CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS VOL. 63, 2018 A publication of The Italian Association of Chemical Engineering Online at www.aidic.it/cet Guest Editors: Jeng Shiun Lim, Wai Shin Ho, Jiří J. Klemeš Copyright © 2018, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l. ISBN 978-88-95608-61-7; ISSN 2283-9216 The Implementation of Lean Construction Tools in Malaysia Mohd Arif Marhani*, Nor Azmi Ahmad Bari, Khairani Ahmad, Aini Jaapar Faculty of Architecture, Planning, and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia arif2713@salam.uitm.edu.my Lean construction (LC) tools are proposed to resolve the issues of construction waste. LC is a continuous improvement in the construction processes that can manage the construction waste efficiently. The implementation of LC also will secure a better health and safety environment and accomplish in sustaining growth and profitability of an organisation. This study was conducted to investigate the availability of LC tools and its implications towards the quality of a construction product via the survey questionnaire. The questionnaire was sent to the contractors that register with the Construction Industry Development Board Malaysia (CIDB) underclass G7 categories in Malaysia. Based on the findings, the most LC tools implemented in the Malaysian construction industry are teamwork, daily hurdles meetings, and 5S. The implementation of LC tools can give a positive impact on the quality of the construction project. It shows that construction projects will produce a higher quality of the product by implementing LC. The findings outlined in this paper could be essential for the future framework of LC tools that can enhance the contractor’s quality of a product towards sustainable low carbon emission development. 1. Introduction Sustainable construction is a way forward for the construction industry to accomplish sustainability in development, while excessively taking environmental, socio-economic and cultural issues into consideration (Shafii et al., 2006). Nevertheless, many construction wastes are being produced due to the rapid development of the construction industry affected the environment solely (Fu and Teng, 2014). Equally, this problem occurred in the Malaysian construction industry due to the tremendous level of construction activity (Mah et al., 2017). Begum et al. (2010) reported industrial and construction industry generated 28.34 % of construction waste due to the current demand for building and infrastructure projects in Malaysia. Simultaneously, this issue overwhelmed the deficiency of overall worldwide resources, the economy, social and environment (Nagapan et al. 2012). Construction waste refers to waste resulting from defective materials, leftover materials and wastage (Poon et al., 2004). There are seven categories of construction waste under the lean mechanism, which are the correction, over-processing, delay, inventory, conveyance, overproduction, and motion (Ogunbiyi et al., 2013). According to Abdul Rahman et al. (2012), waste can be generated during the designing goods and services processes, and mistake by human too. Construction waste gives an enormous impact on project costs and time of any of construction projects (Nagapan et al., 2012). The construction industry in Malaysia is urged to move from traditional wet construction method towards innovative construction techniques to overcome this issue. LC is proposed resolving the issues of construction waste. Fundamentally, LC is a concurrent and continuous improvement in the construction processes that capable of in managing the construction waste (Marhani et al., 2012). LC is necessary for overcoming the issues and adequate in reducing the overall cost and duration of a construction project (Jaapar et al. 2015). The implementation of LC also promises a better quality of the construction project and will improve its performances too (Cho, 2011). This article is intended to investigate the availability of LC tools and its implications towards the quality of a construction product in Malaysia. This paper also proposed to recommend a framework for LC tools that suitable for the Malaysian construction industry. This proposed framework will enhance the future of contractor’s quality of a product towards sustainable low carbon emission development. DOI: 10.3303/CET1863049 Please cite this article as: Mohd Arif Marhani, Nor Azmi Ahmad Bari, Khairani Ahmad, Aini Jaapar, 2018, The implementation of lean construction tools in malaysia, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 63, 289-294 DOI:10.3303/CET1863049 289 2. Lean construction LC is an alternative mechanism that can be implemented in the Malaysian construction industry in settling the issues of construction waste. According to Yahya and Mohamad (2011), LC is about managing and improving the construction process by eliminating construction waste to meet the client’s need. LC is also aiming for a better delivery process, concurrent and continuous improvement to the construction project throughout the life of the project. By implementing LC, an organisation will secure a better health and safety environment and accomplish in sustaining growth and profitability the organisation itself. Table 1: LC tools in construction LC tools Coding Authors Standard Forms LC1 Johansen and Walter (2007) Management Contracts LC2 Engineers Australia (2012) Total quality management (TQM) LC3 Engineers Australia (2012) Concurrent Engineering LC4 Engineers Australia (2012) Value-based Management LC5 Koskela (1992) Increased Visualisation LC6 Construction Industry Research and Information Association (2013) Standardisation of Work LC7 Engineers Australia (2012) Last planner system (LPS) LC8 Engineers Australia (2012) Business Process Re- engineering LC9 Koskela (1992) Five Why's LC10 Suresh et al. (2011) Daily Huddle Meetings LC11 Engineers Australia (2012) First Run Studies LC12 Building Research Establishment Ltd (2013) Error Proofing (Poka-yoke) LC13 Engineers Australia (2012) Partnering LC14 Johansen and Walter (2007) Teamwork LC15 Alinaitwe (2009) Computer-aided Tools LC16 Johansen and Walter (2007) Supply Chain Management LC17 Johansen and Walter (2007) Just-In-Time LC18 Engineers Australia (2012) The 5S Process (Housekeeping system) LC19 Construction Industry Research and Information Association (2013) Industrialised Building System (IBS) LC20 Suresh et al. (2011) Figure 1: LC principles. Source: Marhani et al. (2012) 4. Establish pull 3. Create flow 5. Seek perfection 1. Identify value 2. Map the value stream 290 The literature showed there are implications to the construction project during the implementation of LC. According to Cho (2011), the implementation of LC promotes the construction project performances. These project performances can be measured in term of quality, cost and time (Construction Industry Research and Information Association, 2013). A construction project also can be measured through safety aspect, client’s satisfaction, team member and environmental attributes (Cho, 2011). This article only concentrates on the impact of LC mechanism on the quality of a construction project. According to Ogunbiyi et al. (2013), LC will provide a higher quality of product and the product itself is constructed as planned (Bashir, 2013). By implementing LC, it will increase the functionality of a project and reduce the numbers of defects (Aziz and Hafez, 2013). This LC mechanism needs an organisation to adopt appropriate or suitable LC tools to reap its benefits. Previous researchers suggested specific tools or key concepts or techniques in their frameworks or guidelines. By using appropriate and proper tools (Suresh et al., 2011) to delivery process of a construction project, LC will provide more significant gains to the organisation. Thus, it shows the LC tools are present as the instrumental tool for the realisation of LC mechanism (Salem et al. 2005). There are twenty numbers of LC tools as per Table 1. An organisation should apply the application of these LC tools to gain the greater benefit of the mechanism. All these tools are using the LC principles in their activities. As per Figure 1, there are five LC principles, which are identify value, map the value stream, create flow, establish pull and seek perfection. These LC principles are incorporated and practised throughout the construction processes. Thus, the cooperation of team members and continuous improvement in enhancing the whole construction processes is needed during the forming of these LC principles. 3. Methodology This paper concentrated on the availability of LC tools and its implications towards the quality of a construction product. A questionnaire survey is carried out to collect quantitative data, which included nine questions. This research method is also designed to identify the contractors who implemented the LC tools in their construction projects. Additionally, the study uses a 5-point Likert as a point of scales, which range from 1 = never use/strongly disagree to 5 = frequently use/strongly agree. In this study, the unit of analysis used is the organisation. The data used is collected from contractors in Malaysia. The questionnaire was sent to randomly 392 contractors as well as a small sample of academics with interest in LC (5 for a pilot study and 387 for the primary study). Based on a stratified random sampling design, the target population for contractors was based on 6,000 companies that register with the CIDB underclass G7 (projects greater than Ringgit Malaysia 10 million) categories and were identified from the CIDB directory. 44 questionnaires were returned within seven months of being forwarded, making the complete response rate only 11.2 %. This response rate was finally achieved after several efforts were conducted regarding personal contacts and follow-up emails and calls. It is believed that the low rate of responses was due to the attitude, busy schedule and unwillingness of the respondents to participate in the survey. Although the norm response rate in the construction industry for postal questionnaires is around 20 – 30 % (Takim et al., 2004), the authors believed 11.2 % is uncommon but still acceptable. For instance, Dulaimi et al. (2003) received 5.91 %, Ofori et al. (2013) obtained 11.03 %, and Yunus (2012) received 14.9 % for their studies. The authors are confident with the respondents, who are taken from a high-quality group. Even if the survey response is not significant, it still produces substantial findings and outcomes to the study (Che Ibrahim, 2014). 4. Result and discussion According to address the objectives of this study, this section presents an analysis of the data obtained through the quantitative research. A questionnaire survey conducted to ascertain the perspective of the LC tools to promote a better quality of construction project for the Malaysian construction industry. The quality that has been discussed here were either the LC tools provided a higher quality of a project, achieved the quality of a product as planned, increased the functionality of project and reduced nos. of defects. The findings will then be used to develop further and refine the LC tools framework. 4.1 Demographic study The distribution or mixture of the professionals and organisations involved in this study is presented in Table 2. The largest proportion of the participants was meant for others, which were site quantity surveyors and contract officers (70.5 %) while 40.9 % of the respondents had more than ten years of experience in the industry. 32.9 % of them were involved in the housing project, and 35.2 % of the project sizes were worth more than 50 x 10 6 MYR. It can be concluded that most of the respondents were from practitioners’ holdings 291 managerial positions with more than 10 years’ experience in the industry. Furthermore, most of the respondents were involved a lot in housing projects size more than 50 x 106 MYR. Their responses and thoughts are under a strong effect on the results of the study and established the reliability of the research as well. Table 2: Distribution of the questionnaire survey Designation Experience (y) Managing Director Project Manager Site Supervisor Others Below 5 5 - 10 Above 10 9.1 % 15.9 % 4.5 % 70.5 % 38.6 % 20.5 % 40.9 % Project type Project size (106 MYR) Commercial Industrial Housing Civil engineering Others < 2 2 - 5 5 - 10 10 - 50 > 50 27.4 % 6.8 % 32.9 % 24.7 % 8.2 % 11.1 % 11.1 % 22.2 % 20.4 % 35.2 % 4.2 The potential of LC tools To identify the availability of LC tools in Malaysia, Table 3 indicates the list of LC tools. These tools were examined according to the construction stages (project definition, lean design, lean supply, lean assembly and use) by ranking them considered their mean values (μ) and standard deviation (σX). Table 3: List of LC tools during construction stages Project definition Lean design Lean supply Lean assembly Use LC tools μ σX LC tools μ σX LC tools μ σX LC tools μ σX LC tools μ σX LC15 3.82 1.225 LC15 3.86 1.212 LC15 3.77 1.054 LC11 3.80 1.091 LC19 3.48 1.406 LC3 3.70 1.250 LC4 3.68 1.157 LC11 3.66 1.119 LC18 3.75 0.991 LC4 3.45 1.066 LC1 3.66 1.180 LC7 3.66 1.033 LC8 3.64 1.036 LC15 3.70 1.091 LC17 3.45 0.999 LC7 3.61 1.146 LC8 3.66 1.219 LC17 3.64 1.143 LC9 3.61 1.083 LC15 3.43 1.208 LC11 3.59 1.282 LC16 3.66 1.380 LC3 3.55 1.088 LC3 3.59 1.106 LC3 3.41 1.085 LC16 3.59 1.452 LC12 3.61 1.385 LC16 3.52 1.303 LC8 3.59 1.127 LC7 3.36 1.102 LC2 3.57 1.301 LC11 3.57 1.301 LC18 3.50 1.151 LC17 3.57 1.149 LC8 3.36 1.163 LC17 3.48 1.248 LC14 3.55 1.190 LC2 3.50 1.229 LC4 3.52 1.000 LC11 3.30 1.153 LC4 3.43 1.189 LC17 3.52 1.248 LC20 3.50 1.321 LC16 3.50 1.267 LC9 3.30 1.250 LC14 3.43 1.283 LC1 3.43 1.283 LC10 3.48 1.338 LC10 3.50 1.355 LC20 3.30 1.374 LC12 3.43 1.453 LC3 3.39 1.224 LC4 3.45 1.150 LC20 3.48 1.320 LC16 3.27 1.318 LC8 3.39 1.385 LC2 3.39 1.243 LC5 3.41 1.187 LC5 3.41 1.148 LC18 3.25 1.102 LC10 3.36 1.366 LC20 3.36 1.382 LC1 3.39 1.125 LC12 3.41 1.245 LC2 3.23 1.198 LC5 3.32 1.235 LC10 3.36 1.416 LC7 3.36 1.080 LC6 3.39 1.166 LC1 3.23 1.255 LC19 3.32 1.360 LC5 3.34 1.160 LC9 3.34 1.160 LC1 3.34 1.055 LC5 3.18 1.147 LC9 3.30 1.304 LC13 3.25 1.349 LC14 3.34 1.256 LC7 3.34 1.077 LC6 3.16 1.180 LC6 3.23 1.344 LC9 3.23 1.309 LC12 3.32 1.308 LC14 3.32 1.157 LC12 3.16 1.238 LC13 3.20 1.340 LC18 3.20 1.340 LC6 3.25 1.296 LC19 3.30 1.391 LC10 3.16 1.293 LC20 3.18 1.402 LC6 3.16 1.275 LC13 3.18 1.281 LC2 3.23 1.138 LC14 3.09 1.117 LC18 3.05 1.311 LC19 3.16 1.311 LC19 3.16 1.311 LC13 3.00 1.181 LC13 3.09 1.197 Teamwork is reported with the highest μ = 3.82, σX = 1.225 during the project definition, μ = 3.86, σX = 1.212 during the lean design and μ = 3.77, σX = 1.054 during the lean supply stage. Daily hurdles meetings are preferred during the lean assembly (highest μ = 3.80, σX = 1.091) while 5S is favoured during the use stage (highest μ = 3.48, σX = 1.406). It shows the contractors frequently used the twenty numbers of LC tools since all the LC tools received a μ greater than 3.00 throughout the construction processes. Teamwork, daily hurdles meetings, and 5S are the typical LC tools implemented by the contractors in Malaysia. 4.3 The implication of LC tools towards quality of a product Table 4 indicates the implication of LC tools towards the quality of a product. According to the respondents, implementing teamwork in a construction project would provide a higher quality project (highest μ = 4.11, σX = 0.97) and increase the functionality of the project (highest μ = 3.95, σX = 0.861). By implementing TQM, it would reduce the numbers of defects (highest μ = 4.07, σX = 0.974) and achieve the quality of a product (highest μ = 3.95, σX = 0.939). It shows teamwork and TQM are the most strongly agree of LC tools that reflect the quality of a product in the construction project. By implementing these LC tools, it will provide a higher quality of a construction project. 292 Table 4: Implications of LC tools towards quality of a product Providing a higher quality of project Achieving quality of product as planned Increasing the functionality of project Reducing nos. of defects LC tools μ σX LC tools μ σX LC tools μ σX LC tools μ σX LC15 4.11 0.970 LC3 3.95 0.939 LC15 3.95 0.861 LC3 4.07 0.974 LC3 4.07 0.950 LC7 3.93 1.043 LC7 3.77 1.008 LC4 4.02 1.171 LC7 3.95 0.963 LC15 3.84 1.140 LC16 3.75 1.059 LC15 3.86 1.025 LC4 3.86 1.153 LC4 3.82 1.018 LC9 3.75 1.102 LC11 3.82 1.018 LC1 3.82 1.063 LC2 3.82 1.167 LC10 3.75 1.102 LC7 3.82 1.084 LC2 3.77 1.075 LC6 3.77 1.031 LC1 3.75 1.222 LC13 3.77 1.159 LC16 3.77 1.118 LC1 3.77 1.159 LC3 3.73 1.149 LC1 3.77 1.273 LC18 3.77 1.159 LC11 3.73 1.246 LC4 3.70 1.133 LC10 3.70 1.112 LC5 3.75 1.123 LC5 3.70 1.047 LC2 3.70 1.212 LC6 3.68 1.137 LC19 3.66 1.119 LC17 3.68 1.157 LC6 3.68 1.052 LC19 3.68 1.137 LC10 3.66 1.200 LC16 3.66 1.077 LC18 3.66 1.055 LC2 3.68 1.272 LC13 3.64 1.163 LC10 3.55 1.109 LC20 3.66 1.256 LC20 3.68 1.308 LC17 3.64 1.203 LC13 3.55 1.150 LC17 3.64 1.123 LC18 3.66 1.238 LC12 3.61 1.125 LC20 3.55 1.422 LC11 3.64 1.143 LC12 3.64 1.183 LC6 3.61 1.166 LC19 3.52 1.191 LC13 3.64 1.222 LC16 3.61 1.125 LC8 3.50 1.067 LC8 3.50 1.067 LC8 3.61 1.166 LC5 3.59 1.187 LC14 3.50 1.191 LC9 3.50 1.151 LC19 3.50 1.089 LC9 3.57 1.129 LC9 3.45 1.150 LC14 3.48 1.110 LC12 3.50 1.210 LC17 3.52 1.267 LC20 3.45 1.190 LC18 3.48 1.151 LC5 3.48 1.023 LC8 3.39 1.104 LC11 3.43 1.319 LC12 3.41 1.226 LC14 3.45 1.109 LC14 3.39 1.125 5. Conclusions Based on the findings, it is discovered that most of LC practitioners in the Malaysian construction industry is knowledgeable regarding this mechanism. Most of them are manageable in dealing with its principles and tools. In the Malaysian construction industry, teamwork, daily hurdles meetings, and 5S are the most LC tools being implemented. Teamwork is very crucial when performing LC in a construction project. Cooperation and participation of all members in thinking, planning, decision-making, and action will smoothen the construction process. By implementing daily hurdles meetings, it will establish a platform for the team members to share their view in solving any problem during the lean assembly process. 5S will make a better and more comfortable working environment at the site. All these LC tools are best to be in the LC tools framework. TQM is advised to be on the list of LC tools framework. It will help any contractor to utilise its’ human and material resources to achieve customers’ satisfaction, profit, and growth of the contractor itself. LC tools can give a positive impact on the quality of the construction project. It shows that construction projects will produce a higher quality of the product by implementing LC. Hence, implementation of LC tools is beneficial to the contractors and at the same time, it will enhance the client satisfaction. The results could assist contractors intending to adopt LC in selecting the appropriate tools to address their needs. The findings reported in this paper could be essential for a future LC tools framework that can enhance the contractor’s quality of a product towards sustainable low carbon emission development. Forthcoming research in a similar area will be done on case studies that have implemented LC mechanism by interviewing resource people on the site. Acknowledgments This research was supported by a grant from Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS/2/2014/SSI11/UiTM/0/02) funded by the Ministry of Education Malaysia and Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Selangor. Reference Abdul Rahman H., Wang C., Lim I., 2012, Waste processing framework for non-value-adding activities using lean construction, Journal of Frontiers in Construction Engineering, 1, 8-13. Alinaitwe H., 2009, Prioritising lean construction barriers in Uganda’s construction industry, Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 14, 15-30. 293 Aziz R.F., Hafez S.M., 2013, Applying lean thinking in construction and performance improvement, Alexandria Engineering Journal, 52, 679-695. Bashir A.M., 2013, A framework for utilising lean construction strategies to promote safety on construction sites, PhD Thesis, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom. Begum R.A., Satari S.K., Pereira J.J., 2010, Waste generation and recycling: comparison of conventional and industrialized building systems, American Journal of Environmental Sciences, 6, 383–388. Building Research Establishment Ltd, 2013, Construction Lean Improvement Programme (CLIP) accessed 03.10.2013. Che Ibrahim C.K.I., 2014, Development of an assessment tool for team integration in alliance projects, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 8, 813-827. Cho S., 2011, The relation between lean construction and performance in the Korean construction industry, PhD Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, United States of America. Construction Industry Research and Information Association, 2013, CIRIA Lean Construction guides accessed 03.10.2013. Dulaimi M.F., Ling F.Y., Bajracharya A., 2003, Organizational motivation and inter-organizational interaction in construction innovation in Singapore, Construction Management and Economics, 21, 307–318. Engineers Australia, 2012, Recommended practices for the application of lean construction methods to building new Australian LNG capacity, Perth, WA. Fu Q., Teng J., 2014, Analysis of the construction cost management based on the perspective of the construction waste recycling, International Conference on Management Science and Management Innovation (MSMI 2014), 14th-15th June, Changsha, China, 701-706. Jaapar A., Marhani M.A., Ahmad Bari N.A., 2015, Green lean construction tools framework for Malaysian construction industry, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 9, 68–71. Johansen E., Walter L., 2007, Lean construction: prospects for the German construction industry implementation of lean concepts in construction, Lean Construction Journal, 3, 19–32. Koskela L., 1992, Application of the new production philosophy to construction accessed 02.10.2013. Mah C.M., Fujiwara T., Ho C.S., 2017, Concrete waste management decision analysis based on life cycle assessment, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56, 25–30. Marhani M.A., Jaapar A., Ahmad Bari N.A., 2012, Lean construction: towards enhancing sustainable construction in Malaysia, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 68, 87–98. Nagapan S., Rahman I., Asmi A., 2012, Factors contributing to physical and non-physical waste generation in construction industry, International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences, 1, 1-10. Ofori G., Ai Lin E.T., Tjandra I.K., 2013, Effectiveness of Construction 21: enhancing professionalism in Singapore’s construction industry, 19th International CIB World Building Congress, 5th-9th May, Queensland, Australia. Ogunbiyi O., Oladapo A., Goulding J., 2013, A review of lean concept and its application to sustainable construction in the UK, International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering & Technology, 4, 82–92. Poon C., Yu Ann, T., Jaillon L., 2004, Reducing building waste at construction sites in Hong Kong, Construction Management and Economics, 22, 461–470. Salem O., Solomon J., Genaidy A., Luegering M., 2005, Site implementation and assessment of lean construction techniques, Lean Construction Journal, 2, 1–58. Shafii F., Arman Ali Z., Othman M.Z., 2006, Achieving sustainable construction in the developing countries of Southeast Asia, The 6th Asia-Pacific Structural Engineering and Construction Conference (APSEC 2006), 5th-6th September 2006, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Suresh S., Bashir A., Olomolaiye P., 2011, A protocol for lean construction in developing countries, Contemporary Issues in Construction in Developing Countries. Taylor & Francis Ltd, 376–405. Takim R., Akintoye A., Kelly J., 2004, Analysis of measures of construction project success in Malaysia, 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1st-3rd September, Edinburgh, UK, 1123–1133. Yahya M.A., Mohamad M.I., 2011, Review on lean principles for rapid construction, Jurnal Teknologi (Sains & Kejuruteraan), 54, 1–11. Yunus R., 2012, Decision making guidelines for sustainable construction of industrialised building systems, PhD Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Queensland, Australia. 294