P a g e
Abstract
There are numerous challenges and problems facing the construction industry in Egypt.
The main criterion for success of any construction project is to deliver the project without
time or cost overrun. Lean Construction is a new management technique that has been
successfully implemented in many countries to increase the probability of a project
success. This research examines the effectiveness of implementing lean thinking on the
performance of Egyptian construction projects. First, the current appreciation and
awareness of lean construction within the Egyptian construction industry is determined
through an actual survey within one of the largest construction firms in Egypt. It is
concluded that 55% of the respondents are not aware about lean concept but have high
potentials to use new management techniques/approaches to improve the projects’
performance. The survey also presents some of the lean principles that are efficiently used
in some of the construction projects in Egypt such as standardization, continuous
improvement, housekeeping, customer focus, and reduce variability. However, some of
the principles are still not fully implemented and need to be more considered in the
Egyptian construction industry such as waste reduction, visual management, just-in-time,
collaboration, benchmarking, and prefabrication. Second, a Proposed Lean Construction
Framework is developed and several lean techniques are adapted. The developed
framework consists of six items: 1) Process map 2) Current State Map 3) Waste Elimination
4) Used lean tools/techniques 5) Future State Map (for ongoing projects) 6) Ideal State
Map (for new projects). The framework is applied on a Case Study for the ready mix
concrete works of a garage area in an existing hotel project in Egypt to show its impact on
the duration of certain processes in the project and on the non-value added activities. The
three main phases of work examined in this case study are the preparation process (preexecution), material delivery, and execution process of the ready mix concrete works. The
data were collected through observations, monthly reports and schedules. The
effectiveness and impact of some of the lean tools/techniques used in this research is
evaluated based on previous implementations in similar countries to Egypt. In order to
mimic the execution process of the ready mix concrete works in different projects
conditions, concrete data is collected from 9 different projects in Egypt and is simulated in
MS Excel to show the effect of the lean concepts on the duration of the execution process
only. The results of applying the proposed framework to the current state for the three
work phases of the project have showed significant improvements in time reduction,
process efficiency and the number of the non-added value activities. It is found that the
improvements in the project’s performance of the ideal state (future projects) are more
than those of the future state (for ongoing project). The proposed Lean Construction
XII | P a g e
Framework in this study is generic and can be applied to any type of work. However, the
research results are based on one case study that only attributable and restricted to
certain type of projects.
.
XIII | P a g e
Chapter One
1. Introduction & Background
There are numerous challenges and problems facing the construction industry all over the
world. Construction projects are famous for being over-budget, late and burdened with scope
creep. Many of the problems facing the construction industry, such as delays, over-budgeting
and poor quality, have been extensively discussed in the literature. The traditional
construction management approach has been effective in solving some of these problems.
The Construction Management has been defined as the overall planning of a project by
allocating the appropriate resources to finish the
project on time, at budget and at targeted quality.
Figure 1.1 shows the “Scope triangle “which illustrates
the relationship between the three tradeoffs in a
project cost, time & quality. Successful project
management can be achieved by bringing together the
tasks and resources necessary to accomplish the project
objectives and deliverables within the specified time
constraints and within the planned budget.
Figure 1. 1 - Scope Triangle
In Egypt, there are some serious challenges facing the construction sector. Being one of the
major sectors in the Egyptian economy, construction and building sector has a significant
impact on GDP, employment and investment contributing to at least 4.7% of the total GDP
(Amcham 2003), (ISCG 2010). However, in the last two years and after the Egyptian
revolution, many sectors suffered due to the unstable economy situation associated with the
political risks in Egypt (Aref 2012). The construction sector has seen decline with 9.4% in the
1st Quarter of the Year 2012 and it continued to suffer the impacts of the unstable political
situation (Aref 2012). This contraction, if continued, would have a deep impact on
unemployment rates and many other industries. The main factors that are affecting the
Egyptian construction sector can be classified as follows: construction companies,
government policies and strategies, available resources, institutional backing and supporting
industries (Amcham 2003). The prices and cost of the construction production factors such as
labor, materials, machine utilization, transport, energy and other cost have changed over
time, especially after the revolution. Figure 1.2 shows some of the price changes in the
construction materials.
Figure 1. 2 - Price Changes in Construction Material (CAPMAS n.d.)
Therefore, a new methods and approaches should be developed and introduced to the
industry in an attempt to overcome the damages occurred due to the current economic
situation and to face all the new challenges that occurred after the revolution by
minimizing all the non-add values to the industry.
Construction, being a complex industry, has motivated researchers to introduce new
approaches and solutions to relieve the chronic problems in the industry. In this context, it
was essential to enhance the traditional management methods in solving the problems,
introduced by the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) of the Project
Management Institute (PMI), with novel management methods. These new methods
include adoption of new technologies such as simulation, 3D modeling, Building
Information Modeling (BIM) and new project management approach such as Lean Project
Management.
1.1 Lean Construction versus Traditional Construction Project
management approach
Lean approach is a new method of project management in construction industry. It is more
efficient on complex projects with high uncertainties in addition to the fast track projects.
There are several differences between the Lean Construction approach and the traditional
project management approach. Following are some of these differences as discussed in the
literature (more details will be presented in chapter 2) (Sicat 2012):
2|Page




The role of control in lean is to assure reliable workflow in contrary to traditional
method which takes corrective actions after detecting variances.
The main target of the lean approach is to maximize value by improving the whole
process but in the traditional method optimization is for each activity separately.
Lean is a pull-driven approach while traditional method is push-driven approach
Reducing variations at early stages is one of the main aims of lean thinking while in
the traditional approach it is not considered.
1.2 Brief Background on Lean Production
The Lean management philosophy was essentially derived from the Japanese
manufacturing industry, mostly from the Toyota Production System (TPS) by Ohno, a young
Engineer in Toyota (Holweg 2007). This system (TPS) was initially introduced by Japan after
World War II when Japan required producing small batches of cars in many varieties in
contrary to the Ford principle of mass production (same cars with large production runs)
(Conte 2002). Toyota concluded that the principle of mass production is not efficient
anymore, especially, after the collapse in sales that Toyota encountered and led to
releasing large part of their workforce. Hence, they came up with new ideas and
introduced the Toyota Production system, known as lean production (Ahrens 2006).
Toyoto’s main purpose behind introducing this new concept, known as lean production,
was to enhance production efficiency by producing high quality products with maximum
value and at less cost (Jacobs 2010). The system was based on achieving a continuous
production flow in order to reduce inventories. In essence, this was accompanied by
eliminating activities that add no value to the final product, namely wastes which obtained
a system that gave Toyota high performance levels (Conte 2002). In lean manufacturing, all
the lean techniques are employed to continuously identify and remove the wastes from
the system (Badurdeen 2006). Lean production system aims to meet customer
requirements by delivering the product instantly and with no intermediate inventories (G.
A. Howell, What is Lean Construction 1999).The manufacturing process has seen
noticeable improvements and development after applying lean production principles to
the industry (Zimmer 2005).
1.3 From Lean Manufacturing to Lean Construction
Construction processes are becoming much more complex and therefore a coherent
management approach should be developed to solve the chronic problems and difficulties
of the construction projects. Lean Construction (LC) was introduced and defined by The
3|Page
Lean Construction Institute (LCI) as “a production-management-based approach to project
delivery-a new way to design and build capital facilities”. Having seen intrinsic
improvements in manufacturing, implications of lean production principles to the
construction changed the method of work done through the delivery process. The main
purpose of lean production system is to maximize value and minimize waste by using the
appropriate lean techniques (Blakey 2008). Despite the significant differences between the
features of construction and manufacturing, they almost share the same goals and pursue
same principles such as system optimization through collaboration, continuous
improvement, focus on customer satisfaction, work flow by eliminating obstacles and nonadded values and creating pull production.
Implementing lean production philosophy to Construction presents challenges due to the
significant differences in the physical characteristics of the end product of manufacturing
and construction. Yet, it meant to be a step forward as it presents a lot of potentials to
improve the industry. One-of-a-kind production, site production and complexity are some
of the features that distinguish construction from manufacturing (O. Salem, et al. 2006).
These features were described in previous researches as follows: On-site production:
Construction is site-position manufacturing where the production process (installation &
erection) is carried out at the final site which increases the value of the product. Also, the
contractor must assure high-quality standards for the erected components on site which is
mostly affected by site conditions (O. Salem, et al. 2006) (Koskela, Application Of The New
Production Philosophy To Construction 1992); One-of-a-kind production: The frequency of
customizing products in construction is much more higher than in manufacturing where
the customers play an important role in customization/change throughout the course of a
project. In contrary, manufacturing are known for using specialized equipment to
standardize the items accepting very low level of customizations by retailers (O. Salem, et
al. 2006) (Koskela, Application Of The New Production Philosophy To Construction 1992);
Complexity: Construction process is complicated, unique and dynamic where each project
is a new task accompanied by different resources, ideas and initial design with variable
specifications. In contrast, in manufacturing, the production process is optimized by using
specialized facilities with appropriate technology to ensure the reliable flow of the product
(O. Salem, et al. 2006). These characteristics together cause a lot of uncertainties in the
production process. The climatic and soil conditions, coordination between different trades
and the customer changes are some of the uncertainties that may encounter any project
causing significant impact on the time and cost of the project (O. Salem, et al. 2006).
Despite the differences between Construction and manufacturing industries, they are both
aiming to deliver a competitive product in the shortest time possible with maximum value
4|Page
and quality and at less cost (Zimmer 2005). Given the aforementioned resemblances, then
the applicability of lean production in construction was considered. Notwithstanding, each
industry has its own ways to achieve the target of Lean (O. Salem, et al. 2006).
1.3.1 Implementing Lean Manufacturing Techniques to Construction
Lean approach is determined by applying the relevant techniques to the main activities of
the process. Design, supply and manufacturing are the basic activities of the lean
organization (O. Salem, et al. 2006). The main goals of these principles, as introduced by
TPS, are cost reduction, quality assurance and developing people/partners to ensure
sustainable growth of the system (O. Salem, et al. 2006).
Japanese manufacturers, especially Toyota Co., have developed the principles of lean
production. Liker introduced the 14 principles that create the Toyota way and organized
them in four wide categories known as the four “P’s” :1) Philosophy, 2) Right Process lead
to Right Results 3) Developing Your People/Partners, and 4) Solving Root Problems (Liker
2004). Toyota Way is about creating continuous improvements within an organization.
Essentially, TPS is famous for its focus on waste reduction by reducing non-value added
activities. Toyota identifies seven main types of waste and Liker added an eighth: 1)
overproduction 2) waiting 3) unnecessary transport 4) over processing 5) Excess inventory
6) unnecessary movement 7) defects 8) unused employee creativity (Liker 2004).
The shortcomings in the existing planning, execution, and control models were
demonstrated by Koskela and Howell while introducing new conceptual models of project
management theory. They concluded that the traditional tools, as introduced in the
PMBOK (work breakdown structure, CPM, and earned value management), failed to deliver
projects’ on-time, at budget and at desired quality and argued that that these tools are
unable to manage project-based production systems (Abdelhamid 2004).
The term “Lean Construction” was introduced in 1993 by the International Group for Lean
Construction in its first meeting that was hosted by Lauri Koskolea in Finland (Gleeson
2007) (Ballard and Howell, Lean project management 2003). The lean project delivery
system was developed by the Lean Construction Institute (LCI)/Ballard. The basic idea or
domain of LPDS is the project-based production systems. Ballard classified the LPDS into
four interconnected modules: project definition, lean design, lean supply, and lean
assembly (G. Ballard, Lean Project Delivery System 2000). Following is some of the lean
production techniques as introduced in the literature: Flow Variability, Process Variability,
Continuous Improvement, and Transparency (O. Salem, et al. 2006). Several countries
5|Page
started to use and incorporate lean concepts and techniques in the construction industry
such as USA, UK, Finland, Denmark, Singapore, Korea, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Peru, Ecuador
and Venezuela (Ballard and Howell, Lean project management 2003).
1.4 Problem Statement
The conventional project management approach in construction is not appropriate for
complex projects anymore due to the several deficiencies of the traditional method
illustrated in chapter 2. The traditional Monitoring and Control under the PMBOK® Guide,
4th Edition, corresponds to a reactive approach more than a proactive one in which actions
are only taken after the problems are appeared instead of preventing their occurrence.
The Lean thinking is still not widely applied among the construction organizations and
projects in Egypt. The emphasis within lean construction literature has mainly been
focused on data collected from construction projects outside Egypt. Limited lean
construction studies were conducted in Egypt concerning the applicability of the lean
principles on construction projects.
1.5 Objective
The main aim of the thesis is to improve the performance of construction building projects
in Egypt by applying the appropriate lean concepts to the process from the Contractor’s
perspective. This can be achieved through the following:
1. Determining the current appreciation and awareness of lean construction within
the Egyptian construction industry.
2. Developing a framework to show the effectiveness of implementing Lean concepts
to the conventional management approach (PMBOK) in the Egyptian construction
industry. It also shows how various aspects of lean thinking can be implemented in
a construction project.
3. Verifying the proposed framework by applying it to a case study in Egypt showing
the impact of using lean construction concepts on the duration of the ready-mix
concrete activities.
4. Enhancing the prospect of the Project Control process from being a reactive
approach to a proactive one by applying lean concepts.
6|Page
1.6 Research Methodology
The research method used to achieve the objectives of this thesis is based on the following
steps:
1. Literature Review to show the realized benefits from applying lean concepts to
construction in different projects from different countries
2. An actual survey (on-site and off-site interviews) to identify the current appreciation
and awareness of lean construction within the Egyptian construction industry.
3. Proposed Framework for applying Lean Construction in Egypt (practical guidelines)
4. Apply the proposed lean construction framework on a case study to show the impact of
implementing lean concepts on the project performance
5. Simulation model for a part of the framework to show all the possible improvements to
the project
Research Question
How can the performance of the project be improved through the use of lean thinking?
Questionnaire
Literature Review (previous works)
*Traditional Management methods
*Lean Construction Applications
*Actual survey to determine the current
appreciation and awareness of lean
construction within the Egyptian
construction industry.
*Data Collection for the Survey: Through
on-site & off-site interviews for engineers
within one of the largest construction
firms in Egypt.
Problem Statement
Research Objective
Data Collection for the Case study
Developing Proposed Lean Construction
Framework
* The case study data: durations, productivity rates and process map for the concrete
works through site observations , monthly reports and schedules.
*From literature, the benefits of lean construction in different countries around the world
Data Collection for the Simulation model
*Durations and productivity rates of the ready mix concrete for 9 building Projects in
Egypt through monthly reports and schedules.
Framework Verification:
*By applying the Lean Construction framework on a Case Study of an existing Construction project in Egypt
*Measuring the Performance (Compare to AS is Model)
*Developing simulation model to mimic the execution process of the ready mix concrete works in different projects conditions
Framework Validation:
By getting 5 experts in the construction field in Egypt to provide their opinion about the proposed lean construction Framework
Figure 1. 3 - Research Methodology
7|Page
These steps are further explained in the following section and are illustrated in figure 1.3.
1. Literature Review
The literature review conducted in this research focused on the several applications of lean
principles in construction industry. The benefits of using lean approach in different
countries outside Egypt were also addressed. In addition, criticism for the traditional
management approach pursued by the PMBOK was discussed, especially, the Monitoring
and Controlling phase being the backbone for the whole construction process. Based on
this, the difference between the conventional management approach and lean approach
was addressed to show the deficiencies of the conventional approach in comparison with
the lean thinking.
2. Questionnaire
For the purpose of achieving the goal of this research, a questionnaire was conducted in
one of the leading construction companies in Egypt. This questionnaire was used to
investigate the main factors impacting the construction projects performance and the
employees ‘understanding regarding the lean thinking/techniques in the Egyptian
construction industry.
The questionnaire is classified into 3 main sections as follows:



Section (A): is structured to investigate general information and background about
the respondents’ experience.
Section (B): is structured to identify the factors affecting the overall performance of
the project in current practice and the methods adopted to reduce these negative
impacts.
Section (C): is structured to examine the respondents’ awareness about lean
techniques and their applications in the Egyptian construction industry.
3. Problem Formulation
The problem statement was formulated after conducting an initial research in the
literature and in the Egyptian construction industry through a survey. The literature and
the survey showed that there is lack of awareness of lean thinking in the construction
industry in Egypt. Most of the scholarly studies were based on data collected outside Egypt
and very few studied was conducted in Egypt regarding lean thinking in Construction.
8|Page
4. Thesis Objective
The main aim of the thesis is to improve the performance of construction building projects
in Egypt by applying the appropriate lean concepts to the process from the Contractor’s
perspective.
5. Framework Development
A Framework was developed to show the effectiveness of implementing Lean concepts to
the conventional management approach in the Egyptian construction industry. It also
shows how various aspects of lean thinking can be implemented in a construction project.
The proposed framework showed the practical guide lines that can be followed in order for
the lean thinking to be appropriately applied to the construction industry.
6. Framework Verification: A Case Study
For the purpose of framework verification, actual data from an existing project was
gathered (case study) and analyzed to show the impact of using lean concepts on the
overall duration of certain process. Case studies are a suitable way to study and investigate
the current management approach in projects (Merschbrock 2009).
The framework application focused on the preparation phase, material delivery and
execution phase of the ready mix concrete works (including all the relevant works such as
shuttering, reinforcement and pouring). The choice of this scope of work (concrete) was
based on the 80/20 rule as concrete works usually represents a considerable percentage of
the project cost and duration in most of the projects in Egypt.
The collected data shows the current work activities and map the real process of concrete
work activities of construction project in one of the largest construction firms in Egypt. The
necessary quantitative data for preparation and execution process of the concrete works
was collected from site observations and the schedule updates. The collected data was
analyzed and the main factors impacting the performance were identified. Based on this
data, the lean construction framework was applied to the current process and the
effectiveness of implementing lean concepts to the process was identified.
9|Page
7. Simulation Model
To ensure that the framework accurately represents the real process, a customized
simulation model was developed in Excel to show the effect of the lean principles on the
project duration for part of the works described in the framework. The duration of the
concrete work activities was collected from 9 projects to provide basis for such model.
Random numbers of the projects duration were generated using normal distribution on MS
Excel software. The project activities (variables) were simulated to show the impact of each
variable on the output results (project duration) and changes to as is model were
identified. Then, the lean principles were introduced to both models to show the effect of
different lean techniques on the overall duration of the concrete activities.
8. Data Collection
8.1 Survey
A questionnaire was conducted and sent to 25 respondents in different projects within the
same organization. Only 20 out of 25 responded to the questionnaire. The main purpose of
this questionnaire is to measure the awareness of employees about Lean construction in
Egypt. The examined sample was taken from one of the two biggest construction
companies in Egypt, being a pioneer in the construction field. The details and the analysis
of the questionnaire are illustrated in Chapter three.
8.2 Case Study Data
The quantitative data of the case study was provided by the Main Contractor. The
concerned data was the preparation phase, material delivery phase and execution phases.
The durations and productivity for all the relevant activities was collected. The data
collection included also the process maps of the aforesaid activities. These data was
collected from the approved Baseline schedules, daily reports and submittal logs. Based on
the literature, the lean approach is more efficient in the fast track, uncertain and complex
projects; hence, the case study was chosen based on this. The case study description:
Existing Hotel project located near downtown in Cairo, Egypt. It consists of one existing
building which is the main building which consists of 144 rooms and 12 floors and three
new building: swimming pool, Garage area and Ballroom. The research will focus on the
concrete process of the Garage Area. The details of the Garage Area are illustrated in
Chapter four.
10 | P a g e
8.3 Lean benefits from Literature
Since lean construction is new to the construction sector in Egypt, an overview of lean
benefits from previous works outside Egypt was highlighted. The impact of lean approach
on the duration and productivity of projects outside Egypt was addressed. These impacts
were then filtered and the most convenient results, from countries that are almost similar
to Egypt circumstances, were chosen to show the impact of such principles on the
construction process of the chosen case study.
9. Framework Validation
For the purpose of framework validation, a set of interviews were conducted with 5
experts in the construction field in Egypt. They were asked to provide their opinion about
the applicability and efficiency of the proposed lean construction Framework. The analysis
and results of the interviews are illustrated in chapter 5.
1.7 Thesis Overview
The thesis consists of six chapters as follows:
Chapter two presents an extensive literature review for the traditional construction
management approach and how the lean construction emerged and applied to the
industry.
Chapter three demonstrates on the questionnaire analysis and results regarding the
Egyptian market awareness of the Lean thinking in the construction industry. In addition, it
focuses on the relation between the lean principles and the main factors affecting the
projects’ performance in Egypt.
Chapter four introduces detailed description for the Framework development that was
used to achieve the research objective. This chapter includes description and analysis for
the used case study. It also includes customized simulation model for part of the works
addressed in the framework.
Chapter five shows the study results of the proposed framework and the simulation
model.
Chapter six presents the conclusions and recommendations for future research.
11 | P a g e
Chapter Two
2. Literature Review
Construction is a very complicated industry that requires rigorous systems to deliver the
project on timely, efficient and effective manner. The schedule and cost overrun are
common in most of the construction projects. Therefore, the main criterion for success of
any construction project, regardless its size or complexity is to deliver the project without
time or cost overrun. Several causes of the cost and time overrun were identified in the
literature. Rahman et al. present in their research the causes related to construction
resources which considerably causing cost overrun. The resource related factors as
identified in the literature includes: material, manpower, equipment and finance (Rahman,
Ismail A.; Memon, Aftab H.; T.A.Karim, Ahmad 2013).Table 2.1 shows list for the causes
identified by Rahman, et al. 2013; Olawale and Sun 2010.
Table 2. 1 - Factors causing construction cost and time overrun (Rahman, Ismail A.; Memon, Aftab
H.; T.A.Karim, Ahmad 2013) (Olawale and Sun 2010)
Category
Material
Factors for Time and cost overrun
Fluctuation of prices of materials
Shortages of materials
Changes in material specification and type
Delay in delivery of materials
Dependency on imported materials
Manpower
High cost of labor
Shortage of skilled labor
Severe overtime
Labor productivity
Financial difficulties of owner
Delay payment to supplier/subcontractor
Money
Delay in progress payment by owner
Cash flow and financial difficulties faced by
contractors
Poor financial control on site
12 | P a g e
Machinery
Equipment availability and failure
Late delivery of equipment
Insufficient number of equipment
Unforeseeable conditions
Management
Unpredictable weather conditions
Risk and uncertainty associated with
projects
Lack of proper training and experience of
PM
Complexity of works
Lack of appropriate software
Engineering/Contract
Design changes
Discrepancies in contract documentation
Project Stakeholders
Conflict between project parties
Non-performance of subcontractors and
suppliers
Many of the causes of cost and schedule overrun can be avoided by incorporating various
changes to the traditional management approach or by applying new management
thinking to the industry.
2.1 Deficiencies in Traditional Project Management Method
Koskela and Howell (2000), in their prior researches, highlighted the reasons behind
introducing novel methods in construction management. In their researches, they criticized
the current management practice and argued that this
approach is inadequate and should be reformed to keep
pace with the complexity and uncertainty of the projects
(Howell and Koskela, Reforming Project Management: The
Role of Lean Construction 2000). Before showing the
shortcomings of the traditional project management
approach, the following paragraph will present a brief
about its definition and contents.
Figure 2. 1 - Project Management
Triangle
13 | P a g e
The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) of the Project Management
Institute (PMI) defined project management as (R.Duncan 1996):
“Project Management is the application of knowledge skills tools, and techniques to
project activities in order to meet or exceed stakeholder needs and expectations from a
project. Meeting or exceeding stakeholder needs and expectations invariably involves
balancing competing demands among:
• Scope, time, cost and quality
• Stakeholders with differing needs and expectations
• Identified requirements (needs) and unidentified requirements (expectations)”
Project
initiation
Project
Closure
Monitoring
&
Controlling
Project
Planning
Project
Execution
Figure 2. 2 – Project Management Life cycle (PMI 2008)
The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) provides guidance for the typical
project life cycle. The phases of the project life cycle as introduced in the PMBOK are as
follows:
1) Initiation Process
2) Planning Process
3) Execution Process
4) Monitoring & Controlling Process
5) Closing process
14 | P a g e
Koskela and Howell (2000) claimed that the deficiencies in the current project
management are due to flawed assumptions and theories. The assumptions include several
deficient perceptions such as low uncertainties as to scope; activities relationship and
dependencies are simple, controlling activity standards will assure outcomes. Morris
described the theory of project management as a discipline of applying the transformation
model of production used previously in manufacturing (Howell and Koskela, Reforming
Project Management: The Role of Lean Construction 2000). Theoretical deficiencies can be
briefed as follows: that there are other characteristics in production besides
transformations that can make the output valuable, resources usage efficient and
customer requirements are met in the best manner (Howell and Koskela, Reforming
Project Management: The Role of Lean Construction 2000). It was argued that
improvements to the current practice of management can be achieved by applying the
production management approach including not only transformation but management of
workflow and value generating process as well. Hence, lean production theory and
principles were considered to be applied to construction (Howell and Koskela, Reforming
Project Management: The Role of Lean Construction 2000). Table 2.2 illustrates the
Ingredients of the new and theoretical foundation of project management.
Table 2. 2 - The ingredients of the new and underlying theories of project management
(Koskela and Howell, The Theory of Project Management: Explanation to Novel Methods 2002)
Subject of Theory
Project
Management
Underlying theory of project
management
Transformation
Output)
New theoretical foundation of
project management
(Input
& Transformation
Flow
Value generation
Planning Management-as-planning
Management-as-planning
Management-as-organizing
Execution Classical communication theory Classical communication theory
Language action perspective
Control
Thermostat model
Thermostat model
Scientific experimental model
Koskela and Howell (2002) believed that the underlying theory of the conventional
construction project management practice is obsolete; hence, it should be reformed. They
addressed the problems occurred as a result of the conventional methods flaws such as:
“Project management has not achieved the goals set to it: it does not perform in a
satisfactory way. In small, simple and slow projects, the theory-associated problems could
be solved informally and without wider penalties. However, in the present big, complex,
and speedy projects, traditional project management is simply counterproductive; it
15 | P a g e
creates self-inflicted problems that seriously undermine performance.” (Koskela and and
Howell, The underlying Theory of project management is obsolete 2002). Therefore, it
became crucial in construction industry to search for non-conventional methods and new
management thinking to achieve the maximum value with minimum waste, time, and cost.
Table 2.3 shows the differences between the traditional approach and Lean approach as
addressed in the literature
Table 2. 3 - Differences between the traditional approach and the Lean approach (H. G. Ballard
2000, Sicat 2012, G. Ballard, 2000, Howell, 1999)
Activity
Control
Traditional PM Approach
Project control represented in
monitoring the performance
(schedule and cost) and take
corrective
actions
after
detecting negative variances as
shown in figure 2.3 and 2.4 (H.
G. Ballard 2000).
In the traditional approach, all
the efforts of the management
are concentrated on optimizing
each activity separately, thus,
reducing overall performance
(Sicat 2012)
Lean Construction Approach
The role of project control is
to assure reliable workflow
by measuring and improving
the system Performance
(Sicat 2012)
Value
Considering less cost as value.
Also, the customer has to define
all his requirements at the
outset of the project regardless
the change in markets and the
new technologies (Sicat 2012).
Project is managed as a
value generating process
where
the
customer
satisfaction is created and
developed over the course of
the project (G. A. Howell,
What is Lean Construction
1999).
Work
techniques
Push-driven schedules are used
to release information and
material (Sicat 2012).
(e.g.
material is ordered to a predetermined schedule to arrive
on site before the work is carried
out. If the stock is not used, the
Pull-driven schedules control
the information and material
flow (H. G. Ballard 2000). etc.
The team works backwards
(pulls) from the end date to
the start of the phase to
identify
the
activities
Performance
The
main
target
is
maximizing
value
with
minimum waste at the
project level to assure
reliable workflow (Sicat
2012) (G. Ballard, Lean
Project Delivery System
2000).
16 | P a g e
supplier continues to deliver to
schedule.)
Centralization Decision making is centralized
through
one
manger
in
sometimes.
Under
loading
PMI does not consider
adjustments
Variations
Variation’s mitigation and
management is not considered
Collaboration
Such policy is not applied in the
traditional methods
Transparency
Transparency methods are not
considered
in
traditional
management methods.
Continuous
Improvement
Traditional method does not
consider continuous
improvement so much.
necessary to reach the “end”
target. (building only what is
needed, when it is needed,
with no waste in the
process)
Decision making through
transparency by getting
project participants involved
in the production control
system and empowering
them to take action (Sicat
2012) (H. G. Ballard 2000).
Production unit capacity is
adjusted as well as inventory
to be able to absorb
variation (H. G. Ballard 2000)
.
Attempts
to
mitigate
variation in respect of end
product quality and work
rate (H. G. Ballard 2000)
LC gives continuing support
to suppliers by developing
new commercial contracts
which gave the suppliers
incentives for reliable work
flow and for participating in
the
overall
product
improvement (G. A. Howell,
What is Lean Construction
1999).
Increasing
transparency
between all the project’s
stakeholders to allow people
make decisions reducing the
need of central management
(G. A. Howell, What is Lean
Construction 1999).
LC considers continuous
improvement in the process
and workflow (G. A. Howell,
What is Lean Construction
1999).
17 | P a g e
Interactions
and
dependencies
Managing the combined
effect of dependence and
variation on activities is
important as it affects the
time and cost of any project
(G. A. Howell, What is Lean
Construction 1999).
Work
Inspect
Rework
Figure 2. 3 – Quality Control Process in the traditional method
Monitor
cost & time
Detect
variances
Corrective
actions
Figure 2. 4 – Project Control Process in the traditional method
2.2 Lean construction – a project approach
Construction industry is suffering from various
problems such as low productivity, insufficient
quality, poor safety, time and cost overruns
minimizing the value of the end product as shown
in figure 2.5. The adoption of Lean manufacturing
principles to the construction is an innovative
approach
for
managing
and
improving
construction processes by reducing cost and
maximizing value considering customer needs
(Koskela et al. 2002).
Figure 2. 5 - Project Problems (Howell and
Lichtig 2008)
18 | P a g e
Same as manufacturing principles, minimizing waste at early stages lead to a better quality
and thus successful project in terms of time and cost. The manufacturing process has seen
noticeable improvements and development after applying lean principles to the industry.
The main attribute of large construction projects nowadays is the complexity and
uncertainty. Traditional project management methods are more adequate for simple
projects. These traditional methods will not be able to comply with the sophisticated
projects requirements’ due to the various interactions between activities (Bosca' 2012). In
an attempt to find alternative approach to deal with the projects complexity and problems,
Lauri Koskela (1992), who is a pioneer in introducing lean construction, used the lean
thinking approach. He argued that traditional thinking of construction management
focuses on conversion activities and does not pay attention to flow and value. He described
wastes associated with the construction process as waste of materials and non-value
added activities that may lead to waste such as delays, transportation of materials and
others (Senaratne and Wijesiri 2008). Some researches that were conducted in the United
States and Europe showed that waste can be generated during the flow process of
construction. Following is the percentages of consumed cost due to flow deficiency
according to koskela (1992) findings: ‘non-conformance quality costs’ consume 12% of
total project cost; ‘poor materials management’ causes 10- 12% of total labor cost; ‘time
used for non-value adding activities’ amounts to 2/3 of total project time; and ‘lack of
safety’ amounts to 6% of total project cost (Senaratne and Wijesiri 2008). By eliminating
cost-consuming flow activities, Lean approach provides potential advantages for cost
reduction when successfully implemented in a construction company and can be
considered as a cost leadership (Senaratne and Wijesiri 2008). One of the main challenges
that facing implementation of lean construction, is its acceptability by the workforce. In
this regard, implementation of this concept should be done in a proper way and without
adding any burdens on the workforce and by convincing them that this approach is a way
to enhance the organization profit (Senaratne and Wijesiri 2008).
Although there are many common elements between Lean manufacturing and lean
construction techniques, not all lean production theories can fully be implemented in the
construction industry. There are obvious differences between Manufacturing plants and
construction sites (O. Salem, et al. 2006). From the literature, lean principles were found to
be affecting the construction process efficiently. The construction process has seen
intrinsic improvements in terms of quality and cost by addressing lean principles. The
project is said to be “lean” when it is delivered with minimum waste and maximum value.
19 | P a g e
2.2.1 Waste Elimination
Wastes usually result from poorly managed systems and process that result in excessive
time and cost. The level of waste associated with construction projects has been reported
to be as much as 50 percent, and is attributed to inefficiencies through design,
mobilization, construction and maintenance activities (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
The main purpose of lean construction is waste reduction (Sacks, et al. 2010). The
challenge in waste reduction is determining the methodology of identifying waste in
construction projects. Waste elimination should start from the design stage. In order to
eliminate the waste in the construction process, types of wastes should be identified. The 8
types of wastes were introduced in the literature as follows (Garrett and Lee 2011):








Overproduction
Waiting
Transportation
Unnecessary processes
Inventory
Unneeded movement
Defects
Underutilized people
Figure 2. 6 - Production as a flow process and the shaded boxes are the non-value adding
activities (Koskela, An exploration towards a production theory and its application to
construction 2000)
Figure 2.6 shows the several wastes within the production process which prevent the work
from flowing smoothly. The aforesaid types of wastes can be eliminated or reduced by
considering the relevant lean techniques. Some of which are housekeeping, just-in-time
(JIT) delivery, information technology and pre-fabrication (Eriksson 2010). Nevertheless,
Sacks et al. (2009) focused on the notion of process transparency which leads eventually to
20 | P a g e
waste reduction as visualization helps to reduce uncertainties (Sacks, Treckmann and
Rozenfeld 2009). In construction industry, waste generation is not only confined to that
resulted from execution (material waste, productivity loss...) but extends to the flow of
information and documentation. Garrett and Lee (2011) addressed the types of waste and
its possible causes to the submittal review process in construction project (Garrett and Lee
2011). Thus, waste reduction became an objective by itself more than a tool when
thoroughly collaborates with other lean principles.
2.2.2 Lean Project Delivery System
Production is defined as designing and making things. Projects are considered temporary
production systems which are interrelated with other production systems from which the
project is provided by supplies, resources and information. The primary goals of any
production system is to deliver the product while maximizing value and minimizing waste.
Construction is one among many types of project-based production systems (Ballard and
Howell, Lean project management 2003).
Lean Project Delivery System (LPDS) is a new construction management approach inspired
by the Toyota Production System (TPS) (Michel n.d.). This system based on the principles of
applying the theory of lean production to construction projects - a project-based
production system. LPDS was introduced by LCI (Lean Construction Institute) as part of
their mission in developing an innovative way to design and build capital facilities. LCI
developed the Lean Project Delivery System (LPDS) that applies lean construction
principles and tools to facilitate planning and control, maximize value and minimize waste
throughout the construction process. (G. Ballard, Lean Project Delivery System 2000)
The main focus of this system was to improve the entire delivery system and its main
components (e.g. design, assembly, use) instead of optimizing each sub process separately.
Different to the project phases of the traditional method, LPDS divided the project into 5
interconnecting phases from project definition to design to supply, assembly and use (See
figure 2.8) (G. Ballard, Lean Project Delivery System 2000) (Ballard and Howell, Lean project
management 2003).
Project Definition includes purposes, design concepts, design criteria, cost and duration
estimate and collaborative production with customer and the entire project’s stakeholders,
on (Ballard and Howell, Lean project management 2003). Lean design phase develops the
conceptual design from Project Definition into Product and Process Design. Last Planner
21 | P a g e
System is applied to the design phase, being a production control tool, with the help of IT
tools such as 3D modeling and collaborative design software.
The lean supply phase includes generating detailed engineering of the project design
followed by material fabrication and delivery to site. The key benefit of this process is to
minimize inventories on site. The whole process should be done to maximize customer
value. Once the resources delivered to site, the Lean Assembly phase starts and ends when
all the works are handed over to the client. Continuous flow process should be efficiently
managed through this phase (G. Ballard, Lean Project Delivery System 2000) .
Figure 2. 7 – Lean Project Delivery System (G. Ballard, Lean Project Delivery System 2000)
2.2.3 Lean Construction Principles
According to Howell and Lichting (2008), the aim of approaching projects as production
systems is to change the structure of work in both design and construction to maximize
project performance (Howell and Lichtig 2008). Lean principles present whole process
optimization through collaboration, continuous improvement, elimination of waste and
customer satisfaction by delivering the value desired by the end-user (Enache-Pommer, et
al. 2010). Lean construction thinking applied to production systems on site has increased
awareness of the benefits of stable work, of pull flow of teams and materials to reduce
inventories of work in progress (WIP), and of process transparency to all involved (Sacks,
22 | P a g e
Treckmann and Rozenfeld 2009). Lean construction concentrates efforts on defect
prevention (O. Salem, et al. 2006).
Womack and Jones originally outlined the 5 key principles of the Lean methodology as
follows (Bertelsen 2002):
1. Identify Customer Value: It is essential to meet the required specifications and to
deliver the value desired to the end customer. By clearly defining value for product or
service, customer value becomes the common focus for parties involved in the project.
2. Map the Value Stream (operations that generate the value): The entire process
required to deliver a product or service and then assessing to what extent the
customer value is being delivered. This represents the end-to-end process that delivers
the value to the customer which requires reducing any non-added value activities.
3. Make the product flow, waiting is waste: Maintain the work flow by achieving the best
sequence of work. The appropriate work flow where the product or service never stops
across the entire value chain will simultaneously minimize waste and increase value to
the customer.
4. Use a pull logistic: It means producing as per the customers need or in-line to the
demand of the customer (what the customer wants when the customer wants)
5. Seek perfection in all operations: To seek perfection all the time through continuous
improvement and implementing appropriate methods to the process.
1.
Identify
Value
2. Map
the value
stream
5. Seek
perfectio
n
3. Create
flow
4. Use
pull
Figure 2. 8 – The 5 Guide Principles of Lean (Bertelsen 2002)
23 | P a g e
Lean Construction tools and techniques
There are several Lean tools and techniques that can be used to improve performance in
the construction industry and to ensure efficient processes in the pre-construction,
construction and maintenance phases of a project. Table 2.4 shows a comprehensive list of
lean tools and techniques that were addressed in the literature (O. Salem, et al. 2006)
(Mostafa E. Shehata 2011). The following is brief description about some of the lean tools
and techniques.
1. Flow Process
The lean construction system sees production as a flow of material, information,
equipment, and labor from raw material to the product (Yong-Woo Kim and Bae 2010). The
stable flow is considered one of the main principles in lean thinking (Sacks, Treckmann and
Rozenfeld 2009). Several lean techniques are used to improve flow process and reduce
waste. These techniques include but not limited to:
1.1 Reduce Process Variability
Construction projects are subjected to numerous variations during the projects’ duration
causing uncertainties and instability in the process (Hook and Stehn 2008). In order to
avoid variability in process, certain actions should be taken to preclude defects at the
source so they do not flow through the process. In lean manufacturing, Fail-safe devices
are used to automatically prevent defects from going to the next process (O. Salem, et al.
2006) . Yet, in construction this approach was challenging due to the complexity of
discovering defects before installation. To ensure quality conformity at the source or
defect prevention, Failsafe actions can be implemented on all the activities on site. These
actions can be addressed by developing an overall quality assessment and safety action
plans at the project start (O. Salem, et al. 2006).
1.2 Reduce cycle time
Reducing variability will result in reducing the work cycle time. The reduction of cycle time
in construction is accompanied by reducing the duration of activities and reducing
inventory (Sacks, et al. 2010) which requires an effort from the team to redesign the
process to make it more flexible and efficient.
24 | P a g e
1.3 Reduce batch sizes
Reduction the batch sizes improves the work flow. Also, it contributes in reducing the cycle
time of the process (Sacks, et al. 2010).
1.4 Increase flexibility
This can be done by quick changeover and by obtaining multi-skilled teams. The reduction
of changeover times to move from one activity to the next increases the productivity rates
(O’Connor and Swain 2013). Using multi-skilled teams also help in reducing the cycle time
and hence, improving the workflow (Sacks, et al. 2010).
2. Pull approach
One of the most significant and important features of lean approach is using the pull
scheduling as an appropriate production method. Pull scheduling is considered one of the
crucial lean techniques to improve work flow in Construction projects (Thomas, et al.
2003). In a pull system, the flow is a method of controlling product flow in which the
quantity of work in progress inventory (WIP) between process stages is minimized, and
only products demanded “pulled” by the ultimate “customer” process are produced (Sacks,
Treckmann and Rozenfeld 2009).
2.1 Last Planner System (LPS)
It is one of the associated techniques to the pull approach as it supports the predictability
and reliability of construction production in which look-ahead scheduling are adopted. The
last planner is simply the field supervisor who assigns work to the crew as it allows the
conversations between the site management and the trade foreman at proper level of
detail preventing critical issues on site to happen. LPS is a collaborative approach to
manage project-based production of complex and uncertain projects, allowing problems to
be identified and resolved at the source to increase the chance that work flows with no
delays (Mossman 2012). The LPS practices in construction include managing tender
process, design process, and both design and construction production in the context of
integrated project delivery (Mossman 2012). Figure 2.9 shows the Last Planner System
procedures. It includes Reverse Phase Scheduling, Six week Look-ahead schedule, weekly
work plan and Percentage Plan Completed Charts (PPC). It consists of series of planned
conversations as shown in Figure 2. 10.
25 | P a g e
Figure 2. 9 – Last Planner System (Zettel 2008)
Figure 2. 10 – Last Planner System conversations (Australia 2012)
26 | P a g e
2.2 Just-in-Time technique
Just in Time means producing only what is needed, when it is needed, and in the amount
needed. It is a Pull System that responds to actual customer demand and accordingly leads
to reduced inventories (and space), and better equipment productivity (Australia 2012).
2.3 Collaborative Planning
This technique depends on bringing together representatives from all parties involved in a
construction project to jointly develop an agreed target programme. It can be usefully used
at any point in the life cycle of a project to recover any time or cost overrun that may
occur. It comprises five steps:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
High-level collaborative master target programme
Detailed level collaborative master target programme
Short-term detailed production plan
Daily brief
Weekly production control
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is one of the methods that can enable the collaboration
concept to be implemented efficiently. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) defines
integrated project delivery (IPD) as (Dave, et al. 2013):
“a project delivery approach that integrates people, systems, business structures and
practices into a process that collaboratively harnesses the talents and insights of all
participants to reduce waste and optimize efficiency through all phases of design,
fabrication and construction”
IPD allows the early involvements for all stakeholders in the project through use of new
technologies. One of the fundamental principles of IPD is sharing benefits and risks
between all participants. However, all these benefits will be enabled if it is represented by
an IPD legal agreement (Dave, et al. 2013).
.
3. Continuous Improvement
Continuous improvement can help in reducing variability, improving work flow (Sacks, et al.
2010). All the lean techniques are supporting the continuous improvement principle (O.
Salem, et al. 2006). Continuous Improvement of the construction process can be classified
into two types: Process Improvement and Operation Improvement (O’Connor and Swain
2013).
27 | P a g e
3.1 Process Improvement
Process improvement means setting an efficient method to deliver a project to improve
the overall process in terms of reducing the overall lead time through end-to-end process.
The key benefits of implementing this technique are to improve the work productivity,
clarify process and roles, minimize waste and reduce lead time (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
The main methods related to this technique are: 1) establishing current state map (CSM) to
show the current project process including a view of all the delays, disruptions and any
other wastes. 2) Establishing future state mapping (FSM) to set a process incorporating all
the appropriate Lean techniques so that work flows efficiently (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
3.2 Operation Improvement
It is about improving the work activity method of execution. Operations improvement aims
to reduce the cycle time to complete work activity, improve productivity, ensure ‘right first
time’ quality and support safe working by eliminating non-added value activities,
monitoring and controlling performance and optimizing resources (O’Connor and Swain
2013). Monitoring and controlling performance through setting measures related to
quality, time, cost and safety to control the process (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
4. Transparency
4.1 Five S’
The five S’ was initially introduced in manufacturing to identify housekeeping in plants as in
lean manufacturing, any resource that does not contribute to better performance is
regarded as waste that should be eliminated from the system (O. Salem, et al. 2006). The
five S’s are sort, straighten, standardize, shine, and sustain. In construction, deploying this
tool (5 S’s) allow for a transparent job site, at which materials flow competently between
warehouses and the pertinent jobs in site. Figure 2.11 shows the storage area after and
before applying 5S.
28 | P a g e
Figure 2. 11 - 5S approach (the left picture store before 5S & the left picture after 5S) (O’Connor
and Swain 2013)
4.2 Visual Management
Visualization is important in construction process to avoid any ambiguity in the
information. This also helps to identify the work flow and create awareness of action plans
on site (O. Salem, et al. 2006). The visualization process can rigorously contribute in
supporting the Lean approach in construction if adopted in a fashion appropriate to the
context. The technique includes showing the work completion status of the previous
activities, the availability of materials, any changes in the layout and the locations of other
resources. Pursuing the aforementioned steps can improve the effectiveness of production
planning and control and reduce the tendency for errors within the process (Sacks,
Treckmann and Rozenfeld 2009). Mobile signs, notice boards, electric wiring, safety signs,
project milestones and PPC charts are some of the visualization forms that can be used in
construction projects (O. Salem, et al. 2006) . Sacks et al. (2009) in their study, provides the
ways in which computer-aided visualization can be utilized to support the Lean
requirements (Sacks, Treckmann and Rozenfeld 2009). Figure 2.12 and 2.13 shows some
visualization tools.
Figure 2. 12 - Site communication centre for
all parties to access vital project information
(O’Connor and Swain 2013)
29 | P a g e
Figure 2. 13 - Proposed 3D visualization for past, present and future work status for a trade
(Sacks, Treckmann and Rozenfeld 2009)
Table 2. 4 - Lean Construction Principles and techniques (O. Salem, et al. 2006) (Refaat H. AbdelRazek 2007) (Sacks, et al. 2010) (Eriksson 2010)
Lean Construction
principles
Flow
Technique
Methodology
Reduce variability
Fail safe for quality
Reduce batch size
Get quality right the first time (reduce product
variability)
Focus on improving upstream flow variability
(reduce production variability)
Reduce cycle times
Reduce production cycle durations
Increase flexibility
Reduce changeover times
Use multiskilled teams
Use reliable technology
(e.g. BIM)
Pull
Last planner
Collaborative Planning
Just-in-Time
Pull scheduling approach
Reduce inventory
Continuous improvement
Huddle meetings
First-run studies
Current State Mapping
Future State Mapping
Start of the day meeting
Plan Do Check Act
Transparency
Five S’s
Visual Management
Visualize production methods
Visualize production process
30 | P a g e
2.2.4 Application of Lean in Construction Industry
The lean thinking has recently penetrated the construction industry to reform the
traditional construction management approach. Lean thinking was implemented and
examined in several construction sectors such as infrastructure, supply chain, finishes, and
concrete and office related activities. The following summarizes some of the various
application of lean in different trades in construction. A review on lean effect and benefits
in construction is summarized in table no.

Construction supply chain
Being complex, a study was conducted to show the potential improvements in applying
lean concepts to construction supply chains by presenting the case of pipe supports used in
power plants. It was concluded that value stream analysis, one of the lean concepts, is a
reliable tool to improve supply chain performance as it helped in identifying wastes in the
process. Also, several lean principles were used to improve the performance such as
reducing batch size, early involvement of suppliers in design stage, standardization of
process, and improve supplier selection (Tommelein 2002).
Another study was conducted in Brazil to examine the application of value stream mapping
(VSM) tool on the aluminum supply chain from raw materials to the job site installation. It
was concluded that VSM shows a high potential to help the application of lean concept
beyond job site (Fontanini and Picche 2004).

On-Site Subcontractor Evaluation
Subcontractor evaluation can play a key role in improving their productivity during a
construction project. A study was conducted in Chile to develop on-site evaluation method
for subcontractors based on lean principles and partnering practices. This method was
achieved through periodic evaluations and visualization tools to improve the
communication between the subcontractors and main contractors. This method helped in
resolving many disputes, and helped the subcontractors’ supervisors to monitor their
workers on-site performance. It also helped the main contractor to select the suitable
subcontractor based on their previous performance in future works. This supports the idea
of collaborative relationship with the subcontractors that consistently perform well
(Maturana, et al. 2007).
31 | P a g e

Finishing Trades in buildings
The efficiency of work flow of interior finishing trade teams for building projects is a
complex task due to the unavailability of design information at certain stages of
construction. The challenge is to efficiently allocate the teams in the available work zones
to prevent accumulation of WIP. In an attempt to solve this problem, lean concepts were
implemented through visualizing the process on site. This was done through using status
board generator software using small icons drawing in each cell that indicate the work
status and the future work as well. Using this status board has helped the trade supervisor
to efficiently allocate his team by viewing the near future work, work should not be done
and the rework required. Also, the status board helps in data collection for progress
monitoring, making project status information available to all levels of management.
Consequently, novel-computer aided visualization tools showed its ability in improving the
work flow by revealing the rate of progress and the bottlenecks of the process (Sacks,
Treckmann and Rozenfeld 2009).

Construction Submittals
Any delay in construction submittals can negatively impact the project schedule.
Therefore, improving the office activities is crucial in any construction project for a better
work flow on site. By applying lean concepts in an office process as the submittals process
in some construction firms in San Diego, considerable improvements have been noticed.
These improvements include time reduction by eliminating wastes and reducing non-value
adding activities (Garrett and Lee 2011).

Improving labor work flow in construction
Several studies have examined the impact of reliable work flows as a lean principle on
labor work flow. Thomas et al. (2003) highlighted the importance of the Labor flow for
improving the workflow management in the construction process by using data from three
projects involved construction of 3 bridges covering 137 workdays. The Flexible Capacity
approach was addressed as a potential area for improving construction performance. They
concluded that ineffective labor flow lead to ineffective flow management, hence, lean
improvement initiatives should focus more on workforce management strategies for better
labor performance (Thomas, et al. 2003).
In another study, Thomas et al. 2002 examined the issue of variability in construction and
its impact on project performance using data from 14 concrete formwork projects. They
32 | P a g e
reached a conclusion that reducing the variability in labor productivity is more intensely
correlated to better performance than reducing workflow variability (H. Randolph Thomas,
et al. 2002).

Formwork Engineering
A study was conducted in Taiwan using lean concepts to improve traditional formwork
engineering. The improvements include reductions in resource waste and increases in
operational value by using value stream mapping to identify the process waste. The results
of this study showed that applying lean concepts can reduce wastes resulted from walking
and searching in mold assembly and machining (Ko, Wang and Kuo 2011).

Construction projects (Structure and Finishes)
A study was done in Nigeria to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing some Lean
Construction Techniques in construction of 80 housing units. These techniques include Last
Planner, Daily Huddle Meetings, and Increase Visualization. The results showed
improvements in time management that lead to a lot of savings in the project cost. The
project was completed in 62 days using lean techniques instead of 90 days (Samalia Adamu
2012).
Another study took place to show how VSM can improve the performance of civil
engineering projects by allowing the site management to visualize the flows of materials,
resources and information. This was examined through the fixing of reinforcement in two
bridge construction projects. The results showed improvements in lead time, inventory
level and cost by approximately 80% (Simonsson, et al. 2012).
In a study conducted by Salem, et al. (2006), a Lean Assessment tool was utilized to assess
the implementation of several Lean Construction techniques. The assessment tool
evaluates six lean construction elements: last planner, increased visualization, huddle
meetings, first-run studies, five S’s, and fail safe for quality (2006). In the test study, the
selected General Contractor agreed to implement and test 6 lean construction techniques
on a parking garage project. The results of the study were tangible in that the project was
under budget and 3 weeks ahead of schedule. (O. Salem, et al. 2006)
33 | P a g e

Precast concrete fabrication
A study was conducted to describe the application of lean production concepts and
techniques to structural precast concrete fabrication. Last Planner and Five S techniques
were used to improve the performance. The results achieved included shop cycle time and
lead time reduction, increased throughput rate, and improved productivity (Glenn Ballard
2003).

Infrastructure projects
The successful use of Lean techniques in the infrastructure industry was shown in a study
conducted on tunneling project. The lean techniques used in this study include
standardization, mapping, fishbone diagrams, and 5S approach. As a result, the
productivity has increased by 43% and the project was on schedule and no delays were
incurred. Additionally, the project profit was doubled (Wodalski, et al. 2011).
2.2.5 Assessing and Evaluating Lean techniques
Vieira et al. used in their study the Rapid Lean Construction-Quality Rating Model to
evaluate the application of Lean Construction principles of two construction companies in
the State of Goiás (Vieira, Souza and Amaral 2012). The performance level of these
companies was obtained in respect of applying and understanding lean principles &
thinking. After the evaluation was done, recommendations and suggestions were
introduced to help the companies implement lean thinking in a more efficient way (Vieira,
Souza and Amaral 2012).
To ensure that the expected benefits of applying lean thinking to construction projects are
actually being delivered, evidence should be provided to the concerned stakeholders to
encourage them continue applying this new approach. Lean benefit realization
management (LBRM) is a “systematic way of ensuring that the outcomes of a Lean
improvement programme deliver benefits that are advantageous to stakeholders”. This
system presents some tools and techniques that help in quantifying lean benefits (Smith
2013).
34 | P a g e
Chapter Three
3. Questionnaire
For the purpose of achieving the goal of this research, a questionnaire was designed and
administrated in one of the leading construction companies in Egypt. This questionnaire
was used to investigate the main factors impacting the construction projects performance
and the employees ‘understanding regarding the lean thinking/techniques in the Egyptian
construction industry. Based on this questionnaire and the literature survey, the problem
statement was better formulated.
Sample Selection
The questionnaires have been distributed among construction engineers within the same
organization. This organization is one of the leading construction companies in Egypt. It has
a market capitalization of $8,964 million (Hussein 2012). In addition, it is considered the
second leading company in construction industry in Egypt. Globally, it ranks among the
world’s top 250 global contractors. Its ranking in 2013 was 182 in comparison with the 1st
leading Egyptian construction company which ranked no. 106 among the 250 companies.
However and for the sake of this research, the 2nd leading company was chosen as it
provides international engineering and construction services primarily on infrastructure,
industrial and high-end commercial projects in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa
for public and private clients (http://www.contrack.com/?page_id=1784 n.d.). Being an
international company, it has a firm management system that regularly measures the
performance, and processes efficiency, to practice continuous improvement. These
attributes relates to an extent to the lean thinking approach. Therefore, the questionnaire
was conducted in this organization to see the impact of using some of the techniques that
relates to lean thinking on the projects’ performance.
Sample size
The sample size (N) was 25 as it was only focused in the building projects inside the
company. Twenty Five questionnaire forms have been distributed among different
engineers in different projects within the same organization. Only 20 out of 25 responded
to the questionnaire.
The sample size was determined and taken from one company which is the largest listed
construction company in Egypt (http://www.nbkcapital.com/ 2010). The reason behind
selecting this company is their tendency to enhance the quality of work by setting group of
35 | P a g e
policies that should be followed by all the employees to ensure that the company operates
in a way that meets or exceeds the requirements of their customers. However, this
limitation in sample size impacted the results of the questionnaire. It provided optimistic
values about the respondents’ awareness and appreciation of lean construction due to the
company’s firm management system that supports in a certain way the lean thinking.The
results would have significantly differs if the questionnaire was distributed among all the
construction firms in Egypt due to the absence of the lean thinking in most of them. New
management systems such as lean should be first examined at large scale companies. This
allows the systems to be established in more professional environment with a lot of
potentials and hence can be easily applied to smaller scale companies.
Structure of the Questionnaire
The key purpose of this survey is to identify the employees ‘understanding regarding the
lean thinking/techniques in the Egyptian construction industry. The questionnaire is
classified into 3 main sections as follows:



Section (A): is structured to investigate general information and background about
the respondents’ experience.
Section (B): is structured to identify the factors affecting the overall performance of
the project in current practice and the methods adopted to reduce these negative
impacts.
Section (C): is structured to examine the respondents’ awareness about lean
techniques and their applications in the Egyptian construction industry.
This questionnaire and all of its three sections are included under Appendix A of this thesis.
Section A: Project Information
This section is structured to investigate general information about the project and
background about the respondents’ experience. The experience of the respondents varied
between 5 years’ experience and above 20 as illustrated in fig.3.1 and 90 % of them have a
position of project managers as shown in fig.3.3. All the projects were new buildings. Most
of the projects values fall between EGP 100 to 500 Million as illustrated in fig.3.2.
36 | P a g e
Respondents Experience
10%
5-10 years
20%
10-15 years
15-20 years
60%
10%
20 years and above
Figure 3. 1 - Experience of the Respondents
Project Value
25%
20%
Less than 100 Million EGP
100-500 Million EGP
500 Million -1 billion EGP
5%
Above 1billion EGP
50%
Figure 3. 2 - Project Values
37 | P a g e
Respondents' Profession
10%
Project Manager
Site Manager
Technical office Manager
Quality Control Manager
90%
Figure 3. 3 - Respondents’ professions
Section B: Factors affecting project performance in construction projects in
Egypt
The purpose of section (B) is to identify the factors affecting the overall performance of the
project in current practice. The impact of several factors on the project performance was
measured. These types of question give an indication of the major problems that
encounter the project manager in the operation phase. These factors cause a lot of
disruptions to the construction process. Table 3.1 shows the frequency of the factors
impacting the overall project performance.
Table 3. 1 – The frequency of factors impacting the project performance in Egypt
Factors Impacting the project Performance
1
Change orders by owner during construction (Variations)
2
Rework due to errors during construction
3
Poor site management and supervision by contractor
Frequency of its impact on Cost,
Time, Quality & productivity
Produc
Cost
Time
Quality
tivity
100% 100%
55%
90%
70%
75%
40%
70%
55%
60%
45%
55%
38 | P a g e
Factors Impacting the project Performance
4
5
6
7
Difficulties in financing project by contractor
Poor communication and coordination by contractor with
other parties
Ineffective planning and scheduling of project by
contractor
Improper construction methods implemented by
contractor
8
Poor qualification of the contractor’s technical staff
9
Mistakes and discrepancies in design documents
10
Un-use of advanced engineering design software and tools
11
Inadequate details in drawings
12
Complexity of project design
13
Insufficient data collection and survey before design
14
Delay in material delivery
15
Changes in material types and specifications during
construction
16
Damage of sorted material while they are needed urgently
17
Low productivity and efficiency of equipment
18
Unqualified workforce
19
Low productivity of labors
20
Site uncertainties
Frequency of its impact on Cost,
Time, Quality & productivity
Produc
Cost
Time
Quality
tivity
50%
45%
30%
40%
55%
65%
45%
50%
45%
50%
20%
45%
65%
60%
65%
60%
80%
85%
80%
80%
90%
100%
75%
95%
45%
50%
35%
40%
65%
80%
65%
60%
60%
60%
30%
45%
40%
30%
25%
35%
80%
90%
30%
60%
85%
75%
45%
75%
55%
55%
25%
20%
60%
55%
15%
55%
55%
50%
45%
55%
85%
85%
50%
85%
65%
65%
35%
60%
Respondents were asked to rank the factors, using a Likert scale (1-5), as either ‘Very High
(5)’,’High (4)’, ‘Average (3)’, ‘Low (2)’, or ‘Very Low (1)’. The following describes the major
factors impacted the Cost, Time, quality, and productivity as per the rankings done by the
respondents. The major factors impacting the project performance are identified based on
the following:
1. Factors that its frequency of occurrence more than 50 % (10 out of 20),
39 | P a g e
2. Factors with total impacts of average level, high level and very high levels greater than
or equal 50% of the total respondents of each factor

Main Factors Impacting project cost
As shown in Figure 3. 4, the major factors that impact the project cost as per the
aforementioned criteria are (17 factors out of 20 factors):

















change orders by Engineer/owner,
Rework due to errors, Improper construction methods,
Poor site management and supervision by contractor
Difficulties in financing project by contractor
Poor communication and coordination by contractor with other parties,
Improper construction methods implemented by contractor
poor qualification of the contractor’s staff,
Mistakes and discrepancies in design documents
Inadequate details in drawings,
Complexity of project design,
Delay in material delivery
Changes in material types and specifications during construction
Damage of sorted material,
Low productivity and efficiency of equipment
Unqualified workforce
Low productivity of labors
Site uncertainties
40 | P a g e
Factors Magnitude (Average+High+V.High
Major Factors Impacting Cost
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
89% 92%
91%
90%
80%
81% 82%
77% 75%
77%
73% 76%
67%
64% 64%
55% 58%
Factors impacting cost
Figure 3. 4 - Factors impacting the project cost

Main Factors Impacting project time
As shown in Figure 3. 5, the major factors impacting the project time as per the
aforementioned criteria are (17 factors out of 20 factors):











Change orders by owner
Rework due to errors during construction,
Poor site management and supervision by contractor
Poor communication and coordination by contractor with other parties,
Ineffective planning and scheduling of project by contractor
Improper construction methods implemented by contractor
Poor qualification of the contractor’s technical staff,
Mistakes and discrepancies in design documents,
Un-use of advanced engineering design software and tools,
Inadequate details in drawings,
Complexity of project design,
41 | P a g e






Delay in material delivery
Changes in material types and specifications during construction
Damage of sorted material while they are needed urgently,
Unqualified workforce
Low productivity of labors
Site uncertainties
Factors Magnitude (Average+High+V.High)
Factors Impacting Project Time
120%
100%
100%
80%
94% 90% 90%
87% 85% 83%
80% 77% 76% 76%
75%
60%
67% 67%
58% 55%
50%
40%
20%
0%
Factors Impacting Project Time
Figure 3. 5 - Factors Impacting Project Time

Main Factors Impacting project quality
As shown in Figure 3. 6, the major factors impacting the project quality as per the
aforementioned criteria are (5 factors out of 20 factors):


Improper construction methods implemented by contractor
Poor qualification of the contractor’s technical staff
42 | P a g e



Mistakes and discrepancies in design documents
Inadequate details in drawings
Low Productivity of labors
Factors Magnitude (Average+High+V.High
Major Factors Impacting Quality
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
81%
67%
62%
62%
70%
Improper
Poor qualification
Mistakes and
Inadequate details Low productivity of
construction
in drawings
labors
of the contractor’s discrepancies in
methods
technical staff design documents
implemented by
contractor
Factors Impacting Quality
Figure 3. 6 - Factors impacting project quality
Main Factors Impacting project productivity
As shown in Figure 3. 7, the main factors impacting the project the major factors impacting
the project productivity as per the aforementioned criteria are (14 factors out of 20
factors):












Change orders by owner during construction,
Rework due to errors during construction
Poor site management and supervision by contractor
Poor communication and coordination by contractor with other parties,
Improper construction methods implemented by contractor
Poor qualification of the contractor’s technical staff
Mistakes and discrepancies in design documents
Inadequate details in drawings,
Delay in material delivery
Changes in material types and specifications during construction
Low productivity and efficiency of equipment
Unqualified workforce
43 | P a g e


Low productivity of labors
Site uncertainties
Factors Magnitude (Average+High+V.High
Major Factors Impacting Productivity
120%
100%
80%
60%
100%
90%
83%
75%
71%
81%
79%
75%
82%
67%
55%
64%
76%
75%
40%
20%
0%
Factors impacting productivity
Figure 3. 7 - Factors impacting project productivity
Section C: Respondents’ awareness about lean techniques and their applications
in the Egyptian construction industry
Section (C) is structured to examine the respondents’ awareness about lean techniques
and their applications in the Egyptian construction industry. The questionnaire used a
Likert-type scale from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high). The first two questions examined the
potential of using new management techniques in construction as well as respondents’
awareness about lean techniques as illustrated in Figure3. 8 and
Figure 3. 12
respectively. The results showed that 55% of the respondents have high potentials to use
new management techniques/approached in construction field in Egypt. Regarding the
respondents awareness about lean construction, 55% of them are almost not aware of this
approach while 40% of the respondents were moderately aware.
44 | P a g e
Potential of using New techniques
15%
30%
Very Low
Low
Average
High
Very High
55%
Figure3. 8- Potential of using new management techniques in construction
understanding about Lean construction principles
60%
55%
50%
40%
40%
30%
understanding about Lean
construction principles
20%
10%
5%
0%
0%
High
Very High
0%
Very Low
Low
Average
Figure3. 9 - Respondents’ awareness about lean techniques
45 | P a g e
Question number 3, 4, and 5 were related to the computer-aided tools that can effectively
help in improving the overall project performance. Only 14 out of 20 respondents are using
believes that the computer-aided tools are improving the project performance. The
questionnaire showed that only 30% of the respondents in their projects use BIM as an
innovative tool to improve the performance while the remaining 40% out of the 70% who
are using computer-aided tools use 3D-modelling to enhance performance. Figure 3.10
shows percentage of respondents who use computer-aided tools to improve work
performance and figure 3.11 shows the computer-aided tool used in their projects.
Using computer-aided tools
Computer-aided tool used
30%
yes
30%
3D Modeling
No
40%
BIM
70%
Figure3. 10 - Percentage of respondents using computer-aided tools
Figure3. 11- Computer aided tool used
In Question number six the different principles of lean were examined to see the possibility
of applying lean approach to construction projects in Egypt. The following principles were
evaluated using Likert-type scale from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high). Then the mean score of
each principle was calculated as the average of the 5 points of the rating scale of the total
respondents (From Very low to very high)
Waste Reduction
Fig. 3.12 shows the rating of each principle related to waste reduction in Egyptian
construction projects. It can be concluded that more effort should be done to increase the
awareness of employees on site about waste reduction as 55% of the respondents believe
that the people awareness about waste reduction is either low or very low. Also, more
focus should be given to decrease the material waste on site as 70% of the respondents
believe it is either average or very high. The concern to reduce the non-added value
46 | P a g e
activities should be improved. Also, the quantification of the material loss and productivity
loss should be highly considered. Fig.3.13 shows mean scores for each principle for the 20
respondents.
Waste Reduction
60%
50%
50%
50%
45%
45%
40%
40%
35%
35%
35%
35%
30%
30%
30%
25%
20%
35%
2
25%
20%
15%
10%
10%
10%
0%
4
5
5%
0%
15%
10%
10%
0%
3
20%
20%
10%
1
30%
0%
5%
5%
0%
0%
0%
0%
reduce the non- the range of
Employees
unneeded
value added material waste awarness about movements
activities
in site
waste
(locating the
elimination
storage)
underutilized material waste
people on
be easily
project as a
quantified
waste
quantify the
productivity
loss
Figure 3. 12 – Waste Reduction
Mean score for waste reduction
4.00
3.50
3.45
3.35
3.55
3.00
2.70
3.00
2.60
2.30
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
reduce the
non-value
added
activities
the range of Employees
unneeded underutilized
material
awarness movements ( people on
waste in site about waste
locating
project as a
elimination
storage)
waste
material
waste be
easily
quantified
quantify the
productivity
loss
Figure3. 13 - Mean Scores for waste reduction
47 | P a g e
Reduce Variability
Fig. 3.14 shows the rating of each principle related to reduction of variability. It was
concluded that much concern was given to process standardization within the projects in
the same organization which reflects their potential for adopting some of the lean
construction techniques. Fig.3.15 shows mean scores for each principle for the 20
respondents.
Reduce Variability
70%
60%
50%
1
40%
2
30%
3
20%
4
10%
5
0%
standardize the
construction/design
process
Do you communicate
standard process to
workers?
reviewing the design
drawings at early stages
Figure3. 14 – Reduce Variability
Mean score for Reduce Variability
4.20
4.10
4.00
3.90
3.80
3.70
3.60
3.50
3.40
4.10
3.65
3.65
standardize the
construction/design
process
Do you communicate
standard process to
workers?
reviewing the design
drawings at early stages
Figure 3. 15 – Mean score for Reduce Variability
48 | P a g e
Increase Transparency
Fig. 3.16 shows the rating of each principle related to transparency on site in construction
projects in Egypt. It can be concluded that only few projects are using visual management
to improve the performance and that most of the visualization tools used are related to
safety signs only as more than 50% of the respondents are not deploying visual
management in their projects. Hence, more attention should be given to increase the
process visualization on site. Conversely, the housekeeping of site is highly adopted in most
of the projects. Fig. 3.17 shows mean scores for each principle for the 20 respondents .
Increase Transparency
70%
60%
50%
40%
1
30%
2
20%
3
10%
4
0%
5
visual management
do you concern clarifying the whole communication
system at site
about housekeeping
method of
channels with all the
on site?
construction to project stakeholders
employees on site?
Figure3. 16 – Increase Transparency
Mean score for Increase Transperancy
5.00
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
4.40
3.80
3.95
2.45
Series1
visual management do you concern clarifying the whole communication
system at site
about housekeeping
method of
channels with all the
on site?
construction to project stakeholders
employees on site?
Figure 3. 17 – Mean score for Increase Transparency
49 | P a g e
Flow Variability
Fig. 3.18 shows the rating of each principle related to flow variability on site in construction
projects in Egypt. It can be concluded that the just-in-time method are barely used on
construction project in Egypt as well as the concept of work flexibility (using multi-skilled
labor) and visualization management as more than 50% of the respondents are almost not
using these techniques. The concept of collaboration with the suppliers needs
improvement to be more efficient as 30% of the respondents have low concern about
collaboration. On the contrary, there is decent potential for using the schedule look-ahead
to improve the process work flow. Fig. 3.19 shows mean scores for each principle for the
20 respondents.
Flow Variability
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
50%
45%
40%
40%
35%
35%
30%
30%
30%
30%
25%
20%
20%
10%
30%
1
25%
20%
20%
20%
15%
15%
10% 10%
20%
2
15% 15%
10%
10%
5%
0%
0% 0%
0% 0%
0%
3
0%0%
4
the schedule visualization management just-in-time collaboration
Do you
the work
look-ahead to
tools on
system to
method to
with the
consider the flexibility on
improve the site/project to guarantee that decrease the suppliers to importance of
site
work flow? improve work
the
volume of
assure the the smooth of
flow?
information inventory on
delivery of
information,
flows smoothly
site?
material on material and
time?
equipment on
site?
5
0%
Figure 3. 18 – Flow Variability
50 | P a g e
Mean score for Flow Variability
4.50
4.00
3.95
3.85
3.70
3.30
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.20
2.15
1.75
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
the schedule
look-ahead to
improve the
work flow?
visualization
management
tools on
system to
site/project to guarantee that
improve work the information
flow?
flows smoothly
just-in-time
method to
decrease the
volume of
inventory on
site?
collaboration Do you consider
the work
with the
the importance flexibility on site
suppliers to of the smooth of
assure the
information,
delivery of
material and
material on
equipment on
time?
site?
Figure3. 19 – Mean score for Flow Variability
Continuous Improvement
Fig. 3.20 shows the rating of each principle related to continuous improvement on site in
construction projects in Egypt. It can be concluded that there is noticeable potential for
adopting most of the techniques related to the continuous improvement. Only the two
techniques related to prefabrication and benchmarking need some attention and
improvement. Fig. 3.21 shows mean scores for each principle for the 20 respondents.
51 | P a g e
Continous Improvement
70%
60%
60%
50%
50%
50%
45%
40%
40%
35%
35%
30%
25%
1
30%
30%
25%
30%
30%
25%
20%
20%
15%
10%
10%
5%
0%
10%
10%
5%
5%
2
25%
20%
20%
30%
20%
15%
15%
10%
5%
0%
10%
5%
0%
3
20%
4
5%
5%
5%
0%
proactive
actions to
prevent
defects at
source
quantify the lesson-learned the employees continuous
consider the pre-fabricated monitor the
unused
gained from contributing in education customer feed material on site production on
ordered
previous
the process programmes
back
site and record
material on site experience enhancement
performance
benchmarks
Figure3. 20 – Continuous Improvement
Mean score for Continous Improvement
4.50
4.00
3.95
4.00
3.95
3.60
3.50
3.55
3.05
2.85
3.00
3.05
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
proactive
actions to
prevent
defects at
source
quantify the lesson-learned the employees continuous consider the pre-fabricated monitor the
unused
gained from contributing in education customer feed material on production on
ordered
previous
the process programmes
back
site
site and record
material on
experience enhancement
performance
site
benchmarks
Figure 3. 21 – Mean score for Continuous Improvement
52 | P a g e
5
Process Variability
Fig. 3.22 shows the rating of each principle related to process variability on site in
construction projects in Egypt. It can be concluded that more consideration should be
given to the start of day meetings as 25% of the respondents are almost not adopting this
method. Fig. 3.23 shows mean scores for each principle for the 20 respondents.
70%
60%
60%
50%
40%
40%
1
40%
2
30%
30%
25%
25%
20%
20%
20%
3
4
10%
10%
10%
5
5%
0%
0%
start of the day meeting
for all the employees in
the project?
Is there overall quality
assessment for all the
activties in the project?
safety action plans and
identify list of the main
risks in the project?
Figure 3. 22 – Process Variability
Mean score for Process Variability
4.50
3.80
4.00
3.50
4.00
3.00
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
start of the day meeting for all
Is there overall quality
safety action plans and identify
the employees in the project? assessment for all the activties list of the main risks in the
in the project?
project?
Figure 3. 23 – Mean score for Process Variability
53 | P a g e
Customer Focus
Fig. 3.24 shows the rating of each principle related to customer focus on site in
construction projects in Egypt. It can be concluded that there are huge attention and
consideration for the customer focus approach in most of the projects. Fig. 3.25 shows
mean scores for each principle for the 20 respondents.
80%
70%
70%
65%
60%
50%
1
2
40%
30%
30%
25%
3
4
5
20%
10%
5%
5%
0%
0%
0%
The flexibility to meet the customers
changes & requirements?
The communication between the contractor
and the customer?
Figure 3. 24 – Customer Focus
Mean score for Customer Focus
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
4.20
4.20
The flexibility to meet the customers
changes & requirements?
The communication between the
contractor and the customer?
Figure 3. 25 – Mean score for Customer Focus
54 | P a g e
Visual Management
Question number 7 measured the awareness of the respondents about visual
management. It can be concluded from the responses that the awareness of 65% of the
respondents is average while 30% is low and are using it for safety related issues only as
shown in figure 3.26.
Your understanding about visual management
70%
65%
60%
50%
40%
Your understanding about
visualization tools (visual
management)?
30%
30%
20%
10%
5%
0%
0%
0%
1
2
3
4
5
Figure3. 26 – Visual Management
Questionnaire Results and Findings
1. Factors Impacting Project Time
For the purpose of this thesis, the main focus will be on the causes of project delay or the
factors impacting the project schedule. The ranking of the causes of Time overrun from the
Contractor perspective is shown in Table 3.2. It can be concluded that more than 80% of
the respondents believes that inadequate drawings, poor communication by contractor,
change orders by owner, discrepancies in design documents, ineffective scheduling, and
changes in material specifications during construction are the most factors causing delays
and time overrun for a construction project. In the proposed framework, the focus will be
in the aforementioned factors to show how using lean concept can avoid such delays.
55 | P a g e
Table 3. 2– Ranking of the causes of Time overrun
Factors Impacting the project Performance
Change orders by owner
Rework due to errors during construction,
Poor site management and supervision by contractor
Poor communication and coordination by contractor with
other parties,
Ineffective planning and scheduling of project by contractor
Improper construction methods implemented by contractor
Poor qualification of the contractor’s technical staff,
Mistakes and discrepancies in design documents,
Un-use of advanced engineering design software and tools,
Inadequate details in drawings,
Complexity of project design,
Delay in material delivery
Changes in material types and specifications during
construction
Damage of sorted material while they are needed urgently,
Unqualified workforce
Low productivity of labors
Site uncertainties
Degree of severity
(Impact) with frequency
of occurrence >50%
Ranking
by
Severity
100%
94%
90%
1
2
3
90%
87%
85%
83%
80%
77%
76%
76%
75%
67%
67%
58%
55%
50%
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
2. Respondents’ awareness about lean concept
The results showed that 55% of the respondents are not aware about lean concept and
45% of the respondents have scarcely aware of it. Being not well known in the Egyptian
construction industry, the lean approach was examined in a case study for a project in
Egypt to show its impact on the performance.
3. Implementation of Lean techniques/tools/principles in the Egyptian Construction
Industry
Table 3.3 shows the all the lean techniques/tools with mean score less than 3.5. This score
gives indication that these techniques are either not efficiently implemented or not totally
implemented in the Egyptian construction industry. Therefore, these techniques should be
examined in Egypt to see its impact on the project performance. In this research, the way
of implementing such techniques and their effect will be shown in the case study.
56 | P a g e
Table 3.4 shows the all the lean techniques/tools with mean score more than 3.5. This
score is an indicator for the level of implementation of these techniques in the Egyptian
construction industry. These techniques are almost fully implemented and efficient and
with some more effort their efficiency will be increased.
Table 3. 3 – Lean Principles/technique/tools to be efficiently deployed
Scope
Waste reduction
Lean Principles/technique/tools to be efficiently deployed (Mean
Score < 3.5)
Mean
Score
The concern to reduce the non-value added activities in the project
3.35
The range of material waste in construction site
The awareness of the employees about waste elimination
The concern about unneeded movements when locating the
inventory on site
2.7
2.3
3.45
Material waste quantification
Transparency
Flow Variability
Continuous
Improvement
Process variability
3
Productivity loss quantification (labor/equipment)
2.6
Visual management system at site
visualization tools on site/project to improve work flow
2.45
2.15
just-in-time method to decrease the volume of inventory on site
2.2
collaboration with the suppliers to assure the delivery of material
on time
the work flexibility on site
1.75
Quantification of the unused ordered material on site
3.05
Pre-fabricated material on site
Monitoring the production on site and record performance
benchmarks
2.85
start of the day meeting for all the employees in the project
3
3.3
3.05
57 | P a g e
Table 3. 4 – Lean Principles/technique/tools Semi/fully implemented
Scope
Waste reduction
Lean Principles/technique/tools semi/fully implemented (Mean
Score > 3.5)
underutilized people on project considered as a waste
Mean
Score
3.55
standardize the construction/design process
Reduce Variability communicate standard process to workers
reviewing the design drawings at early stages
Housekeeping on site
Clarifying the whole method of construction to employees on site
Transparency
Communication channels with all the project stakeholders
Schedule look-ahead to improve the work flow
Management system to guarantee that the information flows
Flow Variability smoothly
The importance of the smooth of information, material and
equipment on site
3.65
3.65
4.10
4.40
3.80
3.95
3.95
Proactive actions or set quality plans to prevent defects at source
3.95
the lesson-learned gained from your previous experience
the employees contributing in the process enhancement
Continuous education programmes or courses for the employees
Consider the customer feedback to improve the process
Overall quality assessment for all the activities in the project?
safety action plans and main risks identification in the project
The flexibility to meet the customer’s changes & requirements
Communication between the contractor and the customer
3.95
3.60
3.55
4.00
3.80
4.00
4.20
4.20
Continuous
Improvement
Process
Variability
Customer focus
3.70
3.85
Based on the above lean tools/techniques classification, the lean tools/techniques that are
implemented in the Egyptian construction projects will be examined in this research
through applying it to a case study in a project in Egypt.
4. The potential of the respondents to use new management approach
55% of the respondents with experience more than 15 years have high potentials to use
new management techniques/approaches while 30% of the respondents with experience
above 10 years have average potentials. Only 10% of the respondents with experience
between 5-10 years have low potential to use new management techniques.
58 | P a g e
Chapter Four
4. Lean Construction Framework
Lean concept has been introduced into the construction industry with varying levels of
success for different projects at different countries. However, currently there are no
practical guidelines for the application of the lean concept in the Egyptian construction
industry.
This chapter introduces a proposed framework for the application of lean principles to
enhance the Egyptian construction performance. This framework is considered a lean
implementation guideline.
This framework was applied to a Case Study to see the potential improvements that lean
can achieve. The main purpose of the case study is to show a real current process for the
ready mix concrete works at a construction site in Egypt and to analyze the process. The
main actual causes of delays and disruptions were also highlighted.
Before presenting the proposed Lean Construction Framework, the benefits achieved by
using lean principles in different countries around the world will be addressed. It gives an
indication with the potential improvements that can be achieved if lean approach was
applied in construction projects in Egypt.
4.1 Benefits realized by Lean Construction implementation in different
Countries
The construction industry has recently seen improvements in the projects performance in
terms of value, quality, time and cost as a result of introducing lean thinking to the industry
and using different lean techniques/principles. Lean thinking has proven to deliver tangible
benefits to the performance and delivery of construction projects in different countries
and organizations around the world.
Table 4.1 shows summary for the realized benefits achieved in different countries after
implementing lean construction approach. The main focus was on the implementation of
lean principles in concrete works.
The improvements in the construction field in several countries around the world due to
lean thinking have been reported in this research to develop a trend for lean benefits as
shown in figure 4.1. The improvements achieved in Nigeria and Brazil, being developing
59 | P a g e
countries, by applying Lean construction management can be taken as a guide for the
improvements that lean approach can achieve in Egypt. Fig. 4.1 shows that the
improvement accomplished by Brazil and Nigeria in reducing the project duration is 25%
and 31% respectively. Hypothetically and due to the several similarities in their economic
situation, Egypt can successfully implement lean construction and achieve similar results to
those achieved in Brazil and Nigeria (IMF n.d.). This improvement will vary between 25%
and 31%.
Table 4. 1 Countries Using Lean Approach in Construction & the realized benefits (performance
Improvement)
Country
% of
improvement
(Duration
Reduction)
Used Lean techniques
United
States
(US)
Brazil
16%
Nigeria
31%
Last Planner System, Visualization (Samalia Adamu 2012)
management & Huddle meetings
United
Kingdom
(UK)
37%
Just-in-time, collaborative planning,
visual management, prefabricated
material, Waste elimination, 5S,
theory of constraints.
Sweden
79%
25%
Last Planner System, Visualization
management & First run studies, 5S,
and fail safe for quality & safety
Last Planner System
References
(J. S. O. Salem 2005),
(Turner 2013)
(Conte 2002)
(Wodalski, et al. 2011),
(Shires, Munn and
Thompson 2005),
(O’Connor and Swain
2013), (Smith 2013),
(Ansell, et al. 2007),
(BRE 2003)
Last Planner System, continuous
(Simonsson, et al.
improvement,
Value
Stream 2012), (Eriksson 2010)
Mapping, Pull approach, reduce
batch
size,
Just-in-time,
collaboration, and prefabricated
material.
60 | P a g e
Lean Construction benefits - Concrete Works
90%
79%
% of Improvement
80%
70%
60%
50%
37%
40%
31%
25%
30%
20%
16%
10%
0%
US
Brazil
Nigeria
UK
Swedan
Figure 4. 1 - Countries Using Lean Approach in Construction & the realized performance
Improvement
4.2 Proposed Lean Construction Management Framework
A Framework was developed to show the impact of applying certain lean principles on the
project performance, especially, project duration. It can be considered as a way to
proactively control the construction projects in terms of time, cost & quality. The
guidelines presented in this framework depends more on feed forward method than
feedback ones. In contrary to the traditional project control approach, the proposed Lean
Construction Framework presents a proactive approach in controlling time, cost and
quality. The proposed framework showed the practical guide lines that can be followed in
order for the lean thinking to be appropriately applied to the construction industry.
4.2.1 Framework Foundation
The proposed framework presented in this chapter was established after an extensive
research in several directions. The foundation of this framework is based on the following
(see fig.4.2):
1. Literature survey
All the previous works show the impact of using lean management approach in projects
outside Egypt as illustrated in chapter 2 of this research.
61 | P a g e
2. Questionnaire
The results of the questionnaire conducted as shown in chapter 3 of this research
showed the following:
a. The unawareness of engineers in Egypt about the lean concepts (55% of the
respondents have not any idea about lean and 45% of the respondents have
heard about it)
b. More effort should be done to increase the awareness of employees on site
about waste reduction and the concern to reduce the non-added value
activities should be improved.
c. The unawareness of engineers’ in Egypt with the visualization management
(30% of the respondents are scarcely using it while 65% are using it for safety
issues only)
d. Work flow should be improved by using several techniques that are not familiar
to the construction industry in Egypt such as Just-in-time technique and
flexibility
e. The potential of the respondents to use new management approach (55% of
the respondents have high potential to use new management techniques)
f. The causes of disruptions and the factors impacting the overall performance of
the project were also measured through the questionnaire. Previous studies
have shown that tremendous improvements for these disruptions can be
achieved by adopting lean approach.
3. Theoretical framework of traditional project control
The role of traditional Project Control approach in controlling the projects corresponds
to a reactive approach more than a proactive one where actions are only taken after
the problems are appeared instead of preventing their occurrence. The controller (cost
or time) records the variance or feedback signals on the variables (activities
duration/cost) we wish to control. Then the variance/deviation between the planned
and actual performance is measured and the control is implemented by taking the
corrective action in an attempt to reduce the deviation. Fig. 4.3 shows the traditional
control approach as introduced in the PMBOK® Guide, 4th Edition
However, the proactive approach or the feed forward could be found in the mindset of
the lean construction. The feed-forward approach emphasizes on controlling the inputs
(resources that flow into the process) and on removing any obstacles from the
execution process to ensure smooth flow of process execution. This approach prevents
problems from occurrence rather than having to cure them later (Merschbrock 2009).
62 | P a g e
Litreature
Survey
Lean
Framework
foundation
Traditional
Project Control
Approach
Questionnaire
Figure 4. 2 – Lean Framework Foundation
Project Management Process
(PMBOK® Guide)
Initiation Process
Planning Process
Execution
Monitoring &
Controlling Process
Closing Process
Tools
Performance reviews
Inputs
Output
Project Management Plan
Inspection to check scope
Organizational process
Variance Analysis
Work Performance
measurments
Work Performance
Information
Project management
software
Change requests / Change
request update
Schedule: Project Schedule
Schedule: Schedule tools Resource leveling
Project management plan
updates
Cost: Earned Value
Mangement- Forecating - To
complete performance Index
Budget Forecast
Cost: Project funding
requirements
Input
Transformation
Output
Feedback (Reactive Approach)
Figure 4. 3– Traditional Project Control process (PMBOK® Guide, 4th Edition)
63 | P a g e
Based on the above framework foundations, proposed guidelines for the lean management
approach are established. The following guidelines are generic and can be applied to any
type of work. The proposed lean construction management framework consists of six steps
(See Fig.4.4):
1) Process Map for the activities
Develop a process map for all the activities in a construction project to show the
sequence and the important steps in order to achieve the project deliverables. In this
research, the main focus was on the ready mix concrete works starting from the
preparation (preconstruction) phase and till pouring the concrete on site.
2) Establishing the Current state Map
Current state mapping (CSM) is typically used to map the existing project process as it
is actually operating. The main purpose of the map is to provide a clear view of where
wastes exist, such as delays, disruptions, bottlenecks, non-‘right first time’ quality, or
excessive processes etc. CSM stipulates the basis for developing an improved future
state process (O’Connor and Swain 2013). For the purpose of this research, a current
state map should be established and all the existing activities and their durations are
to be plotted. This includes the Value Added, Non-value added and the Essential nonadded value activities.
3) Waste Reduction/Elimination
Construction waste is classified into two main groups namely the physical and nonphysical waste. The physical wastes include solid and material waste while the nonphysical wastes include the time and cost overrun (Nagapan, Rahman and Asmi 2012).
The waste reduction/elimination in this research was done through three main steps:
3.1 Waste Identification
Identifying the wastes in the process in accordance with eight types of wastes
introduced in the literature as follows (Garrett and Lee 2011):







Overproduction (e.g. materials or services not needed)
Waiting (e.g. employees waiting for equipment to finish)
Transportation (e.g. unnecessary transport of goods)
Unnecessary processes
Inventory (e.g. goods awaiting processing or use)
Unneeded movement (e.g. people or labor unneeded movements)
Defects (e.g. in materials / finished installation)
64 | P a g e

Underutilized people
3.2 Waste Analysis
After identifying the wastes in the process, the wastes should be analyzed and
classified. The types of the activities (value added activities, Non Value added
activities, and Essential Non Added value activities) should be determined and its
impact on the overall process performance should be measured.
3.3 Fishbone analysis (also known as cause and effect)
It is a visual brainstorming process to identify the main causes of the delays, disruptions
and/or any causes that contribute to the problem (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
4) Lean tools/techniques selection to be used for construction improvement
The main purpose of the proposed Framework is to apply the five key principles of the
Lean approach to the construction projects in Egypt. These principles are (more details
about the principles/techniques are shown in chapter 2):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Identify Customer Value
Map the Value Stream (operations that generate the value)
Make the product flow, waiting is waste
Use a pull logistic
Seek perfection in all operations
To adequately implement the above principles, the appropriate lean tools/techniques
should be chosen to improve the current process. These techniques/principles will be
selected based on the following criteria:


The limiting constraints surrounded by the project and if these constraints can
be changed or not.
The applications of these tools and their efficiency based on data collected
from the literature.
65 | P a g e
5) Developing the Future State Map (Ongoing projects)
Future state mapping (FSM) is typically developed to map a process after incorporating
Lean principles so that work flows efficiently through streamlined processes.
Appropriate Lean tools are then used to support the implementation of the improved
process (e.g. problem solving, 5S, visual management etc...) (O’Connor and Swain
2013). For the purpose of this research, a future state map is established after
eliminating wastes and after incorporating the appropriate lean techniques/tools to
improve the work flow of the process. This includes elimination of the bottle necks and
avoiding any causes of future delays. The future map is usually constrained by the
current condition of the project; therefore, it is a method for improving the process
within the limiting constraints of the project. Accordingly, the future map is the
enhanced version of the existing current state of the project.
6) Developing the ideal State Map (New or future Projects)
For new starting projects, an ideal state map can be established based on previous
experience from the historical data from previous projects. The future maps used in
previous projects can be used as guideline for the new similar projects to avoid any
inconvenience in the new projects. This can be done through adapting the conditions
of the new projects and make it more flexible to accept the lean approach.
4.2.1 Framework Limitation
1. The proposed Lean Construction Framework is limited to complex, uncertain and
fast track projects. The project complexity can be defined as “'consisting of many
varied interrelated parts and can be operationalized in terms of differentiation and
interdependency” (Baccarini 1996). The project is considered to be complex when
the project behaviors and outcomes are difficult to predict and explain. Complex
projects consist of multiple interdependencies and nonlinear relationships (Howick,
Ackermann and Williams 2009).
2. The proposed Lean Construction Framework in this study is generic and can be
applied to any type of work. However, the research results are based on one case
study that only attributable and restricted to certain type of projects. Therefore,
the features for some of the Framework guidelines will be adopted according to the
project type, yet, following the same procedures of the framework. The selected
lean technique and the results of the waste analysis are the main items that will
66 | P a g e
differ according to the type of the project, yet resulting in different future and ideal
maps.
3. The acceptance of adopting this Framework in any construction firm is quite
challenging. The company strategy and way of management plays a crucial role in
accepting such new techniques. To successfully implement any new technique in a
company, the top management has to accept and appreciate this new practice.
Therefore, the” top- down” management approach should be adopted while
developing an implementation strategy to new systems in the company to ensure
the successful execution of these systems. This includes providing training to all the
work team to increase their awareness about lean concepts to make the whole
process more efficient.
67 | P a g e
1. General process map for the Activties
2.Establish the Current state Map of the Process
3.Waste Elimination
3.1 Waste Identification (VA,NVA,ENVA)
3.2 Waste Analysis
3.3 Fishbone Analysis
4.Lean Tools/techniques used in the process
5. Establish the Future state Map of the process
6. Establish the Ideal state Map of the process
Figure 4. 4 - Proposed Lean Construction Framework
68 | P a g e
4.3 Lean Construction Framework Verification: A Case Study
The research objective is to show the impact of applying the lean approach through the
proposed framework on construction projects in Egypt. Case studies would be a suitable
way to study and investigate the current management approach in projects (Merschbrock
2009).
This research uses a case study approach to gather data. This data shows the current work
activities and map the real process of ready mix concrete work activities of construction
project for one of the largest construction firms in Egypt. The data collected in this
research includes the durations for all relevant activities of concrete works (execution and
pre-execution phase) in the project as well as analysis to all the causes of delays and
disruptions. Also, the case study is vital for analyzing the actual durations and work
sequence in the real life that each activity can take and see the effect of applying the lean
thinking in changing the sequence and reducing the activities’ durations. The durations of
these activities can vary from project to the other, however and for the purpose of this
research, this gives an idea of how we can control a project by using the lean approach.
This case study can be regarded as a representative sample for the ready mix concrete
work execution in most projects.
Case study description
The project is an existing Hotel located near downtown in Cairo, Egypt. It consists of one
existing building and three new buildings: swimming pool, Garage area and Ballroom. Table
4.2 shows the project data. The research will focus on the ready mix concrete process of
the Garage Area. The garage area was divided into 3 main zones for execution purposes as
per the agreed method statement (see figure 4.5).
Table 4. 2 – Case Study data
Item
Description
Project Type
Project Value
Contract Type
Scope of Work
Project Duration
Garage Duration Only
Building
80 M EGP
Remeasured/FIDIC 87/Design-Bid-Build
Concrete Works/Steel structure
9 months
7 months
69 | P a g e
Building Type
Existing Hotel Building
Description
No. of rooms: 352 - 40487 m2
No. of floors: 12 floors
Swimming Pool & Cabanas
No. of Cabanas: 17
Garage Area
No. of floors: 1
Area: 9000 m2
Concrete Quantity: 12,000 m3
Ballroom
No. of floors: 3
Zone (1)
Zone (2)
Zone (3)
Figure 4. 5 – Case Study Layout (Garage Area)
70 | P a g e
4.3.1 Application of Lean Construction Framework on the Case Study
The framework as mentioned in the beginning of the chapter consists of 6 steps. These
steps were derived for the case study as follows:
1) Process Map for the activities
Figure 4.6 shows the process map of the activities. The process was divided into 3
main phases as follows:
1. Preparation works include:
 The shop drawings process
 Material submittal process
 Quantity surveying process
 Purchasing Process
2. Material (Rebar) Delivery & fabrication include:
 Rebar delivery
 Rebar inspection
 Loading/unloading of Rebar
 Rebar fabrication
 Material movements on site
3. Execution process include:
 Concrete works for foundations of the Garage Area
 Concrete Works for the Raft of the Garage Area
 Concrete Works for the Retaining walls of the Garage Area
In this Case Study, the Monitoring and control process was highlighted in the process
map. The project was over budget and behind schedule due to the passive attribute of
the traditional project control process. The reasons behind the time and cost overrun
were mainly due to the following reasons:


The long time taken by the Engineer/owner to approve the Baseline schedule
which hinders the Contractor from updating the schedule properly
The method of control based on the monthly updates of the schedule and the
budget which means that the corrective actions are taken after the problem
71 | P a g e

occurrence by one month leading to successive delays in the other project
activities.
The passive nature of the project control which highlights the problem after its
occurrence (e.g. realizing that the completion date was delayed after the
monthly update or that there are losses in the project after updating the
monthly cost report). No actions were taken to prevent the occurrence of the
problem and no appropriate analysis was done for the root causes of the
problem to avoid it in the future. It was all about instant solutions for the
problems.
2) Establishing the Current state Map
Based on the above process for the different work phases, a current state map was
established and all the existing activities and its durations were plotted including the Value
Added, Non-value added and the Essential non-added value activities. The main purpose of
the value stream process is to identify the wastes and its main causes, thus, reducing these
wastes. Current state maps were developed for the above highlighted three phases of
construction. Figure 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9 show the current state maps for the three phases
studied in this research which includes the activity name, duration, type, and no. of
workers. Table 4.3 presents the list of symbols used in this thesis for the development of
the state map.
Table 4. 3 – Value Stream Mapping Symbols
Symbol
Name and Meaning
Procedure: represents an activity or work to be done and the type of
the activity (VA, NVA, ENVA)
: Number of workers
VA
NVA
ENVA
Waiting
Decision Node
Connector: represents a flow relationship
Electronic Information Flow
72 | P a g e
Symbol
Name and Meaning
Pull (e.g. from Store)
Supplier
Truck
Inventory
This highlights improvement needs at a specific process that is
critical to achieving the future or ideal state map (lean tools used)
This highlights actions that should be taken to implement the lean
tools/techniques
The main purpose of the value stream mapping is to highlight the potential improvements
that can be done in certain activities to reduce waste and make the process more efficient.
It can be considered as a decision support system for the project manager in which he can
decide his priorities in solving the project’s problems. This map can assist the management
team on two issues: 1) To identify the value added and non-added value activities in the
main process and try to improve the efficiency and decrease the durations of these
activities 2) To improve the performance of the disrupted durations whether these
activities is value added or non-value added activities.
The following are the work phases of the concrete works as shown in the current state
maps:
I.

Preparation Works:
The planned and actual durations of the activities in the preparation phase was
collected from the approved Baseline schedules and by interviewing the concerned
engineers. The data was limited to part of the concrete works, namely the foundation
works which include the footings, connecting slabs, raft and Retaining walls. Table 4.4
73 | P a g e

shows the actual and planned duration for all the related activities. The total planned
and actual duration due to concurrency between the activities are 74 and 144
respectively.
To develop current state map, both the actual and the planned durations should be
identified and the root causes of the delays and disruptions should be investigated and
analyzed in addition to the process map. Figure 4.7 shows the current process for the
preparation phase and all the related stakeholders. The preparation works mean the
work required to be done before issuing purchase orders and starting execution. The
activities included in this phase usually impact the overall duration of the project.
Table 4. 4 - Durations for the preparation phase activities
Act.
No.
Planned
Dur.*
Actual
Dur.*
5
26
I.7
All the concrete drawings of
Area 3
7
26
I.3,I.
7,I.1
1,I.1
3
Assign technical team for the
Shop drawings & take off
3
8
I.2
I.4
For the rebar works only
5
5
I.3
I.5
For the rebar works only
5
5
I.4
I.6
For the rebar works only
5
10
I.5
I.14
For the rebar works only
I.7
Shop Drawings submission
for concrete and steel rft
foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
30
40
I.8
For the rebar, formwork
I.8
Shop drawings approval for
concrete and steel rft
foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
34
40
I.9
For the rebar & formwork
I.9
Shop Drawings resubmission
0
21
I.10
For the rebar & formwork
I.10
Shop drawings final approval
0
14
I.11
Material Submittal
7
15
Activities
I.1
Receiving IFC dwgs (waiting
period)
I.2
Assigning Team (time taken
to assign team)
I.3
I.4
I.5
I.6
Developing Supplier list
(Time taken)
send the specs to the
suppliers to get the offers
Receiving Quotations
(waiting time)
Contract agreement with the
Supplier/Subcontractor
Pred.
I.1,I.2
I.7
I.8
Succ.
I.9
I.2
Remarks
For the rebar & formwork
I.12
For the rebar
74 | P a g e
Act.
No.
I.12
I.13
I.14
Planned
Dur.*
Actual
Dur.*
21
21
12
30
Issue PO for Formwork &
Rebar
3
3
Total Durations
74
144
Activities
Material resubmission &
Approval
Take off (time taken ) for
Concrete works for
foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
Pred.
I.11
Succ.
Remarks
I.14
For the rebar
I.7
I.14
For the rebar works only
I.6,I.1
2,I.13
II.1
For the rebar works only
*Planned Duration: Durations from the approved Baseline Schedule of the project
*Actual Duration: Durations from the updated schedule of the project
II.


Material delivery/on-site transportation
The planned and actual durations of the activities in the Material delivery/On-site
transportation phase was collected from the approved Baseline schedules and by
interviewing the concerned engineers. The data was limited to part of the concrete
works, namely the rebar of the foundation works which include the footings,
connecting slabs, raft and Retaining walls. The flow unit of the current map is 50 Ton of
Rebar, hence, all the durations based on this flow unit. Table 4.5 shows the actual and
planned duration of all the related activities.
This phase is part of the execution phase but it is vital to be elaborated as it includes
several activities that add no value to the execution process. The flow unit of this
process is the material, namely steel rebar. It shows the work flow of the material onsite. Figure 4.8 shows the current process for the Material delivery/On-site
transportation phase.
Table 4. 5 – Durations for the material delivery/on-site transportation phase
Act.
No.
Activities
Planned
Dur.*
Actual
Dur.*
Pred.
Succ.
II.1
Prepare Storage
2
5
II.5, II.6
II.2
Install Mobile Crane (Rented)
1
2
II.4
II.3
Inspect the delivered Material
0.25
0.5
II.4
Remarks
For storing 50 Ton of rebar
Qty = 50 Ton
75 | P a g e
Act.
No.
II.4
II.5
II.6
II.7
II.8
II.9
II.10
II.11
II.12
II.13
II.14
II.15
II.16
Planned
Dur.*
Actual
Dur.*
Pred.
0.125
0.375
II.3
0.625
0.125
5
1
0.125
8
II.4
II.5
2
4
0.125
0.375
II.7
II.5
0.125
0.25
II.9
0.125
0.25
II.10
II.12,II.13
Qty = 50 Ton
1
3
II.7,
II.8
II.13
Qty = 50 Ton
5
10
II.12
II.14
Qty = 50 Ton
0.125
0.25
II.13
II.15
Qty = 50 Ton
0.125
0.25
II.14
II.16
Qty = 50 Ton
unloading material on site
0.125
0.25
II.15
Total Durations
15.75
29.75
Activities
Unload the material and move it
to the Storage area
Sort the Material in the store
Update the inventory list
Prepare the workshop
Install the equipment and tools
(Rebar Bender and cutter)
Loading Material to move it to
Workshop
Movements from storage area
to site Workshop
Unloading Material to workshop
Provide the steel foeman with
the shop drawings to start
fabrication
Fabrication of Steel
Loading of material to move to
Site
Movements from Workshop to
site
Succ.
II.5
II.6
II.8
II.13
II.10
II.11
Remarks
Qty = 50 Ton
Qty = 50 Ton
For all the project
For all the project
Qty = 50 Ton
Qty = 50 Ton
Qty = 50 Ton
*Planned Duration: Durations from the site engineer’s experience
*Actual Duration: Durations from the site daily reports
III.


Execution Phase
The planned and actual durations of the activities in the execution phase was collected
from the approved Baseline schedules and by interviewing the concerned engineers.
The data was limited to part of the concrete works, namely the foundation works
which include the footings, connecting slabs, raft and Retaining walls. Table 4.5 shows
the actual and planned duration of all the related activities.
The current state map of the execution process of the concrete works includes the
following main activities:
- Reinforced Concrete Footings
- Reinforced Concrete raft
- Reinforced Concrete Walls (Retaining Walls)
76 | P a g e
The durations and sequence of these activities were mapped in the current state map
showed in figure 4.9. The map shows the sequence of work in one cycle. This map
should be repeated for every cycle to be more efficient but for the sake of this research
we focused only on one cycle as the main purpose is to show how the works flow. All
the relevant stakeholders are shown in the map and its relation with the activities.
Table 4. 6 – Durations for the activities of the execution phase
Act.
No.
III.1
III.2
III.3
III.4
III.5
III.6
III.7
III.8
III.9
III.10
III.11
III.12
III.13
III.14
III.15
III.16
III.17
III.18
III.19
III.20
III.21
III.22
Activities
Planned
Dur.*
Actual
Dur.*
Pred.
Succ.
Remarks
Installation of FW for
1.5
5
III.2
Concrete Qtys/ cycle= 100 m3
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
0.25
4
III.1
III.3
Installation of rebar work for
5
10
III.2
III.4
Steel Rft qtys/Cycle= 15 Ton
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
0.375
3
III.3
III.5
Pouring Concrete
1
2
III.4
III.6
Concrete Qtys/ cycle= 100 m3
Waiting till removing the FW
4
8
III.5
III.7
Removal of FW
1
5
III.6
III.8
Transporting the removed
0.125
1
III.7
FW to another works
FW for Raft/cycle
2
25
III.5
III.10
Concrete Qtys/ cycle= 230 m3
Inspection
0.5
4
III.9
III.11
1st layer of rebar work for
Steel Rft qtys/Cycle= 17.25
5
20
III.10
III.12
raft
Ton
Inspection
0.375
4
III.11
III.13
2nd Layer of rebar work for
Steel Rft qtys/Cycle= 17.25
5
20
III.12
III.14
raft
Ton
Inspection
0.375
4
III.13
III.15
Pouring Concrete
2
12
III.14
III.16
Concrete Qtys/ cycle= 230 m3
unloading Wall FW on site
0.125
6
III.15
III.17
and FW assembly
FW for Retaining walls/cycle
4
III.16
III.18
Concrete Qtys/ cycle= 50 m3
12
(27 LM, H= 6, W=0.3)
Inspection/Cycle
0.375
III.17
III.19
2
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
4
III.18
III.20
Steel Rft qtys/Cycle= 7.5 Ton
10
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
0.125
III.19
III.21
0.5
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
0.5
III.20
III.22
Concrete Qtys/ cycle= 25 m3
2
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
0.5
III.21
Concrete Qtys/ cycle= 25 m3
2
Total Durations
38.125
161.5
* Planned Duration: Durations from the approved Baseline Schedule of the project
*Actual Duration: Durations from the updated schedule of the project
77 | P a g e
Execution process (Rebar, Formwork & Concrete)
Purchasing and Delivery Process (Rebar)
Project Start
Tender
Schedule
Receiving IFC
dwgs
Prepare Storage
Yard
Shop drawings
preparation &
submission
Assigning Team
Not Approved
(Resubmission)
Developing
Supplier list
Consultant
Approval
Choose the
appropriate
supplier
Develop
Time
Schedule
Loading Material to
move it to Workshop
Send the prequalifcation
& Material submittal to
the Consultant/Engineer
Installation of FW for
Raft
Installation of FW
for RC walls
Formwork Inspection
1st layer of rebar
work for raft
Formwork
Inspection
Install site
Equipment (Mobile
Crane)
Movements from storage
area to site Workshop
/unload material
Material
delivered (Rebar)
Provide the steel foeman
with the shop drawings to
start fabrication
Rebar Installation for
foundations
Rebar Inspection for
1st layer of rebar
Rebar Installation
for RC walls
Fabrication of Rebar
Rebar Inspection for
foundations
2nd Layer of rebar
work for raft
Rebar Inspection for
RC walls
Pouring Concrete
Rebar Inspection for
2nd layer of rebar
Pouring Concrete
Formwork Removal
Pouring Concrete
Not Approved
Inspect the
delivered
Material
Approved
Quantity Take
off
Installation of FW for
foundations
Loading of material to
move to Site
Approved
Unload the material
(rebar) if complied
with the required
specs
unloading material on site
Not Approved
Consultant
Approval
Purchasing
Load Material (rebar) and
move it to the Storage
area / Unload material to
the storage area
Approved
Sort the Material
(rebar) in the store &
update the inventory
list
Contract
Agreement with
the supplier
Prepare the Rebar
workshop /Install the
equipment
Preperation Phase
Material Delivery and Fabrication Phase
unqualified
labor
Change order
Approved by Client
Start Work if the schedule
developed and approved on
time
Start Work as per the
schedule
Updated
Baseline
schedule
Contractual Period
Rejected by the Client
Resubmission
if the Contractor delayed in
developing the schedule
Start Work as per the CM
instructions
Problem
occurred
Measure Performance and
Variance analysis
Monthly
Reports
Delay in material
delivery
Update the Schedule with the new forecast
Identify
Delays
Shortage in
resources
Feedback approach
Time Control Process
Productivity loss
Increase in
material prices
Change order
Tender
Estimated
Budget
Start Project
Develop Budget (allocating all the resources)
Approved by Top
Management
Allocate the cost each
month & monitor actuals
against budget (all the
expenses of the project)
through Monthly Reports
Problem occurred (Cost
Overrun)
Updated Budget & update the
Forecast at completion
Take Corrective
Actions
Feedback
approach
Cost Control Process
Figure 4. 6 – Original process map for the different work phases
78 | P a g e
Cu
rre
nt Sta
teMa
p
i
-P
re
p
a
ra
ti
on W ork
s (
P
re
Ex
e
c
u
ti
on)
Project Start
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Assigning Team
Developing Supplier list
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
26
7
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
send the specs to the
suppliers to get the offers
8
3
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
ENVA
Process Activity:
Shop Drawings submission for
foundations
Process Activity:
Shop drawings approval for
foundations
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
40
30
ENVA
Process Activity:
Contract agreement with the
Supplier
Receiving Quotations
5
5
Process Activity:
Receiving IFC dwgs (waiting
period)
26
5
ENVA
Process Activity:
40
34
ENVA
Process Activity:
Take off (time taken )
Process Activity:
Issue PO
Lead Time (LT):
30
Processing Time (PT):
12
VA
NVA
ENVA
Lead Time (LT):
3
Processing Time (PT):
3
VA
NVA
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
5
5
ENVA
Approved or
Approved as
Noted
Rejected
Process Activity:
Material Submittal
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
10
5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Shop Drawings resubmission
Shop drawings approval
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
21
0
ENVA
14
0
ENVA
Process Activity:
Material Approval
15
7
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
21
21
ENVA
Contractor
Engineer to review and
approve the Shop
Drawings
Engineer to review and
approve the Shop
Drawings
Engineer/Owner
Supplier to review the documents & send the
quotations to the Contractor
Negotioation with the Supplier
Supplier/Subcontractor
Figure 4. 7 - Current State Map for preparation Phase (I)
79 | P a g e
Cu
r
r
e
nt Sta
teM
a
p
i
i
-M
a
te
r
i
a
l De
li
v
e
r
y
/
o
nsi
tetr
a
nsp
o
r
ta
ti
o
n
Steel Reinforcement Supplier
Issue Purchase
Order
Qty= 50 Ton
Request
Order
Project Management
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Prepare Storage Yard
Inspect the delivered Material
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
5
2
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
ENVA
Process Activity:
Install Crane
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
2
1
ENVA
Process Activity:
Prepare the workshop
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
8
5
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
0.375
0.125
ENVA
Process Activity:
Movements from storage area
to site Workshop
Process Activity:
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
0.375
0.125
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
1
0.625
ENVA
Process Activity:
Loading of material to move
to Site
3
1
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
ENVA
Process Activity:
Movements from Workshop
to site
Fabrication of Steel
0.25
0.125
ENVA
10
5
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Unloading Material to workshop
Waiting
Time
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
0.25
0.125
ENVA
0.25
0.125
ENVA
0.25
0.125
ENVA
Process Activity:
unloading material on site
Waiting
Time
Waiting
Time
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
0.25
0.125
ENVA
Process Activity:
Update the inventory list
4
2
ENVA
Waiting
Time
Process Activity:
shop drawings to foremen to
start fabrication
Process Activity:
Unload the material and move
it to the Storage area
Process Activity:
Sort the Material in the store
Process Activity:
Install rebar equipment
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
0.5
0.25
ENVA
Process Activity:
Loading Material to move it to
Workshop
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
0.125
0.125
ENVA
Figure 4. 8 – Current Sate Map for the material delivery phase
80 | P a g e
Curre
nt StateMap
i
i
i
-Ex
e
cuti
on P
roce
ss
Project Management
Develop Baseline Time Schedule
Updated Budget
Ready Mix Concrete
Ready Mix Concrete
Ready Mix Concrete
Updated Schedule
Process Activity:
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Installation of rebar work for
foundations/Cycle
9
5
1.5
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
9
10
5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Pouring Concrete
FW for Raft/cycle
Pouring Concrete
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
6
2
1
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
ENVA
9
25
2
ENAV
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
unloading Wall FW on site and
FW assembly
6
12
2
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
6
0.125
ENVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
7
10
4
ENVA
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
6
2
0.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Inspection/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Waiting till removing the FW
Inspection
FW for Retaining walls/cycle
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
I
I
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
4
0.25
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
3
0.375
ENVA
I
I
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
8
4
ENAV
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
4
0.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Removal of FW
1st layer of rebar work for raft
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
5
1
ENAV
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Transporting the removed FW
to another works
Process Activity:
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
1
0.125
ENAV
I
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
9
12
4
ENVA
0.5
0.125
ENVA
2
0.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
9
20
5
ENVA
Inspection
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
2
0.375
ENVA
Inspection
4
0.375
ENVA
Process Activity:
2nd Layer of rebar work for
raft
Actual Time (AT):
Planned Time (PT):
VA
NVA
9
20
5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Inspection
Actual Time (AT):
4
Processing Time (PT):
0.375
VA
NVA
ENVA
Figure 4. 9 - Current state Map for the execution phase
81 | P a g e
3) Waste Reduction/Elimination
Any disruption, delay or non-added value activity is considered a waste in the
construction industry. Waste reduction can only take place after wastes have been
identified. Plotting the current process on the value stream mapping can facilitate
waste identification and the potential improvements. In this research, three main
steps were pursued to identify the non-physical wastes, namely, i) Waste Identification
ii) Waste Analysis iii) Fish bone diagram
The waste identification can be easily done after developing the current state map.
The activities were divided into three main types, namely:
-
Value Added activities (VA): the work that directly contributes to the final form of
the product that the customer is willing to pay for (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
-
Non-Value Added activities (NVA): the activities that do not add value to the final
product in direct or indirect way are considered wastes that must be eliminated.
These wastes are usually accompanied by particular works such as unnecessary
movements, poor quality and waiting (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
-
Essential Non-Value Added activities (ENVA): the activities that must be done to
enable the value-adding (VA) activities to be completed but not directly contribute
to the final form of the product. On other words, it does not add value to the
process (O’Connor and Swain 2013).
The wastes of all the work phases were classified in accordance with the eight types of
waste and descriptions listed in Table 4. 7. The list presented in Table xx is considered a
guide for waste classification. Any activity in the process that represents or generates
any of the 8 types of waste is either considered NVA or ENVA activities.
Table 4. 7 – Types of wastes and its descriptions
Type of Waste
Overproduction
Description
Producing more work than
needed
Examples
Install extra rebar (increase the density) with
no need or extra unneeded shop drawings.
Waiting
Any resource that is not used
Waiting for the other parties’ comments on
submittals or design drawings/ waiting for
material delivery or equipment delivery
Transportation
Moving a resource from one
place to another
Transportation of material from storage area
to site/ Transportation of submittals
Unnecessary
processes
Activities that can be
eliminated
Resubmission of shop drawings/ unneeded
resources movements/double handling of
material/ Inspection
82 | P a g e
Type of Waste
Inventory
Description
Assets that are unused
Examples
Storing material from the early start of the
project with no urgent need/ Renting all the
needed scaffolding the project at the
beginning of the project
Unneeded
movement
Movements that waste time
Unneeded movements of labor, material or
equipment due to unorganized site
Defects
Any error or defect that
occurs (poor quality)
Defects in the concrete works after
pouring/Defects in drawings
Underutilized
people
Not using the employees
efficiently
Unbalanced work load/ problems in the
organization chart
3.1 Waste Identification
I.
Preparation Works:
Table 4. 8 shows the main activities of this phase. It classifies the types of the activities
as per the aforesaid classification. The following is a clarification for the activities
classification:
1. Issue for construction drawings: is essential for starting the work but it adds no
value to the final product. It is essential to get the shop drawings done.
2. Assigning team: is essential for starting the work but it adds no value to the
customer.
3. Developing supplier list: To get the convenient offers from the various suppliers,
developing a supplier list become essential but as a step in itself it does not add
value to the final product. The time spent on this activity is considered essential
waste that could be avoided if there is firm coordination between the tender team
and the operation team or if there are standard lists offered in the organization for
all the projects to use it.
4. Send the specs to the suppliers to get the offers: an Essential step in order to be
able to get the offers from the supplier but the customer is not willing to pay for it.
5. Receiving Quotations (waiting time): The time taken to collect the offers is
essential but adds no value to the final product.
6. Contract agreement with the Supplier/Subcontractor: The contract agreement is
one of the activities that can add value to the final product. When it is firm and
fair, the terms and conditions of any agreement is the main driver for the good
quality and can help in saving time and money.
83 | P a g e
7. Shop Drawings submission for concrete and steel reinforcement foundations: It is
essential and cannot be eliminated. The time taken by the contractor to prepare
the drawings is an essential waste and can be improved by several means.
8. Shop drawings approval for concrete and steel reinforcement foundations: It is
essential and cannot be eliminated. The time taken by the consultant to approve
the drawings is an essential waste and can be improved by several means.
9. Shop Drawings resubmission: The resubmission usually appears when the quality
and adequacy of the drawings are very poor. In all cases, it is considered a rework
activity which certainly adds no value to the process.
10. Shop drawings final approval: it is considered a rework activity which certainly
adds no value to the process.
11. Material Submittal: The material submittal is one of the essential activities that
directly contribute to the final product. Submitting an adequate material submittal
to get the approval from the Engineer usually saves time and money.
12. Material Approval: The approval of the material submittal by the Engineer means
an implicit approval for the final product by the customer.
13. Take off (time taken) for Concrete works for foundations: The takeoff is essential
for purchasing but it adds no value to the final product.
14. Issue PO for Formwork & Rebar: Purchasing the material as per the required
specifications is considered one of the important activities that contribute to the
final product.
Table 4. 8 - Waste Identification for preparation phase (planned, actual & disrupted durations)
Activity
#
I.1
I.2
I.3
I.4
I.5
I.6
Activities
Receiving IFC dwgs (waiting
period)
Assigning Team (time taken
to assign team)
Developing Supplier list (Time
taken)
send the specs to the
suppliers to get the offers
Receiving Quotations (waiting
time)
Contract agreement with the
Supplier/Subcontractor
Waste
Identificatio
n(VA,NVA,E
NVA)
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disruption
Index
ENVA
5
26
21
81%
ENVA
7
26
19
73%
ENVA
3
8
5
63%
ENVA
5
5
0
0%
ENVA
5
5
0
0%
VA
5
10
5
50%
84 | P a g e
Activity
#
I.7
I.8
Activities
Shop Drawings submission for
concrete and steel rft
foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
Shop drawings approval for
concrete and steel rft
foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
Waste
Identificatio
n(VA,NVA,E
NVA)
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disruption
Index
ENVA
30
40
10
25%
ENVA
34
40
6
15%
I.9
Shop Drawings resubmission
NVA
0
21
21
100%
I.10
Shop drawings final approval
NVA
0
14
14
100%
I.11
Material Submittal
VA
7
15
8
53%
VA
21
21
0
0%
ENVA
12
30
18
60%
VA
3
3
0
0%
74
144
70
I.12
I.13
I.14
Material resubmission &
Approval
Take off (time taken ) for
Concrete works for foundations
(Conc. Qty = 2000 m3)
Issue PO for Formwork &
Rebar
Total Durations
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
Table 4. 9 shows the main activities of this phase and classified the types of the
activities as per the aforesaid classification. The following is a clarification for the
activities classification:
1. Prepare storage: This activity can be easily eliminated if the contractor managed to
get all the major material just-in-time. The storage area can be only used for
storing the small tools and supplies that not take much space or cost a lot of
money.
2. Install Mobile crane: it is essential for loading and unloading of material but does
not add any value to the final product.
3. Material Handling: This step in the lean approach is a complete waste. The several
steps of material handling as shown in table 4.6 can be shrunk if the material
arrived to the site just in the time of installation. Merging all the unnecessary steps
85 | P a g e
of handling in one step will reduce the process duration and reduce the non-added
value activities.
4. Steel fabrication: This activity contributes directly in the final product of the
process. Therefore, it is an added value activity. However, it can be improved by
using alternatives for fabrication on site such as prefabrication rebar from central
workshops.
Table 4. 9 - Waste Identification for material delivery phase (planned, actual & disrupted dur.)
Activity #
Activities
Waste
Identificatio
n(VA,NVA,E
NVA)
Planne
d Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disruption
Index
II.1
Prepare Storage
NVA
2
5
3
60%
II.2
Install Mobile Crane (Rented)
ENVA
1
2
1
50%
II.3
Inspect the delivered
Material (Time taken)
NVA
0.25
0.5
0.25
50%
II.4
Unload the material and
move it to the Storage area
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
II.5
II.6
Sort the Material in the store
Update the inventory list
NVA
NVA
0.625
0.125
1
0.125
0.375
0
38%
0%
II.7
Prepare the workshop
NVA
5
8
3
38%
NVA
2
4
2
50%
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
VA
1
3
2
67%
VA
5
10
5
50%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
ENVA
0.125
15.75
0.25
29.75
0.125
14
50%
II.8
II.9
II.10
II.11
II.12
II.13
II.14
II.15
II.16
Install the equipment and
tools (Rebar Bender and
cutter)
Loading Material to move it
to Workshop
Movements from storage
area to site Workshop
Unloading Material to
workshop
Provide the steel foeman
with the shop drawings to
start fabrication
Fabrication of Steel
Loading of material to move
to Site
Movements from Workshop
to site
unloading material on site
Total Durations
86 | P a g e
III.
Execution Phase
Table 4. 10 shows the main activities of this phase and classified the types of the
activities as per the aforesaid classification. The following is clarification for the
activities classification:
1. Installation of formwork: The formwork installation is an essential step to start the
concrete works. However, it does not add value to the customer being not part
from the final product. Therefore, this activity should be improved to reduce the
time of its installation.
2. Inspection: In the production process, inspection is one of the wasteful activities
that should be eliminated. In construction, this process can be eliminated if more
attention is given to the quality of work to get it done right first time to avoid
rework due to errors. Removing such activities improves the process work flow.
3. Installation of Rebar: This activity contributes to the final product of the customer.
Therefore, the method of installation should be improved to increase the efficiency
of the process.
4. Pouring Concrete: This activity contributes to the final product of the customer.
Therefore, the method of installation should be improved to increase the efficiency
of the process.
Table 4. 10 - Waste Identification for execution phase (planned, actual & disrupted durations)
Activity
#
Activities
Waste
Identificatio
n(VA,NVA,E
NVA)
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disruption
Index
III.1
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
ENVA
1.5
5
3.5
70%
III.2
Inspection/Cycle
NVA
0.25
4
3.75
94%
III.3
Installation of rebar work for
foundations/Cycle
VA
5
10
5
50%
III.4
Inspection/Cycle
NVA
0.375
3
2.625
88%
III.5
Pouring Concrete
VA
1
2
1
50%
III.6
Waiting till removing the FW
NVA
4
8
4
50%
III.7
Removal of FW
ENVA
1
5
4
80%
III.8
Transporting the removed FW
to another works
NVA
0.125
1
0.875
88%
87 | P a g e
Activity
#
Activities
Waste
Identificatio
n(VA,NVA,E
NVA)
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disruption
Index
III.9
FW for Raft/cycle
ENVA
2
25
23
92%
III.10
Inspection
NVA
0.5
4
3.5
88%
III.11
1st layer of rebar work for raft
VA
5
20
15
75%
III.12
Inspection
NVA
0.375
4
3.625
91%
III.13
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
VA
5
20
15
75%
III.14
Inspection
NVA
0.375
4
3.625
91%
III.15
Pouring Concrete
VA
2
12
10
83%
ENVA
0.125
6
5.875
98%
ENVA
4
12
8
67%
NVA
0.375
2
1.625
81%
III.16
III.17
unloading Wall FW on site and
FW assembly
FW for Retaining walls/cycle
(27 LM, H= 6, W=0.3)
III.18
Inspection/Cycle
III.19
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
VA
4
10
6
60%
III.20
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
NVA
0.125
0.5
0.375
75%
III.21
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
III.22
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
38.125
161.5
123.375
Total Durations
88 | P a g e
3.2 Waste Analysis
I.
Preparation Works:
The total number of activities of this process is 14. The actual total duration of the process
due to the dependencies and concurrency of the activities is 144 days. The longest path
consists of VA, ENVA, and NVA activities. The total number of the actual days without
dependencies is 264 days. After classifying the activities, the following results were
observed:






The total number of the Essential non added value (ENVA) activities is 8 activities
out of 14. This number contributes with 57% of the total number of activities of the
process which represents the highest contribution as shown in Figure 4. 10. The
total number of actual days (without dependencies) for all the ENVA activities are
180 days out of 264 days which contributes with 68% of the total number of days of
the process as shown in
Figure 4. 11. The actual duration of ENVA activities on the longest path (106 days)
represent 74% of the total actual duration of this path.
The total number of the non-added value activities is 2 activities out of 14.This
number contributes with 14% of the total number of activities of the process as
shown in Figure 4. 10. The total number of actual days (without dependencies) for
all the NVA activities are 35 days out of 264 days which contributes with 13% of the
total number of days of the process as shown in
Figure 4. 11. The actual duration of NVA activities (35 days) on the longest path of
the process represent 24% of the total actual duration of this path.
The total number of the value added activities is 4 activities out of 14. This number
contributes with 29% of the total number of activities of the process as shown in
Figure 4. 10. The total actual number of days (without dependencies) for all the VA
activities are 49 days out of 264 days which contributes with 19% of the total actual
number of days of the process as shown in
Figure 4. 11. The actual duration of VA activities (3 days) on the longest path
represent 2% of the total actual duration of this path.
It can be concluded that in the preparation works (pre-execution) there are several
activities that are not contributory to the final product that the customer is willing to pay
for. Most of the activities that are located on the longest path of the process related to
non-essential activities (NVA & ENVA=98%). The total number of days should be reduced
and not only those on the longest path in order to decrease any associated impacts that
89 | P a g e
may occur (e.g. any increase of their durations may shift these activities to be on the
critical path).
Activities contribution in the process (No. of activities)
29%
ENAV
NVA
VA
57%
14%
Figure 4. 10 – Activities contribution in the preparation works (no. of activities)
Activities contribution in the process (durations)
80%
70%
68%
60%
50%
40%
Type of activities
30%
19%
20%
13%
10%
0%
ENAV
NVA
VA
Figure 4. 11 – Activities contribution in the preparation works (durations)
90 | P a g e
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
The total number of activities of this process is 16. The actual total duration of the process
due to dependencies and concurrency of the activities is 30 days. The longest path consists
of VA, ENVA, and NVA activities. The total number of the actual days without
dependencies is 35 days. After classifying the activities, the following results were
observed:



The total number of the essential non added value activities is 2 out of 16. This
number contributes with 12% of the total number of activities of the process as
shown in Figure 4. 12. The total number of actual days (without dependencies) is 2
days out of 35 days which contributes with 6% of the total number of days of the
process as shown in Figure 4. 13. The actual duration of ENVA activities on the
longest path (2 days) represent 7% of the total actual duration of this path.
The total number of the non-added value activities is 12 out of 16. This number
contributes with 75% of the total activities of the process which represents the
highest contribution as shown in Figure 4. 12. The total number of actual days
(without dependencies) is 20 days out of 35 days which contributes with 57% of the
total number of days of the process as shown in Figure 4. 13. The actual duration of
NVA activities on the longest path (15 days) represent 49% of the total actual
duration of this path.
The total number of the value added activities is 2 out of 16. This number
contributes with 13% of the total number of activities of the process as shown in
Figure 4. 12. The total number of actual days is 13 days out of 35 days which
contributes with 36% of the total number of days of the process as shown in Figure
4. 13. The actual duration of VA activities on the longest path (13 days) represent
44% of the total actual duration of this path.
It can be concluded that in the material delivery and on-site transportation process there
are several activities that are not contributory to the final product that the customer is
willing to pay for. Most of the activities that are located on the longest path of the process
related to non-essential activities (NVA & ENVA=56%). The total number of days should be
reduced and not only those on the longest path in order to decrease any associated
impacts that may occur (e.g. any increase of their durations may shift these activities to be
on the critical path).
91 | P a g e
Activities contribution in the process (No. of activities)
13%
12%
ENAV
NVA
VA
75%
Figure 4. 12 – Activities contribution in the material delivery/transportation (No. of Activities)
Activities contribution in the process (durations)
70%
57%
60%
50%
40%
36%
Type of activities
30%
20%
10%
6%
0%
ENAV
NVA
VA
Figure 4. 13 – Activities contribution in the material delivery/transportation (durations)
92 | P a g e
III.
Execution Phase
The total number of activities of this process is 22. The actual total duration of the process
due to dependencies and concurrency of the activities is 162 days. The longest path
consists of VA, ENVA, and NVA activities. The total number of the actual days without
dependencies is also 162 days (due to the FS relation of all the activities). After classifying
the activities, the following results were observed:






The total number of the essential non added value activities is 6 out of 26. This
number contributes with 26% of the total number of activities of the process as
shown in Figure 4. 14. The total number of actual days is 53 days out of 161 days
which contributes with 33% of the total number of days of the process as shown in
Figure 4. 15
The total number of the non-added value activities is 9 out of 23 .This number
contributes with 39% of the total activities of the process which represents the
highest contribution as shown in Figure 4. 14. The total number of days is 30 out of
161 which contributes with 19% of the total number of actual days of the process
as shown in
Figure 4. 15.
The total number of the value added activities is 8 out of 23. This number
contributes with 35% of the total number of activities of the process as shown in
Figure 4. 14. The total number of actual days is 78 days out of 161 days which
contributes with 48% of the total number of days of the process as shown in
Figure 4. 15.
It can be concluded that in the ready mix concrete execution process that the ratio
between the contributory activities and the non- contributory activities to the final product
is almost equal (VA= 48%, NVA& ENVA= 52%). Most of the activities in this process the
customer is willing to pay for as it contributes directly to the final product. The total
number of days of the VA activities should be reduced and not only the ENVA or NVA
activities in order to decrease any associated impacts that may occur (e.g. Delays in any
activity may hinder the progress in the following activities)
93 | P a g e
Activities contribution in the process (No. of activities)
26%
35%
ENAV
NVA
VA
39%
Figure 4. 14 – Activities contribution in the Execution phase (no. of activities)
Activities contribution in the process (durations)
60%
48%
50%
40%
33%
30%
Types of activities
19%
20%
10%
0%
ENAV
NVA
VA
Figure 4. 15 – Activities contribution in the Execution phase (durations)
94 | P a g e
3.3 Fish Bone diagram
Table 4. 8 and Table 4. 10 show the disrupted durations and the disruption indices of the
preparations works and execution activities respectively. The disruption index was
calculated using the following equation:
Disrupted Duration
Actual Duration
Disruption Index=
[4.1]
Where, Disrupted Duration= Actual Duration – Planned Duration
The causes of disruptions of the preparations works and the execution works were
collected from the project monthly reports and the revised schedules.
These disruptions have several causes that should be identified to solve it and avoid it in
the further process. The root causes can be known through several techniques, one of
these techniques is the fish bone diagram where all the causes of delay are mapped and
analyzed. Figure 4. 16 and Figure 4. 17 show the fish bone diagram for the preparation
works and the execution works respectively.
Delay in shop
drawings
Delay by owner
in providing IFC
drawings
Delays from
consultant
Shortage of
Contractor's
Workforce
Resubmission
(poor quality of 1st
submission)
Delay in
preparation works
Delay in Material
submittal (submission
& approval)
Miscoordination
between suppliers &
Contractor
Workforce
Shortage
Delay in qty take off
by contractor
Delay in Material
Delivery
Inappropriate
Software
Figure 4. 16 – Causes of disruptions for preparation phase
95 | P a g e
Miscoor
between
Cont
Delay by owner
in providing IFC
drawings
Delay in Steel
fabrication
Delays from
consultant
Delays by
Engineer
Shortage of
Contractor's
Workforce
Delayof Shop drawings
by Contractor/Engineer
Design Changes
Rework due to
design changes
Late Approvals of
submittals
Delay in Concrete works
(Execution Phase)
Delay in Material
submittal (submission
& approval)
Miscoordination
between suppliers&
Contractor
unqualified
Manpower
Improper
Management
Delay inqty take off
by contractor
Delay in Material
Delivery
Rework due to
poor quality
Delays by
Contractor
Figure 4. 17– Causes of disruptions for execution phase
4) Lean tools/techniques selection to be used for construction improvement
The current conditions and circumstances in any project directly affect the choice of
the lean techniques/tools when applying lean thinking to the process. Therefore, two
scenarios are developed in this research, namely, the future state map (for ongoing
projects) and, the ideal state map (for new projects). The future state map is based on
analyzing the current state of the ongoing project and trying to avoid any kind of
disruption in the same process within the same project. The ideal state map is a
scenario where the ideal conditions to apply lean is presented, hence, establishing ideal
state map for future or new projects. Based on this, the lean tool/ technique will be
selected. For the purpose of this research, the impact of these tools on reducing the
overall duration of the process will be presented based on previous works and results
from the literature. The main target of this framework is not only to show the
percentage of reduction in duration of the process but to create a foundation to
understand the mindset of the lean approach.
96 | P a g e
The lean techniques/principles used in the case study were selected based on the
following criteria:
a) The current conditions surrounded by the project and if these conditions can be
changed or not. The current conditions of the case study that impacts the choice of
certain lean tools is shown in step 5 and 6. Based on these conditions, the future
and ideal maps can be established.
b) The applications of the lean tools and its efficiency are based on data collected
from the literature. Table 4. 11 shows several techniques that were used previously
in similar projects and activities and have positively impacted the project
performance.
Table 4. 11 – Lean techniques and the associated actions & benefits
Lean technique
Last Planner
Actions
a) Reverse Phase
Scheduling
6-Week Look-Ahead
Variance Analysis
Percentage Plan Completed
Charts
Effects of technique
a)the project was
under budget and
three weeks ahead of
schedule, and
subcontractors
were more satisfied
with their relationships
with the General
Contractor
Practices
a) A four-story
parking garage
construction
project.(Formwork,
Rebar, Concrete)
Reference
(O. Salem,
et al. 2006)
b)Evaluates
the b)Highly impacted the
performance of workers overall project
base on their ability to performance
meet a reliable
b) Construction of
housing units by
Yobe State
Government of
Nigeria
(Samalia
Adamu
2012)
c) clarify the scope of each c) reduced the overall
subcontractor’s work ahead variability in the
of bid day
bidding process and
mitigated many of the
risks associated with
lump sum bidding
C) assembling and
submitting a large,
public-sector lump
sum bid for buildings
(Reginato
and
Graham
2011)
97 | P a g e
Increased
visualization
Information flow through
posting signs accessible for
workers (PPC charts,
milestone charts, safety
signs, commitment charts.
a)the project was
under budget and
three weeks ahead of
schedule, and
subcontractors
were more satisfied
with their relationships
with
the
General
Contractor
a) A four-story
parking garage
construction
project.(Formwork,
Rebar, Concrete)
Meetings
were
held a)the project was
regularly for the workers to under budget and
update the work status
three weeks ahead of
schedule, and
subcontractors
were more satisfied
with their relationships
with
the
General
Contractor
a) A four-story
parking garage
construction
project.(Formwork,
Rebar, Concrete)
b) Construction of
housing units by
Yobe State
Government of
b) Partially impacted Nigeria
the overall project
performance
Daily Huddle
Meetings
b) Highly impacted the
overall project
performance
Visual
Workplace (5S)
Material and tools were a)the project was
organized on site
under budget and
three weeks ahead of
schedule, and
subcontractors
were more satisfied
with their relationships
with
the
General
Contractor
b) Construction of
housing units by
Yobe State
Government of
Nigeria
a) A four-story
parking garage
construction project
(Formwork, Rebar,
and Concrete).
(O. Salem,
et al. 2006)
(Samalia
Adamu
2012)
(O. Salem,
et al. 2006)
(Samalia
Adamu
2012)
(O. Salem,
et al. 2006)
98 | P a g e
Fail Safe for
Quality
A preliminary safety and
quality analysis should be
conducted before the job
starts.
Just-in-time
reinforcement was pulled
just-in-time to the
construction site, i.e. it
came the same day as it
was supposed to be fixed
into the construction
Prefabrication
the construction process
involved fewer activities if
compared to traditional
bridge construction
Standardization Systemize operations and
materials so that
movements between
operations and needed
resources are efficiently
used.
Lean
collaborative
planning
a)the project was
under budget and
three weeks ahead of
schedule, and
subcontractors
were more satisfied
with their relationships
with
the
General
Contractor
Duration reduced by
78% and more efficient
use of inventory at site
was achieved
a) A four-story
parking garage
construction project
(Formwork, Rebar,
and Concrete).
(O. Salem,
et al. 2006)
The manufacturing
cost at site decreased
significantly (-68 %)
Still, the overall
construction cost
decreased as well as
construction time onsite.
The overall
construction cost
decreased as well as
construction time onsite.
Bridge construction (Simonsson
(Rebar)
, et al.
2012).
Bridge construction (Simonsson
(Rebar)
, et al.
2012).
Bridge construction (Simonsson
(Rebar)
, et al.
2012).
Getting all the project
14 weeks out of the 22 £1.4m leisure centre
participants (Contractor,
weeks forecast overrun refurbishment and
Consultant, client &
were saved
new build.
subcontractor) to develop
the Master programme at
the early start of the project
(O’Connor
and Swain
2013)
99 | P a g e
The lean techniques/tools will be applied in this case study to examine its impact on the
project performance and establish future and ideal map for the process. Several
techniques were used to ensure the process flow during the different phases of the
process. The techniques used in the future state map were slightly different than the ideal
state map. The techniques used for both maps in each phase separately are presented
here below.
4.1 Future State Map (for ongoing projects)
Table 4. 13, Table 4. 14, and Table 4. 15 show all the process activities with the relevant
lean tool/technique used and the associated actions that enable lean tools
implementation.
I.
Preparation Works:
a) Lean tools/techniques used
 Standardization
 Last Planner System
 Get Quality right at first time
 Coordination
 Use reliable technology
 Ensure requirements flow down
b) Application of these tools/techniques to the process
Engineering Works: The current state map shows the time taken by the Engineer to
provide the contractor with the issue for construction (IFC) drawings. It is vital for the
contractor to receive these documents in the nearest possible time to start preparing
the shop drawing. As shown in the fish bone diagram, the causes of IFC drawings delay
in this case study was due to the mis-coordination between the contractor and the
engineer and due to some design changes done by the engineer which delayed the
issuance of the drawings. The early coordination between the Contractor and the
Engineer will prevent the delays of the drawings. To ensure that the Requirements
flow down smoothly, a firmly connected document control system should be followed
using the appropriate software.
100 | P a g e
The duration taken by the technical team to prepare and submit shop drawings
preparation can be reduced by ensuring the flow of information. This can be achieved
by standardizing the process. Using standard format and standard system to follow will
reduce the duration taken to prepare the drawings. Also, the appropriate coordination
between the Engineer and the Contractor will reduce the duration taken by the
engineer to view and approve the drawings. The resubmission of the shop drawings is
one of the main causes of the delays of the process. This usually can be avoided by
submitting adequate drawings that comply with the required specifications.
Procurement Works: The procurement procedures include the agreement with the
suppliers, the material submittals, the quantity surveying, and the purchase order. In
this case study, a time was consumed in developing supplier lists, collecting offers and
set an agreement with the appropriate supplier. The Coordination between the tender
department and the operation department can facilitate this mission by providing the
projects by all the supplier lists. Last Planner system technique can be used in
collecting the adequate offers from the suppliers on the required time by developing a
reliable work plan (Reginato and Graham 2011). The time taken to draft a contract
with the suppliers/subcontractors can be reduced by using standard contracts and
format in similar projects. After collecting the offers and the material samples, the
material submittal should be prepared as per the standards to get the approval from
the first submission. The last step before issuing the purchase order is the quantity
take off. This step usually takes time due to the inappropriate software used or
shortage in workforce. The duration of this step can be reduced by using reliable
technology to quantify all the required material before purchasing.
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
a) Lean tools/techniques used




Just-in-time
Coordination
Collaboration
Last Planner System
b) Application of these tools/techniques to the process
Material (Rebar) Handling: In this case study, the steel reinforcement (Rebar) is
usually purchases and stored in the storages area till fabrication and installation. The
101 | P a g e
handling of the rebar needs coordination with the equipment supplier to get the
mobile crane on time (there is no tower crane in the project due to the limited space).
Upon the delivery, the workers unload the rebar and move it to the storage area. As
per the schedule, the rebar is again loaded and is moved to the rebar workshop to
start fabrication and then loaded again after finishing fabrication to the site. This
process includes double handling to the material several times which can be avoided
by using the just-in-time technique. The just-in-time reduces the amount of inventory
in the storage areas and reduces the time taken and the effort to transport the
material on site.
Steel (Rebar) Fabrication: The rebar is fabricated in the workshop inside the site. This
includes many delays due to the low productivity of steel fixers while fabrication. The
delays caused from productivity loss can be avoided by getting the supervisors to plan
their workloads on weekly basis and monitor the labor performance on daily basis
through implementing Last Planner system. Also, a lot of coordination needed
between the technical office and the site to get the shop drawings within the agreed
time frame.
III.
Execution Phase
a) Lean tools/techniques used
-
Just-in-time
Visualization
Five S
Get quality right first time
Prefabricated material
b) Application of these tools/techniques to the process
Formwork/Rebar Installation: The main causes of delay for the formwork/rebar
process are the shop drawings delays, the unawareness of the labors with the
available places for work, the mis-coordination between the site team and the
technical team, and the inspection process. This can be avoided by using look ahead
schedules and development of weekly reports. By doing the work with the maximum
quality during the work, the inspection step will gradually be eliminated from the
process saving a lot of time. Also, using the 5S technique is extremely important in
organizing the FW and rebar on site till installation to avoid any inconvenience or
unorganized site. The visualization of the work progress can help in coordination and
102 | P a g e
clash detections and this can be done through status boards or by using computer –
aided tools.
Pouring Concrete: A firm coordination should take place for the delivery of the ready
mix concrete to ensure its arrival just-in-time. Any mis-coordination causes a lot of
losses for the supplier and the contractor.
4.2 For the ideal state (New/Future projects)
Table 4. 17, Table 4. 18, and Table 4. 19 show all the process activities with the relevant
lean tool/technique used and the associated actions that enable lean tools
implementation.
I.
Preparation Works:
a) Lean tools/techniques used







Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)
Collaborative Master Target Programme (CMTP)
Use Reliable technology (BIM)
Collaboration
Reduce Variability
Standardization
Last Planner System
b) Application of these tools/techniques to the process
Engineering Works: As shown in the fish bone diagram, the causes of Issue for
Construction (IFC) drawings delay in this case study was due to the mis-coordination
between the Contractor and the Engineer and due to some design changes which delayed
the issuance of the drawings. An integrated and collaborative project can overcome all
these challenges. This can be achieved through establishing contracts that are based on
collaborative approach (e.g. IPD contracts). In such contracts, owner, consultants,
contractor, subcontractors and suppliers understand the value of collaboration and are
committed to working as a team in the best interests of the project. Through this
approach, a collaborative master programme can be developed by bringing together all the
project participants to jointly establish a predictable and reliable programme (O’Connor
103 | P a g e
and Swain 2013). This early involvement of all the project participants will reduce the
amount of design changes by sharing the project model among all participants of the
project team using reliable technology system like BIM (Building Information Modeling)
(Bongiorni 2011).
Since the Integrated projects often depend on reliable technologies (Bongiorni 2011), the
duration taken by the contractor to prepare the shop drawings and, by the engineer to
approve the shop drawings can be reduced by using reliable technology such as BIM. By
using BIM, the preparation and approval of the shop drawings can be merged in one step.
This can be achieved by sharing the BIM model among the contractor and the Engineer to
instantly check the drawings. The extraction of shop drawings from BIM can reduce much
time in this process. This will inevitably eliminate and reduce the rework of the shop
drawings.
Procurement Works: The same tools and techniques implemented in the future map
(ongoing projects) can be used in the ideal state map (new projects). The only thing that
can be added is applying reliable technology such as BIM to quantify all the required
material to reduce the duration of the quantity take off step. In a research conducted by
Chelson (2010), the implementation of BIM has showed reduction in the timing of the
quantity take off by 95% (Chelson 2010).
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
a) Lean tools/techniques used
-
Just-in-time
Prefabricated material
Standardization
b) Application of these tools/techniques to the process
Material (Rebar) Handling: This process includes double handling to the material several
times as illustrated previously in the future state map and can be avoided by using the prefabricated material and the just-in-time technique. By using the prefabricated material, the
resources and time consumed to fabricate the steel will be reduced and all the risks of
fabrication will be transferred to the subcontractor. The just-in-time reduces the amount
104 | P a g e
of inventory in the storage areas and reduces the time taken and the effort to transport
the material on site.
Steel (Rebar) Fabrication: The delays caused from productivity loss to fabricate the rebar
on site can be avoided by using prefabricated material from reliable subcontractors.
III.
Execution Phase
a) Lean tools/techniques used






Visualization (BIM & Status Boards)
Five S
Get quality right first time
Collaborative Master Target Programme (CMTP)
Last Planner System
Just-in-time
b) Application of these tools/techniques to the process
Formwork/Rebar Installation: The same tools and techniques implemented in the future
map (ongoing projects) can be used in the ideal state map (new projects). However, in the
new projects, the delays resulting from changes in design by the engineer can dramatically
decrease if BIM is efficiently implemented among all the parties. In a research conducted
by Chelson (2010), the implementation of BIM has showed reduction in the change orders
by 82% (Chelson 2010). Implementing BIM at an early stage of the project or from the
design stage reduces variability that usually introduced by late client-initiated variations
during the construction stage (Sacks, et al. 2010). Also, developing agreed collaborative
master programme at early stages of the project (before starting execution) will help all
the project participants to review the project obstacles and the potential design changes at
early stage. This collaborative approach ensures that work will flow smoothly over the
course of the project especially if this was supported by daily and weekly collaborative
planning workshops (O’Connor and Swain 2013). The inspection activities can be totally
eliminated if the team followed the internal quality process of execution to reach zero
defects at handover.
105 | P a g e
Pouring Ready Mix Concrete:
This process can be managed by implementing the Just-in-time technique to efficiently
adjust the arrival times of ready mix concrete trucks. In addition, standardization of the
operation and materials at this critical stage of work and within the allowed time for
pouring concrete ensures efficient human motion between operations and needed
resources.
5) Developing the Future State Map
The future state map is developed after incorporating the lean techniques to the current
process. Lean techniques together with waste elimination can reduce the overall duration
of the activities and reduce the causes of disruptions. The future map is usually
constrained by the current conditions of the project; for example, the type of contract if it
is design build or integrated project delivery as this will impact the duration from the
design phase.
By incorporating the lean thinking into the process and using the improvement factor used
in similar countries to the construction process, a future map can be easily established.
The following shows how the lean thinking was applied to each phase and its effect on the
overall duration of the process. The procedures of establishing future state map is
introduced in this chapter and the final results are shown in Chapter 5.
To establish future map for the process, the activities for all the phases of the case study
were analyzed in the following manner:







Planned durations: It reflects when an event initially supposed to start.
Actual durations: It reflects when an event actually starts.
Process Map: It shows the different activities within the process and the sequence of
work.
Waste Identification: To classify the activities into Value Added activities, Non Valueadded activities and Essential Non added-value activities as previously illustrated in
point 3 of the framework.
Disruption index (DI): It is the ratio of the number of disrupted workdays divided by
the total number of observed workdays (Refaat H. Abdel-Razek 2007). It is calculated
using equation [4.1] in section 3.3 of this chapter.
Causes of disruptions: The causes of disruption for each activity were collected from
the project. This was done through interviews, observations and Monthly reports.
Constraints for applying certain lean techniques: There are some factors that may
hinder the implementation of Lean in some projects and make it inefficient if
106 | P a g e

implemented (Dave, et al. 2013). Some of the lean techniques cannot be used in a
current working project due to the existence of some constraints such as the type of
contract, the technology used for Engineering works (e.g. using BIM for one trade only
or for certain phase only or not using BIM and use a less reliable program), noninvolvement of key stakeholders in relevant stages (Dave, et al. 2013), applying lean
construction for one project phase only (e.g. design or construction) (Dave, et al.
2013), and the organization chart of the company. The current circumstances are
employed in the best possible way to make the process lean. Adopting lean
management approach is more about way of thinking than using certain techniques;
however, using lean techniques/tools are essential to get the best results.
Factors affecting the used lean techniques:
As illustrated in the previous point, the following are some of the factors that are
found in the case study used for this research:
-

Type of Contract (Owner/Contractor): It is Bid-Build contract and cannot be
changed
Technology/program used for engineering works: The program used is
Autocad and cannot be altered by another program.
Technology/program used for quantity surveying: The program used is
Autocad but it can be altered by another program.
Integration between departments in the same organization: This is not
applicable inside the organization.
Prefabricated material: No prefabricated material will be used in this project.
Workshop location from site: The workshop location can be changed to be
near from the site
Storage area location from site: The storage area location cannot be changed
Crane: only mobile cranes can be used as there is no place for tower cranes
Visualization tools on site: There are no existing visualization tools except for
safety sign but this can be achieved
Program for coordinating drawings: The program used is Autocad and cannot
be altered to another program.
Lean principles/techniques used: The appropriate lean principles are chosen after
examining the current situation and circumstances of the project to be able to
establish the future state map. In addition, the literature was used to give an
indication about the benefits of the lean techniques and how it was used in
different projects. The process of establishing the current map and future is part
of the lean process even if there are few lean techniques/ tools used. The
107 | P a g e
development of process that can eliminate/ reduce waste and improve the work
flow after removing all the constraints and bottle necks is known to be lean
process. Table 4. 12 shows summary for the lean techniques used in each process
Table 4. 12 – Summary for the lean techniques used in each process
Lean Techniques/tools
Standardization


Preparation
Works
●
Last Planner System
●
Get Quality right at first time
●
Coordination
●
Material Delivery
process
Execution
process
●
●
Just-in-time
●
Collaboration
●
●
Visualization
●
Five S
●
Prefabricated material
●
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)
Collaborative Master Target
Programme (CMTP)
Use reliable technology
●
Ensure requirements flow down
●
Actions taken by the project management for implementing Lean techniques: To
adopt the lean management approach, some actions should be taken to make the
process lean.
Equation used to calculate the final Duration:
Y (Process duration) = F[x1 (related lean technique), x2 (Activity type-VA, NVA,
ENVA), x3 (Project Constraints)]
[4.2]
I.
Preparation Works:
The data of the preparation works in the case studied were analyzed as per the
abovementioned procedures. Table 4. 13 shows the details of the process as per the
above analysis and Figure 4. 18 shows the developed Future Map (ongoing projects).
108 | P a g e
The results of adopting the above steps to establish the future map are shown in
chapter 5.
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
The data of the material delivery/On-site transportation works in the case studied
were analyzed as per the abovementioned procedures. Table 4. 14 shows the details
of the process as per the above analysis and Figure 4. 19 shows the developed Future
Map (ongoing projects). The results of adopting the above steps to establish the future
map are shown in chapter 5.
III.
Execution Phase
The data of the concrete execution works in the case studied were analyzed as per the
abovementioned procedures. Table 4. 15 shows the details of the process as per the
above analysis and Figure 4. 20 shows the developed Future Map (ongoing
projects).The results of adopting the above steps to establish the future map are
shown in chapter 5.
109 | P a g e
Table 4. 13 –Procedures for Future Map development (ongoing project) for preparation works process
Activities
Receiving IFC dwgs (waiting period)
Waste
Planned Actual Disrupte Disrupti
Identifica
Dur.
Dur.
d Dur. on Index
tion
ENVA
5
26
21
81%
Causes of disruption*
Actions taken by the project
management for implementing
Lean techniques
Constraints**
Lean
Scope
-Engineer's delay due to
design changes
-Miscoordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Coordination between
Contractor & the Engineer at
early stages
-Type of Contract :Design-BidBuild
-Technology used: AutoCAD
Flow
-Transferring the team worked
in the tender to operation: Not
Applicable
Flow
Lean Principles/techniques used
-Ensure requirements flow down
-Coordination
-Standardization
Assigning Team (time taken to assign
team)
ENVA
7
26
19
73%
-Shortage of workforce
-Coordination with Human
Resources
Developing Supplier list (Time taken)
ENVA
3
8
5
63%
-Manpower shortage
-Improper Management
-Flow of information between
departments
Flow
0%
-Flow of information between
project parties
Flow
-Ensure requirements flow down
0%
- Developing a reliable work
plan with the
suppliers/subcontractors to
collect the offers on time
Pull
-Last Planner System (Pull
Scheduling)
Flow
-Standardize the process
-Coordination
Flow
-Standardize the process
-Reduce batch sizes
Send the specs to the suppliers to get
the offers
Receiving Quotations (waiting time)
Contract agreement with the
Supplier/Subcontractor
Shop Drawings submission for concrete
and steel rft foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
Shop drawings approval for concrete
and steel rft foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
ENVA
ENVA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
5
5
5
30
34
5
5
10
40
40
0
0
5
10
6
50%
25%
15%
-Mis-coordination between
Suppliers/Contractors
-Unavailability of standard
subcontracts
-Coordination
-Ensure requirements flow down
-Standardization
-Online access to production
standards of subcontracts
-Coordination with suppliers
-Manpower shortage
-Lack of information &
standards
-Online access to production
standards
-Technology used: AutoCAD
(Advanced Programme such as
BIM* is not available)
-Engineer's delays in
reviewing the drawings
- Poor drawings quality
-Technology used: AutoCAD
-Contractor to follow the
(Advanced Programme such as
required standards
-Collaborate with the Engineer BIM* is not available)
while reviewing the drawings to -Type of Contract :Design-Bidclarify any ambiguous
Build (Collaboration will not be
information
in an early stage )
-Collaboration
Flow
-Get Quality right first time
110 | P a g e
Activities
Shop Drawings resubmission
Shop drawings final approval
Material Submittal
Waste
Planned Actual Disrupte Disrupti
Identifica
Dur.
Dur.
d Dur. on Index
tion
NVA
0
21
21
Causes of disruption*
-Inadequate drawings
100%
submitted by contractor
NVA
0
14
14
-Inadequate drawings
100%
submitted by contractor
VA
7
15
8
53%
-Delays by the supplier
Actions taken by the project
management for implementing
Lean techniques
Constraints**
Lean
Scope
- The contractor to meet the
required standards from the
first submission to avoid
resubmission.
-Technology used: AutoCAD
(Advanced Programme such as
-Collaborate with the Engineer BIM* is not available)
while reviewing the drawings to
clarify any ambiguity to avoid
resubmission.
Flow
- The contractor to meet the
required standards from the
first submission to avoid
resubmission.
-Technology used: AutoCAD
(Advanced Programme such as
-Collaborate with the Engineer BIM* is not available)
while reviewing the drawings to
clarify any ambiguity to avoid
resubmission.
Lean Principles/techniques used
-Get quality right first time
-Collaboration
Flow
-Get quality right first time
-Collaboration
Flow
-Collaboration
-Standardization
-Collaborate with the Engineer
to clarify any ambiguity to avoid
resubmission.
Flow
- Collaboration
-Standardization
-Use reliable technology
(programme) for take off
Flow
-Use Reliable technology
Flow
Standardize the process
- Collaborate with the suppliers
- The contractor to meet the
required standards.
Material Approval
Take off (time taken ) for Concrete
works for foundations
Issue Purchase order for Formwork &
Rebar
Total Durations
VA
21
21
0
0%
ENVA
12
30
18
60%
VA
3
3
0
0%
74
144
70
-Manpower Shortage
-No standard format for
quantity surveying
-Online access to production
standards of Purchase orders
111 | P a g e
Table 4. 14 - Procedures for Future Map development (ongoing project) for material delivery process
Waste
Identific
ation
Planne
d Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupt
ed Dur.
Disrup
tion
Index
Prepare Storage
NVA
2
5
3
60%
-Lack of space in stores
Install Mobile Crane (Rented)
ENVA
1
2
1
50%
-Delay in equipment
delivery
Inspect the delivered Material
(Time taken)
NVA
0.25
0.5
0.25
50%
Unload the material (Rebar) and
move it to the Storage area
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
Sort the Material (Rebar) in the
store
NVA
0.625
1
0.375
38%
Update the inventory list
NVA
0.125
0.125
0
0%
Prepare the workshop
NVA
5
8
3
38%
Install the equipment and tools
(Rebar Bender and cutter)
NVA
2
4
2
50%
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
Activities
Loading Material to move it to
Workshop
Movements from storage area to
site Workshop
Unloading Material to workshop
-Unload the rebar directly at
the workshop
-Unload the rebar directly at
the workshop
67%
5
50%
-Low productivity of steel
fixers
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis
0.25
0.125
50%
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
15.75
29.75
14
1
3
2
Fabrication of Steel
VA
5
10
Loading of material from workshop
to move to Site
NVA
0.125
Movements from Workshop to site
NVA
unloading material on site
ENVA
Lean
Scope
Lean Principles/techniques
used
Pull
approach
-Just-in-time
-Coordination
-Collaboration
-Last Planner System
-Unload the rebar directly at
the workshop
-Coordination process
between technical office, Site
engineers & suppliers
VA
Constraints**
-Unload the material directly
at the workshop
-Coordination with the
supplier to get the
crane/material on time
-Collaborate with the
Supplier to avoid any defects
in the rebar
-Lack of information
-Lack of Coordination
Provide the steel foeman with the
shop drawings to start fabrication
Total Durations
Causes of disruption*
Actions taken by the project
management for
implementing Lean
techniques
-Prefabricated material will
not be used in this project
-Storage area location and
workshop location will stay
the same
-No place for tower crane on
site and only mobile cranes
can be used for handling
material
112 | P a g e
Table 4. 15 - Procedures for Future Map development (ongoing project) for execution process
Activities
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Waiting till removing the FW
Waste
Identific
ation
ENVA
NVA
VA
NVA
Planne
d Dur.
1.5
0.25
5
0.375
Actual
Dur.
5
4
10
3
Disrupt
ed Dur.
3.5
3.75
5
2.625
Disrup
tion
Index
Causes of disruption*
70%
-Low productivity due to
unqualified labors and
lack of coordination
between trades
94%
-Mis-coordination
between Engineer &
Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
50%
-Low productivity of
labors
-shortage in material
88%
-Mis-coordination
between Engineer &
Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
VA
1
2
1
50%
ENVA
4
8
4
50%
Actions taken by the project
management for implementing Lean
Constraints**
techniques
-Sort the material on site to facilitate
the process
-Use Status Board to show progress
to labors/supervisors
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed
schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis - Technology used:
AutoCAD (Advanced
Programme such as BIM is
-Follow internal quality process of
not available)
execution
-Sort the material on site to facilitate
the process
-Use Status Board to show progress
to labors/supervisors
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed
schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis
-Follow internal quality process of
execution
Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
-Coordination with other crews to
arrange the resources
Lean Scope
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
Flow Process
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
-Last Planner System
-Visualization of process
-5S
-Get quality right first time
-Type of Contract :DesignBid-Build (Collaboration
will not be in an early
stage )
-The procedures of
inspection by Engineer
can only be reduced
(cannot be eliminated)
-The location of the batch
plant is constant
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
Flow Process
-Last Planner System
-Visualization of process
-5S
-Coordination
-Get quality right first time
Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
-coordination
Flow
- Coordination
113 | P a g e
Waste
Identific
ation
Planne
d Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupt
ed Dur.
Disrupt
ion
Index
Removal of FW
ENVA
1
5
4
80%
Transporting the removed FW to
another works
ENVA
0.125
1
0.875
88%
-Coordination with other crews to
arrange the resources
92%
-Sort the material on site to facilitate
the process
-Use Status Board to show progress
to labors/supervisors
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed
schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis
-Collaboration with the Engineer at
early stages to avoid the design
changes
Activities
FW for Raft/cycle
Inspection/Cycle
1st layer of rebar work for raft
ENVA
NVA
VA
2
0.5
5
25
4
20
23
3.5
15
88%
75%
Causes of disruption*
Engineer's Delay due to
design changes
-Miscoordination
between Engineer &
Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
-Engineer's Delay due to
design changes
-Low productivity of
labors
Actions taken by the project
management for implementing Lean
techniques
Follow internal quality process of
execution
-Sort the material on site to facilitate
the process
-Use Status Board to show progress
to labors/supervisors
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed
schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis
-Collaboration with the Engineer at
early stages to avoid the design
changes
Constraints**
- Technology used:
AutoCAD (Advanced
Programme such as BIM*
is not available)
-Type of Contract :DesignBid-Build (Collaboration
will not be in an early
stage )
Lean
Approach
Lean Principles/techniques
used
Flow
- Coordination
Flow
- Coordination
Flow Process
Pull
Approach
-Last Planner System
-Visualization of process
-5S
-Collaboration
Flow Process
-Get quality right first time
Flow Process
Pull
Approach
-Last Planner System
-Visualization of process
-5S
-Collaboration
-The procedures of
inspection by Engineer
can only be reduced
(cannot be eliminated)
-The location of the batch
plant is constant
114 | P a g e
Activities
Inspection
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on site and FW
assembly
FW for Retaining walls/cycle (27
LM, H= 6, W=0.3)
Waste
Identific
ation
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
Planne
d Dur.
0.375
5
0.375
2
0.125
4
Actual
Dur.
4
20
4
12
6
12
Disrupt
ed Dur.
3.625
15
3.625
10
5.875
8
Disrup
tion
Index
91%
Causes of disruption*
-Miscoordination
between Engineer &
Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
75%
-Lack of Coordination
-Low productivity of
labors
91%
-Miscoordination
between Engineer &
Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
83%
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
98%
67%
-Low productivity of labor
-Delayed material
-Low productivity of
labors
-Lack of Coordination
between trades and items
Actions taken by the project
management for implementing Lean
techniques
Constraints**
Follow internal quality process of
execution
-Sort the material on site to facilitate
the process
-Use Status Board to show progress
to labors/supervisors
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed
schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis
-Sort the material on site to easily
work with it
-Use Status Board to show progress
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed
schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
Flow Process
-Get quality right first time
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
-Follow internal quality process of
execution
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis
Lean
Approach
Flow Process
- Technology used:
AutoCAD (Advanced
Programme such as BIM*
is not available)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization of process
-5S
-Coordination
-Get quality right first time
Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
-Last Planner System
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
-Last Planner System
-Visualization of process
-5S
-Coordination
-Type of Contract :DesignBid-Build (Collaboration
will not be in an early
stage )
-The procedures of
inspection by Engineer
can only be reduced
(cannot be eliminated)
-The location of the batch
plant is constant
115 | P a g e
Activities
Inspection/Cycle
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
Waste
Identific
ation
NVA
VA
NVA
Planne
d Dur.
0.375
4
0.125
Actual
Dur.
2
10
0.5
Disrupt
ed Dur.
1.625
6
0.375
Disrup
tion
Index
81%
Causes of disruption*
-Miscoordination
between Engineer &
Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
60%
-Engineer's Delay due to
design changes
-Low productivity of
labors
75%
-Miscoordination
between Engineer &
Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
38.125
161.5
123.37
Total Durations
Actions taken by the project
management for implementing Lean
techniques
-Follow internal quality process of
execution
-Sort the material on site to facilitate
the process
-Use Status Board to show progress
to labors/supervisors
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed
schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload
on weekly basis & monitor
performance of labors on daily basis
-Collaboration with the Engineer at
early stages to avoid the design
changes
-Follow internal quality process of
execution
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get the
material on time
Constraints**
Lean
Approach
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
Flow Process
-Get quality right first time
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
Flow Process
-Last Planner System
-Visualization of process
-5S
-Collaboration
-Get quality right first time
Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
* Causes of disruptions as stated in step no.3 of the framework
**These are the actual constraints limiting the case study and were collected from the project documents.
116 | P a g e
Fu
tu
reSta
teMa
p
i
-P
re
p
a
ra
ti
on W ork
s (
P
re
Ex
e
c
u
ti
on)
Project Start
-Requi rements fl ow
-WS
Coordin
ati on
Process Activity:
Coordination with
Human Resources dep.
Flow of information
between departments
and between Parties
Assigning Team
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
26
19.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Developing Supplier list & send
specs to supplier
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
13
10
ENVA
Process No.:
IFC dwgs /Shop dwgs prep.
Rel i abl e
technology
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Contract agreement with the
Supplier
Receiving Quotations
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
5
5
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
10
7
ENVA
26
19.5
ENVA
-Contractor to follow
the required standards
-Collaborate with the
Engineer to clarify any
ambiguous information
Process Activity:
Shop drawings approval
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
40
30
ENVA
WS
Process Activity:
Take off (time taken )
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
Collaboration
Process Activity:
Developing a reliable
work plan with the
suppliers/subcontracto
rs to collect the offers
on time
-Get Qual i ty ri ght
fi rst ti me
-Reduce batch si zes
-Requi rements fl ow
-Coordi nati on
-WS
-Coordination between Contractor
& the Engineer at early stages
-Online access to production
standards
-WS
-Coordi nati on
LPS
30
22
ENVA
Process Activity:
Material Submittal
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
15
11
ENVA
Online access to
production standards
of Purchase orders
-Collaborate with the
suppliers
-Standardize the Process
-Collaborate with the
Engineer to clarify any
ambiguity
-Online access to production
standards of subcontracts
-Coordination with suppliers
Process Activity:
Issue PO
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
3
3
ENVA
Process Activity:
Material Approval from the 1st time
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT) :
VA
NVA
21
16
ENVA
Contractor
Engineer to review and
approve the material
submittal
Engineer to review and
approve the Shop
Drawings from the 1st
submission
Engineer/Owner
Supplier to review the documents & send the
quotations to the Contractor
Negotiation with the Supplier
Supplier/Subcontractor
LPS
WS
Last Planner System
Work Standardization
Figure 4. 18 - Future Map (ongoing project) for preparation works process
117 | P a g e
Fu
tu
reSta
teMa
p
i
i
-Ma
te
ri
a
l De
li
ve
ry
/
onsi
tetra
nsp
orta
ti
on
Pul l as demand
Project Management
Issue Purchase
Order
Steel Reinforcement Supplier
-Coordination process between
technical office, Site engineers &
suppliers
Coordi nati on
JIT
Coordi nati on
-Coordination with the
supplier to get the
crane/material on time
Process Activity:
Install Crane
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
2
1.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
unloading material on site
(Workshop)
Process Activity:
shop drawings to supervisors
to start fabrication
Process Activity:
Loading of material to move
to Site
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
0.25
0.18
ENVA
3
2.25
ENVA
0.25
0.25
ENVA
Col l aboration
LPS
Process Activity:
Prepare the workshop
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
8
8
ENVA
Process Activity:
Inspect the delivered Material
(Time taken)
Process Activity:
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
0.5
0.4
ENVA
Process Activity:
Movements from Workshop
to site
Fabrication of Steel
10
7.5
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis
Install rebar equipment
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
0.25
0.25
ENVA
unloading material on site
4
4
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
ENVA
LPS
JIT
0.25
0.25
ENVA
Last Planner System
Just in Time
Figure 4. 19 - Future Map (ongoing project) for material delivery process
118 | P a g e
FutureStateMap
iii-Ex
e
cution Proce
ss
Project Management
Develop Baseline Time Schedule
Ready Mix Concrete
Steel Reinforcement
Fabricator
Request
Order
-Sort the material on site to easily work with it
-Use Status Board to show progress
-Reverse Phase Scheduling (detailed schedule)
-Supervisors to plan their workload on weekly basis & monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
-Follow internal quality process of execution
-Coordination with the subcontractors/suppliers to get the material on time
Request
Order
Visualization
LPS
5S
Visualization
LPS
5S
Coordination
Visualization
LPS
5S
Visualization
LPS
5S
Collaboration
JIT
JIT
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for
foundations/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Transporting the removed FW
to another works
FW for Raft/cycle
1st & 2nd layer of rebar work
for raft
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on site and
FW assembly
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
9
5
4
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
ENVA
Quality
Right 1st
time
9
10
7
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
6
2
1.5
ENVA
Quality
Right 1st
time
Process Activity:
Inspection/Cycle
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
ENVA
9
25
19
ENAV
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
3
2
ENVA
Process Activity:
Waiting & Removal of FW
Process Activity:
Inspection/Cycle
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
13
10
ENAV
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
18
40
30
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
Quality
Right 1st
time
Quality
Right 1st
time
Process Activity:
Inspection/Cycle
4
3
1
0.75
ENAV
6
12
9
ENVA
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
6
4.5
ENVA
Visualization
LPS
5S
Coordination
Visualization
LPS
5S
Coordination
Process Activity:
Inspection/Cycle
4
3
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
JIT
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
FW for Retaining walls/cycle (27 LM, H= 6, W=0.3)
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
9
7
Actual Time (AT):
12
Actual Time (AT):
10
Revised Time :
9
Revised Time :
7
VA
NVA
ENVA
VA
NVA
ENVA
8
6
ENVA
Quality
Right 1st
time
Process Activity:
Inspection/Cycle
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Inspection/Cycle
2
1.5
ENVA
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
JIT
0.5
0.3
ENVA
Process Activity:
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
Actual Time (AT):
Revised Time :
VA
NVA
LPS
JIT
6
2
1.5
ENVA
6
2
1.5
ENVA
Last Planner System
Just in Time
Figure 4. 20 - Future Map (ongoing project) for execution process
119 | P a g e
6) Developing the ideal State Map
The ideal state map can be developed from the lesson learned from the previous
projects. In this case, all the circumstances are employed to achieve the target of
the lean approach. The ideal state map is established after incorporating the lean
techniques in the original planned process till reaching the ideal state. Lean
techniques together with waste elimination can reduce the overall duration of the
activities and reduce the causes of disruptions. Unlike the future map, the ideal
state map has less constrains as it can be controlled before the project start. On
other words, the type of contract, project delivery, the layout of the site and many
other factors can be controlled before starting the project.
By incorporating the lean thinking into the process and using the improvement
factor used in similar countries to the construction process, an ideal state map can
be easily established. The following shows how the lean thinking was applied to
each phase and its effect on the overall duration of the process.
The procedures of establishing ideal state map is introduced in this chapter and the
final results are shown in Chapter 5.
For the purpose of this research, the ideal state map will be used for new projects;
however, we will assume that some of the current conditions can be changed in
the existing project to act as a new project. The main purpose behind applying the
ideal state map to the case study to show how any change in the current condition
can affect the overall performance of a project confirming the idea that lean
approach is a way of thinking more than techniques/tools to be used. Therefore,
the impact of lean approach on the overall actual duration is presented after
changing the current conditions together with the lean techniques used. To
establish ideal map for the process, the activities for all the phases of the case
study were analyzed in the following manner:





Planned durations: It reflects when an event initially supposed to start.
Actual durations: It reflects when an event actually starts.
Process Map: It shows the different activities within the process and the
sequence of work.
Waste Identification: To classify the activities into Value Added activities, Non
Value-added activities and Essential Non added-value activities as previously
illustrated in point 3 of the proposed framework.
Disruption index (DI): It is the ratio of the number of disrupted workdays
divided by the total number of observed workdays (Refaat H. Abdel-Razek
2007). It is calculated using equation [4.1] in section 3.3 of this chapter.
120 | P a g e



Causes of disruptions: The causes of disruption for each activity were collected
from the project. This was done through interviews, observations and Monthly
reports.
Factors affecting the choice of the used lean techniques: There are some
factors that may hinder the implementation of Lean in some projects and make
it inefficient if implemented (Dave, et al. 2013). Some of the lean techniques
cannot be used in a current working project due to the existence of some
constraints such as the type of contract, the technology used for Engineering
works (e.g. using BIM for one trade only or for certain phase only or not using
BIM and use a less reliable program), non-involvement of key stakeholders in
relevant stages (Dave, et al. 2013), applying lean construction for one project
phase only (e.g. design or construction) (Dave, et al. 2013), location, and the
organization chart of the company. In this case and for the purpose of this
research, the current conditions are employed to reflect the best case scenario
if the current circumstances were changed. Adopting lean management
approach is more about way of thinking than using certain techniques;
however, using lean techniques/tools are essential to get the best results.
Factors affecting the used lean techniques:
As illustrated in the previous point, the following are some of the factors that
can impact the used lean technique:
-

Type of Contract (Owner/Contractor): The contract can be changed to
Design –Build contract or Integrated project delivery
Technology/program used for engineering works: The program used can
be altered to BIM.
Technology/program used for quantity surveying: The program used is
Autocad but it can be altered by BIM.
Integration between departments in the same organization: This can be
applicable within the organization
Prefabricated material: Prefabricated material will be used in this project.
Crane: Tower crane will be installed
Visualization tools on site: Visualization tools can be used
Program for coordinating drawings: The program used is BIM
Lean principles used: The appropriate lean principles are chosen after
examining the new circumstances of the project to be able to establish the
ideal state map. In addition, the literature was used to give an indication about
the benefits of the lean techniques and how it was used in different projects.
The process of establishing the current map and ideal map is part of the lean
process even if there are few lean techniques/ tools used. The development of
process that can eliminate/ reduce waste and improve the work flow after
121 | P a g e
removing all the constraints and bottle necks is known to be lean process. Table
4. 16 shows summary for the lean techniques used in each process
Table 4. 16 – Summary for the lean techniques used in each process
Lean Techniques/tools
Standardization
Preparation
Works
●
Last Planner System
Material Delivery
process
●
●
Execution
process
●
●
Get Quality right at first time
Coordination
●
Just-in-time
Collaboration
●
●
Visualization
●
Five S
●
●
Prefabricated material
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)
Collaborative Master Target
Programme (CMTP)
Use reliable technology (BIM)
●
●
●
●
Ensure requirements flow down


Actions taken by the project management for implementing Lean techniques:
To adopt the lean management approach, some actions should be taken to
make the process lean.
Equation used to calculate the final Duration:
Y (Process duration) = F[x1 (related lean technique), x2 (Activity type-VA, NVA,
ENVA), x3 (Project Constraints)]
[4.2]
I.
Preparation Works
The data of the preparation works in the case studied were analyzed as per the
abovementioned procedures. Table 4. 17 shows the details of the process as per
the above analysis and Figure 4. 21 shows the developed ideal map (new
projects). The details of the new factors that will affect the chosen lean
techniques are illustrated also. The results of adopting the above steps to
establish the ideal map are shown in chapter 5.
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
122 | P a g e
The data of the material delivery/On-site transportation works in the case
studied were analyzed as per the abovementioned procedures. Table 4. 18
shows the details of the process as per the above analysis and Figure 4. 22
shows the developed ideal map (new projects). The details of the new factors
that will affect the chosen lean techniques are illustrated also. The results of
adopting the above steps to establish the ideal map are shown in chapter 5.
III.
Execution Phase
The data of the concrete execution works in the case studied were analyzed as
per the abovementioned procedures. Table 4. 19 shows the details of the
process as per the above analysis and Figure 4. 23 shows the developed ideal
map (new projects).The details of the new factors that will affect the chosen
lean techniques are illustrated also. The results of adopting the above steps to
establish the ideal map are shown in chapter 5.
123 | P a g e
Table 4. 17 - Procedures for Ideal Map development (new project) for preparation works process
Activities
Receiving IFC dwgs (waiting
period)
Assigning Team (time taken to
assign team)
Developing Supplier list (Time
taken)
Send the specs to the suppliers to
get the offers
Receiving Quotations (waiting
time)
Contract agreement with the
Supplier/Subcontractor
Shop Drawings submission for
concrete and steel rft foundations
(Conc. Qty = 2000 m3)
Shop drawings approval for
concrete and steel rft foundations
(Conc. Qty = 2000 m3)
Waste
Identific
ation
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
Planned
Dur.
5
7
3
5
5
5
30
34
Actual
Dur.
26
26
8
5
5
10
40
40
Disrupte
d Dur.
21
19
5
0
0
5
10
6
Disrupti
on
Index
Lean
Scope
Lean Principles/techniques
used
-Type of Contract :
Design –Build contract
or Integrated Project
Delivery
-Technology used: BIM
Flow
-Integrated Project Delivery
(IPD)
-Using Reliable Technology
-Ensure requirements flow
down
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Shortage of employees
-Coordination between
departments in the same
organization (tender team to be
in the operation team)
-Integration and
coordination between
the departments in the
same organization:
Applicable
Flow
-Coordination
-Manpower shortage
-Improper Management
-Flow of information between
departments (Developed
supplier list from the tender
department)
-Integration between
the departments in the
same organization:
Applicable
Flow
-Coordination
-Flow of information between
departments
-Integration between
the departments in the
same organization:
applicable
Flow
-Ensure requirements flow
down
Pull
-Last Planner System (Pull
scheduling)
Flow
-Standardize the process
-Coordination
Flow
-Integrated project Delivery
-Use Reliable technology
(BIM)
Flow
-Integrated project Delivery
-Use Reliable technology
(BIM)
Causes of disruption*
Actions to be taken
-Engineer's Delay due to
design changes
-Mis-coordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Sharing project models’ among
all participants of a project team
-All the project participants
involved in the project planning
to develop agreed master
programme
73%
63%
81%
0%
0%
50%
25%
15%
-Miscoordination between
Suppliers/Contractors
-Not following the
standards
Constraints**
- Developing a reliable work plan
with the
suppliers/subcontractors to
collect the offers on time
-Online access to production
standards of subcontracts
-Coordination with suppliers
-Manpower shortage
-Lack of information
-Use BIM to extract Shop
drawings
-All the participants to share the
same design model (IPD)
-The essential use of
BIM programme among
all the participants to be
included in the Contract
(Full Implementation)
-Engineer's delay
-Poor drawings quality
-Use BIM to review the shop
drawings instantly and do the
necessary modifications in
shorter time.
-All the participants to share the
same design model (IPD)
-The essential use of
BIM programme among
all the participants to be
included in the Contract
(Full Implementation)
124 | P a g e
Activities
Shop Drawings resubmission
Shop drawings final approval
Material Submittal
Waste
Identific
ation
NVA
Planned
Dur.
0
Actual
Dur.
21
Disrupte
d Dur.
21
Disrupti
on
Index
100%
Actions to be taken
Constraints**
Lean
Scope
Lean Principles/techniques
used
-Inadequate drawings
submitted by contractor
-Use BIM to extract Shop
drawings
-All the participants to share the
same design model (IPD)
-The essential use of
BIM programme among
all the participants to be
included in the Contract
(Full Implementation)
Flow
-Integrated project Delivery
-Use Reliable technology
(BIM)
-Use BIM to review the shop
drawings instantly and do the
necessary modifications in
shorter time.
-All the participants to share the
same design model (IPD)
-The essential use of
BIM programme among
all the participants to be
included in the Contract
(Full Implementation)
Flow
-Integrated project Delivery
-Use Reliable technology
(BIM)
- Collaborate with the suppliers
Flow
-Collaboration
-Standardization
Flow
-Collaboration
-Standardization
The essential use of BIM
-Use BIM/reliable technology for
programme to be
take off
included in the Contract
Flow
-Use Reliable technology
(BIM)
-Online access to production
standards
Flow
-Standardization
Causes of disruption*
NVA
0
14
14
100%
-Inadequate drawings
submitted by contractor
VA
7
15
8
53%
-Delays by the supplier
- The contractor to meet the
required standards.
Material Approval
Take off (time taken ) for Concrete
works for foundations (Conc. Qty
= 2000 m3)
Issue PO for Formwork & Rebar
Total Durations
VA
21
21
0
0%
ENVA
12
30
18
60%
VA
3
3
0
0%
74
144
70
49%
-Collaborate with the Engineer
to clarify any ambiguity to avoid
resubmission.
-Manpower Shortage
-No standard format for
Quantity surveying
125 | P a g e
Table 4. 18 - Procedures for Ideal Map development (new project) for material delivery process
Activities
Waste
Identific
ation
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupte
d Dur.
Disrupti
on
Index
Causes of disruption*
Actions to be taken
NVA
2
5
3
60%
Install Mobile Crane (Rented)
ENVA
1
2
1
50%
Inspect the delivered Material
(Time taken)
NVA
0.25
0.5
0.25
50%
-Collaboration with the supplier
Unload the material and move it
to the Storage area
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
-Prefabricated material and
arrives just in time
Sort the Material in the store
NVA
0.625
1
0.375
38%
-Prefabricated material and
arrives just in time
Update the inventory list
NVA
0.125
0.125
0
0%
-Prefabricated material and
arrives just in time
Prepare the workshop
NVA
5
8
3
38%
-Prefabricated material
Install the equipment and tools
(Rebar Bender and cutter)
NVA
2
4
2
50%
-Prefabricated material
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
-Prefabricated material
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
-Prefabricated material
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
-Prefabricated material
Unloading Material to workshop
67%
-Lack of information
-Lack of Coordination
-Coordination process between
technical office & Subcontractor
(Fabricator)
5
50%
-Lack of information
-Lack of Coordination
-Coordination process between
technical office & Subcontractor
(Fabricator)
0.25
0.125
50%
-Prefabricated material
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
-Prefabricated material
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
15.75
29.75
14
47%
Provide the steel foeman with the
shop drawings to start fabrication
VA
1
3
2
Fabrication of Steel
VA
5
10
NVA
0.125
NVA
ENVA
Loading of material to move to
Site
Movements from Workshop to
site
unloading material on site
Total Durations
Lean
Scope
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
-Unload the material
Lack of space in stores
(Prefabricated Rebar) directly on
site
-Install Tower Crane during the
Delay in equipment delivery mobilization period instead of
renting mobile crane
Prepare Storage
Loading Material to move it to
Workshop
Movements from storage area to
site Workshop
Constraints**
-Prefabricated material
can be used in this
project
Pull
-Tower crane can be
approach
installed on site
instead of mobile crane
-Just-in-time
-Coordination
-Collaboration
-Prefabrication
126 | P a g e
Table 4. 19 - Procedures for Ideal Map development (new project) for execution process
Activities
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for
foundations/Cycle
Waste
Identific
ation
ENVA
NVA
VA
Planned
Dur.
1.5
0.25
5
Actual
Dur.
5
4
10
Disrupte
d Dur.
3.5
3.75
5
Disrupti
on
Index
70%
94%
50%
Causes of disruption*
-Low productivity due to
unqualified labors and lack
of coordination between
trades
-Mis-coordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
-Low productivity of labors
-shortage in material
Actions to be taken
-Sort the material on site to
facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by
using Status Board to show
progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get
the material on time
-Develop agreed collaborative
master programme to review all
the project obstacles.
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis &
monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
-Follow internal quality process
of execution to reach zero
defects at handover
-Adopt visual management by
showing the project model to all
the employees
-Sort the material on site to
facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by
using Status Board to show
progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination/collaboration with
the subcontractors/suppliers to
get the material on time
-Develop agreed collaborative
master programme to review all
the project obstacles.
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis &
monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
-Reverse Phase Scheduling
(detailed schedule)
Constraints**
Lean
Scope
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization (BIM)
-5S
-Flow
Process
-Get quality right first time
-Visualization (BIM)
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization (BIM)
-5S
- Technology used: BIM
can be used instead of
Autocad
-Type of Contract
:Integrated Project
Delivery (collaborative
approach)
-The procedures of
inspection by Engineer
can be entirely
eliminated
127 | P a g e
Activities
Waste
Identifi
cation
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupte
d Dur.
Disrupt
ion
Index
Causes of disruption*
Inspection/Cycle
NVA
0.375
3
2.625
88%
-Miscoordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
Pouring Concrete
VA
1
2
1
50%
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
Waiting till removing the FW
ENVA
4
8
4
50%
Removal of FW
Transporting the removed FW to
another works
ENVA
1
5
4
80%
ENVA
0.125
1
0.875
88%
FW for Raft/cycle
Inspection/Cycle
ENVA
NVA
2
0.5
25
4
23
3.5
92%
-Engineer's Delay due to
design changes
88%
-Miscoordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
Actions to be taken
-Follow internal quality process
of execution to reach zero
defects at handover
-Adopt visual management by
showing the project model to all
the employees
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get
the material on time
-Coordination with other crews
to arrange the resources
-Coordination with other crews
to arrange the resources
-Sort the material on site to
facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by
using Status Board to show
progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination/collaboration with
the subcontractors/suppliers to
get the material on time
-Develop agreed collaborative
master programme to review all
the project obstacles & design
changes at early stage.
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis &
monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
-Reverse Phase Scheduling
(detailed schedule)
-Follow internal quality process
of execution to reach zero
defects at handover
-Adopt visual management by
showing the project model to all
the employees
Constraints**
Lean
Scope
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
-Flow
Process
-Get quality right first time
-Visualization (BIM)
-Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
-Coordination
-Coordination
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization (BIM)
-5S
-Flow
Process
-Get quality right first time
-Visualization (BIM)
128 | P a g e
Activities
1st layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
Waste
Identifi
cation
VA
NVA
VA
Planned
Dur.
5
0.375
5
Actual
Dur.
20
4
20
Disrupte
d Dur.
15
3.625
15
Disrupt
ion
Index
Causes of disruption*
75%
-Engineer's Delay due to
design changes
-Low productivity of labors
91%
-Miscoordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
75%
-Lack of Coordination
-Low productivity of labors
Actions to be taken
-Sort the material on site to
facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by
using Status Board to show
progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination/collaboration with
the subcontractors/suppliers to
get the material on time
-Develop agreed collaborative
master programme to review all
the project obstacles & design
changes at early stage.
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis &
monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
-Reverse Phase Scheduling
(detailed schedule)
-Follow internal quality process
of execution to reach zero
defects at handover
-Adopt visual management by
showing the project model to all
the employees
-Sort the material on site to
facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by
using Status Board to show
progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination/collaboration with
the subcontractors/suppliers to
get the material on time
-Develop agreed collaborative
master programme to review all
the project obstacles & design
changes at early stage.
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis &
monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
-Reverse Phase Scheduling
Constraints**
Lean
Scope
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization (BIM)
-5S
Flow
Process
-Get quality right first time
-Visualization (BIM)
Flow
Process
Pull
Approach
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization (BIM)
-5S
129 | P a g e
Activities
Inspection
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on site and FW
assembly
FW for Retaining walls/cycle (27 LM,
H= 6, W=0.3)
Inspection/Cycle
Waste
Identifi
cation
NVA
Planned
Dur.
0.375
Actual
Dur.
4
Disrupte
d Dur.
3.625
Disrupt
ion
Index
Lean
Scope
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
91%
-Mis-coordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
-Follow internal quality process
of execution to reach zero
defects at handover
-Adopt visual management by
showing the project model to all
the employees
-Flow
Process
-Get quality right first time
-Visualization (BIM)
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get
the material on time
-Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get
the material on time
-Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
-Flow
Process
-Pull
Approach
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization (BIM)
-5S
Flow
Process
-Get quality right first time
-Visualization (BIM)
Causes of disruption*
Actions to be taken
VA
2
12
10
83%
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
ENVA
0.125
6
5.875
98%
-Low productivity of labors
67%
-Sort the material on site to
facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by
using Status Board to show
progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination with the
-Low productivity of labors
subcontractors/suppliers to get
-Lack of Coordination between
the material on time
trades and items
-Develop agreed collaborative
master programme to review all
the project obstacles.
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis &
monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
81%
-Follow internal quality process
of execution to reach zero
defects at handover
-Adopt visual management by
showing the project model to all
the employees
ENVA
NVA
4
0.375
12
2
8
1.625
-Miscoordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Poor quality of Contractor's
work
Constraints**
130 | P a g e
Activities
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Waste
Identifi
cation
VA
Planned
Dur.
4
Actual
Dur.
10
Disrupte
d Dur.
6
Disrupt
ion
Index
Causes of disruption*
60%
-Engineer's Delay due to
design changes
-Low productivity of labors
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
NVA
0.125
0.5
0.375
75%
-Miscoordination between
Engineer & Contractor
-Poor quality of
Contractor's work
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
-Transportation problems
(traffic)
38.125
161.5
123.375
Total Durations
Actions to be taken
-Sort the material on site to
facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by
using Status Board to show
progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination/collaboration with
the subcontractors/suppliers to
get the material on time
-Develop agreed collaborative
master programme to review all
the project obstacles & design
changes at early stage.
-Supervisors to plan their
workload on weekly basis &
monitor performance of labors
on daily basis
-Reverse Phase Scheduling
-Follow internal quality process
of execution to reach zero
defects at handover
-Adopt visual management by
showing the project model to all
the employees
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get
the material on time
-Coordination with the
subcontractors/suppliers to get
the material on time
Constraints**
Lean
Scope
Lean
Principles/techniques
used
Flow
Process
Pull
Approach
-Collaborative Master
Target Programme (CMTP)
-Last Planner System
-Visualization (BIM)
-5S
Flow
Process
-Get quality right first time
-Visualization (BIM)
Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
Pull
Approach
-Just-in-time
* Causes of disruptions as stated in step no.3 of the framework
**These are the actual constraints limiting the case study and were collected from the project documents.
131 | P a g e
I
d
e
a
l Sta
teM
a
p
i
-P
r
e
p
a
r
a
ti
o
n Wo
r
k
s (
P
r
e
Ex
e
c
u
ti
o
n)
-Requi rements
fl ow down
-Coordi nati on
LPS
-WS
-Coordi nati on
Project Start
-Develop Collaborative Master
Target Programme(CMTP)
Process Activity:
Get Supplier list & send specs
to supplier
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
-Flow of information between
departments (Developed
supplier list from the tender
department).
Process Activity:
Developing a reliable
work plan with the
suppliers/subcontractors
to collect the offers on
time
4
0
Revised Time (RT):
ENVA
VA
-IPD
-BIM
-CMTP
Process Activity:
Contract agreement with the
Supplier/subcontractor
Receiving Quotations
NVA
5
Revised Time (RT):
ENVA
VA
NVA
8
ENVA
Process Activity:
Shop drawings prep. &
approval
-Use BIM to extract Shop drawings
-All the participants to share the same design model
(IPD)
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
32
ENVA
WS
Use Reliable
technology for take off
(BIM)
BIM
Process Activity:
Take off (time taken )
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
1.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Material Submittal
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
Standardize the
Process
12
ENVA
Process Activity:
Issue PO
Revised Time (RT):
VA
- The contractor to
meet the required
standards.
-Collaborate with the
Engineer to clarify any
ambiguity to avoid
resubmission.
NVA
3
-Online access to production
standards of subcontracts
-Coordination with suppliers
ENVA
Process Activity:
Material Approval
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
16.8
ENVA
-WS
-Col l aboration
Contractor
Engineer to review and
approve the material
submittal
Engineer/Owner
Supplier to review the documents & send the
quotations to the Contractor
Negotiation with the Supplier
Supplier/Subcontractor
LPS
WS
BIM
IPD
CMTP
Last Planner System
Work Standardization
Building Information Modeling
Integrated Project Delivery
Collaborative Master Target Programme
Figure 4. 21- Ideal Map (new project) for preparation works process
132 | P a g e
I
d
e
a
l Sta
teM
a
p
i
i
-M
a
te
r
i
a
l De
li
v
e
r
y
/
o
nsi
tetr
a
nsp
o
r
ta
ti
o
n
Pul l as
demand
Project Management
Steel Reinforcement
Fabricator Actual Time
(AT): 7.5 days
Prefabri cati on
Process Activity:
Provide Shop dwgs to Fabricator
Use Prefabricated
Revised Time (AT):
VA
NVA
2.25
ENVA
JIT
Collaboration
Process Activity:
unloading material on site
Revised Time (AT):
-Collaboration with the supplier to
avoid inspection process at site
-Coordination with fabricator to
bring rebar just in time
VA
NVA
0.25
ENVA
JIT
Just in Time
Figure 4. 22 - Ideal Map (new project) for material delivery process
133 | P a g e
I
deal StateMap
iii-Execution Process
Project Management
Develop Baseline Time Schedule
Steel Reinforcement
Fabricator
Ready Mix Concrete
Request
Order
Request
Order
-CMTP
-LPS
-Visualization
(BIM)
-5S
Quality
Right 1st
time
-CMTP
-LPS
-Visualization
(BIM)
-5S
Quality
Right 1st
time
JIT
JIT
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for
foundations/Cycle
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
9
3.75
ENVA
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
9
7.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Pouring Concrete
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
6
1.5
ENVA
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
Transporting the removed FW
to another works
FW for Raft/cycle
1st & 2nd layer of rebar work
for raft
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on site and
FW assembly
Revised Time (RT):
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
0.75
ENVA
VA
NVA
9
5.64
ENAV
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
18
12.9
ENVA
Process Activity:
Removal of FW
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
6
9
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
ENVA
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
-CMTP
-LPS
-Visualization
(BIM)
Quality
Right 1st
time
4.5
ENVA
JIT
Process Activity:
Process Activity:
FW for Retaining walls/cycle (27 LM, H= 6, RFT
W=0.3)
for Retaining walls/cycle
9
7
Revised Time (RT):
9
Revised Time (RT):
4.08
3.75
ENAV
VA
NVA
ENVA
VA
NVA
Process Activity:
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
6
1.5
Revised Time (RT):
ENVA
VA
JIT
NVA
ENVA
Process Activity:
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
6
1.5
Revised Time (RT):
VA
NVA
ENVA
-Sort the material on site to facilitate the process
-Adopt visual management by using Status Board to show progress on site to
labors/supervisors
-Coordination with the subcontractors/suppliers to get the material on time
-Develop agreed collaborative master programme to review all the project
obstacles & design changes at early stage.
-Supervisors to plan their workload on weekly basis & monitor performance
-Follow internal quality process of execution to reach zero defects at
handover
-Adopt visual management by showing the project model to all the
employees
LPS
JIT
BIM
CMTP
Last Planner System
Just in Time
Building Information Modeling
Collaborative Master Target Programme
Figure 4. 23 - Ideal Map (new project) for execution process
134 | P a g e
4.4 Simulation for the Execution phase
A simulation model was built to mimic the aforementioned execution process of the
concrete works. Two simulation models were tried in this research, namely, Extend and
Arena; however and for the requirements of this research, a customized simulation model
was developed in Excel to show the effect of the lean principles on the project duration for
part of the works described in the framework. Using Excel for simulation was more
convenient of this kind of research in which the main aim of the study was to show the
practical guidelines for applying lean thinking to the traditional management approach and
to mimic the execution process in different projects conditions. Notwithstanding, the
simulation results gives various results and show the impact of each activity on the overall
duration. The duration of the concrete work activities was collected from 9 projects to
provide an empirical basis for such model. Random numbers of the projects duration were
generated using normal distribution using MS Excel software. The project activities
(variables) were simulated to show the impact of each variable on the output results
(project duration) and changes to as is model were identified. Then, the lean principles
were introduced to both models to show the effect of different lean techniques on the
overall duration of the concrete activities. The simulation was done through the following
steps:
1. Durations from 9 projects were collected for the concrete activities. Random
numbers of the projects duration were generated using normal distribution using
MS Excel software and the maximum durations were calculated after 30
replications.
2. The random generated durations of the ready mix concrete activities of the as-is
model is shown in Table 4. 20
3. The type of each activity is identified whether it is VA, NVA or ENVA activity. This
classification as mentioned before in the framework helps the decision maker to
decide if the activity needs to be improved or eliminated.
4. This study Simulated few lean principles as listed in Table 4. 21 and showed their
way of application and management in the simulation model.
135 | P a g e
Table 4. 20 – Durations of the ready mix concrete activities (after 30 replications)
Activities
Installation of FW for foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Waiting till removing the FW
Removal of FW
Transporting the removed FW to another works
FW for Raft/cycle
Inspection
1st layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on site and FW assembly
FW for Retaining walls/cycle (27 LM, H= 6, W=0.3)
Inspection/Cycle
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
Total Days
Waste
Identification
ENVA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
ENVA
NVA
ENVA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
VA
Dur.
9.88
2.9
9.6
2.2
9.0
5.6
3.7
1.4
17.2
2.7
16.8
2.7
16.8
2.7
20.9
1.0
13.1
2.1
9.0
1.0
2.2
2.2
155
Table 4. 21 - Simulated Principles
Simulated Lean Principles
Its application in the simulated process
Identify Value adding Activities
Measure the durations of the value adding
activities and its contribution in the total
process.
Remove the non-added value activities from
the process and run the model. Also, the
duration of the VA activities can be increased
by adding the durations of the NVA activities
to the VA activities to improve it.
Identify and remove non-value adding activities
136 | P a g e
Identify and improve Essential non-value adding
activities
Improving the ENVA activities by changing the
sequence.
Get quality right first time
Eliminate the unnecessary activities based on
this lean principle
The results of the simulation are presented in chapter 5.
137 | P a g e
Chapter Five
5. Results and discussions
This chapter presents the results of applying the proposed Framework to a case study and
the results of Simulation for part of the works, namely, the execution process of concrete
works. The case study verified the proposed framework. It showed how the framework can
be employed in any kind of projects. It was also used to identify the obstacles that prevent
the work flow in the concrete process.
In the first section of this chapter, the results of applying the proposed framework to the
above elaborated case study included in chapter 4 are presented. Two different results are
presented based on the existing and idealistic circumstances of the project.
In the second section of this chapter, the results of simulation for the concrete execution
process are presented. Data collected from 9 projects in Egypt were used to simulate the
real process and results after incorporating lean thinking are analyzed and tabulated.
5.1 Results of applying the proposed Framework on Case Study
After analyzing the process map for the three phases of the case study, lean thinking was
adopted and its impact on the overall duration of the process was observed. The process
was analyzed and the wastes were classified. The appropriate lean techniques were used
after analyzing the actual data. The improvement was done through the following steps:
1. Increase the efficiency of the value added activities by using alternative
methods
2. Improve the method of the Essential non value added activities
3. Eliminate the non-added value activities, if applicable (depending on the current
circumstances of the project)
4. Choosing the appropriate lean tools/techniques to achieve the above three
steps. The efficiency of lean tools was calculated based on data from literature.
As mentioned at the beginning of chapter 4.The percentage of improvement in
similar countries in projects’ durations ranged between 25% - 31%. Therefore,
these percentages were taken as a guide to impact the duration of each activity.
The percentage applied in this research is 25% improvement in each activity.
138 | P a g e
5.1.1 Results of the Future state – Ongoing projects
I.
Preparation Works
The initial analysis of the preparation works data showed the % of the VA, NVA and
ENVA activities. This was discussed thoroughly in chapter4. Table 5.1 shows the
overall duration of the process after adopting the Lean Construction Framework.
The actual duration was decreased from 144 days to approximately 74.5 days
which represents decrease 48% in the overall duration of this phase which is
almost near to the initial (planned) duration. The disruption index also was
decreased from 49% to 0% which means that the process returned to the initial
planned schedule without any disruptions. The activities that contributed in this
reduction are the elimination of the shop drawings resubmission and reapprove.
The number of the NVA activities days was reduced from 35 days to 0 days as it
were totally eliminated from the process. The VA activities also were improved and
the total days were reduced from 49 Days to 37 Days. The number of the ENVA
activities days was reduced from 180 days to 136 days. By eliminating the NVA
activities, the percentage of the ENVA and VA was increased from 68% and 19% to
be 78% and 22% respectively. Fig. 5.1 shows the percentage of decrease in the
total number of days for each activity type (VA, NVA, and ENVA).
Table 5. 1- Overall duration of the preparation works process after adopting Lean approach
Activities
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Receiving IFC dwgs (waiting
period)
ENVA
5
26
21
81%
25%
19.5
Assigning Team (time taken
to assign team)
ENVA
7
26
19
73%
25%
19.5
Developing Supplier list
(Time taken)
ENVA
3
8
5
63%
25%
6
send the specs to the
suppliers to get the offers
ENVA
5
5
0
0%
25%
3.75
Receiving Quotations
(waiting time)
ENVA
5
5
0
0%
VA
5
10
5
50%
Contract agreement with
the Supplier/Subcontractor
% of
Disruptimprovem
ion Index
e-nt
Final
Durations
5
25%
139 | P a g e
7.5
Activities
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
ENVA
30
40
10
25%
25%
30
ENVA
34
40
6
15%
25%
30
NVA
0
21
21
100%
100%
0
NVA
0
14
14
100%
100%
0
VA
VA
7
21
15
21
8
0
53%
0%
25%
25%
11.25
15.75
ENVA
12
30
18
60%
25%
22.5
VA
3
3
0
0%
3
74
144
70
49%
75
Shop Drawings submission
for concrete and steel rft
foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
Shop drawings approval for
concrete and steel rft
foundations (Conc. Qty =
2000 m3)
Shop Drawings
resubmission
Shop drawings final
approval
Material Submittal
Material Approval
Take off (time taken ) for
Concrete works for
foundations (Conc. Qty = 2000
m3)
Issue PO for Formwork &
Rebar
Total Durations
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
NVA
NVA
% of
Disruptimprovem
ion Index
e-nt
VA
VA
ENVA
Final
Durations
VA
Operation Time
% of NVA of the
total days (13%)-35
Days
% of ENVA of the total days (68%) -180 Days
% of VA of the total days (19%) 49 Days
Reduce
Reduce
Eliminate
Reduction in
total
duration
Total days of ENVA after incorporating Lean (78%) - 136 Days
Total days of VA after
incorporating Lean
(21%) - 37 Days
Figure 5. 1- Percentage of decrease in each type of activity
140 | P a g e
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
The initial analysis of the Material delivery/On-site transportation data showed the
% of the VA, NVA and ENVA activities. This was discussed thoroughly in chapter 4.
Table 5.2 shows the overall duration of the process after adopting the Lean
Construction Framework. The actual duration was decreased from 30 days to
approximately 25 days which represents decrease 15 % in the overall duration of
this phase. The disruption index also was decreased from 47% to 32%. The most
activities contributed in this reduction are the elimination of the double handling
activities of the rebar. The number of the NVA activities days was reduced from 20
days to 13 days after eliminating some of them from the process and improving
the remaining activities from the process. The VA activities also were improved and
the total duration was reduced from 13 Days to 10 Days. The ENVA activities
durations’ almost were not reduced in which the actual duration was reduced from
2.2 days to 1.8 days. Therefore, there is no actual reduction in the ENVA activities
in this process. By reducing the NVA activities and eliminating some of them, the
percentage of the ENVA and VA was increased from 6% and 36% to be 7% and 41%
respectively. The percentage of the NVA activities duration was decreased from
57% to 52%. Fig. 5.2 shows the percentage of decrease in the total number of days
for each activity type (VA, NVA, and ENVA).
Table 5. 2 - Duration of the material delivery process after adopting the Lean approach
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Prepare Storage
NVA
2
5
3
60%
100%
0
Install Mobile Crane
(Rented)
ENVA
1
2
1
50%
25%
1.5
NVA
0.25
0.5
0.25
50%
25%
0.375
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
100%
0
Sort the Material in
the store
NVA
0.625
1
0.375
38%
100%
0
Update the inventory
list
NVA
0.125
0.125
0
0%
100%
0
Activities
Inspect the delivered
Material (Time taken)
Unload the material
and move it to the
Storage area
Disrupt
% of
-ion
improvemeIndex
nt
Final
Durations
141 | P a g e
Activities
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Prepare the workshop
NVA
5
8
3
38%
8
NVA
2
4
2
50%
4
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
Install the equipment
and tools (Rebar
Bender and cutter)
Loading Material to
move it to Workshop
Movements from
storage area to site
Workshop
Unloading Material to
workshop
Provide the steel
foeman with the shop
drawings to start
fabrication
Fabrication of Steel
Loading of material to
move to Site
Movements from
Workshop to site
unloading material on
site
Total Durations
Disrupt
% of
-ion
improvemeIndex
nt
Final
Durations
0
100%
0
100%
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
25%
0.1875
VA
1
3
2
67%
25%
2.25
VA
5
10
5
50%
25%
7.5
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
0.25
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
0.25
ENVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
0.25
16
30
14
47%
25
142 | P a g e
NVA
ENAV
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
VA
VA
NVA
NVA
ENAV
Operation Time
% of NVA of the total days (57%)-20 Days
% of VA of the total days (36%) - 13 Days
6%-2 days
Reduce/Eliminate
Reduce
Reduction in
total duration
% of NVA of the total days (52%)-13 Days
2
% of VA of the total days (41%) - 10 Days
Figure 5. 2 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity
III.
Execution Phase
The initial analysis of the concrete execution works data showed the % of the VA,
NVA and ENVA activities. This was discussed thoroughly in chapter4. Table 5.3
shows the overall duration of the process after adopting the Lean Construction
Framework. The actual duration was decreased from 162 days to approximately
121 days which represents decrease 25% in the overall duration of this phase. The
disruption index also was decreased from 76% to 51%. The number of the NVA
activities days was reduced from 30 days to 23 days. The VA activities also were
improved and the total duration was reduced from 78 Days to 58.5 Days. The
number of the ENVA activities days was reduced from 53 days to 39 days. The
percentage of the VA and ENVA activities in the process stayed the same. Figure
5.3 shows the percentage of decrease in the total number of days for each activity
type (VA, NVA, and ENVA).
143 | P a g e
Table 5. 3 - Duration of the execution process after adopting Lean approach
Activities
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disruption
Index
% of
improvement
Final
Durations
ENVA
1.5
5
3.5
70%
25%
3.75
NVA
0.25
4
3.75
94%
25%
3
VA
5
10
5
50%
25%
7.5
NVA
0.375
3
2.625
88%
25%
2.25
VA
1
2
1
50%
25%
1.5
Waiting till removing
the FW
NVA
4
8
4
50%
25%
6
Removal of FW
ENVA
1
5
4
80%
25%
3.75
NVA
0.125
1
0.875
88%
25%
0.75
ENVA
NVA
2
0.5
25
4
23
3.5
92%
88%
25%
25%
18.75
3
VA
5
20
15
75%
25%
15
NVA
0.375
4
3.625
91%
25%
3
VA
5
20
15
75%
25%
15
NVA
0.375
4
3.625
91%
25%
3
VA
2
12
10
83%
25%
9
ENVA
0.125
6
5.875
98%
25%
4.5
ENVA
4
12
8
67%
25%
9
NVA
0.375
2
1.625
81%
25%
1.5
VA
4
10
6
60%
25%
7.5
NVA
0.125
0.5
0.375
75%
25%
0.375
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
25%
1.5
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
25%
1.5
38
162
123
Inspection/Cycle
Installation of rebar
work for
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Transporting the
removed FW to
another works
FW for Raft/cycle
Inspection/Cycle
1st layer of rebar work
for raft
Inspection
2nd Layer of rebar
work for raft
Inspection
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on
site and FW assembly
FW for Retaining
walls/cycle
Inspection/Cycle
RFT for Retaining
walls/cycle
Inspection for steel
Rft/cycle
Pouring Concrete (1st
level)
Pouring Concrete (2nd
level)
Total Durations
121
144 | P a g e
ENAV
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
ENAV
NVA
ENAV
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
ENAV
ENAV
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
VA
Operation Time
% of NVA of the total days
(18%)-30.5 Days
% of ENVA of the total days (33%) -53 Days
Reduce
Reduce
Reduction in total
duration
% of VA of the total days (49%) - 78 Days
Reduce
18% - 23 days
% of ENVA of the total days (49%)-39 Days
% of VA of the total days (33%) - 58.5 Days
Figure 5. 3 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity
5.1.2 Results of the Ideal State – New/Future projects
I.
Preparation Works
The initial analysis of the preparation works data showed the % of the VA, NVA and
ENVA activities. This was discussed thoroughly in chapter 4. Table 5.4 shows the
overall duration of the process after adopting the Lean Construction Framework.
These results are based on the the ideal state where the current conditions of the
project can be altered to align with most of the lean techniques. The actual
duration was decreased from 144 days to approximately 30 days which represents
decrease almost 80% in the overall duration of this phase. In addition, the planned
or original duration was also decreased from 74 days to 30 days. This denotes that
using the lean appropriately from the early start of the project can cause a huge
decrease in the original duration of the project. In this case study, the percentage
of decrease from the original duration was equal 60%. The decrease in the actual
duration with this percentage from the original duration means that the lean
approach succeeded to overcome most of the causes of delays and disruptions.
The most activities contributed in this reduction are merging the shop drawings
submission and approval in one step by getting all the stakeholders to use the BIM
to share the same model, hence, eliminating the rework activities of the shop
145 | P a g e
drawings. The NVA activities durations’ were reduced from 35 days to 0 days as it
were totally eliminated from the process. The VA activities also were improved and
the total days were reduced from 49 Days to 37.5 Days. The number of days of the
ENVA activities was reduced from 180 days to 40.25 days. By eliminating the NVA
activities, the percentage of the ENVA was decreased to be 52 % instead of 68%
and the VA activities were increased from 19% to 48%. Fig. 5.4 shows the
percentage of decrease in the total number of days for each activity type (VA, NVA,
and ENVA).
Table 5. 4 - Duration of the preparation works after adopting Lean approach
Activities
Receiving IFC dwgs
(waiting period)
Assigning Team
(time taken to
assign team)
Developing Supplier
list (Time taken)
send the specs to
the suppliers to get
the offers
Receiving
Quotations (waiting
time)
Contract agreement
with the
Supplier/Subcontrac
tor
Shop Drawings
submission for
concrete and steel
rft foundations
(Conc. Qty = 2000
m3)
Shop drawings
approval for
concrete and steel
rft foundations
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disrupt
% of
-ion
improvemeIndex
nt
ENVA
5
26
21
81%
100%
0
ENVA
7
26
19
73%
100%
0
ENVA
3
8
5
63%
100%
0
ENVA
5
5
0
0%
25%
3.75
ENVA
5
5
0
0%
0%
5
VA
5
10
5
50%
25%
7.5
ENVA
30
40
10
25%
25%
30
ENVA
34
40
6
15%
100%
0
Final
Durations
146 | P a g e
Activities
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
NVA
0
21
21
100%
100%
0
NVA
0
14
14
100%
100%
0
VA
7
15
8
53%
25%
11.25
VA
21
21
0
0%
25%
15.75
ENVA
12
30
18
60%
95%*
1.5
VA
3
3
0
0%
3
74
144
70
49%
30
Shop Drawings
resubmission
Shop drawings final
approval
Material Submittal
Material Approval
Take off (time taken )
for Concrete works for
foundations (Conc.
Qty = 2000 m3)
Issue PO for
Formwork & Rebar
Total Durations
Disrupt
% of
-ion
improvemeIndex
nt
Final
Durations
* This % based on study conducted by Chelson (2010) in which the implementation of BIM has
showed reduction in the timing of the quantity take off by 95%.
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
ENVA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
NVA
NVA
VA
VA
ENVA
VA
Operation Time
% of NVA of the
total days (13%)-35
Days
% of ENVA of the total days (68%) -180 Days
% of VA of the total duration
(19%) - 49 Days
Reduce
Reduce
Eliminate
Reduction in
total days
Total days of ENVA after incorporating Lean (52%) - 40.25
Days
Total days of VA after
incorporating Lean
(48%) - 37.5 Days
Figure 5. 4 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity of the
preparation works
147 | P a g e
II.
Material delivery/On-site transportation
The initial analysis of the Material delivery/On-site transportation data showed the
% of the VA, NVA and ENVA activities. This was discussed thoroughly in chapter4.
Table 5.5 shows the overall duration of the process after adopting the Lean
Construction Framework. These results are based on the ideal state where the
current conditions of the project can be altered to align with most of the lean
techniques. The actual duration was decreased from 30 days to approximately 10
days which represents decrease 34 % in the overall duration of this phase. In
addition, the planned or original duration was also decreased from 15 days to 10
days. This denotes that using the lean appropriately from the early start of the
project can cause a huge decrease in the original duration of the project. In this
case study, the percentage of decrease from the original duration was equal 63%.
The decrease in the actual duration with this percentage from the original duration
means that the lean approach succeeded to overcome most of the causes of delays
and disruptions. The most activities contributed in this reduction are the
elimination of the double handling activities of the rebar and the use of
prefabricated rebar. The NVA activities number of days was totally eliminated and
thus from 20 days to 0 days. The VA activities also were improved and the total
days were reduced from 13 Days to almost 10 Days. The ENVA activities number of
days was also reduced in which the actual duration was reduced from 2.2 days to
0.25 days. By eliminating the NVA activities, the percentage of the VA was
increased from 6% to be 98%. The percentage of the NVA activities duration was
decreased from 57% to 0%. Fig. 5.5 shows the percentage of decrease in the total
number of days for each activity type (VA, NVA, and ENVA).
Table 5. 5 - Duration of the material delivery process after adopting Lean approach
Activities
Prepare Storage
Install Mobile Crane
Inspect the delivered
Material (Time taken)
Unload the material and
move it to the Storage
area
Disru
% of
ptimprovemeion
nt
Index
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
NVA
ENVA
2
1
5
2
3
1
60%
50%
100%
100%
0
0
NVA
0.25
0.5
0.25
50%
100%
0
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
100%
0
Final
Durations
148 | P a g e
Activities
Sort the Material in the
store
Update the inventory list
Prepare the workshop
Install the equipment and
tools (Rebar Bender and
cutter)
Loading Material to move
it to Workshop
Movements from storage
area to site Workshop
Unloading Material to
workshop
Provide the fabricator
with the shop drawings
to start fabrication
Fabrication of Steel
Loading of material to
move to Site
Movements from
Workshop to site
unloading material on
site
Total Durations
Disru
% of
ptimprovemeion
nt
Index
Waste
Identificat
-ion
Planned
Dur.
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
NVA
0.625
1
0.375
38%
100%
0
NVA
0.125
0.125
0
0%
100%
0
NVA
5
8
3
38%
100%
0
NVA
2
4
2
50%
100%
0
NVA
0.125
0.375
0.25
67%
100%
0
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
100%
0
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
100%
0
VA
1
3
2
67%
25%
2.25
VA
5
10
5
50%
25%
7.5
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
100%
0
NVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
100%
0
ENVA
0.125
0.25
0.125
50%
0%
0.25
15.75
29.75
14
47%
Final
Durations
10
149 | P a g e
NVA
ENAV
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
VA
VA
NVA
NVA
ENAV
Operation Time
% of NVA of the total days (57%)-20 Days
% of VA of the total days (36%) - 13 Days
6%-2 days
Reduce
Reduce
Eliminate
Reduction in total
days
2%-0.2
days
% of VA of the total days (98%) - 9.75 Days
Figure 5. 5 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity of the material delivery
III.
Execution Phase
The initial analysis of the Concrete execution works data showed the % of the VA,
NVA and ENVA activities. This was discussed thoroughly in chapter 4. Table 5.6
shows the overall duration of the process after adopting the Lean Construction
Framework. These results are based on the ideal state (new projects) where the
current conditions of the project can be altered to align with most of the lean
techniques. The actual duration was decreased from 162 days to approximately 71
days which represents decrease 55% in the overall duration of this phase. The
disruption index also was decreased from 76% to 46%. The number of NVA
activities days was reduced from 30.5 days to 7 days. The VA activities also were
improved and the total duration was reduced from 78 Days to 38 Days. The ENVA
activities durations’ were reduced from 53 days to 27 days. By reducing the NVA
activities, the percentage of the ENVA and VA was increased from 32% and 48% to
be 37% and 53% respectively. Fig. 5.6 shows the percentage of decrease in the
total number of days for each activity type (VA, NVA, and ENVA).
150 | P a g e
Table 5. 6 - Duration of the execution process after adopting Lean approach
Activities
Waste
Planned
IdentificDur.
ation
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disrupt
-ion
Index
% of
improveme
-nt
Final
Durations
Installation of FW
for
foundations/Cycle
ENVA
1.5
5
3.5
70%
25%
3.75
Inspection/Cycle
NVA
0.25
4
3.75
94%
100%
0
VA
5
10
5
50%
25%
7.5
NVA
VA
0.375
1
3
2
2.625
1
88%
50%
100%
25%
0
1.5
NVA
4
8
4
50%
25%
6
ENVA
1
5
4
80%
25%
3.75
NVA
0.125
1
0.875
88%
25%
0.75
Installation of rebar
work for
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Waiting till
removing the FW
Removal of FW
Transporting the
removed FW to
another works
FW for Raft/cycle
ENVA
2
25
23
92%
Inspection/Cycle
NVA
0.5
4
3.5
88%
25% (original
dur.)
82%*
(Variations)
100%
VA
5
20
15
75%
20%
6.45
NVA
0.375
4
3.625
91%
100%
0
VA
5
20
15
75%
25%
6.45
NVA
0.375
4
3.625
91%
100%
0
VA
2
12
10
83%
25%
9
ENVA
0.125
6
5.875
98%
25%
4.5
ENVA
4
12
8
67%
25%
9
NVA
0.375
2
1.625
81%
100%
0
VA
4
10
6
60%
25%
4.08
NVA
0.125
0.5
0.375
75%
100%
0
1st layer of rebar
work for raft
Inspection
2nd Layer of rebar
work for raft
Inspection
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW
on site and FW
assembly
FW for Retaining
walls/cycle (27 LM,
H= 6, W=0.3)
Inspection/Cycle
RFT for Retaining
walls/cycle
Inspection for steel
Rft/cycle
5.64
0
151 | P a g e
Waste
Planned
IdentificDur.
ation
Activities
Pouring Concrete
(1st level)
Pouring Concrete
(2nd level)
Actual
Dur.
Disrupted
Dur.
Disrupt
-ion
Index
% of
improveme
-nt
Final
Durations
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
25%
1.5
VA
0.5
2
1.5
75%
25%
1.5
38
162
123
Total Durations
71
* This % of improvement was assumed based on study conducted by Chelson (2010) in which the
implementation of BIM has showed reduction in change orders by 82% .
ENAV
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
ENAV
NVA
ENAV
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
ENAV
ENAV
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
Operation Time
% of NVA of the total days
(18%)-30.5 Days
% of ENVA of the total days (33%) -53 Days
Reduce
Reduce
Reduction in total days
% of VA of the total days (49%) - 78 Days
Reduce
9% - 6.75 days
% of ENVA of the total days (38%)-26.6 Days
% of VA of the total days (53%) - 38 Days
Figure 5. 6 - Percentage of decrease in each type of activity of the execution
152 | P a g e
VA
5.1.3 Summary of the future and ideal state results
a. Time saved after applying the proposed Framework
Table 5.7 shows the time saved for the VA, NVA, ENVA activities after imposing the
proposed framework. It can be concluded that there are massive reductions in durations
(total no. of days) after applying lean approach, especially in the ideal state (New Projects).
These results based on results of improvements from previous work outside Egypt.
Table 5. 7- Time saved per cycle after imposing the proposed framework
Preparation Process
Time Saved *(Days)
Type of
Activity
NVA
ENVA
VA
Total
Action
Eliminated/
reduced
Reduced/
Improved
Reduced/
Improved
Future
State
Ideal State
Material delivery/On-site
transportation
Time Saved* (Days)
Future State
Time Saved *(Days)
% of Total Time
saved per
activity type
Future
State
Future
State
Ideal
State
Execution Process
Ideal State
Ideal State
35
100%
35
100%
7
35%
20
100%
8
25%
23
77%
11%
17%
44
24%
140
77%
0.5
22%
2
88%
13
25%
26
50%
12%
36%
12
23%
11.5
23%
3
25%
3
25%
20
25%
40
51
8%
12%
91
34%
187
71%
11
31%
25
69%
41
25%
89
55%
* The time saved in each activity type is the total number of days saved regardless the
concurrency between activities as the main aim is to improve all the activities whether it is
on the longest path of the process or not. The extra float that will be generated as a result
of reducing the duration of the non-critical activities will be used at the best interest of the
project.
b. Number of activities after applying the proposed Framework
Table 5. 8, Figure 5. 7and Figure 5. 8 show the reduction in number of activities after
imposing the proposed framework.
153 | P a g e
Table 5. 8 - Number of activities after applying the proposed Framework
Activity
Type
No. of activities
Before Lean
NVA
ENVA
VA
Total
23
15
14
52
Future Map (ongoing projects)
No. of activities After
Reduction
Lean
%
15
35%
15
0
14
0
44
15%
Ideal Map (New projects)
No. of activities After
Reduction %
Lean
3
87%
10
33%
14
0%
27
48%
No. of activities of Future map before & after Lean
25
23
No. of Activties
20
15
14
15
14
15
15
10
Future Map (ongoing
projects) Before Lean
5
Future Map (ongoing
projects) After Lean
0
VA activties
NVA activties
ENAV Activties
Type of Activity
Figure 5. 7 - No. of activities of Future map before & after Lean
No. of activities of Ideal map before & after Lean
23
No. of Activities
25
20
15
14
15
14
10
10
Ideal Map (New projects)
After Lean
3
5
Ideal Map (New projects)
Before Lean
0
VA activties
NVA activties
ENAV Activties
Type of Activity
Figure 5. 8- No. of activities of Ideal map before & after Lean
154 | P a g e
c. Contribution of the activity type in the process after applying lean
Table 5. 9 and Table 5. 10 show the contribution of the activity type (VA, NVA, and ENVA)
in each process before and after applying lean in terms of duration. Figure 5.9, 5.10 and
5.11 show the contribution of the activity types in the future state of the 3 processes.
Figure 5.12, 5.13 and 5.14 show the contribution of the activity types in the ideal state
of the 3 processes.
Table 5. 9 - Contribution of activity type after applying lean in the future State
Preparation Process
Material delivery
Execution Process
Classification
% of waste
Before Lean
% of waste
After Lean
% of waste
Before Lean
% of waste
After Lean
% of waste
Before Lean
% of waste
After Lean
ENVA
NVA
VA
68%
13%
19%
78%
0%
22%
6%
57%
36%
7%
52%
41%
33%
19%
48%
33%
19%
48%
Preparation Process
Before Lean
Preparation Process
After Lean
VA
19%
VA
22%
NVA
0%
NVA
13%
ENAV
68%
ENAV
78%
Figure 5. 9 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the future State of
the preparation process
155 | P a g e
Material delivery
After Lean
Material delivery
Before Lean
ENAV
6%
ENAV
7%
VA
36%
VA
41%
NVA
52%
NVA
58%
Figure 5. 10 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the future State of
the Material delivery process
Execution Process
Before Lean
Execution Process
After Lean
ENAV
33%
VA
48%
ENAV
33%
VA
48%
NVA
19%
NVA
19%
Figure 5. 11 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the future State of the
Execution process
Table 5. 10 - Contribution of activity type after applying lean in the ideal State
Classification
ENVA
NVA
VA
Preparation Process
% of waste % of waste
Before Lean After Lean
68%
13%
19%
52%
0%
48%
Material delivery
% of waste % of waste
Before Lean After Lean
6%
57%
36%
2%
0%
98%
Execution Process
% of waste
% of waste
Before Lean
After Lean
33%
19%
48%
37%
10%
53%
156 | P a g e
Preparation Process
Before Lean
Preparation Process
After Lean
VA
19%
VA
48%
NVA
13%
ENAV
52%
ENAV
68%
NVA
0%
Figure 5. 12 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the ideal State of the
preparation process
Material delivery
Before Lean
ENAV
Material delivery
ENAV
After Lean
2%
6%
VA
36%
NVA
58%
VA
98%
Figure 5. 13 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the ideal State of the
Material delivery process
157 | P a g e
Execution Process
After Lean
Execution Process
Before Lean
ENAV
33%
VA
48%
ENAV
37%
VA
53%
NVA
10%
NVA
19%
Figure 5. 14 - Contribution of activity type after & before applying lean in the ideal State of the
Execution process
d. Process Efficiency after applying Lean
The process efficiency is measured by comparing time consumed by value adding activities
to the total time as shown in Equation 5.1 (A.Al-Sudairi 2007). Table 5. 11 shows the
process efficiency for both the ideal and future state.
Process Efficiency = Time of Value adding activities/ Total Process Time [5.1]
Table 5. 11 – Process efficiency after applying Lean
Type of
Activity
Preparation Process
After Lean
Before Future
Ideal
Lean
State
State
Material Delivery
After Lean
Before
Future
Ideal
Lean
State
State
Execution Process
After Lean
Before
Future
Ideal
Lean
State
State
VA Time (No.
of Days)
49
38
38
13
10
9.75
78
58.5
38
Total No. of
process days
Process
Efficiency
264
174
78
36
25
10
162
121
72
19%
22%
49%
36%
40%
98%
48%
48%
53%
158 | P a g e
5.2 Results of Simulation
In this section, the simulation of part of the works, namely, execution of concrete works
was simulated. Durations of the related activities were collected from 9 different projects.
Random numbers of the projects duration were generated using normal distribution in MS
Excel software.
The steps that were adopted to simulate the process as mentioned in chapter 4 are as
follows:
1. Run the model at Non-added value activities equals zero. Then run the model at ENVA
equals zero and finally run the model at NVA and ENVA equals zero. The purpose of
three runs is to identify the most effective type of activities in the overall duration of
the process.
1.1 Run the model at Non-added value activities equals zero
Table 5. 12 and Figure 5. 15 show the overall duration after eliminating the NVA activities
which were mainly in this case the inspection activities. The overall duration decreased
from 154.8 to 131.5 days with percentage of decrease 15%. The number of VA activities in
comparison to the ENVA activities is 8 out of 16 which represents 62% of the process.
1.2 Run the model at Essential Non-added value activities equals zero
Table 5. 13 and Figure 5. 16 show the overall duration after eliminating the ENVA activities.
The overall duration decreased from 154.8 to 110 days with percentage of decrease 29%.
The number of VA activities in comparison to the NVA activities is 8 out of 17 which
represents 47% of the process.
1.3 Run the model at Essential Non-added value and Non-added value activities equals
zero
Table 5. 14 and Figure 5. 17 show the overall duration after eliminating the ENVA and NVA
activities (this is a hypothetical assumption and was done to show the effect of the ENVA
and VA together on the overall duration of the project). The overall duration decreased
from 154.8 to 86.7 days with percentage of decrease 44%.
159 | P a g e
Table 5. 12 – Duration at Non-added value activities equals zero
Activities
Installation of FW for foundations/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for foundations/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Removal of FW
FW for Raft/cycle
1st layer of rebar work for raft
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on site and FW assembly
FW for Retaining walls/cycle
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
Total Days
Value Added steps (%)
Waste
Identification
ENVA
VA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
VA
VA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
VA
VA
VA
Dur.
9.9
9.6
9.0
3.7
17.2
16.8
16.8
20.9
1.0
13.1
9.0
2.2
2.2
131.5
VA
Steps
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
62%
Figure 5. 15 - Duration after eliminating NVA activities
160 | P a g e
Table 5. 13 – Durations at Essential Non-added value activities equals zero
Waste
Identifica
tion
Activities
Inspection/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Waiting till removing the FW
Transporting the removed FW to another works
Inspection
1st layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
Pouring Concrete
Inspection/Cycle
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
Total Days
Value Added steps (%)
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
NVA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
VA
Dur.
VA
Steps
2.9
9.6
2.2
9.0
5.6
1.4
2.7
16.8
2.7
16.8
2.7
20.9
2.1
9.0
1.0
2.2
2.2
110.0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
47%
Duration after eliminating ENVA only
180.0
160.0
154.8
140.0
110.0
120.0
100.0
Series1
80.0
Linear (Series1)
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
Do
D1
Figure 5. 16 – Durations after eliminating ENVA activities only
161 | P a g e
Table 5. 14 – Durations at ENVA and NVA activities equals zero
Activities
Waste
Identification
Installation of rebar work for foundations/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
1st layer of rebar work for raft
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
Pouring Concrete
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
Total Days
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
Dur.
9.6
9.0
16.8
16.8
20.9
9.0
2.2
2.2
86.7
Figure 5. 17 – Durations after eliminating ENVA and NVA activities
Table 5. 15 shows summary for the hypothetical assumptions mentioned earlier in this
section. It can be concluded from the results that the ENVA activities have the biggest
effect on the overall duration followed by the NVA activities. Therefore, the NVA activities
should be first removed to improve the work flow and then the ENVA should be improved
to reduce the overall duration of the process.
162 | P a g e
Table 5. 15 – Summary for simulation results of step 1
Activity type impact
NVA=0
ENVA=0
NVA=0, ENVA=0
% of reduction on the
overall process duration
15%
29%
44%
VA duration
(%)
65%
78%
100%
VA steps
(%)
62%
47%
100%
NVA steps
(%)
0%
53%
0%
2. Effect of Quality right first time on VA, ENVA & NVA.
Unnecessary process and waiting are two of the eight types of waste. The inspection
process in the construction hinders the work from flowing smoothly. The time waiting for
the Engineer/supervisor to inspect the work and the rework that might occur due to
defects in work add no value to the process. In the ideal cases and according to the lean
principles, such step/activity should be eliminated from the process. For the purpose of
this research, an assumption has been done that the productivity of the Formwork (ENVA
activities), Steel Reinforcement (VA activities) and Concrete Pouring (VA activities) will
decrease by 10 % to increase the quality of the final product and accordingly eliminating
the inspection activity from the whole process. This can be considered as a factor of safety
for this case.
By implementing one of the lean techniques, namely, quality right first time, the VA
activities increased from 86 days to be 92 days representing 6% increase, the ENVA
activities increased from 44 days to 49 days representing 10% increase, and the NVA
activities decreased from 23 days to 7 days representing 70% decrease. The overall
duration of the process decreased from 154 days to 148 days representing overall of 3 %
decrease in the process duration.
Table 5. 16, Figure 5. 18 and Figure 5. 19 show the impact of this decrease on the overall
duration of the project and on the VA and ENVA activities of the process.
163 | P a g e
Table 5. 16 – Impact of Quality right first time on the durations
Activities
Installation of FW for
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Installation of rebar work for
foundations/Cycle
Inspection/Cycle
Pouring Concrete
Waiting till removing the FW
Removal of FW
Transporting the removed FW to
another works
FW for Raft/cycle
Inspection
1st layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
2nd Layer of rebar work for raft
Inspection
Pouring Concrete
unloading Wall FW on site and FW
assembly
FW for Retaining walls/cycle (27
LM, H= 6, W=0.3)
Inspection/Cycle
RFT for Retaining walls/cycle
Inspection for steel Rft/cycle
Pouring Concrete (1st level)
Pouring Concrete (2nd level)
Waste
Identifi
cation
ENVA
Dur.
9.88
New duration
after
decreasing
productivity
Qty
Unit
Productivi
ty
(Unit/day)
100
M3
10.13
10.97
NVA
VA
9.59
15
Ton
1.56
10.66
NVA
VA
NVA
ENVA
8.99
5.63
3.75
100
M3
11.12
0.00
0.00
8.99
5.63
3.75
0.00
1.36
M3
13.40
19.07
16.85 17.25
Ton
1.02
18.72
16.85 17.25
Ton
1.02
18.72
M3
10.99
20.94
0.00
0.97
NVA
ENVA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
ENVA
ENVA
NVA
VA
NVA
VA
VA
1.36
17.16
20.94
230
230
0.97
50
M3
3.82
14.55
9.04
7.5
Ton
0.83
10.04
2.21
2.21
25
25
M3
M3
11.33
11.33
2.21
2.21
13.09
164 | P a g e
Duration of VA,NVA,ENVA after Introducing Lean
100.0
92.5
86.7
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
49.3
After Lean
44.9
Before Lean
40.0
30.0
23.3
20.0
7.0
10.0
0.0
ENVA
VA
NVA
Figure 5. 18 – Duration of each activity type after introducing “Get quality right first time”
Total duration after & before Introducing Lean
156
155
154
153
152
151
150
149
148
147
146
145
154.85
Series1
148.78
After Lean
Before Lean
Figure 5. 19 - Total Duration after introducing “Get quality right first time”
165 | P a g e
5.3 Framework Validation
For the purpose of framework validation, a set of interviews were conducted with 5
experts in the construction field in Egypt. They were asked to provide their opinion about
the applicability and efficiency of the Proposed Lean Construction Framework. The
interview questions can be found under Appendix B. Table 5. 17 summarizes the results of
the interview. All the respondents were not familiar with lean construction concept before
interviewing them.
Table 5. 17 – Summary for the interviews results
Interview questions and responses
Q1
Response
Comment
Are you familiar with the lean construction concepts?
100% of the respondents were not familiar with lean construction
The author introduced them the concept before the interview
Do you believe that the traditional project control approach is reactive
Q2
(passive)?
Response
100% of the respondents replied yes
Applicability and Efficiency of the proposed Framework (Low, Average,
Q3.A
High)
Response
60% High and 40% Average applicability & Efficiency
All the respondents believe that the lean approach will succeed overtime in
Comment
Egypt but it depends on the appreciation of the decision makers and the
employees to this concept.
Applicability and Efficiency of the lean techniques/tools used (Low,
Q3.B
Average, High)
Collaboration & Applicability: 60% High and 40 % Average
Coordination
Efficiency: 80% High and 20 % Average
60% of the respondents commented that this technique is implemented in
Comment
several projects in Egypt and has proved its efficiency.
Last Planner
System
Applicability: 20% High and 80 % Average
Efficiency: 60% High and 40 % Average
Standardization
Applicability: 80% High and 20 % Average
Efficiency: 80% High and 20 % Average
Reliable
Technology
(BIM)
Applicability: 20% High and 80 % Average
Efficiency: 80% High and 20 % Average
80% of the respondents commented that BIM will only be efficient if it was
shared between all the parties and used from the early stages of the project.
Applicability: 20% High and 80 % Average
Get Quality
Right First Time Efficiency: 80% High and 20 % Average
Comment
166 | P a g e
Interview questions and responses
Just-in-time
Comment
Visual
Management
Five S'
Comment
Q4
Response
Q5
Response
Q6
Response
Q7
Response
Q8
Response
Applicability: 20% High, 60 % Average, and 20% low
Efficiency: 20% High, 60 % Average, and 20% low
Some of the respondents commented that this approach will only be
applicable if there is escalation clause applied in the contract for any increase
in prices. They believe that purchasing the entire inventory at the start of the
project will save money due to the instability of the market prices.
Applicability: 60% High and 40 % Average
Efficiency: 40% High and 60 % Average
Applicability: 80% High and 20 % Average
Efficiency: 80% High and 20 % Average
80% of the respondents commented that this technique is implemented in
several projects in Egypt and has proved its efficiency.
Please give an indication if the proposed framework is user friendly or not?
100% of the respondents replied yes
Do you think that the proposed lean construction framework is beneficial
for both small and big construction projects?
60% for big projects and 40% for both
Do you think that the proposed lean construction framework could improve
the projects performance in construction?
100% of the respondents replied yes
Do you think that the proposed lean construction framework can be a
project control tool (Time & Cost Control)?
100% of the respondents replied yes
If yes, do you think it is proactive project control tool?
100% of the respondents replied yes
It can be concluded that all the respondents believe that the proposed framework can
improve the project performance in Egypt and can act as a proactive project control tool.
The results of the interview showed that 60% of the respondents believe it is highly
applicable and efficient if fully implemented. The other 40% of the respondents believe
that it can be applicable and efficient in an average level due to the absence of the lean
mindset of the decision makers in the construction industry. Most of the respondents
believe that the lean tools and techniques used in this framework are highly efficient if
fully implemented which supports the results of the proposed framework. Furthermore, all
the respondents commented that the lean approach will succeed overtime in Egypt but it
depends on the appreciation of the decision makers and the employees to this concept.
167 | P a g e
Chapter Six
6. Conclusion
This chapter presents a summary of the key findings obtained in this research work and
provides recommendations for future work.
6.1 Research Summary
The main objective of this research was to improve the overall performance of
construction building projects in Egypt by applying the appropriate lean management
approach to the process from the Contractor perspective. This target was achieved by
developing a proposed Lean Construction Framework. This framework is considered as a
lean implementation guideline. This framework was developed based on 3 foundations: 1)
Literature survey to investigate the benefits of using lean approach in construction 2)
Questionnaire in different construction projects in Egypt to evaluate the factors affecting
projects’ performance, measure the awareness of engineers about lean construction and
evaluate their concerns about the main lean principles 3) Traditional Project Control
approach and its effect on the construction process being a reactive approach. The
developed framework consists of six components: 1) Process map 2) Current State Map 3)
Waste Elimination 4) Used lean tools/techniques 5) Future State Map (ongoing projects) 6)
Ideal State Map (new projects). To verify the developed Framework, it was implemented
on Case Study in Egypt. The trade considered in the case study was the ready mix concrete
works for the phases of a garage area in an existing hotel project located in downtown
(execution and pre-execution works). A customized simulation model was developed in
Excel to show the effect of the lean concepts on the project duration for part of the works
described in the framework. The purpose of the simulation was to mimic the execution
process of the ready mix concrete works in different projects conditions after collecting
data from 9 different projects.
6.2 Research Findings
The emphasis within lean construction literature has mainly been focused on data
collected from construction projects outside Egypt. Therefore, this study has mainly
focused on examining the implementation of lean construction approach on the Egyptian
construction industry. This was done through the following:
168 | P a g e
1. A survey to determine the current appreciation and awareness of lean construction
within the Egyptian construction industry.
2. Developing a framework to show how various aspects of lean thinking can be
implemented in a construction project. This framework was applied on a case study in
Egypt showing the impact of using lean construction concepts on the duration of the
ready-mix concrete activities.
Firstly, the findings of the questionnaire that was conducted in one of the largest
construction firms in Egypt showed the following:




More than 80% of the respondents believe that inadequate drawings, poor
communication by contractor, change orders by owner, discrepancies in design
documents, ineffective scheduling, and changes in material specifications during
construction are the most factors causing project delays.
55% of the respondents are not aware about lean concept and 45% of the
respondents have scarcely aware of it.
55% of the respondents with experience more than 15 years have high potentials to
use new management techniques/approaches while 30% of the respondents with
experience above 10 years have average potentials. Only 10% of the respondents
with experience between 5-10 years have low potential to use new management
techniques.
Results of the survey showed that some of the lean techniques have mean score
less than 3.5 such as waste reduction, visual management, just-in-time,
collaboration, benchmarking, and prefabrication techniques which mean that they
are not fully implemented on the construction field in Egypt and more focus should
be given to them to enhance the process. While techniques such as
standardization, communication, continuous improvement, information flow,
housekeeping, customer focus, and reduce variability have mean score more than
3.5 which means that they are efficiently implemented and that with some more
effort their efficiency will be increased.
Secondly, the Framework results showed the effect of the VA, NVA, ENVA (value added,
Non value added, and essential non value added) activities on the overall process duration
and the overall reduction in the process durations. The factors impacting (project
constraints) the used lean technique/tool were found to have excessive impact on the
percentage of improvement in the process durations. This was concluded by establishing
169 | P a g e
the two maps, namely, future state map (on-going projects) and idea state map (new
projects).
The impact of the proposed framework implementation on the future state of the case
study (ongoing projects) can be summarized as follows:




The percentage of time saved (total no. of days) in the preparation works, material
delivery, and execution process are 34%, 31%, and 25% respectively. In preparation
works, the ENVA activities has the highest contribution in total number of days
saved (48%) while on the material delivery phase the NVA activities has the highest
contribution (66%). In the execution process, the VA activities contributed with the
highest savings in time (49%).
The percentage of time saved (total no. of days) from the total time of the 3 phases
are 11%, 12%, and 8 % for the NVA activities, ENVA activities, and VA activities
respectively. This shows that the NVA and ENVA activities have the highest impact
on the project duration. Therefore and by implementing the proposed lean
construction framework, the NVA and ENVA activities can be improved and their
durations can be reduced.
The number of the non-value added (NVA) activities have decreased by 35% while
the VA and ENVA activities remained the same. The total number of activities for
the 3 phases has reduced by 15%.
The process efficiency of preparation works increased from 19% to 22% and of
material delivery from 36% to 40% while the process efficiency of the execution
process remained the same (48%).
The impact of the proposed framework implementation on the ideal state of the case
study (new projects) can be summarized as follows:


The percentage of time saved (total no. of days) in the preparation works, material
delivery, and execution process are 71%, 69%, and 55% respectively. In preparation
works, the ENVA activities has the highest contribution in total number of days
saved (75%) while on the material delivery phase the NVA activities has the highest
contribution (80%). In the execution process, the VA activities contributed with the
highest savings in time (45%).
The percentage of time saved (total no. of days) from the total time of the 3 phases
are 17%, 36%, and 12 % for the NVA activities, ENVA activities, and VA activities
respectively. This shows that the ENVA activities have the highest impact on the
project duration and that its duration can be reduced in the new projects.
170 | P a g e


Therefore and by implementing the proposed lean construction framework, the
NVA and ENVA activities can be improved and their durations can be reduced.
The number of the NVA activities and ENVA activities has decreased by 87% and
33% respectively while the VA activities remained the same. The total number of
activities for the 3 phases has also reduced by 48%.
The process efficiency of preparation works increased from 19% to 49% and of
material delivery from 36% to 98% while the process efficiency of the execution
process increased from 48% to 53%.
Execution Process simulation:
It can be concluded from the results that the ENVA (29%) activities have the biggest effect
on the overall duration followed by the NVA (15%) activities. Therefore, the NVA activities
should be first removed to improve the work flow and then the ENVA should be improved
to reduce the overall duration of the process. This validated the results of the case study
after applying the proposed framework.
Finally, the total duration of the process was improved after applying the proposed lean
construction framework on a case study. The proposed Lean Construction Framework in
this study is generic and can be applied to any type of work. However, the research results
are based on one case study that only attributable and restricted to certain type of projects
and will vary according to the project type. Furthermore, adopting the lean approach
enhanced the prospect of the Project Control process from being a reactive approach to a
proactive one as the root causes of the potential problems are mapped and addressed
before its occurrence. These results were validated by interviewing 5 experts in the
Egyptian construction field. Most of the respondent (60%) believed that this framework is
highly efficient and can improve the overall performance of the projects (100%) if it was
fully implemented. Therefore, Lean production principles and tools can be applied to
construction industry to control the outcomes through the control of the entire production
processes. The implementation of lean approach on the construction process managed to
reduce the overall duration of the process by improving the way of management. Being
adopted in similar countries, lean construction can be applied in construction projects in
Egypt by increasing the awareness of the engineers about this approach.
171 | P a g e
6.3 Future research
This thesis identified main guidelines for applying lean approach in construction through a
proposed framework. Further research is required to show the impact of using lean
approach on the overall cost and productivity of a project. Also, the proposed framework
should be applied to different kinds of project to show the amount of contributory and
non-contributory activities in different project types. In addition, this framework should be
further tested at site level in Egypt by conducting action research in different project types.
172 | P a g e
Bibliography
A.Al-Sudairi, abdulsalam. "Evaluating the Effect of Construction Process Characteristics to the
Applicability of Lean Principles." Construction Innovation Vol.7 No.1, pp.99-121, 2007.
Abdelhamid, Tariq S. "The Self-Destruction And Renewal Of Lean Construction Theory: A Prediction
From Boyd’s Theory." Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the International
Group for Lean Construction, Helsingør, Denmark. 2004.
Ahrens, Thorsten. Lean production:Successful implementation of organisational change in
operations instead of short term cost reduction efforts. Lean Alliance, 2006.
Alarco´n, Javier Freire and Luis F. "Achieving Lean Design Process: Improvement Methodology."
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management/ May/June , 2002.
Amcham. The Construction Sector in Egypt . September 2003. amcham.org.eg (accessed April 30,
2013).
Ansell, Mary, Mike Holmes, Rees Evans, Christine Pasquire, and Andrew Price. "Lean Construction
Trial on a Highways Maintenance Project." Proceedings IGLC-15, Michigan, USA. 2007.
Aref, Amr. "Construction Blues." Business Today Egypt , 2012.
Australia, Engineers. "Recommended Practices for the Application of LEAN Construction Methods
to Building New Australian LNG Capacity." 2012.
Baccarini, David. "The concept of project complexity-a review." International Journal of Project
Management Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 201-204, 1996.
Badurdeen, Aza. "http://EzineArticles.com/145534." 2006.
Ballard, Glenn. Lean Project Delivery System. Lean Construction Institute, 2000.
Ballard, Glenn, and Gregory A. Howell. "Lean project management." BUILDING RESEARCH &
INFORMATION (2003) 31(2), 119–133, 2003.
Ballard, Herman Glenn. The Last Planner System of Production Control. PHD, Faculty of Engineering,
The University of Birmingham, 2000.
Bertelsen, Sven. "Bridging the Gaps – Towards a Comprehensive Understanding of Lean
Construction." proceedings of the 10th annual conference in the International Group for
Lean Construction. 2002.
Blakey, Robert. An Introduction to Lean Construction. The Lean Construction Institute, 2008.
Bongiorni, Michael Joseph. INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVERY. UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, 2011.
173 | P a g e
Bosca', Neus Al Caraz. "Lean Project Management - Assessment of project risk management
processes." Master of Science Thesis. Stockholm, Sweden: KTH Industrial Engineering and
Management, 2012.
BRE. Construction Lean Improvement Programme. UK, 2003.
CAPMAS. http://website.informer.com/visit?domain=capmas.gov.eg. n.d. (accessed 2013).
Chelson, Douglas E. "THE EFFECTS OF BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING ON CONSTRUCTION
SITE PRODUCTIVITY." PHD, 2010.
Conte, Antonio Sergio Itri. "Lean Construction: From Theory To Practice." IGLC-10. Gramado, Brazil,
2002.
Dave, Bhargav, Lauri Koskela, Arto Kiviniemi, and Patricia Tzortzopoulos. "Lean construction and
BIM." London, 2013.
Enache-Pommer, Elena, Michael J. Horman, John I. Messner, and and David Riley. "A Unified
Process Approach to Healthcare Project Delivery: Synergies between Greening Strategies,
Lean Principles, and BIM." Construction Research Congress: pp. 1376-1405,. 2010.
Eriksson, Per Erik. "Improving construction supply chain collaboration and performance:a lean
construction pilot project." Volume 15 · Number 5 · 394–403, 2010.
Fontanini, Patricia S. P., and Flavio A. Picche. "VALUE STREAM MACRO MAPPING-A CASE STUDY OF
ALUMINUM WINDOWS FOR CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY CHAIN." Twelfth Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 12). 2004.
Garrett, Deborah F., and Jim Lee. "Lean Construction Submittal Process—A Case Study." Taylor &
Francis Ltd, 2011.
Gilbert, Dane Ryan. "Current Deployment of Lean Methods in the Construction Industry." Master of
Science in Building Construction, Florida, 2008.
Gleeson, F. and Townend J. Lean construction in the corporate world of the U.K. construction
industry. University of Manchester, School of Mechanical, Aerospace, Civil and
Construction Engineering, 2007.
Glenn Ballard, Nigel Harper and Todd Zabelle. "Learning to see work flow: an application of lean
concepts to precast concrete fabrication." Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management Volume 10 . Number 1, 2003.
H. Randolph Thomas, M, Michael J. Horman, Ubiraci Espinelli Lemes de Souza, and and Ivica
Zavrˇski. "Reducing Variability to Improve Performance as a Lean Construction Principle."
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management / March/April , 2002.
174 | P a g e
Holweg, Matthias. "The genealogy of lean production." Journal of Operations Management 25
(2007) 420–437, 2007.
Hook, Matilda, and Lars Stehn. "Applicability of lean principles and practices in industrialized
housing production." Construction Management and Economics (October) 26, 1091–1100,
2008.
Howell, Greg, and Will Lichtig. "Lean Construction Opportunities Ideas Practices." Dean Reed and
DPR Construction, INC/Speech presented to the Cascadia LCI “Introduction to Lean Design”
Workshop Seattle, Washington| September15,. 2008.
Howell, Gregory A. "What is Lean Construction ." Proceedings IGLC-7. California, USA: University of
California, Berkeley, CA, USA, 1999.
Howell, Gregory A., and Lauri Koskela. "Reforming Project Management: The Role of Lean
Construction." 8th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction,
17th - 19th July, Brighton, UK. 2000.
http://www.contrack.com/?page_id=1784. n.d.
http://www.nbkcapital.com/. 2010. (accessed November 2, 2013).
Hussein, Gehad. Egypt's Top 5 Companies in MEED 100. 2012. http://www.egyptbusiness.com/Paper/details/1219-xg-Egypts-Top-5-Companies-in-MEED-100/5153
(accessed September 1, 2013).
IMF. http://www.imf.org/external/country/index.htm. n.d.
ISCG. "EGYPT BUSINESS FACT SHEET." 2010.
Jacobs, Gideon Francois. "Review Of Lean Construction Conference Proceedings And Relationship
To The Toyota Production SystemY Framework." PHD, Colorado State University. Fort
Collins, Colorado, 2010.
Ko, Chien-Ho, Wei-Chieh Wang, and and Jiun-De Kuo. "Improving Formwork Engineering Using the
Toyota Way." Journal of Engineering, Project, and Production Management 1(1), 13-27,
2011.
Koskela, Lauri. An exploration towards a production theory and its application to construction. PhD,
Espoo, Finland: doctoral dissertation, VTT Building technology Publications 408, 2000.
Koskela, Lauri. Application Of The New Production Philosophy To Construction. Technical report,
Finland: Stanford University, 1992.
Koskela, Lauri, and Greg and Howell. "The underlying Theory of project management is obsolete."
Proceedings of PMI research conference. 2002.
175 | P a g e
Koskela, Lauri, and Greg Howell. "The Theory of Project Management: Explanation to Novel
Methods." Proceedings IGLC-10, Aug, Gramado, Brazil. 2002.
Liker, Jeffrey K. The Toyota Way. McGraw-Hill, 2004.
Maturana, Sergio, Luis Fernando Alarcón, Pedro Gazmuri, and and Mladen Vrsalovic. "On-Site
Subcontractor Evaluation Method Based on Lean Principles and Partnering Practices."
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING © ASCE / APRIL , 2007.
Merschbrock, Christoph. "Lean production construction – Prospects for the Icelandic construction
industry." MSc Thesis, 2009.
Michel, Joseph A. Cleves Jr. and John F. "Lean project delivery: A winning strategy for construction
and real estate development." n.d.
Mossman, Alan. "Last Planner – collaborative short-term production planning." 2012.
Mostafa E. Shehata, Khaled M. El-Gohary. "Towards improving construction labor productivity and
projects’ performance." Alexandria Engineering Journal 50, 321–330, 2011.
Nagapan, Sasitharan, Ismail Abdul Rahman, and Ade Asmi. "Factors Contributing to Physical and
Non-Physical Waste Generation in Construction Industry." International Journal of
Advances in Applied Sciences (IJAAS) Vol.1, No.1, March, pp. 1-10, 2012.
O. Salem, J. Solomon, A. Genaidy, and M. Luegring. "Site Implementation and Assessment of Lean
Construction Techniques." Lean Construction Journal Vol 2 # 2 October, 2005.
O. Salem, M., J. Solomon, A. Genaidy, and M. and I. Minkarah. "Lean Construction: From Theory to
Implementation." Journal of Management in Engineering © ASCE / October, 2006.
O’Connor, Richard, and Brian Swain. Lean tools and techniques-an introduction. CIRIA, 2013.
Olawale, Yakubu Adisa, and MCIOB and Ming Sun. "Cost and Time Control of Construction
Projects:Inhibiting Factors and Mitigating Measures in Practice." Construction Management
and Economics, 28 (5), 509 – 526., 2010.
Oskouie, Pedram, David J. Gerber, Thais Alves, and Burcin Becerik-Gerber. "Extending the
Interaction of Building Information Modeling and Lean Construction." Proceedings for the
20th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. 2012.
Peter Andrejev, Christopher Carabetta. "Improving Complex Facility Construction Projects by Using
an “Owner’s Paladin”." 2012.
PMI. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) - Fourth Edition.
PMI, 2008.
176 | P a g e
R.Duncan, William. A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Sylva, NC: PMI
Publications, 1996.
Rahman, Ismail A.; Memon, Aftab H.; T.A.Karim, Ahmad. "Relationship between Factors of
Construction Resources Affecting." Modern Applied Science; Vol. 7, No. 1, 2013.
Refaat H. Abdel-Razek, Hany Abd Elshakour M, Mohamed Abdel-Hamid. "Labor productivity:
Benchmarking and variability in Egyptian projects." International Journal of Project
Management 25,189–197, 2007.
Reginato, Justin M., and Sterling T. Graham. "Implementing the Last PlannerTM System in Large
Public Lump Sum Bidding for Building Projects." 47th ASC Annual International Conference
Proceedings. 2011.
Sacks, R., M. Treckmann, and O. Rozenfeld. "Visualization of Work Flow to Support Lean
Construction." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management © ASCE / December,
2009.
Sacks, Rafael, Lauri Koskela, Bhargav A. Dave, and and Robert Owen. "Interaction of Lean and
Building Information Modeling in Construction." Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management © ASCE / September , 2010.
Samalia Adamu, Razali Abdul Hamid. "Lean Construction Techniques Implimentation in Nigeria
Construction Industry." Canadian Journal on Environmental, Construction and Civil
Engineering Vol. 3, No. 4, May , 2012.
Senaratne, Sepani, and Duleesha Wijesiri. "Lean Construction as a Strategic Option: Testing its
Suitability and Acceptability in Sri Lanka." Lean Construction Journal, 2008.
Shires, Mike, Bill Munn, and Barry Thompson. "Lean Construction – Project Experience." Report of a
workshop organised by the Construction Productivity Network in association with CLIP, BRE
& Constructing Excellence, 2005.
Sicat, Sonny. http://www.fgould.com/north-america/articles/lean-approach/. November 29, 2012.
(accessed April 27, 2013).
Simonsson, Peter, Anders Björnfot, Jarkko Erikshammar, and & Thomas Olofsson. "‘Learning to see’
the Effects of Improved Workflow in Civil Engineering Projects." Lean Construction Journal:
pp 35-48, 2012.
Smith, Stuart. Lean benefits realisation management. London: CIRIA, C727, 2013.
Thomas, H. Randolph, M. Michael J. Horman, M R. Edward Minchin Jr., and M. and Dong Chen.
"Improving Labor Flow Reliability for Better Productivity as Lean Construction Principle."
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management © ASCE / May/June, 2003.
177 | P a g e
Tommelein, Roberto J. Arbulu and Iris D. "Value Stream Analysis of Construction Supply Chains:
Case Study on Pipe Supports Used in Power Plants." Proceedings IGLC-10, Aug., Gramado,
Brazil. 2002.
Turner. http://www.turnerconstruction.com/experience/lean/nationwide-childrens-hospital. 2013.
Vieira, Lígia Cardoso, Lahuana Oliveira De Souza, and Marques Tatiana Amaral. "Application of the
Rapid Lean Construction-Quality Rating Model to Engineering Companies." Proceedings for
the 20th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. 2012.
Wodalski, Michael J., Benjamin P. Thompson, Gary Whited, and Awad S. Hanna. "Applying Lean
Techniques in the Delivery of Transportation Infrastructure Construction Projects."
Technical Report, 2011.
Yong-Woo Kim, A.M, and and Jinwoo Bae. "Assessing the Environmental Impacts of a Lean Supply
System: Case Study of High-Rise Condominium Construction in Korea." Journa of
Architectural Engineering © ASCE / December, 2010.
Zettel, George. Transforming Turner Projects with Last Planer System. Turner Construction
Company, 2008.
Zimmer, Salem and. "Application of Lean Manufacturing Principles to Construction." Lean
Construction Journal,Vol 2, 2005.
178 | P a g e
Appendix A - Questionnaire
179 | P a g e
180 | P a g e
181 | P a g e
182 | P a g e
183 | P a g e
184 | P a g e
185 | P a g e
186 | P a g e
Appendix B – Assessment of the Proposed Construction Framework
187 | P a g e
188 | P a g e