lean construction and delay analysis input in delay
TRANSCRIPT
Lean Construction and Delay Analysis Input in
delay mitigation
Master thesis
International Master of Science in Construction and Real Estate Management
Joint Study Programme of Metropolia UAS and HTW Berlin
Submitted on 20.01.2020 from
Mohamed Nassim Maidi
S0562621
First Supervisor: Prof.Dr.-Ing. Dieter Bunte
Second Supervisor: Architect Eric Pollock
ii
Acknowledgement
I wish to show my gratitude to God who helped me to fulfill my ambition, gave
me strength and belief, then to my parents who pushed me by their prayers and their
support.
I am very grateful to my wife who fought like a soldier, against her sickness,
being patient of my absence and within the kids ,and to all my family ,Hichem, Imad,
Moussa ,Soumiya ,Bilel, Abderrahmane,Sarah,Haifaa,Salem.
My second family: Abdellaoui Berkahoum, Bedja Mohamed, Imane, Mohamed, Tarek,
Lakhdar, Soundous.
My gratitude to my supervisors, Professor Dieter Bunte from the University of
Applied Sciences of Berlin and Architect Eric Pollock from the University of Applied
Sciences of Helsinki for their guidance for this thesis and for their valuable courses
along the Master‟s degree program.
I appreciate too much the class of International Site Management and Project
Management given by Professor Mika Lindholm and Professor Nicole Riediger which
contributed positively to my research.
I thank also my ex-tutor and my friend Dr.-Ing.Mohamed Badaoui for his
support, Dr.-Ing.Hadji Saleh,Dr.Ing Abdallah Rahmani, Professor Abdullah Alsehaimi for
his guidance, and Tutor Donald Jordan for his recommendations.
Finally, I would like to thank those who supported me in my life: Mahmoud
Elazazzy, Daoudi Abdelaziz,Taher Bekkay, Ali Naami, Issam Abdeli ,Mohamed Ben
Amar, Oussama Taibi ,Zakariya Albarakani,Merna Emara, Sherif Abd Elhalim,Samir
Toufik,Ahmed Gahlan, Kei Kyung, Omar Mabrouk, Waqar Rose, Adel Seddik , Ben
Naoui Abderahmane Kaakaa, , Ouanouki Toufik, Houa Kheireddine, Mourad
Benzineb,Salet Rachid, , Taher Tahah ,Mahmoud benkhelil, Hichem Djeddaoui ,and all
the others.
iii
Conceptual Formulation
iv
v
vi
Abstract
This paper introduces an explanatory research by the mean of Content Analysis to
figure out the delay causes, their corrective actions, and the most efficient lean
construction technique, the outcome of this analysis is compared to Delay Analysis
Techniques which is conducted by a Case study along within a benchmarking of the
application of Last Planner System. A Mind Mapping is conducted to picture all the
possible links that combine LPS with the most adequate Delay Analysis Techniques.
The purpose is to build a process to be as a robust preventive mechanism against
delay, and consequently the nominated Delay Analysis Technique is a lean based
because the inner CPM Process is updated from the LPS program. The forensic part of
Delay Analysis is not considered in this research; only the technical part is taken into
consideration.
Key words: Lean Construction, LPS, Delay, CPM, Delay Analysis Techniques
vii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgement..................................................................................................... ii
Conceptual Formulation .......................................................................................... iii
Abstract ..................................................................................................................... vi
Table of Contents .................................................................................................... vii
Table of Figures........................................................................................................ xi
List of Tabulations .................................................................................................. xii
List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................. xiii
List of Symbols ....................................................................................................... xv
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 16
1.1 Objectives ...................................................................................................... 17
1.2 Research Scope and Boundaries .................................................................. 17
1.3 Research Method .......................................................................................... 18
1.4 Research Structure ....................................................................................... 18
2 Literature Review ............................................................................................... 19
2.1 Brief introduction to project management ...................................................... 19
2.1.1 Project Definition ................................................................................... 19
2.1.2 Project management ............................................................................. 19
2.2 Construction Planning ................................................................................... 19
2.2.1 Definition ............................................................................................... 19
2.2.2 Planning Objectives .............................................................................. 20
2.2.3 Planning Techniques ............................................................................ 20
2.3 Traditional Push Planning .............................................................................. 21
2.4 Pull methods .................................................................................................. 22
viii
2.5 CPM role and criticisms ................................................................................. 23
2.5.1 CPM Role .............................................................................................. 23
2.5.2 Criticisms of CPM ................................................................................. 25
2.6 Production Theory ......................................................................................... 30
2.6.1 Workflow Notion .................................................................................... 31
2.6.2 Load and Capacity ................................................................................ 32
2.7 Lean Construction ......................................................................................... 32
2.7.1 Lean Project Delivery: ........................................................................... 35
2.7.2 Takt-Time Planning ............................................................................... 36
2.7.3 The Five S‟s .......................................................................................... 36
2.7.4 Last Planner System ............................................................................. 37
2.7.5 Last Planner System Benchmark .......................................................... 40
2.7.5.1 Pull Planning ................................................................................... 41
2.7.5.2 Lookahead Planning ....................................................................... 42
2.7.5.3 Constraint Analysis ......................................................................... 43
2.7.5.4 Task Breakdown ............................................................................. 44
2.7.5.5 Collaborative Design of Operations................................................. 44
2.7.5.6 Reliable promising........................................................................... 44
2.7.5.7 Visual Control .................................................................................. 44
2.7.5.8 Daily Huddles .................................................................................. 44
2.7.5.9 Countermeasures............................................................................ 44
2.7.5.10 Metrics ........................................................................................ 45
2.8 Delay in Construction Industry ....................................................................... 46
2.9 Delay Analysis Techniques ........................................................................... 48
2.9.1 Additive Methods of Delay Analysis ...................................................... 49
ix
2.9.2 Impacted as-planned ............................................................................ 49
2.9.3 Time impact analysis ............................................................................ 52
2.9.3.1 Windows analysis............................................................................ 52
2.9.4 The Collapsed as-built .......................................................................... 54
3 Research Methodology ...................................................................................... 57
3.1 Overview ....................................................................................................... 57
3.2 Methodology .................................................................................................. 57
3.3 Content Analysis ........................................................................................... 58
3.3.1 Validate Content Analysis ..................................................................... 60
3.3.1.1 Which data are analyzed? ............................................................... 60
3.3.1.2 How are they defined? .................................................................... 60
3.3.1.3 What is the population from which they are drawn? ........................ 60
3.3.1.4 Is the context relative to the data analyzed? ................................... 61
3.3.1.5 What are the boundaries of the analysis? ....................................... 61
3.3.1.6 What is the target of the interference? ............................................ 61
3.4 Six-Step Research Sequence ....................................................................... 61
3.4.1 Starting with Research Questions ......................................................... 61
3.4.1.1 Research Questions ........................................................................ 61
3.4.2 Decide on Sampling Strategy ................................................................ 62
3.4.3 Define the recording unit ....................................................................... 62
3.4.4 Construct Categories for Analysis ......................................................... 62
3.4.5 Test the codes and samples for reliability and validity .......................... 63
3.4.5.1 Reliability ......................................................................................... 64
3.4.5.2 Validity ............................................................................................ 65
3.4.6 Carry out the Analysis ........................................................................... 65
x
3.5 Introduction to Dedoose software .................................................................. 66
3.6 Case Study .................................................................................................... 69
3.6.1 Case Study Description......................................................................... 70
3.6.2 Float Mapping ....................................................................................... 73
3.6.3 Extracting Float Values ......................................................................... 74
3.6.4 Float Map Creation ............................................................................... 74
3.6.5 Driving Activities identification ............................................................... 76
3.6.6 As-built critical path ............................................................................... 77
3.6.7 Case study main findings ...................................................................... 82
4 Research questions answers ............................................................................ 83
4.1 Question One ................................................................................................ 85
4.2 Question Two ................................................................................................ 88
4.3 Question Three .............................................................................................. 90
4.4 Question Four ................................................................................................ 92
4.4.1 Mind Mapping: ...................................................................................... 93
5 Conclusion and Recommendations ................................................................. 95
Appendices .............................................................................................................. 97
Appendix I ................................................................................................................ 97
Appendix II ............................................................................................................. 102
Appendix III ............................................................................................................ 104
Appendix IV ................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Declaration of Authorship .................................................................................... 105
References ............................................................................................................. 106
xi
Table of Figures
Figure 1: A traditional Push Planning System .............................................................. 21
Figure 2: The Toyota Way Model ................................................................................. 30
Figure 3 Lean Project Delivery System ........................................................................ 35
Figure 4: The formation of assignments in the Last Planner planning process ............ 37
Figure 5: The Last Planner System: The Last Planner System .................................... 39
Figure 6: Should-Can-Will-Do ...................................................................................... 41
Figure 7: Last Planner System with Lookahead Process Highlighted .......................... 42
Figure 8: Functions of a Lookahead Process ............................................................... 43
Figure 9: DCAP/PDCA combined cycles ...................................................................... 45
Figure 10: Impacted as –planned (IAP) ........................................................................ 50
Figure 11: As-built sequence with as-built logic. .......................................................... 51
Figure 12: Windows Analysis ....................................................................................... 54
Figure 13:As-planned sequence with as-planned logic. ............................................... 55
Figure 14: As-built sequence. ....................................................................................... 55
Figure 15: As-built sequence with as-built logic. .......................................................... 56
Figure 16: Categorization cluster ................................................................................. 69
Figure 17:Float Deterioration Chart .............................................................................. 73
Figure 18: Driving Critical path ..................................................................................... 76
Figure 19: Code Cloud ................................................................................................. 83
Figure 20: Fine-tuned Co-Occurrence matrix ............................................................... 84
Figure 21: Delay Causes .............................................................................................. 86
Figure 22:Corrective actions ........................................................................................ 87
Figure 23:CPM influence on Flow ................................................................................ 89
Figure 24: Pareto Analysis Chart ................................................................................. 90
Figure 25: Delay Analysis Lean-Based Process Map................................................... 93
xii
List of Tabulations
Table 1: Categories of Delay Analysis .......................................................................... 49
Table 2 :Strengths and weaknesses of the IAP Technique. ......................................... 52
Table 3: Strengths and weaknesses of the impacted as-planned technique. ............... 53
Table 4: Kappa interpretation benchmark ..................................................................... 64
Table 5: Keywords categorization ................................................................................. 68
Table 6: Available programs ........................................................................................ 71
Table 7: Raw data for the float map .............................................................................. 75
Table 8: Driving activities. ............................................................................................. 77
Table 9: Concurrent driving critical paths ...................................................................... 78
Table 10: Illustration of critical paths............................................................................. 79
Table 11: Delays mapped against the as-built critical path. .......................................... 80
Table 12: Employer risk event table.............................................................................. 81
Table 14: LPS Contribution among Lean techniques ................................................... 91
Table 15: Fine-Tuned Co-Occurrence (LPS &CPM) Matrix .......................................... 92
xiii
List of Abbreviations
5S: Seiri ,Seiton ,Seisō, Seiketsu and Shitsuke
AACE: International Recommended Practice 29R-03
AEC: Architecture, Engineering, Construction
ASAB: As-planned versus as-built
BIM: Building Information Modeling
CAB: Collapsed as-built
CCM: Critical Chain Management
CLP: Constraint Logic Programming
CP: Construction Phase
CPM: Critical Path Method
DCAP: Detect-Correct-Analyze-Prevent
DES: Discrete Event Simulation
DIQ: Design Information Quality
EOT: Extension of Time
ES: Early Start
EVM: Earned Value Method
IAP: Impacted as-planned
IGLC: International Group of Lean Construction
IPD: Integrate Project Delivery
IRR: Inter/Intra-rater reliability
JIT: Just-In-Time
LBMS: Location Based Management System
LC: Lean Construction
LOB: Line of Balance
LPDS: Lean Project Delivery System
LPS: Last Planner System
LSM: Linear Scheduling Method
LWS: Lean Work Structuring
PDCA: Plan, Do, Check and Act
xiv
PERT: Program Evaluation Review Technique
PP: Planning Phase
PPC: Percent Plan Complete
QASDAS: Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis software
RCA: Root Cause analysis
RFI: Request for Information
RFID: Radio Frequency Identification
RSM: Repetitive Scheduling Method
SCL: Society of Construction Law
SCM: Supply Chain Management
SDB: Set-Based Design
TA: Task Anticipated
TFV: Transformation, Flow and Value
TIA: Time-Impact Analysis
TMR: Task Made Ready
TPS: Toyota Production System
TVD: Target Value Design
VM: Visual Management
VSM: Value Stream Mapping
WIP: Work-In-Process
WP: Weekly Planning
WS: Work Sampling
WWP: Weekly Work Plan
xv
List of Symbols
Ƙ:Cohen’s Kappa Coefficient
: Proportion of agreed unites
: The proportion of units that might be agreed by chance.
1 Introduction
Construction Industry suffers from delay which occurs by a lot of reasons. These
reasons include human factors, machine and equipment factors, and system factors.
Humans intervention factors such as labor related matters, the lack of know-how of the
planner, the superintendent for instance, machine and equipment factors such as
depreciation and improper tools, and system factors is the one related to IT and
software.
Lean construction is dedicated towards how to minimize waste in construction industry,
how to control the flow and maintain the pace in order to mitigate delay.
Lot of techniques are developed to serve the AEC field, one of the best known is LPS
which dedicated to monitor and control the flow, fit the gaps of the CPM shortcomings.
Delay Analysis Techniques are developed to estimate and quantify delays, it is divided
into prospective and retrospective techniques, and these techniques are developed
based on the experience got through claims and how to assess liability, nevertheless
legal and claims matters will not be discussed in this research.
Delay Analysis Techniques are based on CPM, whereas LPS is the monitoring tool of
CPM, the idea of benefiting from both techniques and use the best technique from both
sides of Lean Construction and Delay Analysis is the core basis of this research.
So far, there is no lean (LPS) based Delay Analysis since Lean priciples don‟t support
the use of CPM in nowaday‟s complex projects (Koskela, cited in Huseyin , Irem, &
Talat, 2017) .
In the next sections a proposed mechanism of delay prevention using one of the Delay
Analysis Techniques based on LPS process.
17
1.1 Objectives
The objectives of the research is to investigate major delay causes and their corrective
actions, examining the contribution of the CPM is causing delay, analyzing the most
used Lean Construction, and figuring out how to bridge Delay Analysis Techniques and
Lean Construction most used techniques.
These objectives will be generated by answering the following research questions:
1) What are the reasons causing delay in construction projects and their corrective
actions?
2) Are Most of the occurring delays generated because of the shortcoming of
CPM?
3) What are the most used and effective techniques of lean construction and its
contribution to delay mitigation?
4) What is the possible relationship, common ground between Delay Analysis
Practice and the most used Lean construction technique?
1.2 Research Scope and Boundaries
This research will only focuses on Delay Analysis Techniques,forenscic part will be
ignored,a case study will be conducted in Delay Analysis,A benchmarking outcome of
LPS will be used within the case study,Only IGLC papers will be used for the content
analysis which will be explained in details in the part of content analysis.
As an outcome,a Mid map will be geerated from MindManager to illustrate the possible
bridge between Delay Anaysis and LPS.
18
1.3 Research Method
Research objectives will be reached through critical Literature review of Lean
Construction,pitfals of the traditional Management,delay and delay in construction
Industry.
A Content Analysis will be conducted by a qualitative software Dedoose, and Excel
Tables and Charts wil be gnererated.
A case Study will be conducted in Delay Analysis to be compared within the outcome
achieved and the LPS benchmarking,and Finaly a Mind Map will be developed to
picture the outcome.
The benchmarking and the case study were chosen based on the quality of the author
and the publisher and also the time accordance of the publication.
1.4 Research Structure
The thesis is divided into five chapters,Introduction, then chapter two is a literature
review that highlights the subjects related to the research questions,starting from
Management ending up with Lean Contruction.
Chapter three,Content Analysis Methodology ,and the case study.
Chapter four,dedicated to the answers of the research question within the Mind
Mapping,and finlay chapter five which represents the conclusion and recommendations.
19
2 Literature Review
2.1 Brief introduction to project management
2.1.1 Project Definition
Project has been defined as per the guide of the project management body of
Knowledge as per PMBOK (2000), “a project is a temporary endeavor undertaken to
create a unique product or service” (P. 4).
2.1.2 Project management
Project management has been defined according to PMBOK (2000), “the application of
knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet project
requirements” (P. 6).
It has been also described by Williams (2008), “project management is everything you
need to make a project happen on time and within budget to deliver the needed scope
and quality” (P. 2).
2.2 Construction Planning
2.2.1 Definition
Planning has been defined as per Neale, Neale, & Stephenson (2016), “the creative and
demanding mental activity of working out what has been done, how, by whom, and with
what” (P. 6).
The planning term is a term that can touch all the stages of construction, from feasibility
to turnkey or commissioning, it requires a nonstop process (Neale, Neale, &
Stephenson, 2016).
20
2.2.2 Planning Objectives
Five essential objectives have been highlighted in a general context (Neale, Neale, &
Stephenson, 2016):
Analysis: investigating the manner the job will be done with, the sequence of the
tasks should be manageable and within budget;
Anticipation: because of the covered uncertainty and risk in activities, a plan
should be done in a way to overcome these obstacles and unforeseen issues;
Scheduling resources: it is the process of investigating what is available and
economic for an optimal decision;
Coordination and Control: coordination between the players and controlling
time and cost;
Data production: to be used as a basis for future plans (Neale, Neale, &
Stephenson, 2016).
2.2.3 Planning Techniques
They are made to help in analyzing the plan, how to manage the information, and the
method it will be liaised to others, usually four essential techniques are often used in
planning which are (Neale, Neale, & Stephenson, 2016):
Bar chart: easy to implement, straightforward method, but it requires a lot of
change and drafting;
Line of Balance: it is dedicated principally for repetitive projects, easy tool to
plan, difficult to be used in monitoring in complex projects;
Linear Programs: Two-dimensional techniques dedicated to linear projects such
as tunnels and roads;
Network Analysis: logic-based technique, strong, adequate to the complex
project and can be fed smoothly to the computer, such as CPM and PERT.
21
2.3 Traditional Push Planning
(Hopp and Spearman as cited in Ballard G. 2000) , the traditional push system is
complemented with a pull technique, which needed especially in the circumstances of
variability. Production is a part of Project management; it is somehow indirectly linked to
it (Ballard G.2000).
Figure 1: A traditional Push Planning System (Ballard G. 2000).
It has been criticized that Production did not give importance to Flow and Value, a
workflow of materials and information is what should be controlled, and corrective action
should be taken against processing methodology, buffer location and sizing, local
control strategies (Huovila and Koskela, as cited in Ballard G,2000).
It has been stated that the study of Lauri Koskela to apply manufacturing concept in
Construction is what drove him to come up with the theory of production (Tommelein
and Ballard, as cited in Tommelein.D.Iris,1998). Consequently, Managers should be
22
aware of the ambiguity of this concept, so they can be realistic once they set their
demands, being optimistic about the production Process may lead to nonsensical
results and lead to failure. Push system could increase the waste because it has been
evaluated driven and having factors that recompense the uncertainty which has been
anticipated, Push System cannot rectify the changing that has occurred, but the Pull
System can do it (Tommelein, 1999).
The mission of Push systems is to issue the information from the Master schedule, for
instance, to the system of predefined due dates (Ballard G. 2000). Push systems can be
represented by traditional techniques other than CPM such as PERT; activities are
pushed by the previous one to keep the relationship of precedency (Tung Yang P. G.,
2001).Moreover, some critics have been directed to Push controlling, and been
considered dominant in the case of LBMS management, stated the fact that successors
were launched even the predecessors have been delayed, which led delays and less
productivity (Seppanen, 2012).
2.4 Pull methods
Pull method can be used as a feedback mechanism to alert the upstream level of what
is needed in the downstream level, while pushed products cause a greater waste, not
only by catching resources, but also maximizing their cycle time. In addition, Pull can
adapt changes of the requirement rather than push which cannot (Tommelein, 1999). It
has been also clarified that pulling is the action of checking the availability of information
and resources (Jun, Chua, & Hwee, 2000). Pull action has been defined also, as
moving the activity finish time to another activity start time (Yang I. 2002).
Pulling could be defined as a method to bringing up Information and Materials to
Production Process, Conversely to Push Method, which is based on Completion Dates,
looking for causes of the intersection of interdependent actions (Ballard G. 2000).
Pull scheduling has been proposed to the construction process as a lean method to
enhance the performance of it, knowing that CPM scheduling is a push-driven
approach, where the activity in a passive way, should wait to fully be resourced in order
23
to be ready, consequently, resources overloaded and waited in a buffer which led to
poor planning productivity (S.Mohammad, 2012).
2.5 CPM role and criticisms
2.5.1 CPM Role
Bottlenecks of construction usually found on CPM critical activities, it has been noticed
that Productivity can be enhanced if detecting those activities in advance, but it has
been criticized with the appearance of Lookahead planning stating that CPM has
neglected Information and resources related to workflow. CPM-Based Scheduling
assumes while CPM and Lookahead have the same objectives, then constraints would
be the same (SHEN Li Jun, 2000).CPM also has been criticized for its failure to shape
the Non-value adding activities (Tung Yang P. G., 2001).
According to Koskela (1992), “These managerial principles violate principles of flow
process design and improvement and thus lead to non-optimal flows and expansion of
non-value-adding activities” (P.31).
In Traditional CPM, if a task takes place without affecting the completion time of the
project we call it float, if we delay the start time of non-critical activities, it gives the
opportunity of different use of resources such as Leveling, as Ballard stated, they can
be used as “Schedule buffers” (Yang T. , 2002). (Harris and Ioannou, as cited in Yang
I,2002), for repetitive nature projects, they have been criticized because it happens that
the production rate is different from crew to another, it leads to waiting for the time
between the predecessor and successors which is unproductive). Continuous workflow
cannot be achieved with the mean of CPM unless detailed and corrective action
analysis has to be taken in every step (Yang T. , 2002) .Creating a CPM schedule is a
way creating a network of a sequence of activities that related to each other, each
activity has its own scope and duration, which facilitate to get limit dates, using forward
and backward pass. If we consider CPM as a product, and if we apply lean to CPM, we
would say that the perfect schedule is the one delivered promptly and without waste. To
enhance the process, we have to know how to deliver the value, eliminating the non-
value adds, by concentrating on the flow in the planning process, identifying the
24
demands and the deliveries that have values at the same time (Bob Huber, 2003).CPM
schedule has been criticized for its shortcomings of deliveries, the interaction of
resources is overlooked, unrestrained capacity plans, and due dates could not be
reached (Vaidyanathan, 2003).
Some factors that would cause waste in time and cost are resource availability and
continuity constraints in CPM and PERT scheduling; it can be clearly noticeable in
repetitive activities. The early start leads to workflow disruptions when resource
continuity is been restrained, for this issue, some methods have been considered such
as LOB, RSM, and LSM to mitigate disruptions, taking these constraints into
consideration by restricting the number of interruptions and shiftless time (idle time),
harmonizing the production rates, work break-even and postponing activities to avoid
interruptions (Sriwuwarnat & Photios, 2007).Nevertheless, some critics have been made
for these techniques announcing that these methods do not consider uncertainty and
variability; they just depend on average production rate (Tommelein et al., as cited in
Sriwuwarnat & Photios ,2007).
The authors suggested using buffers as a control tool of “when to start” to avoid
interruptions, which has been called “lead-time buffer” (Sriwuwarnat & Photios,
2007).The same argument has been settled, criticizing the shortcoming of CPM and
linear scheduling method LSM too, of non-ability to detect the activity-resource
continuity and concurrency-overlap process stated by, it can just maintain the
sequences only when the alternate one is found (Jaafari , as cited in David K.H, 2009).
Moreover, CPM maximizes resources and adds extra time to delayed critical activities,
comparing to LBMS, this last is more solid in productivity. Future researches have been
suggested by the author to simulate and compare these two techniques under different
circumstances and in several ways (Seppanen, 2012).
Another statement has been highlighted that the CPM has been used in a hospital
project as a contractual document and a reporting tool for the owner, along with three
weeks lookahead based on weekly metrics, The CPM has been established by James
E.Kelly and Morgan R.Walker in the ‟50s, in order to substitute the weakness of
traditional planning; stating that one of the crucial problems affecting technical
25
management is to coordinate a lot of activities which have a common goal, claiming the
limitless of the use of CPM (Lauri Koskela G. H., 2014).CPM has been addressed as
the most crucial revolution in construction management in the 20th century, despite, it is
still having criticized as insufficient for controlling, a paradox has been raised by Lauri
Koskela stating, why still using CPM despite its shortcomings even if it cannot achieve
or produce likely acceptable outcomes? (Lauri Koskela G. H., 2014).
CPM has been inserted to construction Management as a production tool, and then it
has been shifted to be used as contract control by the client (Howell & al., as cited in
Lauri Koskela G. H,2014). stated that the mission of planning is to steer action before it
happens (Theory), to hold the operation under control (as planned), and to follow up the
work (as should be done in practice) (Laufer and Tucker, as cited in Lauri Koskela G.
H., 2014). They claimed that management interest has been diverted intensively to
control “at the expense of planning”; the interest was investigating the deviations causes
rather than enhancing the plan (Lauri Koskela G. H., 2014).
Contract document for schedules and activities sequence, performance control, delay
assess, progress and payment arrangement (Jaafari, as cited in sears, 2010). Activities
are considered as “black boxes”, how is going to be done is held to the contractor
(Sears, as cited in Lauri Koskela G. H ,2014).
2.5.2 Criticisms of CPM
It has been claimed that CPM is limited suitable for site management (Peer, as cited in
Lauri Koskela G. H.2014). It has been claimed too that CPM has put more unnecessary
input of management in a bureaucratic environment of management (Applebaum , as
cited in Lauri Koskela G. H.2014). CPM does not work properly at the operation level; it
does not keep the workflow continuous, a discontinuity between stakeholders in terms
of handovers (Peer, as cited in Lauri Koskela G. H., 2014). An argument about the
buffer safety time that misused by CPM, buffers are accompanied activities to
accommodate uncertainty, and the issue is when the predecessor‟s activity will really
26
finish in order preparing for the next step clearly and accurately (Lauri Koskela G. H.,
2014).
Goldratt 1997, as cited in Lauri Koskela G. H., (2014), another argument stating that
finished activities probably not launched early, assuming that in future a pressure will be
practiced letting them finish early. The theory of constraint is to shift safety time to a
strategic level, taking an example of adding project buffers and concentrating on finish
time. CPM could be used to show main critical conflicts (disturbances) but most of the
projects have an outstanding uncertainty which leads to, productivity changes, capacity
loss, and deviations, which often happen too late in case of CPM, opposite to LOB
which deviations detected immediately), these deviations are not set clearly, as with the
LOB method (Seppänen & Aalto, as cited in Lauri Koskela G. H., 2014).it has been
stated that traditional practice is a zero-sum, where different parties with a common goal
are out of the overall process which makes a decision is done from a personal
perspective (Sacks and Harel, as cited in Lauri Koskela G. H,2014). It is been stated
that is difficult to envelop a systematic assessment of CPM in construction, the
shortcomings so far, are not pointed out directly to the most crucial one, some visions
and developments have been introduced such as CCM, LOB, but they are still not the
main used methods, the issue that the critics did not touch the validity evaluation of
critical path method, they have been presented solely, and there is no systematic
evaluation so far, albeit, it remains the most dominant effective tool in the field of project
management (Lauri Koskela G. H., 2014).
CPM has been considered as an optimization tool, leading to a minimum duration of the
project, but it is no longer the same in construction management and in quantitative
methods. In construction management, CPM also presented as a planning tool than an
optimization tool. The main hypothesis behind CPM is finding the best available shortest
task, namely optimal, which requires that planned tasks also should be optimal; to
provide an optimal plan, otherwise fail will occur if only one task is a non-optimal one.
Unfortunately, before Ballard (2000), the methodology is “neglect of validation”, Ballard
realized that roughly half of the tasks were realized as planned in a WP, which leads to
the point that the other half of tasks is non-optimal, which weakens the rational of CPM.
27
One of the crucial reasons for non-optimal tasks (based on RCA) to be done is
margining the other input than the focus on the previous task which leads to a chronic
problem in starting tasks. Obviously, this is the very idealization required for rendering
the problem of planning mathematically amenable (Koskela & Ballard, as cited in Lauri
Koskela G. H.,2014). Koskela confirmed that there is no issue with CPM, there is an
issue with the way they apply it (Lauri Koskela G. H., 2014).
Morris 1997, as cited in Lauri Koskela G. H.(2014) argued that the application of
operations research during the Second World War was a reason to develop modern
management, which progressed around CPM with no exaggeration. Debatably, the
practice has not improved and pushed idealization to realism, but contrarily idealization
has weakened the practice leading to a loss of realism. CPM has been established as a
tool of optimization by quantitative methods, which is based on axiomatic research, but
there was no valid test has been set empirically, which made the discovery of the
unrealistic of CPM was not possible for the last forty years. The dominance of CPM has
been supported despite the shortcomings; the method has never been tested and
validated empirically as mentioned before, a subtle change in purpose from production
to contract management, which weakens the validation of optimality, as an outcome, in
term of construction management methodology, it has been proposed that testing and
validation should take place. CPM does not take into consideration the readiness of
work to be done, (Mossman 2012 as cited in Bo Terje Kalsaas, 2014).
The sequence of activities in the critical path will cause a delay of all the projects if no
action of mitigation is taken (Kelly and Walker 1959, as cited in Bo Terje Kalsaas,
2014). CPM approach is limited in terms of maintaining the construction workflow
(Koskela and Howell 2008 as cited in Pingbo Tang, 2014), they have been criticized for
their limitation of identifying the use and location of the resources while handling the
planned tasks (Pingbo Tang, 2014).It has been argued that CPM schedules contain
repetitive cycles of activities which are independent in location and which inevitably lead
to delay or waiting time, suggesting LOB to solve this issue by figure-hugging the
unseen waste in the schedule (Russell Kenley, 2015), moreover, CPM is also lacking
from: spatial information, continuity, and visualization (Lauri Koskela A. K., 2015).
28
LPS has been considered the most widely held technique being used in construction
projects, it was basically designed to fill the gaps of production management, and
especially those that occurred and left by CPM, nevertheless, gaps still exist in planning
and scheduling and their interface with LPS and LBS is not yet assimilated. Even
though, CPM remains the engine of all the software of planning, like Primavera and MS
Project (Senior, 2009).
Conversely to traditional project control, Decision making should not be centralized by
distributed in a production system which is dynamic by nature. LPS will is described and
evaluated against these criteria, production processes can be divided into these parts
(Ballard G., 2000):
An Input-Output converting tool;
Time and space related flow of Information and Materials;
A value generating tool.
The LPS symbolizes the control notion as causing an event to comply to plan,
conversely to traditional project control where the action takes place after the fact
variance detected, production was mainly specific to industrial engineering, to present
similar type of production manufacturing in the meaning of creating or making, rather
than designing (Ballard G., 2000).
Lauri Koskela 1999, as cited in Ballard G.,(2000), proposed for production control,
stated that:
Firstly, work should only start when all the prerequisites of completion are on
hand to mitigate the suboptimal conditions;
Secondly, PPC should be used as a measure for the assignment to decrease the
variability;
Thirdly, investigate the causes of non-completion to be removed to guarantee a
continuous process;
Fourthly, hold a buffer that is adequate for different crews to avoid the loss of
productivity;
Fifthly, Lookahead planning is suggested to handle the coming assignments that
are already made ready, ensuring the non-emerging of the material buffer
(Ballard G., 2000).
29
It has been stated that, buffers have the capacity to mitigate variation and fluctuations in
the production process (Sakamoto, Horman, & Thomas , 2002). Hopp and Spearman ,
as cited in Ballard G., (2000), an effective design production control should mitigate
“Variability” that exists in quality, in time of the process, in deliveries. Because
neglecting the factor leads to greater variability, Variability could be generated from:
Lead time from flow‟s buffers;
Lower resources utilization;
Lost throughput;
Assignments are sound regarding their prerequisites;
Assignments are measured and monitored;
Investigate and remove Non-completion causes;
A buffer should be maintained for each crew or production unit (Hopp and
Spearman , as cited in Ballard G.,2000).
30
2.6 Production Theory
TPS is a manufacturing approach is the fundamental of lean production, which is
dedicated to eliminate waste and add value, it has been founded in 1950 by Taiichi
Ohno who said “All we are doing is looking at the timeline from the moment the
customer gives us an order to the point when we collect the cash. And we are reducing
that timeline by removing the non-value-added wastes” (Liker, 2004)
Figure 2: The Toyota Way Model (Liker, 2004)
Five principals of lean thinking have been introduced as Value, Value Stream, Flow, Pull
and Perfection (Womack & Jones, 2003).
Value: is the way of knowing precisely what is needed by the customer, it has
been considered the first move in lean thinking, it is delivering the right service
the right way, otherwise delivering the wrong service in a correct way would be a
Muda (waste).
Value Stream: is the group of necessary actions that examine the product and /or
service through a process of problem resolving tasks, information and data
management tasks, and conversion tasks.
Flow: after defining the value and the value stream it is time to maintain (pacing)
the flow of the steps that add value.
31
Pull: it is the way of making the orders stable by letting it pulled by the customer
rather than pushing products.
Perfection: transparency is considered the most spur of perfection, impediment
shows up as much as we pull and hidden waste too, learning from customers to
improve the flow and pull process.
It has been defined that Lean thinking identifies variability and its distribution of the
workflow continuity, one of its doctrines is to harmonize and line up the production
process (Womack and Jones, as cited in Tommelein.D.Iris, 1998).
Because Lean production main role is to reduce waste and eliminating non-adding
value activities, Koskela has established a set of rules to make this happen (Lauri
Koskela, as cited in Patrick T.I.Lam, 2001):
The requirement must be through a systematic way;
Minimize variability;
Minimize cycle times;
Minimize steps
Increase flexibility;
increase transparency;
Build continuous improvement;
Balance flow improvement with transformation one;
Benchmark (Lauri Koskela, as cited in Patrick T.I.Lam, 2001).
2.6.1 Workflow Notion
Production needs to be done in a certain sequence and rate, and the way it makes
production behaves as desired is called Workflow (Ballard H. G., 2000).
Koskela 1992, as cited in Tommelein, (1999), a workflow has also seen crucial because
work and materials which are struggling without flow, are idling money and space.
32
2.6.2 Load and Capacity
A stable Workflow could be verified when Load matches the capacity or vice versa, and
to mitigating or avoiding variability, but preferably that planners adjust Load.
The load can be changed by whether speeding up the workflow or by slowing it down,
on the other hand, Capacity could be changed to adequate Load by adding or
minimizing resources (Ballard G.,2000)
2.7 Lean Construction
A crucial purpose of Lean Construction is to maintain Continuous workflow, the dilemma
here, to have continuous resources use in CPM (Ballard and Tommelein, as cited
inYang T. , 2002).It demands a detailed analysis of activity by activity network and
correction actions. (Yang I., 2002).
The purpose of Lean schedule too is to achieve the requirements of the contract,
company rules, design, supply and delivery in one document and in the earliest possible
time, exploiting the minimum resources, the clue is to recognize the schedule‟s
consumer, and discriminate what could be the value of the schedule (Huber & Reiser,
2003).
Koskela is the one who presented construction as a product, and how the TFV concept
to the AEC field (Koskela 1992). This concept is considering the flow of materials and
Information via experts, to generating customer Value (Koskela and Ballard 2003).
Flow is the principal idea of lean construction, the flow has been divided into three sorts:
by material, by the assembly, and by location. Location and assembly flow represent the
movement through the building and the sequences of it simultaneously (Tan, Horman,
Messner, & Riley, 2003).
Lean thinking has been addressed as a method to enhance construction procedures
and add value, argumentation has been made about the tools to integrate lean are not
well established, Some issues have been faced while shifting from Original schedule to
lean schedule, where dummy represents the activities to be set within the critical path.
33
In the Lean schedule, these activities were removed taking noncritical activities to the
Critical path (Ansell, Holmes, Evans, Pasquire, & Price, 2007).
T.S.Abdelhamid (2009) study stated the following :
A holistic facility design and delivery philosophy with an overarching aim of
maximizing value to all stakeholders through systematic, synergistic, and
continuous improvements in the contractual arrangements, the product design,
the construction process design, and methods selection, the supply chain, and the
workflow reliability of site operations.(P.2)
Lean paradigm has been deeply used (Invested)in planning forthcoming works, for this
purpose the authors developed a tool OODA Loop which has been used as a decision-
making tool to bridge the gap of actions that planners couldn‟t predict/foreseen
(Anticipate) (T.S.Abdelhamid, 2009). Planning Phase has a lot of reasons for the delay
but can be grouped into two groups, those which generated from the project such as
design compatibility and variation, insufficient information of specs, documents conflicts,
and the other group which is generated from the communication and cooperation
between stakeholders, the authors claimed that the number of RFIs is dramatically
increased in PP compared to CP, referring to two crucial reasons: the time frame of the
planning phase is longer, and no information details delivered to contractors (Matias &
Cachadinh, 2010).
Lack of workers and predictable task time have been solved using LPS , for a more
effective master schedule (sequence and duration), leading to fewer workers, only
activities than CAN be done WILL be considered within Pull technique, another
technique that has been taken into consideration is 5 Why‟s for waste reduction (Joao
Matias, 2010). TFV Transformation-Flow-Value theory has been described as a flow of
materials from cradle to grave before the final construction is done.
Koskela, as cited in Lindhard & Wandahl, (2012),“the material flow is undergoing,
moving, waiting, inspection, and transformation before the final construction is finished”
(P.5).Each activity is attached to time and cost, the only activity adding value is the
transformations, the others are waste. The purpose is mitigating or reduces waste and
restructures the Value-adding activities to be effective, knowing that adding value is
satisfying the customer's demand and requirements. Johnson & Kaplan 1987, cited in
34
Lindhard & Wandahl, (2012), “value of any commodity, service, or condition, utilized in
production, passes over into the object or product for which the original item was
expended and attaches to the result, giving it its value” (P.5).
In order to increase value, we must identify and fulfill the needs of the customers which
are the following: activity and the customer during the transformations. Koskela ,as cited
in Lindhard & Wandahl, (2012) ,“the very complexity of a product or process increases
the costs beyond the sum of the costs of individual parts or steps” (P. 5).
Womack 1996, as cited in Senior, (2012),defined Lean Thinking, “More autonomy in
production decisions and enriched jobs as a consequence of the lean principles
regarding distributed decision making, multi-skilling, and pursuit of perfection” (P. 2).
Henrich et al., as cited in Senior, (2012), defined value as the concept which links the
requirements of the customer within the most optimal method.
Lean Construction has played a big role in production enhancement, has been brought
this concept to the construction industry which led to open the door to development
,Koskela presented a lean theory based on Operational management, developed lean
construction in planning and controlling stream, it has been described as an method that
touch all the stages all construction in order to minimize non adding values tasks and to
produce maximum of value, the author described Lean by „doing more with less‟.
The author has described other techniques that have used as a lean tool such as
(S.Mohammad, 2012):
Quick mobilization.
Pull Scheduling.
Six Sigma.
Just-In-Time.
These techniques have proved a significant influence to minimize waste, reduce
schedule variance, and to enhance the quality (S.Mohammad, 2012).
Lean Construction has considered the issue of communication between the players, by
integrating the philosophy of collaboration in each phase, it can advocates decision
making at the last moment with Pull technique which provides high flexibility to manage
activities scheduling and supplies. It is been argued that big spaces of the construction
site have been used as storage areas, which led to cost overruns, this issue could have
35
been solved using lean construction JIT system, where resources should be requested
when they are needed, and consequently reducing the cost of storage and the cash
flow,5S and WIP techniques also have been suggested by the authors for better
standardization, safety in construction, and materials delay (Matias & Cachadinh, 2010).
Ballard and Howell , as cited in Senior, (2012), the main role of Lean construction could
be defined as providing the requested product in the same time maintaining the optimal
value and the less possible waste.
2.7.1 Lean Project Delivery:
It has been defined as a model of project management; its process is to bring into a line,
Ends, Means and Constraints, taking into consideration the customer requirement and
the constraints that might disturb getting to their ends. (Ballard G. , 2008)
LPDS is described as an integrated system to help to make an even flow between
multiple activities and between other players (Kpamma & Adjei-Kumi, 2013).
Figure 3 Lean Project Delivery System (Ballard G., 2008)
36
2.7.2 Takt-Time Planning
The name comes from the German term „Takt‟ which mean „Beat‟,takt-time Frandson et
al, as cited in Frandson, Berghede, & Tommelein, 2014).It is the time which the supply
rate should meet the demand rate, takt-time planning helps to create a continuous flow
(Frandson, Berghede, & Tommelein, 2014).
The authors stated that Takt-Planning is based on work structuring, it has been
developed to respond to the requirement of work structuring by an iterative way of the
following steps:
Data collection;
Zone definition;
Trade sequence generation;
Individual trade duration;
Workflow balancing;
Production schedule (Frandson et al., as cited in Frandson, Berghede, &
Tommelein, 2014).
2.7.3 The Five S’s
Defined the five S as a set of programs to mitigate waste which causes problems to the
process, this five S are (seiri which means Sort, seiton which means Straighten,
seiketsu which means Shine, and shitsuke which means sustain), the definitiion in
English as follow (Liker, 2004):
Sort: sorting out the needed item and those we don‟t need.
Straighten: Everything should be placed, and a place should be set for everything.
Shine: The cleaning process plays an inspection role that investigates the status of
work. Standardize: maintaining and monitoring the three first steps.
Sustain: maintaining continuous improvement.
37
2.7.4 Last Planner System
The name came from the last person who produces the assignments which identify the
communications of requirements (Ballard and Howell, as cited in Ballard, 2000).
These assignments which are a set of planning products are also a responsibility of all
the organization, the concept is what WILL be done that goes with SHOULD with the
CAN Constraints(Ballard, 2000).
Figure 4: The formation of assignments in the Last Planner planning process (Ballard G. , 2000)
But, when it would be impossible to differentiate between SHOULD and CAN, where it
should be eliminating problems, but not neglect them, then uncertainty is increased
leading to failure of control.
Ballard states that the need for orienting the focus from control to Workflow is the link
between them. LPS is composed of two components: Production Control which
enhances the progress of assignments by means of continuous learning, corrective
actions, and the second step is Workflow Control which makes the workflow in the best
possible pace.
Planning at the production level depends on the quality of plans delivered by LPS; the
quality of assignments should verify the following:
Well defined assignments (Enough details to make them ready and clear);
Logic Sequence along with right commitment and right execution strategy;
38
An adequate amount of work;
Practical Selected work (Available resources, perquisites on hand) (Ballard2000).
It could be easy that front line supervisors fulfill what has been set for assignments
quality restrictions, but it is not clear for in-process inspection that cannot be measured
directly, but it will be easy through plan execution where we can measure the PPC
(Percent Plan Complete) .The Higher is the PPC, the higher productivity and Progress
we have, reflecting the right work with the right available resources. It is also an
Indicator of how Committed (WILL) is the front-line supervisor. Measuring LPS
Performance is not only making changes but also investigating the root causes of failed
executions, reasons why certain work is not done starting by lead supervisors should
be identified or directly person responsible for that execution, some reason could be
(Ballard, 2000):
Inadequate provided information to the Last Planner;
Failure to apply the assignments quality steps;
Lack of coordination;
Priority shifting;
Error in the level of design or vendor (Ballard2000).
Last Planner is a mechanism that turns what it SHOULD be done to what it CAN be
done, by preparing a WWP committed by last planners (foremen, squad Bosses) to
what really, they WILL do. (Ballard2000).
39
Figure 5: The Last Planner System: The Last Planner System (Ballard G., 2000).
The last planner of Production Control consists of Planning which is setting goals in
which sequences and Control which creates causes events to approach the wanted
planning, start re-planning whenever it is needed if the planning is no more feasible or
no longer wanted, and start learning when failing to comply to plan (Ballard G., 2000).
The last planner is considered the most used technique, there is no clear lean
scheduling but LPS uses the master plan to start and as a tool of following up(tracking),
(from the milestone perspective) (Ballard, 2000).LPS tries to defeat the shortcomings
generated from CPM, by maintaining a steady planning system and by dealing(tackle)
with flow feature(aspect).It has been argued that decision making should be adapted by
field managers as they know best to handle decisions ,for this purpose, it has been
addressed LPS to solve this decisions (Ballard, as cited in Senior, 2012)
40
2.7.5 Last Planner System Benchmark
A benchmark process has been set by (Ballard & Tommelein, 2016) :
1) SHOULD step:
Pull planning
2) Lookahead planning/make ready:
Constraint Analysis
Task breakdown
Collaborative design of Operations
3) Workflow reliability:
Reliable promising.
Visual Control
Underloading resources
Daily huddles
4) Learning from plan failure:
Analysis of breakdowns
PDCA
DCAP
5) Metrics:
PPC
TMR
TA
Occurrency of Plan failure.
41
Figure 6: Should-Can-Will-Do (Ballard & Tommelein, 2016)
2.7.5.1 Pull Planning
Pull planning is part of LPS, it serves to pace and sequence activities, develop phase
schedule and setting the milestones or important event to be pulled.
42
2.7.5.2 Lookahead Planning
Another concept meaning should appear which is Lookahead Process is, it is commonly
used in industry, it basically reflects what SHOULD be done, but within LPS, it could be
more than that.
Figure 7: Last Planner System with Lookahead Process Highlighted (Ballard,2000)
Lookahead plays an interlink between the Master plan and the WWP, it indicates which
activities that should be done in which week and prepare them to be ready for execution
according to the assignment criteria of the Last planner (Hammond, Choo, Austin,
Tommelein, & Ballard, 2000), lookahead also could be considered as a guide to loop
the constraints of resources and Information; these last issues could decrease the
performance and generate variation (Jun, Chua, & Hwee, 2000).
The next phase of the project that should be looked-ahead is the Phase Schedule that
helps to handle actions that go beyond the Lookahead (Ballard G. , The Last Planner
System of Production Control (PHD dissertation), 2000), It is been clarified also that the
goal of Phase Schedule is to generate a plan that everybody engages, a plan in which
the activities are tied to the Lookahead process making the assignments prepared for
WWP (Ballard & Howell, An Update on Last Planner, 2003).
43
Figure 8: Functions of a Lookahead Process (Ballard G. ,2000)
Nevertheless, assignments should be submitted to Constraint Analysis in order to
guarantee what should be ready for execution, it facilitates the shifting from one
lookahead window to another (Ballard G.,2000).
2.7.5.3 Constraint Analysis
Constraints could be a crucial problem in front of the implementation of LPS; such
constraints are non-acceptance to change, absence of self-evaluation, short term vision,
and Misunderstanding of the PPC Indicator (Alarcón, Diethelmand, & Rojo, 2002).
Moreover, constraints usually differ according to the assignments; it helps to early
warning of issues and problems that give a time or a lead time to plan how to solve
them. Constraints could be shown up in Design, Equipment, Labor, and all other
constraints, assuming that throw it under the wall syndrome would occur once the
constraint analysis is absent (Ballard G.,2000).
44
2.7.5.4 Task Breakdown
Dividing project into phases,process,opertations then steps.
2.7.5.5 Collaborative Design of Operations
It requires the engagement of all participants from first-line supervisors, to crafts
workers.
2.7.5.6 Reliable promising
By building a commitment network based on respect, taking into consideration the
ability to respond to the requirement.
2.7.5.7 Visual Control
Information should be transparent and posted to the public; it should be updated in a
real-time process to rectify and deviation from the production system.
2.7.5.8 Daily Huddles
A daily meeting to liaise commitment issues to be solved and those have been
achieved.
2.7.5.9 Countermeasures
An analysis to avoid the reoccurrences of breakdown, 5 whys implementation would be
an effective tool to investigate why some tasks have not been achieved, PDCA a should
be conducted to check whether the results generated from the root cause analysis is
supported, and DCAP to detect the deviation from the target than taking action to
correct the path of production.
45
Figure 9: DCAP/PDCA combined cycles (Ballard & Tommelein, 2016)
2.7.5.10 Metrics
Four metrics have been dedicated to this benchmarking process:
PPC (Percent Plan Complete): to assess the workflow reliability, by calculating
the completed tasks by the planned ones.
TA (Task Anticipated): after setting a target week, TA measures those
anticipated tasks dedicated to the target week and see the percentage of the
accomplishment.
TMR Tasks Make Ready: it should be done within the lookahead step to remove
the likely possible constraints.
Frequency of failure of the plan: a step to discover Reasons for Variance.
46
2.8 Delay in Construction Industry
Design changes are considered the main reason for construction delays; weekly Plans
WP and Daily planning have been addressed to overcome changes and delays (A.Ghio,
1997).Koskela (1992) stated that AEC fields used to consider conversion work and
neglect the flow issue, saying that flow is crucial in order not to idle the materials,
therefore holding up(Tying up) resources and space leading to waiting and cycle time
increasing, and as a result longer project duration (Tommelein Iris.D, 1999).
Unforced idleness caused by floats in repetitive projects causing waste and waiting
which lead to possible delays (Harris and Ioann, as cited in Tung Yang P. G.,
2001).Ashley, as cited in Tung Yang P. G., (2001), pointed out that contractors that
have left the job, they usually do not get to work on time, causing a serious delay.
Comeback delays could be mitigated by avoiding overlapping of the crews, crews
should be kept productive even in a slow rate, authors suggested RSM approach to
maintain the undistributed flow of resources (Yang I., 2002).To avoid delays generated
from overlapping tasks, a proper time lag should be left between tasks to keep conflicts
away. It is been stated that as much the buffers are small as the project will be delivered
soon with better performance, however, the predecessors and successors should not
cross each other, otherwise, variability increases leading to a delay (Mosanobu
Sakamoto, 2002) Another reason for the delay is the delayed procurement because
usually delays in a schedule based on CPM are not reflected on procurement plans,
Lack of Visibility, resource utilization, and date due to performance, the authors
suggested SCM approach to solving this issue (Vaidyanathan, 2003) Buffers are
considered as a tool to deal with variability that usually causes a delay in schedule,
recent empirical research stating that WIP could be used as Buffers, a simulation
approach has been suggested to provide the best WIP buffer based on lean
construction (González Vicente, 2006).
Design delays, poor planning and poor integration of suppliers in the planning system
are the major reasons for waste in the construction industry (Marcus P.Sterzi, 2007).
It has been pointed out too that if preceding tasks were not finished, delays would
happen, then the lack of information and poor output, some other important reasons
47
are: weather, technical approvals, and ineffective assumption of workload, moreover, it
has been noticed that buffers have not been used, which demonstrates a poor planning
(Mary Ansell, 2007).
Some factors also cause delay and waste in the capital when ignored:
Restrictions in resource availability;
Restrictions in resource continuity;
Issues in Indirect and direct cost;
Penalties generated from the interruptions.
This can be noticed in repetitive tasks at ES dates using CPM and PERT because ES
schedules omit the resource continuity which causes a discontinuity inflow, which leads
to waste in time and cost. To solve this issue, and maintain resource availability and
resource continuity into the production line, some methods can fulfill this matter such as
LOB, LSM, and RSM. These techniques are useful in terms of reducing interruptions,
postpone activities to avoid idle time, and equalize the rate of production, but they do
not take into consideration variability and uncertainty, they are more deterministic by
considering the average rates of production in repetitive projects. But, the average
production rate concept is not enough when practiced, (Tommelein et al as cited in
Photios G.Loannou, 2007). For this purpose, another approach has been proposed to
solve the issue of scheduling in repetitive projects by “Lead-Time Buffer” (Photios
G.Loannou, 2007).Productivity has influenced by the variability, to ensure that the buffer
is executable to eliminate likely discontinuities of flow; each project has to set a strategy
to make an adequate buffer size to mitigate variability. Some metrics, such as PPC,
WPP, and Weekly support activity plan to assure an early decision making and helping
maintain the planned buffer size.
Minimized flow interruption has been achieved, which makes the project target achieved
as scheduled. Results are confirmed as stated by Koskela, as cited in Izquiredo &
Arbulu, 2008), “productivity and duration can be improved at the same time by
improving the reliability of workflow within the system” (P.5).
Delay as the time span between the dates of completion agreed in the contract and the
real completion of the project, it has been declared that delay is the most crucial issue
affecting this industry; the reasons have been highlighted in multiple studies. It has been
48
stated that ineffective planning is the dominant factor of causing a delay, then the poor
site management simultaneously. A Quantitative study has been conducted to come out
with two things: causes of delay could be generated from the management or the
environment of the project (AlSehaimi & Koskela, 2008).
It has been stated that root cause has not been touched by previous studies, for this
matter author recommended constructively and action research should be carried out in
construction management practice to solve the issue of performance, knowledge, and
tenacious managerial obstacles. Hopp and Spearman, as cited in Chin, (2009),
suggested that one-piece flow has a very beneficial impact, because of its short cycle
time which leads to maintaining a low work-in-process. For instance, the shop drawing
most often is not submitted to reviewers as one piece but in batches which (requires
more time to review) also stated that the schedule category has been classified as the
most crucial cause, then the coordination, and finally the procedure. RFI, Lack of
information and engineering revisions have been declared the most frequent to occur
(Chang, 2009).
2.9 Delay Analysis Techniques
Delay analysis has different methods; each one differs from the other depending on the
case, choosing the most adequate one to calculate the effect on CPM is the most
important step in the decision process of delay analysis. In some situations, it is
required to go for both prospective and retrospective methods; prospective methods are
designated to illustrate the consequence of delay on finishing while retrospective
methods are to examine the actual effect of the same delay event,
Determining the unmitigated and non-eliminated effect is important to quantify the EOT
to be authorized (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
Primary Delay analysis techniques DATs are:
As-planned versus as-built (ASAB)
Collapsed as-built (CAB)
Impacted as-planned (IAP)
Time impact analysis (TIA)
49
They fall under three general approaches as shown in table 1, and each primary
technique has a secondary method.
Table 1: Categories of Delay Analysis (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
2.9.1 Additive Methods of Delay Analysis
Additive methods are basically applied in a prospective way, delays occurred to
completion should be forecasted or predicted, it relies on the as-planned CPM or the
one lately updated. Additive methods have a theoretical framework, they are based on
available information at the time of delay happening, where the cause is recognized but
the effect is to be predicted (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
2.9.2 Impacted as-planned
It relies on the as-planned program, it utilizes the original baseline, and delays will be
injected in the baseline program as a new task, they have to be gathered with the
affected tasks and to be submitted to schedule again, the difference between the
original schedule and the new generated one shows the variance that will be used for
the EOT entitlement as per the SCL (Hegazy, 2012).
50
Figure 10: Impacted as –planned (IAP) (AACE ,2011)
The IAP is a quick way of delay analysis; it is independent of the real schedule, it does
not require reports and documents. But , this method has been criticized because it
does not reflect what actually happened (Hegazy, 2012).Impacted as-planned is
considered the easiest form of CPM, the SCL (The Society of Construction Law
Protocol) names this technique as „IAP‟, this technique is a tool to assist getting the
EOT entitlement, but not cost prolongation (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
51
Figure 11: As-built sequence with as-built logic (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
Impacted as-planned integration steps have been stated in (AACE, 2011) as follow
(Hegazy, 2012):
The CPM program has to be approved as the baseline schedule.
Critical and non-critical paths have to be well defined.
Agreed EOTs have to be identified along with necessary documents; also delays
have to be quantified.
Insert and reschedule the activities and observe the effect.
The variance occurred between the as-planned and the impacted is the EOT to
be entitled to the contractor.
52
Verify if the CPM has a continuous path without delay.
Table 2 : Strengths and weaknesses of the IAP Technique (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
2.9.3 Time impact analysis
The difference between TIA (Time impact analysis) and IAP is that TIA uses multiple
base programs and IAP uses single base programs (baseline).
The SCL Protocol states that TIA is the most appropriate technique that could
determine the amount of extension of time, it is based on “what if” scenarios of CPM
baseline programs.
A periodic update of the schedule could affect TIA negatively, and also the window‟s
size (Alkass; Hegazy & Zhang,as cited in Hegazy,2012 ), This method has been
criticized for the inability to take into consideration the fluctuations in the CPM (Hegazy,
2012).It has been also criticized for the possibility to have some errors and bad
assumptions because of its retrospective nature (Hegazy & Zhang, as cited in
Hegazy,2012).
2.9.3.1 Windows analysis
It is an alternative of TIA, it has another name „snapshot‟ analysis, and it has proved a
very reliable logical analysis (KAO & Young ; Farrow, 2001; Alkass ;as cited in
53
Hegazy,2012).It takes into consideration both an as-built and an as-planned program, it
is based on what actually happened, this way it is been called the actual method too
(Farrow, as cited in Hegazy,2012).This method fragment the as-built and as planned
into snapshots in a periodic way and extract the information from the as-built (changes
in relationship, actual dates, and durations), then extracting information concerning the
period from the as planned program, implementing these information to as-planned to
generate the impacted as-planned schedule, after executing the program, a gap in
period will occur between the as planned and the impacted as planned which is the
amount of delay that should be recorded . The first window will be a baseline for the
second process until the end of the project and have the EOT entitlement. This method
has been recommended by the SCL to be the most credible one (brimah, as cited in
Hegazy, 2012).
Table 3: Strengths and weaknesses of the impacted as-planned technique (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
54
Figure 12: Windows Analysis(Hollway,as cited in Hegazy,2012)
2.9.4 The Collapsed as-built
It is been stated that a comparison should be made between the actual schedule and
what would have happened, but for excusable delay,It is a one process simulation on
the network A, Another name is But-For technique, the concept is to eliminate delays
and reschedule to see the resulting effect on completion, and repeat for each delay,
then we get a collapsed as-built after mitigating all delays, rescheduling the CAB and
comply it to as-built to see the differences which represent the EOT (Hegazy, 2012).
The implementation procedure as stated by ( AACE, 2011)
The program should reflect the real status, which came from the updated
baseline which is basically the CPM model.
Define the critical and non-critical paths.
Agreed EOTs have to be identified along with necessary documents; also delays
have to be quantified.
55
CAB should be established from eliminating the delay by delay and reschedule to
recognize the impact, no modification should be done to the CAB program.
CBA should have:
o As-built CP with the critical and proximate critical activities
o Baseline CP along with the lengthiest track.
o All contractual milestones and chain measures
Make the calculations and judgment of delay relativity. Compare the as-built
schedule with the collapsed one, the variance should be the extension of time
granted to the contractor (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
The collapsed as-built (CAB) relies on the “what if” scenario too, based on the critical
path method, it does the actual durations and sequences, conversely to IAP which
integrate delays to a plan and assess what would impact the completion.CAB is a
deductive method, using the “what if” scenario, what if those delays have not occurred?
This method is not prospective, it is hypothetical same as TIA and IAP with some
changes in weaknesses (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
Figure 13:As-planned sequence with as-planned logic (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
Figure 14: As-built sequence (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
56
Figure 15: As-built sequence with as-built logic (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
The Impact as-planned, Time Impact analysis, and Collapsed as-built techniques are
cause-based techniques, they recognize the delay event then assess the effect based
on the models. It has been recommended to prepare all the necessary documents,
contractual provisions, and related records of progress to precise what events should be
added or removed from the program. The as-built techniques are effect-based; they
begin from the effect then detecting the nearest (proximate) event (Caletka & Keane,
2015).
Figure 15: Collapsed as-built Delay Analysis Method ( AACE, 2011)
57
3 Research Methodology
3.1 Overview
The purpose of this chapter is to define the research methodology, for this issue
International Group of Lean Construction (IGLC) database has been used to extract
information about delay related to Lean and to compare it with delay analysis protocol in
order to know the reasons behind delay, their corrective actions, and different
techniques used by the Delay Analysis, filtering the most dominant factors that caused
delays and investigates the relation to CPM, testing the frequency of the most used and
effective method and see if there is a link between this later and delay analysis
techniques to propose a way to know how to make delay analysis techniques lean and
the same time it will be such a mechanism that prevents delay and its consequences.
Content analysis was used to investigate and predict the hidden meaning behind
different papers of IGLC conferences from 1997 to 2019.
3.2 Methodology
This study is conducted by content Analysis, interpretation of coding extracted from
Dedoose, Pareto analysis to test the frequency of the Lean Construction's most used
tool, and Mind mapping within coding co-occurrences to picture the relationship
between delay analysis techniques. An embedded Case study of Delay Analysis will be
conducted to enhance the answer to the fourth research question and substitute the
limitations of the content analysis. Data were collected from the IGLC group, and then it
has been fed to QASDAS software (Dedoose) to proceed with the coding process.
Codes have been categorized to draw a clear picture of the cluster of keywords and
codes in order to facilitate the comprehension of the subject and different aspects
covered by the database. Codes and co-occurrence codes have been explored by excel
pivot tables and charts to visualize the results, and test the frequency of most used lean
construction tools.
58
3.3 Content Analysis
Content Analysis is a systematic strong tool to compress big data content to a fewer
data content, through proper coding rules (Stemler, 2001).
Content Analysis is a mean of coding and categorizing the qualitative data in order to
turn them into quantitative (Saunders , Lewis, & Thornhill, 2016)
Categories should:
be related to the scope and purpose of the research topic;
be exhaustive;
be mutually exclusive, each data should be in one analytical category;
be independent, data are related but not the same characteristics;
Be developed from a single classification to avoid conceptual confusion
(Saunders , Lewis, & Thornhill, 2016).
Tesch, as cited in Zhang & Wildemuth, (2017) defined that “Qualitative content analysis
allows you to assign a unit of text to more than one category simultaneously” (P. 321).
Krippendorff (2004), has been stated that content analysis is “a research technique for
making replicable and valid inferences from texts (or other meaningful matter) to the
contexts of their use” (P.18).
59
Figure 16: Content analysis process (Elo & Kyngas, 2008).
Content Analysis is divided into two parts „deductive and inductive‟:
Inductive Content analysis: it has been notified that, if there is insufficient knowledge
about the area of study, then Inductive approach is recommended (Elo & Kyngas,
2008).Deductive Content analysis: Catanzaro 1988, as cited in Elo & Kyngas, (2008),
deductive content analysis is conducted when we want to test existing data again in a
new perspective. In this study, Inductive content analysis will be conducted in a
60
qualitative way, investigating the meaning and the interference between codes for the
proposed research question.
As shown in figure 16, inductive approach passes through:
Open coding;
Coding sheets;
Grouping;
Categorization;
Abstraction;
Model, Conceptual map, Conceptual system.
The time span of studied papers is 22 years from 1997 to 2019.
3.3.1 Validate Content Analysis
Six questions should be defined in the content analysis process (Krippendorff, 2004):
1) t data are analyzed?
2) How are they defined?
3) What is the population from which they are drawn?
4) Is the context related to the data analyzed?
5) What are the boundaries of the analysis?
6) What is the target of the interferences? (Krippendorff,2004).
The following are the answers of the above-mentioned questions:
3.3.1.1 Which data are analyzed?
Data has been extracted from the IGLC (International Group of Lean Construction),
which is considered as the state of art of Lean Construction researches.
3.3.1.2 How are they defined?
Data has been analyzed from the IGLC group; papers from 1997 to 2019 were
analyzed, this group is considered reliable and related to the AEC industry.
3.3.1.3 What is the population from which they are drawn?
All the research from the first published paper to 2019 that have been generated by the
research term “delay”, which are 89 papers, the first has been published in 1997.
61
3.3.1.4 Is the context relative to the data analyzed?
In fact, the IGLC group is dedicated to all lean related subjects that touch the
construction industry
3.3.1.5 What are the boundaries of the analysis?
Lean construction papers that were related to delay term only will be considered.
3.3.1.6 What is the target of the interference?
The target of interference is if the delay caused in the construction industry are treated
by lean means only in term of cause or effect, or there are other dominant factors,
according to our research questions, taking into consideration only CPM and Lean
construction players.
3.4 Six-Step Research Sequence
Content analysis is conducted by six steps: (Robson, as cited in Jacobs,2010):
1) Start with a research question;
2) Decide on the sampling strategy;
3) Define a recording unit;
4) Construct categories for analysis;
5) Test the codes and samples for reliability and validity;
6) Carry out the analysis.
3.4.1 Starting with Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to know the reasons for the delay, the contribution of CPM
and possible common ground between Lean Construction and Delay Analysis which is
mainly based on CPM. For this issue, IGLC research articles between 1997 and 2019
have been studied.
3.4.1.1 Research Questions
Four questions have been formulated to run the analysis:
1) What are the reasons causing a delay in construction projects and their lean
corrective actions?
62
2) Are Most of the occurring delays generated because of the shortcoming of CPM?
3) What are the most used and effective techniques of lean construction and its
contribution to delay mitigation?
4) 4-What is the possible relationship, common ground between Delay Analysis
Practice and the most used Lean construction technique?
3.4.2 Decide on Sampling Strategy
Data has been collected from the International Group of Lean Construction (IGLC),
which represents researchers from Field and Academia of AEC Industry from all over
the world. It has been stated that these conferences represent a state of art of lean
construction applications and researches (Alves & Tsao, 2007)
The focus of this study is all the papers contain the term “Delay”, which are 89 papers
from 1997 to 2019.
3.4.3 Define the recording unit
All papers have been taken into consideration which is “Document sampling”. Keywords
have been taken into consideration along with own codes. The bias of keywords chosen
by the authors has been acknowledged since there are no restrictions to describe IGLC
conferences (Alves & Tsao, 2007). Code reliability will be tested by means of inter
rater/Intra rater reliability as will be explained later.
3.4.4 Construct Categories for Analysis
Robson, as cited in Jacobs, (2010),researchers can get a perception on a text by testing
the frequency of words because every word accounts for quite a big part of the text ,it is
been addressed that other categories in the content analysis could be used such as:
„subject matter, direction, values, goals, methods, actors, and location‟. In this study, we
aim to investigate high-frequency words and subject matter related to research
questions, in this research, categories will be based on the codes that have been done
with the help of QACDAS software „Dedoose‟.
63
Keywords will be used as a comparative tool for our codes to assess reliability.
Keywords and codes clusters have arisen into three categories: common root words,
related words, and Words with embedded meaning (Alves & Tsao, 2007)
Common root words: some words appear in a frequent way merged with other
words, such as (Waste time, waste causes, waste control…), they all fall under
„waste‟.
Related words: words which share the same interest field such as (Takt-time
planning, Last planner…), they all fall under Lean Construction
Words with embedded meaning: such (PPC, WWP...), they fall under the Last
planner cluster.
it has been defined (Robson, 2002) “Exploratory analysis explores the data, trying to
find out what they tell you and Confirmatory analysis seeks to establish whether you
have actually got what you expected to find” ( P. 399).
Categories within related keywords will be attached in the Appendix I.
3.4.5 Test the codes and samples for reliability and validity
Coding could be done through the selection of the whole text,portion of the
text,paragraph,word,or word sense,in this study we opted to go for text coding.
Figure 17: Text Coding in Dedoose (own Work)
64
3.4.5.1 Reliability
Reliability could be conducted by the following as stated by (Stemler, 2001):
Stability or intra-rater: The inter-rater reliability means if the author or the same
coder can get the same codes if he tries again.
Reproducibility: Do coding schemes lead to the same text being coded in the
same category by different people?
It is been explained that reliability could be measured by evaluating the percentage of
agreements between the raters by summing up the same codes of units done by the
raters then divide it by the total number of units.
A doubt of shortfall might be raised that coding might be based on chance, for this issue
Cohen‟s Kappa coefficient has been set (Stemler, 2001):
Ƙ=
: Proportion of agreed unites
: The proportion of units that might be agreed by chance.
Kappa Statistics Strength of Agreement
<0.00 Poor
0.00- 0.20 Slight
0.21- 0.40 Fair
0.41- 0.60 Moderate
0.61- 0.80 Substantial
0.81- 1.00 Almost Perfect
Table 4: Kappa interpretation benchmark (Landis & Koch 1977, as cited in Stemler, 2001)
65
Miles and Huberman, 1994, as cited in, Marguerite (2017), another formula has been
described for Inter-rater Reliability IRR:
Reliability =
Cohen 1960, as cited in Stemler (2001) clarified that three assumptions have to be
conducted to assure proper using of the Kappa measurement:
1) Units should be coded independently;
2) Categories should be independent, mutually exclusive, and exhaustive;
3) Raters should work independently to avoid agreement that comes in a
consensus way.
Inter-rater reliability has been conducted within a classmate with a coefficient of 0.76
which is substantial (Appendix II).
Intra-rater reliability has been conducted with the author himself getting the strength of
0.74 which is substantial (Appendix III).
3.4.5.2 Validity
it has been defined (Krippendorff, 2004) that: “Validity is that quality of research results
that leads us to accept them as true, as speaking about the real world of people,
phenomena, events, experiences, and actions”(P.313).
Validity is that quality of research results that leads us to accept them as true, as
speaking about the real world of people, phenomena, events, experiences, and actions.
IGLC Group doesn‟t validate the conference unless it should be examined by a jury of
three specialists which gives credit and trustworthiness (Jacobs, 2010).
3.4.6 Carry out the Analysis
Coding has been done by CAQDAS (Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis
software), in our case, we used Dedoose to explore codes cluster, codes co-
occurrence, frequency of codes.
66
3.5 Introduction to Dedoose software
Dedoose is an Internet-based platform app from QASDAS family, for analyzing
qualitative and mixed methods research (Dedoose, 2020).
Steps have been carried out using Dedoose:
All the 89 papers were uploaded to Dedoose as shown in figure 18.
1) feeding the papers into Dedoose in a Pdf format:
Figure 18:Uploading articles to Dedoose(own work)
Dedoose interface shows the papers uploaded along with the date of upload and the
user name, at the left side it shows the number of media or papers uploaded the
number of excerpts, number of code, and code applications.
The lower panel at the right and sometimes it appear at the left, shows the name of
codes, and gives the opportunity to search for codes, see the attached excerpts,
rearrange by number or alphabetically.
67
2) After uploading the papers, it can be seen as follow:
Figure 19:Coding Procss (own Work)
Coding process can be done by selecting the text as in figure 19, pressing the spacebar
to name the code. After the coding process is done for the whole papers, a cluster of
codes will be resulted from the software to as a cloud to give insight about our research.
68
Categories have been launched to group the patterns and confirm the consistency of
the sample data gathered.
Categories Keyword Frequency
Scheduling 1674
Culture and Human aspect 955
Delay 902
Lean Construction 836
Last Planner 806
Supply Chain Management 580
Production Management 439
Waste 423
Design Management 384
Client/Customer 313
Information technology 278
Preassembly /prefabrication 202
Performance Measurement 189
Value 119
Construction 114
Safety 97
Lean Production 89
Project Management 53
Work Structuring 46
Cost 42
Quality 42
complexity 18
Implementation 6
Table 5: Keywords categorization
69
From the figure 16, the sample data gathered focuses more about scheduling, Culture
and human aspect, delay, and Lean Construction which react positively to our research
questions,in this study the focus will be on categories contains CPM and LPS.
Figure 16: Categorization cluster
3.6 Case Study
In this section, a case study of Delay Analysis will be analyzed to figure out the
technique that has been used to answer to the claim raised by employer and the Joint
venture. Because there were no case study that links both Delay Analysis and Last
Planner System, the author opted to use the outcomes generated from Content
Analysis along within this case study, and the Last Planner System Benchmark then to
be developed by a mind map analysis to answer the last research question which is:
19%
11%
10%
10% 9%
7%
5%
5%
4%
4%
3%
2% 2% 1%
1%
1%
1% 1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Frequency
Scheduling
Culture and Human aspect
Delay
Lean Construction
Last Planner
Supply Chain Management
Production Management
Waste
Design Management
Client/Customer
Information technology
Preassembly /prefabrication
70
What is the possible relationship, common ground between Delay Analysis Practice and
the most used Lean construction technique? (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
Another purpose of this embedded case study along with Mind Mapping and
Benchmarking is the limitations of Content Analysis. This method has been adapted to
robust the answer which summarize the outcome, seeking to create a Lean based
Delay analysis technique and the same time, it would be such a mechanism to prevent
delay. This case study were conducted by anonymous, it has been published in Delay
analysis Construction contracts book by (Caletka & Keane, 2015),Wiley Blackwell
(Caletka & Keane, 2015).
3.6.1 Case Study Description
This case study was conducted to present an airport terminal expansion; a joint venture
consortium has been called to do both rehabilitation of the control tower and also the
extension of the runway of the existing airport (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
The work stated on October 1st, 2006 and it supposed to finish on August 1st, 2007, but
the work has been finished on January 28th, 2008.
A dispute has been raised to claim for a time extension and has been transferred to the
court (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
The Planning expert on behalf of the Joint Venture opted to go for Time-Impacted
Analysis, the planning expert from the employer part claimed that the Joint Venture
doesn‟t deserve any recovery because he didn‟t follow the instructions to accelerate,
another argument is that the Joint Venture wouldn‟t have finished on time because there
was a delay originally in the Runway extension work (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
Available information in this case was (Caletka & Keane, 2015):
As-planned baseline is submitted and approved
Contemporaneously updated CPM programs
Contemporaneously prepared as-built program
Agreed employer risk events.
71
From the below table 6, it is clear there was a delay of 28 days from the updated CPM
on October the 6th,which has been reported as a float (-28 days float) (Caletka & Keane,
2015).
Table 6: Available programs (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
Delay events have been detected on the Runway extension and also on Control tower
rehabilitation. Criticisms have been raised about TIA, stated that TIA could not provide a
continuous linear CPM, it has been shifted from place to another, whereas TIA did not
linked the events (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
It has been clarified that TIA has been used to „set the clock to zero‟; it updates the
program by providing progress data, It has been argued that TIA did not provide a help
to precise the compensable delay period, EOT or pricing prolongation, it just showed
the impact of delays against the updated program. Another argument has been
72
highlighted stating that TIA is based on prospective program, so, it is considered as
theoretical such as IAP (Impacted as-planned), claimed that conclusion could be
different within retrospective method and to be compared to as-built program (Caletka &
Keane, 2015).
Update/Windows Analysis, or simply windows analysis, this technique is based on
(Caletka & Keane, 2015):
Best available clue;
programming technical expertise
Common sense.
To finally provide results based on reality and reliable with the available facts. This
approach helped to identify the following (Caletka & Keane, 2015):
1) Quantifying each window‟s delay;
2) Figuring out activities that were driving the CPM, and their location on each
window;
3) Check if there is any near critical paths are existing through the project;
4) Who was responsible for the last mentioned issue?
The first step is conducted using „Float deterioration‟, which has been developed to
illustrate how far the deviation is behind the schedule each project has been slipped
from month to month basis (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
As could be seen on the chart that, Runway extension is behind schedule with 45 days,
Terminal building within 133 days behind schedule, and Control tower within 168 days
late.it has been argued here that it was not driving the CPM during the project (Caletka
& Keane, 2015).
73
Figure 17:Float Deterioration Chart (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
3.6.2 Float Mapping
Kris R. N. and Patricia D. G, as cited in Caletka & Keane, (2015) stated that:
Windows analysis is especially helpful when a critical path program which was
updated on a regular basis was employed on the project. To delay project
completion, the critical activities of the project must have been delayed. The
window analysis only analyses critical activities occurring during specific periods
of time on a project. The periods analyzed are the same periods of time as those
when the project was updated. For instance, if the project was updated monthly
then the window analysis would be monthly. (P. 231)
It is necessary to know which activities were critical ,SCL Protocol, as cited in Caletka &
Keane, (2015) defined that “critical path –The sequence of activities through a project
network from start to finish, the sum of whose durations determines the overall project
duration.3 There may be more than one critical path depending on workflow logic”
(P.232).
SCL Protocol, as cited in Caletka & Keane, (2015) stated also “critical path analysis
(CPA) and CPM –The critical path analysis or method is the process of deducing the
74
critical activities in a program by tracing the logical sequence of tasks that directly affect
the date of project completion”(P.232).
3.6.3 Extracting Float Values
Extracting raw data from the float values for all activities in every updated schedule,
including all information of activity data such as constraints, durations, start and
finish...etc.it is important to extract data to leave no bias of critical areas (Caletka &
Keane, 2015).
3.6.4 Float Map Creation
The float map has been created using the tasks in CPM programs accompanied with
their float from monthly basis to detect critical tasks within the largest negative floats,
aligning floats with the right activity as showed in table 7.This table has been got from
the raw data float map, those floats with minus sign represent a completion of the
activity, the asterisk means the activity is still not existing until a later schedule. This
project has been updated monthly (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
75
Table 7: Raw data for the float map (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
76
3.6.5 Driving Activities identification
Activities have been considered Driving if they fulfill the following two factors (Caletka &
Keane, 2015):
Activity should be part of the „Longest path‟ to finish.
Activity should be running or programmed to run within the update period.
Taking into consideration that the longest path fluctuates and often been modified this is
why monthly update is necessary.
Figure 18: Driving Critical path (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
77
3.6.6 As-built critical path
The activities in black met the requirements of driving critical path, as shown in table
8,the issue that Critical path could is not clear, this is why an assessment should be
conducted based on float values that have been reported and the planner experience
(Caletka & Keane, 2015).
Table 8: Driving activities (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
78
Driving activities have been filtered and grouped by location as seen in the table 9
(Caletka & Keane, 2015):
Table 9: concurrent driving critical paths. (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
It has been stated that near critical paths tend to be critical, and also delays which
pushed near critical activities to be critical along within the concurrent effect, from the
float map an as-built path has been assumed, near critical activities have been identified
by linking successors within the predecessors (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
79
Table 10: Illustration of critical paths (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
This method has advantages such as (Caletka & Keane, 2015):
It uses the real time available program
It detects the dynamicity of CPM
It detects the logic change, duration and intentions
It could detect more than Critical path
Intuitive and easy
It detects loss and gain between progress updates
It shows the actual influence of the delay
It is not theoretical, no need to collapsed CPM
It can detect critical delays in the update period when the work is actually run.
It detects when cost is actually incurred.
The employer risk events that have been agreed should be investigated and see if there
were a part of the critical path, and which were just a concurrent events (Caletka &
Keane, 2015).
80
Table 11: Delays mapped against the as-built critical path. (Caletka & Keane, 2015)
81
The employer risk event along with float loss/gain windows that have been aligned in
the windows where they were happened (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
Table 12: Employer risk event table (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
After the float deterioration map has been set in a monthly basis, attaching the events to
the actual delays has occurred, in order to facilitate to the court to summarize the
outcome and compare the as-built CP delays to the argued one generated from TIA.
Acceleration has been claimed by both sides by analyzing the progress actually
achieved and to being compared against each activity with every window, then updating
the non-accelerated logic. It has been recommended that a proper presentation should
be submitted for delay claims instead of a bunch of papers which causes confusion
(Caletka & Keane, 2015).
4-D Model has been recommended for pre-planning and forensic delay, other tools also
have been stated (Caletka & Keane, 2015):
CPM program and CPM extracts
Blow-up/Call outs documents
82
Animations
They showed a technical accuracy for both progress and events over time while
animations belong to other two categories which are demonstration and reconstruction.
Demonstration animation helped to show an overview of the process and the way of
work, for the purpose of educating the tribunal, while reconstruction showed the
sequence of events, it illustrated the as-planned versus as –built sequence to give
insight of theory of what really happened (David K.H, 2009).
In this stage of reconstruction animation, information that has been delivered to the
legal party is (Caletka & Keane, 2015):
Who made the animation, what is the level of the accuracy
Which hardware and software used for this purpose
Documents used for the animation
Finally, Weather data has to be taken into consideration to figure out which month
exceeded the threshold to support the claim (Caletka & Keane, 2015).
3.6.7 Case study main findings
TIA is not adequate to such case.
IAP is not adequate too.
Update/Windows Analysis is suitable to accommodate real time events, it
helped to quantifying delay by the mean of float deterioration, identifying
activities that were driving the CPM, their location on each window, check if
there is any near critical paths that are exist through the project, and the
responsible for the last mentioned issue.
Importance to generating the float map.
Creating the as-built program.
Employer risk events have to be considered.
Importance to check the acceleration.
Importance of animation for demonstration and reconstruction.
The importance to take weather depiction in consideration (Caletka & Keane,
2015).
83
4 Research questions answers
This chapter delivers the research questions along with answers that have been
generated from the outcomes of the critical review the content analysis methodology,
case study and mind mapping.
Before going through the answers, the author would like to expose the outcome that has
been quantified from the content analysis method, and those that have been launched
from Dedoose.
The Code Cluster:
The cloud of codes provides a general idea about what have been coded mostly,
presenting a rough weight of the codes used along the research.
Figure 19: Code Cloud(own Work)
84
The Code-Co-Occurrences:
The code-Occurrence Matrix gives information about how codes meet each other in the
same excerpt, overlapped, and their frequency.it provides a rational framework to
interpret information (Dedoose, 2020).
Figure 20: Fine-tuned Co-Occurrence matrix(own Work)
The author will attach the original table to the CD because of the huge dimension of the
matrix.
85
4.1 Question One
1) What are the reasons causing delay in construction projects and their
corrective actions?
Reasons of delay in this study are deducted from the texts linked to the codes.
From the chart in figure 16, it summarizes all the delay causes that have been weighed
from the literature review, it is obvious from the chart that variability is the dominant
factor, then, Procurement, Early design, and RFI follows (Figure 20)
It has been stated that Variability is a main opponent of successful of project management
(Davis, 2009).it has been stated also that variability is the main cause of delays (Damaj,
Fakhreddine, Lahoud , & Hamzeh, 2016).
The results confirm these statements which enhance the reliability of the outcomes.
The correction action been taken as in chart (Figure 21) that goes with the variability
could be summarized in LPS,LOB, BIM which reflects the combination of Visualization,
Buffer and controlling necessary (Koskela,; Yang and Ioannou,; Sakamoto, Horman and
Thomas; Kemmer,; Bølviken,Rooke and Koskela ,as cited in Deschamps, Esteves,
Rossetto, Tomazi, & Pereira Da Silva ,2015)
86
Figure 21: Delay Causes(own Work)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Variability
Early Design
Procurement
RFI
Design changes
Omissions
delayed payment
delayed inspection
Changes due to requirements
Poor planning
Huge Batch Size
Deviation in plan
Unrealistic schedule
impropoer design
rework
Bureaucratic
Delay in funds
Corruption
Absenteeism
Lack of Proper Communication
DIQ Design Information Quality
Ineffective Information process
Delayed aprovals
Large WIP
Variability and large flow time
SCs Alternative supply papers
Incomplete Progress Information, schedule…
Delays due to mobility, schedules
Forecasting in Traditional Planning
Reactionary behavior of superintendent and…
Unforeseen and uncertain Conditions
Excess Inventory
Demobilization
Time of decision Making (Systems dynamic).
New laws, Lack of project details
Design revision and changes, Lack of information
Existence of contradictions between documents
Lack of interaction between stakeholders in the…
Existence of contradiction between documents in…
Errors in information and its specs.
Critical Requirement (Constraint managemet)
Late Follow-Up,Long engineering review
Schedule, Coordination, Procedures
Traditional Management
Interruption due to CPM and PERT in repetitive…
Noncompletion of preceding activities
Flaws in the planning system, ineffective…
Procurement
Uncertainty
Comeback delays
Unforced idleness
Delay in case of future changes
Delay Causes
code occurency
87
Figure 22:Corrective actions(own Work)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
LPS,LOB,Buffering,lookahead,BIM,risk matrix,WIP Buffer
BIM
collective explanatory interactions
House Of quality,
LC,FTI(Forward Thinking Index)+LPS
LDP(Lean Design Process)
House of quality
Self-help appraoch
LPS
House Of quality
LPS+SCM
LOB
BIM
LPS
Lean Design Process
TFV+LPDS,WIP, LPS, Pull technique
LPS+VSM
LPS,Self-help appraoch
Lean concepts
SCM
DES,Takt Planning+LOB
LPS,4D Modeling
LPS
WIP-RFI Corelation
Queuing theory, Just-In-Time, Time based Completion, Fast…
SCM
LPS,4D Modeling
5S, LPS
Look ahead+4D
LBMS
OODA Loop +LPS
FTI(Forward Thinking Index)+LPS
Appropriate sizing of Buffer ,JIT+ Location of buffer
VNMT,LBMS,LPS
LPS
Multidisciplinary teams, Collaborative Environment
Collaborative environment
Pull techniques, delayed commitment
Kanban+ Collaborative environment
JIT, WIP
5S, WIP
CLP Constraint logic Programming ,PDM Precedence…
5Whys+Fishbone (check the fishbone Identifying root …
One-Piece Flow (less cycle time),Keep the lowest WIP as…
LPS
Lead time Buffer, LSM, LOB ,RSM
Updated buffered Program,Buffer Analysis, Delay Analysis
LPS+SCM
SCM
PWI Project waste Index,PIT Productivity Improvement…
RSM
Pull system
Corrective Actions
Code Occurrency
88
4.2 Question Two
2) Are Most of the occurring delays generated because of the shortcoming of
CPM?
As Koskela stated that CPM lacks from spatial information, continuity, and visualization,
moreover, CPM has been criticized of not being able to detect variability until it
happens. It causes gaps in production, as we can see from our results which confirm
the statement of Lauri Koskela as mentioned in the literature review.
We can see that Variability is the most dominant factors caused by the CPM; the other
factors fluctuate between cause and effect.
The author proposed to divide these factors based on Flow concept suggested by Lauri
Koskela (Koskela, Kraemer, Henrich, & Kagioglou, 2007) :
Flow Variability: which means how variability affected the process?
Even Flow: to maintain a smooth leveling and continuous process
Non –adding Value: the main objective is to eliminate waste
Value flow: To produce a continuous flow
The seven preconditions, to prohibit making-do waste (Koskela, Kraemer,
Henrich, & Kagioglou, 2007):
1. Components and Materials
2. Connecting works-previous works
3. Construction design (Information)
4. Equipment
5. External conditions
6. Space
7. workers
Because flow and CPM accomplish each other, it has been stated on the literature
review that CPM is the mean of flow ,the author opted to show the weight of variability
against all other factors
89
69%
31%
Chart Title
Seven Preconditions+Value Flow+Even Flow+Non-Adding Values
Variability
Figure 23:CPM influence on Flow(own Work)
CPM direct influences is 31%,it doesn‟t contradict the shortcoming and the claims
stated in the literature review, it has been stated that the real issue couldn‟t be tackled
directly and there is no issue within the CPM but within the way the apply it.
Another concept has attracted the author is the Flow min-cut theorem which proves that
CPM and Flow accomplish each other.
From the chart on figure 23,the author states that third of the flow disturbance comes
from the CPM, whether it is from the making-do, know-how, or other issues related to
method‟s validation. Because CPM is the tool used to present the flow, they can be
used interchangeably in construction field, the 31% of variability generated from the
CPM is responsible of the 69% the other factors, and the 69% influence the CPM
stability as well. Once the variability is tackled by the mean of Lean the other out-
coming issues will be reduced.
90
4.3 Question Three
3) What are the most used and effective techniques of lean construction and its
contribution to delay mitigation?
Pareto Analysis has been used to identify the most significant tool of lean construction
based on the code frequency extracted from the qualitative software Dedoose.
Figure 24: Pareto Analysis Chart(own Work)
From Figure 24, the author confirmed that the most used technique in Lean
Construction is The Last Planner System, as we know that Lean tools have been
created to maintain the flow variability, this finding runs smoothly within the answer two
of the research questions.
LPS represents 43.28 % (Table13) from the contribution of all techniques which
nominates this technique to be the most efficient, and to be used to represent as a
comparison tool against Delay Analysis Protocol.
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Last
Pla
nn
er®
Sys
tem
(LP
S)B
uild
ing
Info
rmat
ion
Mo
de
ls (
BIM
)5
SJu
st in
Tim
e (J
IT)
Takt
Pla
nn
ing
and
Tak
t C
on
tro
lK
anb
anV
alu
e S
trea
m M
app
ing
(VSM
)ID
PV
isu
al m
anag
em
en
t (V
M)
FTI
5 W
hys
Hei
jun
kaP
DC
AV
alu
e E
ngi
ne
erin
gD
e-C
ou
plin
gD
iscr
ete
eve
nt
sim
ula
tio
n (
DES
)Le
an p
roje
ct d
eliv
ery
sys
tem
…Se
t-B
ased
De
sign
(SB
D)
Six
Sigm
aTF
VW
ork
Sam
plin
g (W
S)A
ctiv
ity-
Flo
w M
od
el
AFW
SM(S
tru
ctu
rin
g M
eth
od
)A
gen
t-b
ase
d M
od
el
Ergo
no
mic
sG
emb
aIn
tegr
ate
d P
roje
ct D
eliv
ery
(IP
D)
Kai
zen
Lean
Wo
rk S
tru
ctu
rin
g (L
WS)
RFI
DTa
rget
Val
ue
Des
ign
(TV
D)
91
Lean Tools Code Frequency Total Total Accumulation
Last Planner® System (LPS) 87 43.28% 43.28%
Building Information Models (BIM) 16 7.96% 51.24%
5 S 9 4.48% 55.72%
Just in Time (JIT) 9 4.48% 60.20%
Takt Planning and Takt Control 9 4.48% 64.68%
Kanban 8 3.98% 68.66%
Value Stream Mapping (VSM) 8 3.98% 72.64%
IDP 7 3.48% 76.12%
Visual management (VM) 6 2.99% 79.10%
FTI 5 2.49% 81.59%
5 Whys 4 1.99% 83.58%
Heijunka 3 1.49% 85.07%
PDCA 3 1.49% 86.57%
Value Engineering 3 1.49% 88.06%
De-Coupling 2 1.00% 89.05%
Discrete event simulation (DES) 2 1.00% 90.05%
Lean project delivery system (LPDS) 2 1.00% 91.04%
Set-Based Design (SBD) 2 1.00% 92.04%
Six Sigma 2 1.00% 93.03%
TFV 2 1.00% 94.03%
Work Sampling (WS) 2 1.00% 95.02%
Activity-Flow Model 1 0.50% 95.52%
AFWSM(Structuring Method) 1 0.50% 96.02%
Agent-based Model 1 0.50% 96.52%
Ergonomics 1 0.50% 97.01%
Gemba 1 0.50% 97.51%
Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) 1 0.50% 98.01%
Kaizen 1 0.50% 98.51%
Lean Work Structuring (LWS) 1 0.50% 99.00%
RFID 1 0.50% 99.50%
Target Value Design (TVD) 1 0.50% 100.00%
Table 13: LPS Contribution among Lean techniques(Own Work)
92
4.4 Question Four
4) What is the possible relationship, common ground between Delay Analysis
Practice and the most used Lean construction technique?
From the code co-occurrences matrix, the author opted to develop a mind map to
investigate the explanation behind the codes.
The author used the codes that fall in both categories in the same time and the same
place (Excerpts), which reflects the shared common ground.
Code Co-
Occurrence
BIM Buffer Delay Delay
Analyis
LBMS LOB Looahead Workflow
CPM 1 2 6 4 8 3 1 2
LPS 4 1 11 1 7 1 9 5
Code Co-
Occurrence
Production Pull Waste Float Planning
CPM 1 1 2 3 1
LPS 6 1 2 1 2
Table 14: Fine-Tuned Co-Occurrence (LPS &CPM) Matrix (Own Work)
Some of the codes will be eliminated because the non-significance and the overlapping.
Some codes are just explanatory, such as Delay which means that delay has been
coincided by the two codes CPM and LPS; it is an explanation of delay causes and/or
corrective actions as has been seen in the previous answers.
The bridges that link LPS and CPM (Delay Analysis) are: BIM, Buffer, LBMS,LOB, and
Float, the other codes are just an explicit explanation content.
93
4.4.1 Mind Mapping:
Mind mapping has been used with MindManager software to organize and expose
relationships between different codes generated from the co-occurrence matrix, case
study and the literature review ,it also has been conducted to draw a more
transparency process map for better describing the linkage between last planner system
and delay analysis.
Figure 25: Delay Analysis Lean-Based Process Map (Own Work)
94
From the mind map presented in Figure 25, generated from the MindManager software,
the bridges that link Delay Analysis Protocol and The Last Planner System could be
summarized in one phrase: It is the relation between Prospective Buffer Analysis and
Retrospective Float Mapping trying to figure out the best possible As- built critical path
updated by the mean of LPS.
The process should start within LBMS (Location Based Management System),it can
fluctuate between the planning stage and the control stage what make it best tool to
report the shortcoming of CPM to LPS.it proved a significant performance, it addresses
the shortcoming of CPM (Olivieri , Olli, & Granja, 2018). Forwarding the next step to be
controlled with LPS and coming back to CPM to update it accordingly. Then Delay
Analysis best techniques intervene to manage the float and get the best possible as-
built program.
Finally, LPS philosophy should be continued once we get the best possible schedule to
learn from the errors likely possible to happen and investigate the root causes to be
eliminated.
95
5 Conclusion and Recommendations
AEC industry nowadays is still suffering from delay consequences and funds overrun,
The content analysis provided the most frequent issues caused delay: variability, early
design, procurement, RFI related matters, and the other causes which are a result of
the generated variability from the shortcoming of CPM.
Shaping the CPM to provide value should be done through the Lean Construction
Practice (LPS), LBMS and Delay Analysis Practice.
Last Planner System proved a significant presence in term of solving problems related
to delay such variability ,procurement, design changes, it appeared almost in all delay
corrective actions, but it requires some times some adjustment from other tools such as
Takt-Planning and LBMS.
Preventing delay is a process that gathers Lean philosophy armed with visualization in
order to not affect the completion date, maintain the buffers and Delay Analysis to
control the float that might be generated from the critical path in through the process.
The implementation of LPS with delay analysis and LBMS would create a robust
mechanism from the theoretical perspective.
The prospective techniques of Delay Analysis in the point of view of the author will lead
to zero sum if they are used with LPS for one reason: they will conflict within the
lookahead process, because inserting theoretical delay under LPS process will be
eliminated automatically leading to no validation, regarding to the nature of LPS which is
eliminating delay. This confirm that the only possible way is to use the retrospective
windows analysis to benefit from the systematic float analysis used by Delay analysis
As a result the author conclude that Delay Analysis based on Lean is a robust
techniques to prevent delay but there is nothing to claim to the court once it is applied
with LPS, it will serve as a delay mitigation tool rather than forensic tool lading
assumingly to a perfect situation where AEC industry would not conflict to assess
liability.
96
The author would recommend the following:
Actions research is highly recommended to diagnose the process weaknesses
The use of BIM such as VICO to implement LBMS
The integration of crew-centric planning for better decision-making (Bob Huber,
2003).
Work under a unified platform such as oracle‟s cloud which is dedicated to bridge
Lean scheduling and CPM.
Integration of WIP buffer in repetitive projects (a simulation model to manipulate
the iteration) (González Vicente, 2006).
97
Appendices
Appendix I
Categorization table adapted from (Alves & Tsao, 2007).
Categories keyword Frequency Categories
keyword Frequency
client / customer Information Technology
• client 123 • 3D / 4D CAD 70
• client involvement 3D modeling 46
• client requirements 8 • 4D CAD modelling
• client requirements management • 4D visualization 3
• customer 149 • bar-code technology
• customer lead-time • computer aided design (CAD) 11
• customer needs 8 • computer integration
• customer needs analysis • computer simulation 10
• customer purpose • computer tools
• customer satisfaction 7 • construction simulation 3
complexity • digital fabrication
• complex dynamic systems • digital prototypes
• complex projects 9 • fuzzy logic 4
• complex systems 8 • GPS system 5
• process complexity • Internet 33
• product complexity 1 • IT 2
• stakeholder complexity • java 18
construction • knowledge discovery in
• construction management 114 databases (KDD)
cost • mobile phone 7
• activity based costing and • networking simulation
management • neural network
• activity-based costing • process simulation
• activity-based costing (ABC) • simulation model 39
• cash flow 13 • simulation modeling 8
• construction cost • simulation optimization 6
• construction overhead costs 6 • virtual reality 13
98
• cost control 3 last planner
• cost forecasting • commitment planning 6
• cost information 1 • commitments management 1
• cost management 10 • first-run study
• cost performance • Last Planner Method 1
• cost reduction 3 • last planner methodology
• designing to target cost 5 • last planner system 171
• kaizen costing • lookahead plan 10
• poor quality costs • lookahead planning 29
• poor-quality costing • percent plan complete 19
• profit point analysis (PPA)
• percent plan complete (PPC) 213
• project financial management • phase planning 3
• resource-based costing • PPC 213
• return on investment 1 • the last planner system 113
• target cost • weekly work plan 18
• target costing • weekly work planning 9
• transaction cost economics lean construction 836
• transaction costs analytical lean production 89
modeling performance measurement
culture and human aspects • benchmarking 12
• behavior 34 • construction performance 5
• behavioral development measures
• behaviour model 2 • construction process 142
• change 588 benchmarking
• change management 2 • performance indicators 28
• changed organisational structure
• performance measurements
• cognition 2 • performance metrics 2
• cognitive engineering • performance tracking
• cognitive systems engineering
• qualitative benchmarking
• collaborative work 90 preassembly / prefabrication
• collaborative working • assembly 61
environments • assembly package
• construction culture • disassembly
• cultural barriers • fabrication 137
• culture and subculture 49 • fabrication shop 2
• culture of quality • lean prefabrication
• design sociology • off-site fabrication 1
99
• education 15 • off-site manufacturing
• field personnel 4 • preassembly
• HRM • pre-assembly 1
• human behavior 5 • precast fabrication
• human centered focus • prefabrication
• human error 2 • pre-fabrication
• human resource development
• volume element prefabrication
• human resource management 3 production management
• incentive 29 • production control 108
• lean leadership behavior
• production improvement 1
• lean transformation policy 1 • production planning 186
deployment • production planning and control 138
• learning organization • production/operations
• learning region management
• middle manager role 1 • project production 6
• motivation 15 • project production system
• organisational change project management
• organisational learning 3 • project and planning control
• organization 107 • project control 12
• organization development • project controls 2
• organizational change • project organization 9
• organizational culture • project planning 30
• organizational learning 3 quality
• project culture • internal quality audits
• quality and change management • quality assignment 6
• worker's evaluation • quality assurance 16
design management • quality control 18
• briefing 9 • quality management 2
• concurrent design 2 • quality management systems
• concurrent design and 4 • total quality management
construction safety
• concurrent design for production • accident 11
• dependency structure matrix 2 • accident theory
• DePlan • boundaries 4
• design • construction safety
• design and documentation 44 • hazard 21
100
quality • hazard identification 1
• design brief 1 • macroergonomics
• design concept 11 • occupational ergonomics 55
• design coordination 6 • occupational safety
• design criteria 2 • safety in construction
• design criteria change • safety management 1
• design dictionary • safety training
• design fixity • working conditions 4
• design for maintenance scheduling
• design for production and • coordination
constructability • CPM 150
• design intent document 1 • CPM as product
• design postponement • cross-functional teams 3
• design process 111 • distributed scheduling 6
• design quality 12 • float management
• design rationale systems • flowline 10
• design review 14 • line of balance 22
• design rework 1 • line-of-balance
• designing 78 • multi-diciplinary team
• detail design 1 • multi-skilled workers
• detailed design 0 • multiskilling
• early design 26 • multi-tasking
• engineering design 7 • planning 1201
• information-based design • planning and control 219
dependency matrix • planning system 29
• key design parameter • repetitive scheduling 2
• lean design 21 • schedule planning 5
• lean design management 8 supply chain management
• predesign 1 • construction supply chain 58
• product design 17 management
• product development process
• construction supply chains 37
• resource planning 3 • logistic centers 1
• resource-driven scheduling • logistics 52
• set-based design 2 • logistics planning 3
implementation • supply chain 363
• project implementation 5 • supply chain analysis 2
• strategies of implementation
• supply chain integration 4
• systemic 1 • supply chain 58
101
implementation management in
Delay Analysis construction
Claims • supply chain mapping 1
TIA • supply chain strategies
IAP • supply chains
CAB • total supply chain 1
Windows Analysis value
• chain of value for clients
• customer value 9
• value based management
• value chain 4
• value chain management
• value creation 11
• value generation 19
• value loss
• value management 7
• value parameters
• value stream 38
• value stream analysis 4
• value stream mapping 20
• value stream maps 4
• value-added time 3
• value-based management
• value-stream mapping
waste
• materials waste 11
• time waste/Delay 9
• waste causes 1
• waste control
• waste rates
• waste time 1
• wastes 401
work structuring 46
102
Appendix II
Inter-Rater Reliability (conducted by Mahmoud Elazzazy, Classmate)
INTER-RATER RELIABILITY TEST, Coefficient=0.76
Author Literature Page/Line Code Agreement
David K.H.Chua and
K.W.Yeoh
A Framework for
Construction
Requirements based
Planning Utilizing
Constraints Logic
Programming
page 2 paragraph
1,page2 para 4
Constraints,CPM
Agreed,
Agreed
Diego Cisterna,Luis
Fernando
Alarcon,Isabel Alarcon
Use of Risk Matrix as
Selector of Activity
Priority Execution
Base on Project
History
Page 3and
4paragraph Risk matrix,CPM
Agreed,
Disagreed
Jose Clemente and
Nuno Cachadinha
BIM-Lean Synergies in
the Management on
MEP Works in Public
Facilities of Intensive
use-A case Study
page4,paragraph
2/3 Bim-Lean,VSM
Disagreed,
Agreed
Andres
Covarrubias,Claudio
Mourgues,and Paz
Arroyo
VSM for Improving the
Certificate of
occupancy process in
real estate projects-A
Chilean case study
page 2 paragraph
2 VSM Agreed
Patrick
Dallasega,Andrea
Revolti,Camilia
Follini,Christoph Paul
Schimnaski,Dominik
Tobias Matt
BIM-Based
Construction Progress
Measurement of Non-
Repetitive HVAC
Installation Works page 3 paragraph
4 BIM - LPS Disagreed
Omar
Damaj,Mohamad
Fakhreddine,Makram
Lahoud,and Farook
Implementing
Ergonomics In
Construction To
improve Work
page
3/paragraph2and
page 9 paragraph
1
Ergonomics,
delay
Agreed,
Disagreed
103
Hamzeh Performance
Emmanuel
I.Daniel,Daniel
Garcia,Ramesh
Marasini,Shaba
Kolo,and Olalekan
Oshodi
Improving
Construction
Management Practice
in the Gibraltor
Construction Industry page 3 paragraph
2 LPS Agreed
Alaa Daramis,Karim
Faour,Lyn Richa
Abdel Ahad,Ghadeer
Salami,and Farouk
Hamza
A Lean-Governance
Approach to Mitigate
Corruption within
official Processess in
the Construction
Industry
Page 6 paragraph
2 ERP Agreed
Ankur Paresh Desai
and Tariq Sami
Abdelhamid
Exploring Crew
Behavior During
Uncertain Jobsite
Conditions
2/paragraph 5
and page 6
paragraph 3
Delay,(LPS and
5S) Agreed
104
Appendix III
INTRA-RATER RELIABILITY TEST, Coefficient=0.74
Author Literature Page/Line Code Agreement
Iris. D Tommelein
Parade Game: impact of workflow
Variability On succeed trade Performance
Page 3/paragraph 1
Dependency Agreed
I-Tung Yang
Stochastic Analysis On
Project Duration Under
The requirement of
continuous resource utilization
Page 2paragraph2
Buffer, Float, delay, CPM Agreed
Masanobu Sakamoto
A study of the relationship
Between buffers and
performance in construction
page3,paragraph 2
Delay ,lead time, inventory
Disagreed, Agreed
Iris. D Tommelein
More Just-In-Time
page 2 paragraph 2
JIT,TPS Agreed,
Disagreed
Bob Huber, Paul Reiser
The marriage of CPM and
Lean Construction
page 2 paragraph 2
CPM Agreed
Glenn Ballard
Integrating Design
Planning, Scheduling,and
control with Deplan
page 8,paragraph 3
Workflow, Lookahead, CPM
Agreed, Disagreed
Huseyin Erol
A Construction Delay Analysis
Approach Based On
Lean Principles
Page 2,Paragraph 1
Workflow, LPS,CPM Agreed,
Disagreed
Vaidyanathan
Value of visibility and planning in
engineering -to-order
Environement
Page 7 paragraph 3
CPM, Procurement Agreed,
Disagreed
Shen Li Jun
Distributed schedule with
integrated production scheduler
Page 2 paragraph 1
Delay,(LPS and 5S) Agreed
105
Declaration of Authorship
I hereby declare that the attached Master‟s thesis was completed independently and
without the prohibited assistance of third parties, and that no sources or assistance
were used other than those listed. All passages whose content or wording originates
from another publication have been marked as such. Neither this thesis nor any variant
of it has previously been submitted to an examining authority or published.
Date Signature of the student
106
References
AACE® International Recommended Practices. (2011). AACE. AACE® International,
Inc.
A.Ghio, V. (1997). Development Of Construction Work Methods And Detailed
Production Planning For On-Site Productivity Improvement. IGLC, 8.
Abdelhamid, T. S. (2003). Six-sigma in lean construction systems:. IGLC, 19.
Alarcón, L. F., Diethelmand, S., & Rojo, O. (2002). Collaborative Implementation of
Lean Planning Systems in Chilean Construction Companies. IGLC, 11.
AlSehaimi, A., & Koskela, L. (2008). What can be learned from studies on delay in
construction ? IGLC, 12.
Alves, T. C., & Tsao, C. C. (2007). Lean Construction – 2000 to 2006. Lean
Construction Journal, 25.
Ansell, M., Holmes, M., Evans, R., Pasquire, C., & Price, A. (2007). Lean Construction
Trial On a Highways Mainenance Project. IGLC, 10.
Ballard, G. (2000). The Last Planner System of Production Control (PHD dissertation).
Birmingham: University of Bimingham.
Ballard, G. (2008). The Lean Project Delivery System: An Update. Lean Construction
Journal, 19.
Ballard, G., & Howell, G. A. (2003). An Update on Last Planner. IGLC, 13.
Ballard, G., & Tommelein, I. (2016). Current Process Benchmark for the Last Planner
System. Berkeley: p2sl.berkeley.edu.
Bob Huber, P. R. (2003). The Marriage of CPM and Lean Construction. IGLC, 9.
Caletka, A. F., & Keane, J. P. (2015). Delay Analysis in Construction Contracts. United
Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell.
Chang, S. C. (2009). Identifying Root Causes of Long Review Times for Engineering
shop drawings. IGLC, 16.
Damaj, O., Fakhreddine, M., Lahoud , M., & Hamzeh, F. (2016). Implementing
ergonomics in construction to improve work performance. IGLC, 10.
David K.H, C. (2009). A framework for construction requirements based planning
utilizing constraints logic programming. IGLC, 10.
107
Davis, S. R. (2009). An Algorithme for creating Master Schedules that minimizes
schedule reorganization resulting from adverse risk events. IGLC, 10.
Dedoose. (2020, January 2). Dedoose . Retrieved from
Dedoose.com Dedoose Great Research Made Easy :
https://www.dedoose.com/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAxrbwBRCoARIsABEc9sireSAGEh0_
wCUNu5XONcjrlHUJYpAu1K-ZhjQbqviftJ57NOhd2xwaAuIeEALw_wcB
Deschamps, R. R., Esteves, R. R., Rossetto, R., Tomazi, L. F., & Pereira Da Silva, G.
G. (2015). The impact of variability in workflow. IGLC, 10.
Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 10.
Frandson, A., Berghede, K., & Tommelein, I. D. (2014). Takt-time planning and the last.
IGLC, 10.
González Vicente, L. F. (2006). Design Of Work In Process Buffers In repetitive Building
Projects :A case Study. IGLC, 12.
Hammond, J., Choo, H. J., Austin, S., Tommelein, I. D., & Ballard, G. (2000). Integrating
Design Planning,Scheduling,and Control With Deplan. IGLC, 11.
Hegazy, S. (2012). Delay Analysis Methodology in UAE construction projects:Delay
claims,Literature review. PM World Journal, 21.
Huber, B., & Reiser, P. (2003). The Marriage of CPM and Lean Construction. IGLC, 9.
Huseyin , E., Irem, D., & Talat, B. M. (2017). A Construction Delay Analysis Approach
based on Lean Principles. IGLC, 9.
Izquierdo, J. L., & Arbulu, R. (2008). Application of Production Management In Industrial
EPC and Projects In Peru. IGLC, 8.
Joao Matias, N. C. (2010). Evaluating the Potential Benefits and Challenges of LC
Adoption in the Portugese Construction Industry:A Survey Study. IGLC, 11.
Jun, S. L., Chua, D. K., & Hwee, B. S. (2000). Distributed Scheduling with Integrated
Production Scheduler. IGLC, 11.
Koskela, L. (1992). Application for the New Production Philosophy To Construction.
Stanford: Center For Integrated Facility Engineering.
108
Koskela, L., Kraemer, K., Henrich, G., & Kagioglou, M. (2007, 03 26).
https://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB16363.pdf. Retrieved 10 22, 2018, from
www.irbnet.de: https://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB16363.pdf
Kpamma, Z. E., & Adjei-Kumi, T. (2013). Construction Permits and Flow of Projects
within the Sunyani Municipality,Ghana. IGLC, 10.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis (An Introduction to its Methodology).
Thousand Oaks,London,New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Lauri Koskela, A. K. (2015). Suggestions to improve lean construction planning. IGLC,
10.
Lauri Koskela, G. H. (2014). If cpm is so bad,why have we been using it so long? iglc,
11.
Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's
Greatest Manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Marcus P.Sterzi, E. L. (2007). Integrating Strategic Project Supply Chain Members In
Production Planning and Control. IGLC, 11.
Mary Ansell, M. H. (2007). Lean Construction Trial on a Highways Maintenance Project.
IGLC, 10.
Matias, J., & Cachadinh, N. (2010). Evaluating the potential benefits and Challenges of
LC adoption in the Portuguese construction industry:A survy study. IGLC, 11.
Mosanobu Sakamoto, M. J. (2002). A Study of The Real Relationship Between Buffers
and Performance In Construction. IGLC, 13.
Neale, R. H., Neale, D. E., & Stephenson, P. (2016). Construction Planning. London:
ICE Publishing.
Olivieri , H., Olli, S., & Granja, A. D. (2018). Improving workflow and resource usage in
Construction schedules through location-based management system(LBMS).
Construction Management and Economics, 17.
Patrick T.I.Lam, M. M. (2001). The Mulltiple roles of Specifications in Lean Construction.
IGLC, 11.
Photios G.Loannou, C. S. (2007). The Investigation of Lead-Time Buffering Under
Uncertainty Using Simulation and Cost Optimization. IGLC, 10.
109
Pingbo Tang, D. G. (2014). Workflow stabilization with fine-grained work packaging and
near real-time progressing monitoring. IGLC, 12.
PMBOK. (2000). A Guide to Projet Management Body of Knowledge. USA: Project
Management Institute,Inc.
Russell Kenley, T. H. (2015). Removing waiting hidden time in critical path schedules :A
location-based approach to avoiding waste. IGLC, 8.
S.Mohammad, H. L. (2012). Possibility of applying lean in post-disaster
reconstruction:An evaluation study. IGLC, 10.
Sakamoto, M., Horman, M. J., & Thomas , H. R. (2002). A Study of the Relationship
between Buffers and Peromance in Construction. IGLC, 13.
Saunders , M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research Methods for Business
Students. Pearsons Eduction Limited.
Senior, B. A. (2009). Critical Path Method Implementation Drawbacks: A Discussion
Using Action Theory.
Seppanen, O. (2012). A production control game for teaching a location-based
management system`s controlling methods. IGLC, 10.
Shen Li Jun, D. K. (2000). Distributed Sheduling With Integrated Production Scheduler.
IGLC, 11.
Sriwuwarnat, C., & Photios, L. G. (2007). The investigation of lead-time buffering under
uncertainty using simulation and cost optimization. IGLC, 10.
Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research &
Evaluation. Retrieved 01 05, 2020, from Semantic Scholar:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/An-Overview-of-Content-Analysis.-
Practical-Research-Stemler/192cd7912e2770f3c725a22822b77a59e4c1d75b
T.S.Abdelhamid, D. S.-G. (2009). Working through unforseen uncertainities using the
OODA Loop:An approach for self-managed Construction teams. IGLC, 10.
Tan, B., Horman, M. J., Messner, J. I., & Riley, D. R. (2003). Increasing the
understanding of Lean Principales with advanced Visualization technologies.
IGLC, 10.
Tommelein Iris.D, M. W. (1999). More Just-In-Time :Location Of Buffers In Structural
Steel Supply and Construction Process. IGLC, 12.
110
Tommelein, W. M. (1999). More Just in Time:Location of Buffers in structural Steel
Supply and Construction Process. IGLC, 12.
Tung Yang, P. G. (2001). Resources-Driven Scheduling for repetitive Projects:A Pull
System Appraoch. IGLC, 14.
Vaidyanathan, K. (2003). Value of visibility and planning in an enginner-to-order
environment. IGLC, 14.
Williams, M. (2008). The Principles of Project Management. Canada: SitePoint Pty. Ltd.
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (2003). Lean Thinking:Banish Waste and Create Wealth
in Your Corporation. USA: Free Press.
Yang, I. (2002). Stochastic analysis on project duration under the requirement of
continuous resource utilization. IGLC, 13.