Improving Project Performance Using Lean Construction in Egypt: A Proposed Framework
by user
Comments
Transcript
Improving Project Performance Using Lean Construction in Egypt: A Proposed Framework
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