the need for standard production information of indonesian construction industry

8/8/2019 The Need for Standard Production Information of Indonesian Construction Industry

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-need-for-standard-production-information-of-indonesian-construction-industry 1/7

Group of Construction Management EACEF-45

E-102 EACEF - The 1 st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum

THE NEED for STANDARD PRODUCTION INFORMATION

of INDONESIAN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Reini D. Wirahadikusumah

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung E-mail : [email protected]

ABSTRACT: The Indonesian Construction Industry has played an important role in the nationaleconomy. In 2005, the industry’s direct contribution to the gross national product was about 6%,

and employed 7-8% of the country’s labor force. However, the industry is mostly populated by alarge number of small and medium sized firms, and is considered highly fragmented. Thefragmentation has been acknowledged as one of the major causes of performance-related problemsfacing the industry. Different types of construction information are exchanged between the various parties for the purpose of communicating design, construction and contractual matters. InIndonesia, individual firms have developed their own systems of classifying and disseminating

construction information to facilitate this process. Because there is no standardised system of

sharing of such information, the complete idea originated from the owner, pass through thedesigners and the contractors, is partially lost in the process of constructing the desired facilities.Effective communication of high quality production information between designers andconstructors is therefore essential for the satisfactory realisation of construction projects. Suchstandards of production information for construction works have been widely used in the U.S., theU.K. (and Europe); while neighbouring countries have started to adapt these standards as therecommended national systems. In the era of globalization, Indonesian construction industry needsto catch up in developing such standard in order to be competitive. A pilot study was performed tolook into the possibility of developing a standard information for construction works. Developing

a new standard unique for Indonesian purposes is not reasonable, since in the future it will only become a barrier for playing in the global arena. Thus, a general review of international standards, particularly the widely used classification system developed by the Construction SpecificationInstitute (the MasterFormat), was followed by discussions with architects and contractors. The

case study resulted in a classification format for schedule of work which was agreed by designersand contractors. The proposed format was exercised on a medium-rise building. While a wider national study is required, the study concluded that a standard classification system should be

developed based on industry players’ widespread familiarity, as well as regional/ internationalcompatibility. The MasterFormat has a good potential for adoption with some adjustments in the

structure and the terminology.

KEYWORDS: standard, classification, construction, information, buildings

1. INTRODUCTION

The construction industry in general is highly fragmented and dominated by small businesses. It

involves numerous parties from different professions. The temporary nature and uniqueness of

construction projects is reflected in one-off locations, one-off designs solutions and one-off projectteams, which led to a very fragmented communication platform. This fragmentation results in

significant negative impacts (i.e., low productivity; cost and time overruns; disputes and litigations)

which have been acknowledged as the major causes of performance-related problems facing the

industry (Tucker et al., 2001).

Since the 1990s, in the U.K. and U.S, there have been national movements toward increasing the

productivity of construction industry and more thoroughly as “Rethinking Construction.” The reports

emphasized the need to eliminate adversarial attitudes and practices, and to develop effective team

working. Both recognized the importance of good project information, and a major part of the large

cost savings projected are expected to arise from more effective use of IT in the preparation and use of

project information. The reports are concerned with promoting increased efficiency in the building

process and taken together they clearly identify inadequate project information as a major cause of inefficiency.



Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-45

Universitas Pelita Harapan, INDONESIA - September 26-27 th , 2007 E-103

Different types of construction information are exchanged between the various parties for the purpose

of communicating design, construction and contractual matters. The consequences of the

fragmentation problem include the fragmentation of design, fabrication and construction data, with

data generated at one location cannot readily re-used downstream. Poor communication of design

intent and rationale often leads to unwarranted design changes, inadequate design specifications,

unnecessary liability claims, and increases in project time and cost. The fragmentation problem is

worsened by the fact that individual companies have developed their own means of classifying and

disseminating construction information to facilitate this process. In Indonesia, there is no standardized

system of classifying and sharing of such information in the industry, much of the exchanged data may

be lost along the way

The classification systems for the purposes of the construction industry has been developed in Europe

and North America since the 1970s, while the Swedish system, SfB, has been in existence for more

than 50 years. The importance of a standard classification system is reaffirmed by a UK report

(Building EDC, 1987) which was based on detailed on-site studies of construction projects. This report

examined factors affecting the quality of building and revealed that the largest single cause of quality

problems was inadequate project information.

Indonesia’s neighboring country Singapore, has started their efforts in developing such system in thelate 1990s by forming the Construction Industry IT Standards Technical Committee (CITC). The

national committee prepare the industry for the IT age of the 21st century. The committee has

developed the Standard Code of Practice for Classification of Construction Cost Information, which is

to ensure that construction cost information is structured and stored in a way that is consistent and

reliable within and between the different disciplines so as to reduce any duplication of work. They

have also proposed to the industry a Code of Practice for the Classification of Construction Resources

Information, which presents a uniform system for classifying information relating to construction

products, materials, services and machinery. The codes should provide a standardized format to

facilitate procurement activities in the construction industry. As construction projects use a broad

range of products and services, there is even greater need for a classification standard to ensure a

consistent and structured way of information exchange and storage (Goh and Chu, 2002).

Research has shown that many problems on site are caused by poor or missing production information.Effective communication of high quality production information between designers and constructors is

therefore essential for the satisfactory realization of construction projects. The evidence shows that

improvements in the quality of production information reduce the incidence of site quality problems

and lead to significant savings in the cost of construction work. In many countries, construction sector

can contribute a significant portion of the GNP, around 6-9%. In 2005, construction contributed 6.35%

of Indonesia’s GNP. It is evident, therefore, that improvements in the efficiency of the construction

process should result in significant benefits for the Indonesian economy.

2. STANDARD CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION

Production (construction) information is the information prepared by designers, which is passed to a

construction team to enable a project to be constructed.” It is the means of communication between

designers and contractors, either in separate organizations or in the same organization. It is

independent of who employs the designers and which procurement route or form of contract is used.

Production (construction) information is communicated through drawings, specifications, and bills of

quantity or schedules of work. This information must be complete, accurate and coordinated, so that it

will be effective because no matter how good the design is, it will not be satisfactorily realised on site

otherwise. Poor production information causes delays, additional costs and poor quality, which in turn

give rise to disputes over who is responsible for the problems. Consequently, good production

information is of vital importance to the success of any project.

There are three most commonly known classification systems: the MasterFormat and Uniformat used

in North America and the European CI/SfB coding system. These systems have also been in adoptedin many other countries around the world.





MasterFormat, a product of Construction Specification Institute (CSI) and Construction Specifications

Canada, is a hierarchical system of numbers and titles for organizing construction information. It is the

organizational standard for specifications, the written instructions for construction, and other

information for most commercial and institutional building projects in the U.S. and Canada. It

provides a standard information filing-and-retrieval system that can be used for organizing information

in project manuals and specifications, cost accounts, and cost data; and for filing product information

and other technical data. Functioning as the "Dewey Decimal System" for organizing construction

information, MasterFormat is divided into divisions, and each division is composed of sections.

Since its introduction in 1963, the MasterFormat has been widely accepted as an industry standard in

the United States and Canada. It has been adopted by the Associated General Contractors (AGC), The

American Institute of Architects (AIA), the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), and

others in the United States and Canada in the form of a document entitled “Uniform System for

Building Specifications.” It has also been officially adopted for all construction works by the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Navy (NAVFAC), the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA), and by numerous other public and private agencies. It has been used since

1986 by the McGraw-Hill Information Systems Co. as the basis for the Sweet’s Catalog Files of

construction products; and it has also been used since 1987 by the R. S. Means Company for coding

their construction-cost data publications. In addition, the MasterFormat has also been used for coding product literature, such as the CSI Spec-data product-information sheets, for organizing specifications

and construction bids, as in the CSI Manu-Spec system, and in numerous commercial cost-estimating

and cost-accounting computer systems (Ioannou and Liu, 1993).

The earlier and still widely used version of MasterFormat includes 16 divisions. Among the recent

trends in construction industry is the demand for constructing building with high-tech services (e.g.,

hospitals, entertainment facilities, etc.). According to CSI, data in such construction project manuals

about voice, data, and video networks has often been deficient, misplaced, or left out because of the

limited capacity of MasterFormat's 1995 edition. Its formatting structure does not have enough

locations for specifications in a construction project manual to address the tremendous growth in the

volume and complexity of information about such fast-advancing systems. Specifications writers have

tried to make do by placing data in project manuals where they could, using their individual judgmentabout locations, if they could be found at all. Many people have added non-standard slots for missing

information, without reference to the MasterFormat standard. To diminish these problems, the 2004

version has more divisions (i.e., 50) and sections to provide better specifications about modern

buildings' data, communications, and automation systems.

While MasterFormat has been considered most suitable for buildings in North America and many

other countries; for non-building projects (large and complex civil engineering projects), engineers

often have to develop a unique work breakdown structure, or other standard, for classification system

in preparing the drawings, specifications, and bill of quantity (Peurifoy and Oberlander, 2002). To

achieve further applicability within the construction industry, the 2004 edition of MasterFormat offers

a solution for this problem by adding divisions and sections for standardizing specifications for heavy

civil construction, such as dams and bridges, and process engineering construction projects, such as power plants and refineries.

The “Uniformat,” issued by General Services Administration (GSA), uses a functional breakdown of a

building into subsystems. It includes 12 major divisions that are broken down into sublevels. Unlike

the MasterFormat, it is not material-oriented. In current design practices, the Uniformat is used

primarily for functional breakdown at the early planning and design stages. Information at the detail

design and construction phases is typically organized according to the MasterFormat.

The CI/SfB coding system is based on the SfB system used in Sweden since 1950 as a national method

for organizing official and centrally produced construction-industry specifications, price books, and

building-product data sheets. After many modifications, a new version of the SfB system, now called

the CI/SfB system, was introduced in 1969 and has since been adopted by many European countries,

including the United Kingdom and The Netherlands, and is being considered as a standard for allcountries in the European Economic Community. The CI/SfB coding system includes four main





tables: building environment, elements, construction forms and materials, and activities and

requirements. One characteristic of the CI/SfB system is that each table can be used either

independently or together with other tables. This characteristic makes the CI/SfB system more flexible

than other coding systems, since it allow it to cover technology information from generic to specific

forms (Ioannou and Liu, 1993).

In the U.K., the Construction Project Information Committee (CPIC) is responsible for providing best practice guidance on the content, form and preparation of construction production information and

making sure this best practice is disseminated throughout the construction industry. The Committee is

formed from representatives of the major industry institutions - Royal Institute of British Architects,

Institution of Civil Engineers, Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, Royal Institution

of Chartered Surveyors and the Construction Confederation - which ensure that the guidance we

provide has a solid foundation within all branches of the industry. In 2003, the committee with the

support of the Department of Trade and Industry launched of a new code - Production information: a

code of procedure for the construction industry, which provides practical guidance on the preparation

of good production drawings, specifications and schedules of work by making optimum use of widely

adopted computer systems.

The use of any standardized classification of construction information (MasterFormat, CI/SfB,Uniformat, or else) can cut construction costs because of more accurate specifications, which can

reduce costly changes or delays in projects due to incomplete, misplaced, or missing information.

According to CSI, it is estimated that an average 5 to 10 percent of savings in construction costs can

be realized when such systems are addressed fully in a building's specifications. The use of

standardized system should be started early in the design phase and coordinated between consultants.

Because in recent years, more and more buildings are designed with tremendous complexity as

technology-rich (voice, data, and video networks) facilities, this reality must be fully addressed during

the design phase of a construction project through the specifications and other construction

information. It will lead to more cost-efficient and smoother project delivery, as well as facilitate

future maintenance and accommodation of new technologies over the life of the project. The challenge

of providing standard construction information is increasing in building such facilities with the risks of

additional changes, delays, and costs (tearing down walls to install cabling and cable pathways andthen rebuilding the walls, paying for express delivery of large amounts of construction products such

as wire and cable to minimize schedule delays, paying crews overtime to install such systems to help

keep the overall project on schedule, etc.).

3. CASE STUDY

In the era of globalization, Indonesian construction industry needs to catch up in developing standard

classification in order to be competitive. Such standard should not be developed uniquely for

Indonesian purposes, since in the future it will only become a barrier for playing in the global arena.

The reasonable strategy is to perform a general review of international standards, decide on the

standard which has the best potential for adoption and develop adjustments to accommodate the

industry’s local characteristics.

The Ministry of Public Works, as one of the Indonesia’s construction industry largest clients, do not

provide a standard construction information for their projects. However, for building and road

projects, the Ministry tend to use particular formats; while the application of these formats are not

enforced, they are used on customary grounds. Indonesia’s other biggest players are involved in the

telecommunication, electrics, and oil and gas industry. These industries consist of a major portion of

multi-national companies. They have their own regulations, and the construction aspects within these

significant industries are beyond the scope of the Ministry of Public Works. The interdepartmental

relations among different ministries have traditionally been challenging, thus a national effort in

developing a standard for construction information will require solid national commitment.

A pilot study was performed as an exercise in looking into the possibility of developing standard

information for construction works. While it was not intended for the purpose of developing a nationalstandard, the study started with performing a general review of the most commonly known





international standards, particularly the widely used classification system developed by the

Construction Specification Institute, i.e. the MasterFormat. Limited discussions with architects and

contractors were conducted to obtain inputs to develop the proposed standard. Based on inputs from

designers and contractors, a standard schedule of work or BoQ was proposed and followed by using

this format in a case study of preparing the bill of quantity (BoQ) of a medium-rise building.

The study was carried out with the support of an established engineering design firm in Bandung. Thearchitects/ engineers in this company were familiar with the MasterFormat and were considering

adopting the format for most of their construction production information. Engineering firms have

been traditionally used their own system in preparing drawings, specifications, and BoQ. Even within

the same company, engineers often use different coding system to suit the client’s request.

The engineers have occasionally adopted the 16-division MasterFormat in their designs; however have

limited its use to the second-level sections (only the first two digits). For the more detailed sub

sections, they still use the concept of traditional “analisa harga satuan” or AHS (=unit price analysis)

which has been widely applied in Indonesian construction industry. The AHS system has been existed

since the Dutch era, and is basically a standard breakdown of cost components (material, labor,

equipment). For example, the AHS for concrete work K-175 per 1 m3 involves 6.8 bags of Portland

Cement, 0.8 m3 of gravel, 0.54 m3 of sand, 1.5 man-day of unskilled labor, 0.5 man-day of semi-skilled labor, 0.05 man-day of mason, 0.01 man-day of superintendent, and 0.07 unit of miscellaneous

tools.

In this system, the unit volume per cost component (or the productivity rate) is accepted as the

industry’s standard for the lack of the availability of other standards; however, the numbers have been

considered not relevant anymore in today’s industry characteristics which involve modern

technologies. Besides the need for a standardized classification system, it is required that an industry-

wide study be conducted to provide productivity and cost references for the purposes of owners,

engineers, and contractors.

Pramudita and Bashirah (2006) worked with the company to exercise the use of a classification system

based on the 16-division MasterFormat with adjustments supported by contractors’ inputs. The

proposed system was then applied to prepare the BoQ of a 1900 square meters, 3 stories building,functioning as an administrative facility of an airport complex. The study did not involve using the

proposed system in the development of the drawings and the specifications.

Two contractors which have been worked together with the design firm in many projects explain their

practice of using the BoQ system developed by designers only for bidding purposes. Before starting

the construction phase, contractors often prepare a different system for their own purpose which

breaks down a construction project into separate zones or buildings (i.e., Building A, B, etc.). The

first-level division in the MasterFormat (i.e., Division 01-General Requirements, Division 02-Site

Construction, Division 03-Concrete, Division 04-Masonry, Division 05-Metals, etc) is deemed more

suitable by the interviewed contractors as the second-level divison, after breaking down the project

into separate zones or buildings. This work break down is practiced because the contractors prefer

being able to summarize or aggregates the BoQ and cost for each zone or building. The MasterFormat-

based classification or coding system has been considered inadequate for project cost control purposes

by contractors.

Rather than preparing two different references of schedule of work, contractors prefer the following

format. The format for schedule of works which was preferred by contractors and also agreed by the

engineers in the study, is a Work Breakdown Structure organization of work group-level (e.g.,

Administrative Building A, Warehouse, etc.). Each group is subdivided into divisions of work

required to construct the group. The divisions are standardized into 9 divisions (as opposed to 16

divisions in the MasterFormat):

Division A Design Development

Division B Sitework

Division C Structural Work Division D Architectural Work

Division E Mechanical Work





Division F Electrical Work

Division G Exterior Building Facilities

Division H Interior Fixtures

Division I Miscellaneous Work

Each division is further broken down into components of work required to construct each division:

A1 Contract Documents

A2 Insurance and Bonds

A3 Shop Drawings & As-Built Drawings

A4 Site Management

A5 Material Sampling and Tests

A6 Project Documentation

B1 Setting-out

B2 Temporary Facilities

B3 Mobilization and Demobilization

B4 Site Clearing and Removal

B5 Excavation, Cut, Backfill, and Disposal

C1 Above Ground Structural Work

C2 Under Ground Structural Work

C3 Roof Framing

D1 Concrete

D2 Metals

D3 Wood and Plastics

D4 Masonry

D5 Thermal and Moisture Protection

D6 Openings (Doors, Windows, Frames)

D7 Finishes

E1 Plumbing

E2 Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning

E3 Fire Suppression

F1 Electrical Power Distribution System

F2 Lighting System

F3 Communication System

F4 Lightning Protection

G1 Paving, Parking, PedestrianG2 Fences and Gates

G3 Planting/Landscaping (Plants, Grass, Soils)

I1 Equipment

I2 Special Construction

I3 Conveying Equipment

These subdivions (A1, A2,… etc.) can be further broken down as needed, but the coding system has

not been standardized. In assembling the cost for each item of work, the cost components include the

direct costs (i.e., material, labor, and equipment) and the indirect costs (overhead, contingency, profit).

The “Pajak Pertambahan Nilai” (PPN which is 10% of the total project cost), or the added-value tax

required to be paid to the government for all construction projects, is added later after the schedule of work is finally summarized.





4. CONCLUSIONS

Learning from Singapore’s experience in developing their national standard for construction

information (Goh and Chu, 2002), the Indonesian standard should not be developed uniquely for local

purposes, since in the future it will only become a barrier for playing in the global arena. However, the

pilot study suggests that designers and contractors prefer to use a system suitable for their needs, but

lack of regional and international compatibility. The Indonesian construction industry should not“reinvent the wheel” in developing a new standard, it will take too much efforts and at the end the

standard will probably cannot be useful in the global competition. Instead, the endeavors should start

with a review of international standards; then followed by a selecting a standard (based on local

practitioners familiarity, regional/international compatibility, etc.) for detailed evaluation and should

be a subject to considerable scrutiny and discussion among the industry members and academics; and

a localization of terminology.

While the advantages of adopting a national standard of construction information have been widely

acknowledged, it is well understood that the successful application of a national standard requires a

change of attitude and mindset among all stakeholders. Designers and contractors will have to

willingly make conversion of their database and other necessary operational and administrative

activities. There should also be an incentive for change.The driver for change in one nation may be different from others. An attempt to build a nation-wide

participation, should be initiated by identifying the key factor as the force for such changes. In

Indonesia, the government has still been the biggest client which contributes about 50 percent in value

of construction project spending. Furthermore, the majority of Indonesian construction companies (the

small and medium sized firms which combine to around 90% of the registered companies) are

supplying these governmental/public-funded projects. The government can play a significant role with

supports from Lembaga Pengambangan Jasa Konstruksi, or LPJK (= Construction Industry

Development Board), Badan Standardisasi Nasional (National Standards Board), and the academic

community. The stakeholders have to make a conscious effort benefiting all. LPJK consists of four

elements of the industry: government, contractors, consultants/designers, and scholars. While it is

dominated with small and medium-sized firms, within this board it can be identified several leaders in

the industry who will be the pioneers and drivers for such change to be realized.

5. REFERENCES

Building Economic Development Council (Building EDC). (1987) “Achieving Quality on Building

Sites,” Report of the National Economic Development Office (NEDO), London, U.K.

Egan, J. (1998). “Rethinking Construction,” The Report of the Construction Task Force on the

Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, on Improving the Quality and Efficiency of U.K.

Construction. Department of the Environment, Transport and Regions.

Goh, B. H. and Chu, Y. L. (2002). “Developing National Standards for the Classification of

Construction Information in Singapore,” Proceedings of the Int. Council for Research and

Innovation in Building and Construction - CIB W78 Conference, 12-14 June 2002, Netherland.Ioannou, P. G. and Liu, L. Y. (1993). “Advanced Construction Technology System – ACTS,”

ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, V.119/ 2, June 1993, p.288-306

Peurifoy, R. L. and Oberlender, G. D. (2002). Estimating Construction Costs, 5th

Ed., McGraw-Hill.

Pramudita and Bashirah (2006). “Pengembangan Format Standar Penyusunan Estimasi Biaya

Konstruksi Bangunan Gedung oleh Perencana,” Final Project Report, School of Civil and

Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung.

Tucker, S.N., Mohamed, S., Johnston, D.R., McFallan, S.L. & Hampson, K.D. (2001) “Building and

Construction Industries supply Chain Project (Domestic)” Report for Department of

Industry, Science and Resources, http://www.industry.gov.au/assets/documents/itrinternet/BC-

SCMReport.pdf (July 27, 2004)