STUDY OF FACTORS AFFECTING LABOR PRODUCTIVITY AT A BUILDING

CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IN THE USA: WEB SURVEY

A Paper
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
Of the
North Dakota State University
Of Agriculture and Applied Science

By

Mahesh Madan Gundecha

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE

Major Department
Construction Management and Engineering

September 2012

Fargo, North Dakota

 North Dakota State University
Graduate School

Title

STUDY OF FACTORS AFFECTING LABOR PRODUCTIVITY AT A

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IN THE USA: WEB SURVEY

By

Mahesh Gundecha

The Supervisory Committee certifies that this disquisition complies with

North Dakota State University’s regulations and meets the accepted standards

for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

i
SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE:

Eric Asa
Chair
Charles McIntyre
Selekwa Majura
Abdelrahman Magdy

Approved:
April 03 2013 Yong Bai

Date Department Chair

 ABSTRACT

Construction projects suffer various problems and complex factors such as cost, duration,

quality and safety. Construction sector is diverse as it contains, contractors, consultants,

designers, owners, and others. The aim of this paper is to identify factors affecting labor

productivity at a building construction project.

A literature review and factors recommended by experts were considered to categorize

the factors. 40 factors, categorized into 5 groups, were analyzed and ranked considering Relative

Importance Index. The questionnaires were distributed to Project Manager, Project Engineer,

Architecture, and Others (Scheduler, and Estimator).

It was concluded, final cost of the projects were higher than estimated cost. It’s

recommended to develop human resources through proper and continuous training programs

frame a strong assignment, vision and a planned approach to overcome the disturbances on

the performance of the construction projects. The discussed factors are expected to assist in
ii
completing construction projects successfully.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is my pleasure to thank my adviser, Dr. Eric Asa, who made this research paper

possible with his commitment, encouragement, supervision, and support from the

commencement of the research to its conclusion. His patience and kindness will never be

forgotten. I have enjoyed working with him and appreciate the support and opportunities he

provided.

I would like to thank my supervisory committee: Dr. Charles McIntyre, Dr. Magdy

Abdelrahman, and Dr. Majura Selekwa. I also extend my sincere gratitude to all the research

study’s respondents for their valuable input and suggestions. Also, I thank the faculty and staff of

the Construction Management and Engineering Department for preparing me to achieve my

master’s degree and to succeed in future endeavors.

Special thanks to my parents for believing in me even when I doubted myself. Last but

not least, heartfelt thanks go to my brother, Mukesh; beautiful wife, Harsha; Cody; in-laws;
v
family; friends; colleagues; and God for their continuous support and love.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................iv

LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................................ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................................................... x

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY...................................................................... 1

1.1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................1

1.2. Background about Productivity........................................................................................... 2

1.3. Definition of Productivity in Construction Industry............................................................2

1.4. Significance of Productivity................................................................................................ 3

1.5. Problem Statement...............................................................................................................3

1.6. Misconceptions about Construction Productivity................................................................4

1.7. Facts about Construction Productivity.................................................................................4

1.8. Aim and Objective............................................................................................................... 5

1.9. Research Contribution......................................................................................................... 5

1.10. Research Structure............................................................................................................. 6

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW.........................................................................................8

2.1. Review of Labor Productivity from Previous Study............................................................8

2.2. Different Factors Affecting Labor Productivity from Previous Studies............................11

2.3. Identification of Possible Factors Affecting Productivity in Building Construction.........16

2.4. Factors Affecting Labor Productivity................................................................................ 18

CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...........................................................................19

v
 3.1. Survey Planning ................................................................................................................ 19
3.2. Considerations for the Survey ........................................................................................... 20

3.3. Organization of the Questionnaire .................................................................................... 20

3.4. Questionnaire .................................................................................................................... 21

3.5. Pilot Survey and Questionnaire Revision ......................................................................... 22

3.6. Questionnaire Distributions .............................................................................................. 23

CHAPTER 4. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ................................................. 24

4.1. Data Collected from the Web Survey ............................................................................... 24

4.2. Measurement of Data Collected from the Web Survey .................................................... 24

4.3. Analysis Method Used ...................................................................................................... 25

4.4. Size of Organization (Employees) .................................................................................... 26

4.5. Number of Projects per Year............................................................................................. 26

4.6. Type of Construction Projects ........................................................................................... 26

i 4.7. Job Title ............................................................................................................................. 27

4.8. Typical Size of Projects .................................................................................................... 27

4.9. Manpower Factors Affecting Labor Productivity ............................................................. 28

4.10. External Factors Affecting Labor Productivity ............................................................... 30

4.11. Communication Factors Affecting Labor Productivity................................................... 33

4.12. Resource Factors Affecting Labor Productivity ............................................................. 35

4.13. Miscellaneous Factors Affecting Labor Productivity ..................................................... 40

4.14. Overall Factors Affecting Labor Productivity According to RII Value ......................... 42

4.15. Group of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity .............................................................. 45

4.16. Statistical Method ........................................................................................................... 46

vi
 4.17. Test Formula ................................................................................................................... 46
4.18. Examples of Test ............................................................................................................. 46

4.19. Identification of Significant and Non-Significant Factors .............................................. 46

4.20. Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Other Countries Studied in the Past .. 50

CHAPTER 5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION .................................................. 52

5.1. Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 52

5.2. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 53

5.3. Future Research ................................................................................................................. 54

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 55

APPENDIX A. IRB APPROVAL ................................................................................................ 61

APPENDIX B. WEB-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE.................................................................. 62

ii

vii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page

2.1. Factors Affecting Labor Productivity in Construction Industry (Previous Studies).............. 17

2.2. Possible Factors Affecting Labor Productivity (in Alphabetical Order) ............................... 18

4.1. Statistical Data of Questionnaires Sent and Received ........................................................... 24

4.2. Ordinal Scale Used for Data Measurement ........................................................................... 25

4.3. Types of Organizations that Responded ................................................................................ 27

4.4. Job Title of the Respondents .................................................................................................. 27

4.5. Typical Size of Projects ......................................................................................................... 27

4.6. Manpower Factors ................................................................................................................. 28

4.7. External Factors ..................................................................................................................... 30

4.8. Communication Factors ......................................................................................................... 34

4.9. Resource Factors ................................................................................................................... 35

iii 4.10. Miscellaneous Factors ......................................................................................................... 40

4.11. Overall Ranking of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity ................................................. 42

4.12. Group Factors....................................................................................................................... 45

4.13. Identification of Significant and Non-Significant Factors ................................................... 47

4.14. Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Different Countries Studied in the Past . 51

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1. Flow Chart Showing Research Structure..................................................................................7

4.1. Manpower Factors.................................................................................................................. 29

4.2. External Factors......................................................................................................................31

4.3. Communication Factors..........................................................................................................34

4.4. Resource Factors.....................................................................................................................36

4.5. Miscellaneous Factors............................................................................................................ 41

4.6. Overall Forty Factors..............................................................................................................44

4.7. Group Factors......................................................................................................................... 45

ix
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

% .................... Percentage

APE ................Assistant Project Engineer

APM ...............Assistant Project Manager

CII ..................Construction Industry Institute

CO ..................Contractor

DE ..................Designer

GDC ...............Group Discussion Center

IRB .................Institutional Review Board

NDSU .............North Dakota State University

NECA .............National Electrical Contractors Association

OW .................Owner

PM .................. Project Manager

PE ................... Project Engineer

RII ..................Relative Importance Index

USA................United States of America

x
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

1.1. Introduction

Several studies related to labor productivity are performed for construction industry in

past. Several of them were related to calculating the effect of productivity factors. Measureable

calculations about the effects of those factors are required for several purposes, it includes

estimation of the construction project, it’s planning and scheduling. However, past study shows

that it is tough to calculate such an impact, and at present there are no universally accepted

standards to measure factors causing labor productivity loss in construction industry. This lack

of methods for measuring effects highlights the need to enhance measureable assessments for the

factors affecting productivity in building construction, and this is supposed to be the topic of this

research.

Achieving better labor productivity requires detailed studies of the actual labor cost.

Various labors have different variables affecting their productivity levels. For every project,

productivity, cost, quality, and time have been the main concern. Better productivity can be

achieved if project management includes the skills of education and training, the work method,

personal health, motivational factors, the type of tools, machines, required equipment and

materials, personal skills, the workload to be executed, expected work quality, work location, the

type of work to be done, and supervisory personnel (Rowlinson and Proctor, 1999).

In today’s era, one of the biggest concern for any organization is to improve their

productivity, representing the effective and efficient conversion of resources into marketable

products and determining business profitability (Wilcox et al., 2000). Consequently, considerable

effort has been directed to understand the productivity concept with different approaches taken

by researchers, resulting in a wide variety of productivity definitions (Lema and Samson, 1995;

Oglesby et al., 2002; Pilcher, 1997).

1.2. Background about Productivity

Productivity is generally defined as the average direct labor hours required to install a

unit of material. It is said that perfect productivity (1.0) can be achieved with a 40-hour work

week, with people taking all the holidays and vacation days as planned all of the engineering

drawings would be 100% complete there would be no delays of any kind during construction;

everyone would work safely; everything would fit perfectly the first time; the weather would be

o
70 F; and there would be no litigation at the end of the project (Rowlinson and Proctor, 1999).

1.3. Definition of Productivity in Construction Industry

The term “productivity” expresses the relationship between outputs and inputs

(Borcherding and Liou, 1986). Output and input differ from one industry to another. Also, the

productivity definition varies when applied to different areas of the same industry. Labor is

one of the basic requirements in the construction industry. Labor productivity usually relates

manpower in terms of labor cost to the quantity of outputs produced (Borcherding and Liou,

1986). In other words, the definition of labor productivity is the amount of goods and services

produced by a productive factor (manpower) in the unit of time (Drewin, 1982).

In 1883, Littre defined productivity as the “faculty to produce,” that is, the desire to

produce (Jarkas, 2005). In 1950, the Organization for European Economic Cooperation

(OEEC) introduced the definition of productivity as a quotient obtained by dividing the output

by one of the production factors (Sumanth, 1984). Depending on measurement objectives and

the availability of data, several productivity definitions are encountered. The U.S. Department

of Commerce defined productivity as “dollars of output per person-hour of labor input”

(Adrian, 1987).

2
1.4. Significance of Productivity

Productivity has a great significance in construction. Labor productivity constitutes a

significant part of production input for construction projects. In the construction industry, many

external and internal factors are never constant and are difficult to anticipate. This factor leads to

a continuous variation in labor productivity. It is necessary to make sure that a reduction in

productivity does not affect the plan and schedule of the work and does not cause delays. The

consequences of these delays could result in serious money losses. Further, considerable cost

can be saved if productivity is improved because the same work can be done with less

manpower, thus reducing overall labor cost (Thomas, 1991).

1.5. Problem Statement

In the construction industry productivity loss is one of the greatest and severe problems.

Present construction contracts lack enough to classify recompense for productivity loss due to

field factors (Construction Industry Institute [CII], 2000; National Electrical Contractors

Association [NECA], 1989). Of various project-costs components such as labors materials and

equipment’s, labor component is considered the most risk. Whereas others components

(equipment and material) are determined by the market price and price and are, consequently,

beyond the influence of project management. Labor cost in construction industry is estimated

to be about 33%- 50% of the entire project cost (language Hanna et al., 2005). Because labor is

more variable and unpredictable than other project-cost components, it becomes necessary to

understand the effects of different factors on labor productivity. An increase in productivity can

reduce the labor cost in a direct proportion. It can either benefit or reduce a project’s profit,

making it of vital interest to the construction industry for its success (Hanna et al., 2005).

3
 Previous researches confirm that productivity loss results from various factors, which

includes but not limited to various variation in drawings, long hours of extra work, poor field

management, and extreme climatic conditions (Alarcon and Borcherding, 1991; Leonard,

1987; Sanders and Thomas, 1991; Thomas and Oloufa, 1995). In fact, these factors typically

produce extra disturbances that affect productivity and are beyond the direct control of a

contractor, resulting in productivity loss or extra work hours necessary to accomplish the task.

1.6. Misconceptions about Construction Productivity

A study from (Adrian 1990) states the following general misconceptions about labor

productivity:

i. Key factor for low productivity in construction industry is labor.

ii. Because the construction industry is controlled by the weather, productivity cannot be

improved.

iii. The construction industry always has an unfavorable relationship process.

1.7. Facts about Construction Productivity

Following are a few facts about the construction productivity studied by Adrian (1990):

i. Tuesday is studied as most productive day of the week.

ii. 10 a.m. is studied as most productive time of the day

iii. The least productive time frame for labor is right before the finishing time.

iv. A laborer is capable of lifting approximately 94 pounds on his own.

v. If the laborer is engaged in performing the same task repeatedly, there is a chance of

low productivity after 60-70 minutes of performing the same work.

vi. Friday has been proven to be the least productive day of the week.

4
1.8. Aim and Objective

The objective of this study focuses on views from the construction industry about various

factors affecting labor productivity, analyzes factors affecting the labor productivity impact, and

suggests appropriate measures that can be taken to improve labor productivity. The aim is

supported by the objective stated below.

i. Study and discuss various factors affecting labor productivity in construction industry.

ii. Analyze and calculate the Relative Important Index (RII) of those factors affecting labor

productivity.

iii. To statistically analyze the factors affecting labor productivity.

iv. To make recommendations to improve labor productivity in construction.

1.9. Research Contribution

The research study investigates important factors affecting labor productivity in building

construction. Understanding these factors is helpful for the construction professionals who work

on the initial phases of construction planning in order to efficiently deliver the project plan. The

main goal of the research study is to provide essential information about factors affecting labor

productivity to the project management teams who enable the project’s success. Generally, the

factors which affect construction productivity are a lack of required materials, disputes between

the major parties, weather, and changes during the construction, accidents, and others. For

building construction, extra care must be taken when developing the project time schedule,

which is possible only with prior knowledge of factor causes. The research study aims to provide

knowledge of building construction-related factors that affect the project’s success.

5
1.10. Research Structure

This research consists of five chapters and appendices (IRB Approval and Web-Survey

Questionnaire).

Chapter 1 discusses the background, various definitions, measurement, Problem Statement,

misconceptions, and facts related to productivity.

Chapter 2 discusses previous studies for construction labor productivity found in professional

journals and texts. It also lists various factors affecting productivity and further

identifies the possible factors affecting productivity in the construction industry.

Chapter 3 discusses the research methodology used, including a discussion of the survey

approach.

Chapter 4 discusses the analysis method and Statistical Method utilized for the study as well as

the results obtained from the web survey.

Chapter 5 discuses conclusions, Recommendations, and suggestions for future research.

Figure 1.1 shows the flow-chart describing various stages in research and its structure.

6
 Background of Productivity

Review of Literature/Issue Identification

Design of Questionnaire

Pilot Survey

Data Collection

Preparation of Data

Analysis of Data

Conclusion/Recommendation

Figure 1.1. Flow Chart Showing Research Structure.

7
 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Review of Labor Productivity from Previous Study

Increase of productivity was calculated prior to mid-1906’s, in the construction industry

(Stall, 1983). Later, decline in productivity has remained of great concern issue in the

construction industry all over the world. In 1968, the Construction Roundtable was established

due to concern about the increased cost of construction resulting from an increase in the

inflation rate and a significant decline in construction productivity (Thomas and Kramer, 1988).

Also in 1965, the United Nations Committee on Housing, Building, and Planning (UNC)

published a significant manual concerning the effect of repetition on building operations and

processes (UNC, 1965). The research discovered the necessity for a rise in productivity was

perhaps more severe in the construction sector compared to any other sector. It was necessary to

implement, as far as possible, industry-wide principles of production throughout the

construction process. Though, it was known that careful adaptation would be required to

implement the knowledge and experience gained in the manufacturing industry to the building

construction industry (Alarcon and Borcherding 1991).

Past studies and research show the number of factors affecting productivity, there are still

anonymous factors need to be further studied even in developed countries (Makulsawatudom

and Emsley 2002). A study by (Polat and Arditi 2005) stated that policies to rise productivity are

not always similar in each country. Their study identified different factors affecting labor

productivity and grouped them according to their characteristics such as, design, execution plan,

material, equipment, labor, health and safety, supervision, working time, project factor, quality,

leadership and coordination, organization, owner/consultant, and external factors.

8
 (Adrian, 1987) Classified the productivity factors causing low productivity as industry-

related factors, labor-related factors, and management-related factors. Industry-related factors,

essentially, are the characteristics of the construction industry, such as the uniqueness of

construction projects, varied locations, adverse and unpredictable weather, and seasonality.

Labor-related factors include the union’s influence, little potential for learning, and lack of

motivation. Management-related factors usually refer to a lack of management for tools or

techniques.

(Olomolaiye et al. 1998) Classified the productivity factors into two categories: external

factors the ones outside the control of the organization management and internal factors related

to the productivity factors originating within the organization. From their viewpoint, the nature

of the industry, usually the separation of design and construction functions, has affected

construction productivity through delay in drawings, design changes, and following rework.

Construction clients have sometimes been obstructions to construction productivity because of

their lack of suitable knowledge about construction procedures. Moreover, being an outdoor

industry, construction performance is extremely affected by weather conditions. In addition to

the factors disused, health and safety regulations, and codes of practices are other external factors

influencing task operations and productivity. In the internal category, management inadequacies

could result in a waste of resources with consequent losses in productivity; adoption of modern

technology and training for the laborer would increase productivity.

(Thomas and Sakarcan 1994) Built an ideal to describe the factors affecting labor

productivity. In the model, two groups of factors determine the productivity performance, work

environment, and task to perform. Work-environment factors refer to how well a job is organized

9
 and accomplished. Work to be done, or work content, relates to work required to perform

and includes physical components of work, specification requirements, and design details.

Past study showed that task to be completed could affect the labor resources by as much

as 15%, whereas work environment can affect labor requirements by an extra 25%. Based on this

factor model, more detailed research was done. One study suggested that scheduled overtime

always leads to efficiency losses because of the inability to deliver materials, tools, equipment,

and information at an accelerated rate (Ginther, 1993).

Surveys and interviews are standard methods that have already been adopted in many

productivity studies. (Lim and Alum 1995) Conducted a survey of top construction contractors to

identify the factors affecting productivity in Singapore. The three items of extreme concern were

identified as difficulty in the recruitment of supervisors, difficulty in the recruitment of labors, and a

high rate of labor turnover. (Portas and AbouRizk 1997) undertook a questionnaire of

superintendents and project managers to determine all possible factors affecting productivity. An
0
interview conducted with contractors showed that weather and material delivery were the main

adverse factors for site productivity (Hassanein and Melin, 1997). A questionnaire identified

rework, material problems, tools, heavy-equipment availability, crew interference, overcrowded

work areas, instruction, quality-control inspection, and management interventions as the main

factors affecting craftsman productivity and motivation (Chang and Borcherding, 1985).

Another survey with construction personnel (Hanna and Heale, 1994) was conducted to

gauge their opinion about the field of construction, specifically their knowledge about the factors

that most affect construction productivity. As a result, a set of comprehensive factors was

identified and classified into six groups: contract environment, planning, site management,

working conditions, working hours, and motivation.

10
 2.2. Different Factors Affecting Labor Productivity from Previous Studies

Productivity is the outcome of several interrelated factors. Discussed below are various

factors affecting labor productivity and are reviewed from past studies.

i. Time: During construction projects, there are many tasks which causes a loss of

productivity. Past study shows productivity decreases with working overtime. The most

frequently stated reasons are fatigue; increased absenteeism; decreased morale; reduced

supervision effectiveness; poor workmanship, resulting in higher rework; increased accidents

(Horner and Talhouni, 1995). Working overtime initially result in increased output, but

continuing overtime may lead to increased costs and reduced productivity (Hinze, 1999).

Time used by a construction laborer on productive activities averages about 30% of the total

time available. An employee in the field only works effectively for 3.5 hours of his 8-hour

shift and spends 20% of his time on direct value-adding activities (Alinaitwe et al., 2005).

ii. Schedule Compression: When there are early delays in a project, compressions of the
1
overall time frame for a later activity are often the way to compensate interruptions and to

complete the assigned task on schedule. From a professional scheduling perspective, schedule

compression may be possible without accelerating individual work activities by utilizing float in

the project’s overall schedule. However, on many projects, schedules are not fully resource

loaded. As a consequence, a properly updated schedule reflecting the delays may show the

project finishing on time without shortening individual activities. Schedule compression may

result to force extra labors for the desired task by the contractor because of shortening the overall

duration, allowing the contractor to complete the total remaining work. Schedule compression,

when linked with overtime, often results in major productivity losses due to shortages of material

tools or equipment to support the extra labor’s, resulting in

11
 difficult for planning and coordinating the task, and unavailability of experienced

labors (National Electrical Contractors Association, 1983).

iii. Type of Project: To accomplish substantial productivity, every member of a crew

requires adequate space to perform task without being affected with/by the other crew

members. When more labors are allotted to perform particular task, in a fixed amount of

space, it is probable that interference may occur, thus decreasing productivity. Additionally,

when multiple trades are assigned to work in the same area, the probability of interference

rises and productivity may be reduced. Interference among the various crews and laborers is

due to mismanagement on construction sites. For example, a steel-fixture crew has to wait

before fixing the reinforcement rods if the carpenter’s framework is incomplete. The types

of activities and construction methods also influence labor productivity (Sanders and

Thomas, 1991).

iv. Safety: Accidents have high impacts on labor productivity. Various accident types occur
2
at the site, such as an accident causing death and resulting in a total work stoppage for a number

of days. An accident that causes an injured person to be hospitalized results in a work decrease

of the crew for which the injured employee worked. Small accidents resulting from nails and

steel wires can stop work and, thus, decrease productivity (Sanders and Thomas, 1991). Even

insufficient lighting shows decreased productivity because sufficient lighting is required to work

efficiently and because insufficient lighting has negative effects. Employing a safety officer

helps labors to recognize the required safety regulations and to follow them, which can reduce

the number of accidents, thus increasing productivity.

v.Quality: Inefficiency of equipment and poor quality of the raw material are factors which cause

low productivity. The productivity rate of inefficient equipment is low. Old equipment

12
 is subject to a great number of breakdowns, and it takes a long time for the laborers to

complete the work, thus reducing productivity. Poor-quality material used for work is the

other factor because poor materials generally lead to unsatisfactory work and can be rejected

by supervisors, thus reducing the productivity.

vi. Managerial Factors: Managers’ skill and attitudes have a crucial bearing on

productivity. In many organizations, productivity is low even though the latest technology

and trained manpower are made available. Low productivity is because of inefficient and

indifferent management. Experienced and committed managers can obtain surprising results

from average people. Employees’ job performance depends on their ability and willingness

to work. Management is the catalyst to create both. Advanced technology requires

knowledgeable laborers who, in turn, work productively under professionally qualified

managers. It is only through sound management that optimum utilization of human and

technical resources can be secured.

3
vii.Manpower Group: Literature shows that a lack of labor experience is the factor which

negatively affects labor productivity and proves that, to achieve good productivity, labor

plays a significant role. Contractors should have sufficiently skilled laborers employed to be

productive. If skilled labor is unavailable and a contractor is required to complete specific

task with less-skilled labor, it is possible that productivity will be affected. The absence of

any crew member may impact the crew’s production rate because workers will, typically, be

unable to accomplish the same production rate with fewer resources and with a different crew

members. Misunderstanding among laborers creates disagreements about responsibilities and

the work bounds of each laborer, which leads to a lot of work mistakes and decreases labor

productivity. Lack of compensation and increased laborer age negatively affect labor

13
 productivity because labor speed, agility, and strength decline over time and reduce

productivity (Heizer and Render, 1990).

viii. Motivation: Motivation is one of the important factor affecting construction labor

productivity. Motivation can best be accomplished when labors personal ambitions are

similar to those of the company. Factors such as payment delays, a lack of a financial

motivation system, non-provision of proper transportation, and a lack of training sessions are

grouped in this topic (DeCenzo and Holoviak, 1990).

ix.Supervision: Generally, projects come across some design, drawings and specification changes

during construction. If drawings or specifications are with errors and unclear productivity is

expected to decrease since laborers in the field are uncertain about what needs to be done. As a

result, task may be delayed, or have to be completely stopped and postpone it until clear

instruction. There is a 30% loss of productivity when work changes are being performed

(Thomas et al., 1999). Work inspection by the supervisor is an essential process to

4
proceed. For example, the contractor cannot cast concrete before an inspection of the

formwork and steel work, thus affecting labor productivity (Zakeri et al., 1996). With non-

completion of the required work according to the specifications and drawings, supervisors

may ask for the rework of a specific task. Supervisors’ absenteeism stops the work totally

for activities that require their attendance, such as casting concrete and backfilling, further

delaying inspection of the completed work which, in turn, leads to delays in starting new

work.

x. Material/Tools: Material management is one of the most important factor in construction

industry. Productivity can be affected if required materials, tools, or construction equipment

for the specific are not available at the correct location and time. Selection of the appropriate

14
 type and size of construction equipment often affects the required amount of time it is,

therefore, essential for site managers to be familiar with the characteristics of the major

types of equipment most commonly used in construction. In order to increase job-site

productivity, it is beneficial to select equipment with the proper characteristics and a size

most suitable for the work conditions at a construction site. Laborers require a minimum

number of tools and equipment to work effectively to complete the assigned task. If the

improper tools or equipment is provided, productivity may be affected (Alum and Lim,

1995; Guhathakurta and Yates, 1993). The size of the construction site and the material

storage location has a significant impact on productivity because laborers require extra time

to move required materials from inappropriate storage locations, thus resulting in

productivity loss (Sanders and Thomas, 1991).

xi.Project Management Factors: Improper scheduling of work, shortage of critical

construction equipment or labor, may result in loss of productivity. Improper planning of
5
project-initiation procedures generally lead to lost labor productivity. Additionally, poor site

layout can contribute to a loss of productivity. Laborers have to walk or drive a long way to

lunch rooms, rest areas, washrooms, entrances, and exits, affecting overall productivity

(Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) International

Recommended Practice No. 25R-03, 2004).

xii.Natural Factors: Various natural factors affecting labor productivity collected from

previous study are weather conditions of the job-site and geographical conditions. Others

factors such as fuel, water, and minerals also affect productivity to certain extent.

Productivity is found to be highly affected if weather recorded are too be extreme (too

cold, heavy rainfall, too hot.

15
 xiii. External Factors: Weather conditions are significant factor to consider for

completion of any construction project. Adverse winter weather, such as winds and rains,

reduces productivity, particularly for external work such as formwork, T-shape work,

concrete casting, external plastering, external painting, and external tiling. Adverse

weather sometimes stops the work totally (Sanders and Thomas, 1991).

xiv. Political Factors: Law and order, stability of government, etc. are essential for high

productivity in the construction industry. The government’s taxation policies influence

willingness to work and expansion of plants. (A. Kumar, as cited in Desai, 2004).

2.3. Identification of Possible Factors Affecting Productivity in Building Construction

Based upon the Literature Review, this study extracts various factors affecting labor

productivity in construction from the previous research studies. Some similar factors were

merged together, and some new factors were added. Factors does not take into consideration any

values. They are arranged on general criteria. Table 2.1 shows various factors affecting labor
6
productivity in construction extracted from previous studies.

16
 Table 2.1. Factors Affecting Labor Productivity in Construction Industry (Previous Studies)
Factors Affecting Labor Productivity A B C D E F G H I J
A Management Factors
The level of management control √ √

Professionalism of the design team √ √ √ √

Difficulties in employing site supervisor √ √ √

Work planning and scheduling √ √ √ √ √ √

Incompetence of site supervisor √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Late inspection of completed work √

B Site and Resource Management Factors

Coordination of subcontractor √ √ √

Quality control √

Communication breakdown √ √ √ √

Information √ √

Rework √ √ √ √ √ √

Congestion √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Sequence of work √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Availability of workforce √ √ √ √ √

Financial problems √ √

Availability of materials √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Availability of tools and machinery √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Method and machinery √ √ √ √ √ √

C Project Characteristics Factors

7 Location
Inclement weather √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Project characteristics √ √ √

Specification √

Design requirement
Project size √

Site access √

D Workforce Characteristics Factors

Quality Experience and Training √ √

Disturbance √ √ √ √ √

Morality (e.g., alcohol influence) √

Frequent changes in labors √

Communication problems (laborers) √ √

Turnover √ √ √ √

Absenteeism √ √

E External Characteristic Factors

Overtime (acceleration) √ √ √ √

Order Variations √ √ √ √

Economic Conditions √ √

Development and research √

17
 2.4. Factors Affecting Labor Productivity
Table 2.2. Shows possible factors affecting labor productivity in building construction

collected from past study and literature review. It does not take into consideration any significant

value, they are arranged in alphabetic order.

Table 2.2. Possible Factors Affecting Labor Productivity (in Alphabetical Order)

Sr. Factors Affecting Labor Productivity at Building Construction

1 Accidents
2 Construction method
3 Drawings and specifications alternated during execution
4 Government regulation
5 High quality of required work
6 Increasing number of laborers
7 Inefficiency of equipment
8 Inspection delay
9 Insufficient transportation mean
10 Insufficient lighting
11 Labor absenteeism
12 Labor disloyalty
13 Lack of competition
14 Lack of financial motivation system

8 15
16
Lack of labor experience
Lack of periodic meeting with labor
17 Labor personal problems
18 Lack of place eating and relaxation
19 Lack of training sessions
20 Low quality of raw materials
21 Material shortage
22 Misunderstanding among laborers
23 Misunderstanding between laborers and superintendents
24 Misuse of time schedule
25 Payment delays
26 Rework
27 Supervisors’ absenteeism
28 Tool and equipment shortages
29 Type of activities in the project
30 Unsuitability of materials storage location
31 Violation of safety precautions
32 Weather change
33 Working at high places
34 Working overtime
18
 CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

“Survey research is defined as collection of different data by asking people questions”

(Fowler, 1993). The data collection process used in this research had the option of two basic

methods: questionnaires and personal interviews. A questionnaire was preferred as the best

effective and suitable data-collection technique for the study. It was concluded that the

questionnaire was described as a self-administered tool with web-design questions, an

appropriate response. A questionnaire in a web-survey format comparatively requires less

duration and saves cost for the researcher while permits respondents to response the

questionnaire at their personal ease. However, for this approach the reply rate is usually lower

as compared to face-to-face interviews. Data was collected from literature reviews from books,

journals, articles, seminar conferences, and websites which emphasize building construction’s

labor productivity. A survey was given to employees from different trades involved with the

construction project.

9
3.1. Survey Planning

For the research study, email technology was used to send the survey questionnaire.

Collecting general information on various factors affecting labor productivity in building

construction all over USA was the basic aim of the survey. The purpose and approach used in the

survey was fully explained to the respondents. Guidelines were provided to the respondents to

ensure that the procedure was followed properly to reduce errors. During the survey period, some

oversights were provided to help ensure the process was going smoothly and consistently. The

data were stored in order to maintain confidentiality, and the output was received from the Group

Discussion Center (GDC) in the form of electronic mail, which included raw data sheets,

19
 summary sheets, and computer databases. Results included the overall statistics as well

as individual statistics.

3.2. Considerations for the Survey

The main consideration for a survey was that it should be easy for respondents. If

questions are too complicated, possibility of high drop-out rate was studied. Care was taken so

that the initial questions did not negatively influence the results of subsequent questions.

Preliminary text was introduced for explaining the survey project to the respondents. Page

breaks on the webpages were introduced to improve the text readability. Logic-based questions

were avoided because they could cause respondent frustration and increase the drop-out rate.

Study was done to find any serious loopholes and if questions were truly answerable.

3.3. Organization of the Questionnaire

One of the biggest concern of the research study was about number of responses with

complete information. Recognition of respondents about the benefits and uses of this research
0
study was also of great concern. Following criteria was used to begin the questionnaire

design process:

Questionnaire Response Rate

Exactness Duration

Applicable Ease of Completion

Completeness

Understanding

Carefulness and productivity were achieved by examining the accuracy and completeness

of the related questions, taking into consideration the previous studies and Table 2.1. Even tough,

great measures were taken to make the questionnaire efficient, it was however not assured that

20
 the response will be of high percentage. Great care was taken to assure respondents get precise

duration to respond to the survey questionnaire and turn in to the researcher online. Considering

the length, importance, sensitivity, past experience of researcher’s advisor and feedback

collected from pilot survey it was decided, the average time to complete the whole survey

questionnaire would require about 15 minutes. Duration of 6 weeks was assigned to complete

and submit the survey questionnaire. Questionnaire were kept effective and simple for the

respondents. Various sections were designed for the survey questionnaire and they were assigned

distinct colors for appropriate responding.

3.4. Questionnaire

The questionnaire design practice advanced on a communicating basis. It was categorized

into profile of the respondent and various factors affecting labor productivity in building

construction. Questions in the respondent profile were created to collect information such as job

position, experience of the work, locations of the current and/or previous works and contact
1
information. It was studied, these questions in the survey were of great important to the

research by analyzing productivity loss concerns from a variety of different profiles from

different regions. It was practical to anticipate that a location can have an impact on the loss of

productivity due to various field disturbances, especially geographical and climatic conditions.

The next set of questions (Appendix B), was targeting the factors affecting labor

productivity in the five different groups. It included factors affecting labor productivity.

Respondents simply furnished of factors affecting productivity for given typical condition.

Hence, each respondent had a choice to select only one option for each factor. The responses

were to be based on the understanding, knowledge and experience of the respondents and not

21
 related to any definite project. This simple and straight method was selected to establish a means

of developing a list of factors affecting labor productivity in building construction.

3.5. Pilot Survey and Questionnaire Revision

To improve the questionnaire section, a pilot study was accompanied. This section

contained identification of different causes, collection, and conclusions of data. The application

of this section benefited in better formation of the web-survey development

Total 155 questionnaires, (shown in Table 2.2) were sent by e-mail to laborers, contractors,

architectures, owners, project managers, and project engineers of various building construction

organizations. It was expected to complete and submit the response within 2 weeks. By the end of

nd
2 week, 25 responses collected from the pilot survey, 5 of those were incomplete and were

removed from the set, leaving a total of 20 respondents in the database. Information obtained and

the recommendations provided in from pilot survey are discussed below.

i. Questionnaire should always start with the general information of the organization
2
ii. Some factors are not related to construction. They should be removed or modified.

iii. To get more suitable and consistence meaning some factors should be rearranged.

iv. Some factors should be revised with additional information.

v. Factors repeated with similar meaning should be removed.

vi. Some factors should be changed to give clearer importance and understanding.

Better and accurate questionnaire related to the topic was achieved from the pilot study.

The perfections related to the organization of the questionnaire and the response time. In terms of

organization, the web survey was created using a light appearance and pleasant-looking font

colors. It also included a percentage bar for the completed survey and had an option to navigate

to any question at any given time. All the information entered via the web had an auto-save

22
 option and the respondents had the luxury to return to the survey within the allotted duration.

Respondents were informed about the confidentiality of the responses. The list of questions used

for the web survey can be found in Appendix B.

3.6. Questionnaire Distributions

The target groups in this study were professionals from the construction industry. A list

of 255 building-construction organizations was obtained from the Engineering News-Record.

The sample size can be calculated with the following equation for a 94% confidence level (Al-

Shahri, M et al., 2001; Israel, 2003; Moore et al., 2003):

n= n’ / [1+ (n’ / N)]

Where, n= Total number of population

N = Sample size from a finite population

2
n’ = Sample size from an infinite population = S /V
2
S = the variance of the population elements and
3
V = a standard error of the sampling population. (Usually, S= 0.5, and V = 0.06.)
2 2 2 2
n’=S /V = (0.5) +(0.06) = 69.44 For N=255

n = 69.44/ [1+ (69.44 / 255)] = 55

To obtain 94% of confidence level, it was calculated to send the questionnaire to

55 organizations to accomplish a 94%.

23
 CHAPTER 4. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

4.1. Data Collected from the Web Survey

In successfully achieving main objective of the study, one of the most important phase

is collection of accurate data. Data collection is a procedure of collecting crucial data records

for a certain sample or population of observations (Bohrnstedt and Knoke, 1994). A total of 255

questionnaires were sent to construction professional through e-mail in early October 2009. By

the due date, a total of 54 questionnaires were received, resulting in a nearly 21.17% reply rate

(Table 3.1). Missing data frequently occur after the respondent chooses not to response a

question or when the respondent rejects to answer the question. (Kim, 1993). The most serious

concern presented in the responses was some missing data. Some of the unclear response was

clarified over the phone. A total of 26 (i.e., 10.19%) invalid data received were deleted from

research study. The reason to discard the data was incompleteness and invalid responses.

Table 4.1. Statistical Data of Questionnaires Sent and Received

4 No. Percentage of Total (%)
Total Questionnaires Sent 255.00
Total Questionnaires Received 54.00 21.17
Invalid Data 26.00 10.19
Used for Study 28.00 11.00

4.2. Measurement of Data Collected from the Web Survey

It is commonly believed, while performing different task on construction projects,

disturbances can existent with diverse degrees of danger. In order to overcome with these

different degrees, it was decided to consider four condition levels: not applicable, does not affect

it, somewhat affects it, and directly affects it. A clear specification of the standard conditions was

necessary to enable respondents to clearly distinguish the degree of each adverse condition level.

Standard conditions discussing to four different degrees of severity for each field were

24
 recognized by Dr. Eric Asa, Dr. Y. K. Yates, and the researcher. The concept of different

degrees of severity for productivity factors was previously used in other studies (Mechanical

Contractors of America 1976) and (Neil and Knack 1984). Slight modifications were made to the

typical conditions after they were reviewed by the participants. Further, detailed questionnaire

was developed to calculate the factors affecting labor productivity in building construction.

In order to select the suitable technique of study, the level of measurement is to be

studied. For each measurement type, there is (are) (an) appropriate method(s) that can be

applied. In this research, ordinal scales were used. An ordinal scale, as shown in Table 3.2, is a

ranking or a rating of data that normally uses integers in ascending or descending order. The

numbers assigned (1, 2, 3, 4) neither indicate that the intervals between scales are equal, nor do

they indicate absolute quantities. They are merely numerical labels. Based on a Likert scale, we

have Table 3.2 (Cheung et al., 2004; Iyer and Jha, 2005; Ugwu and Haupt, 2007).

Table 4.2. Ordinal Scale Used for Data Measurement

5 Item Not applicable Does not affect it Somewhat affects it Directly affects it
Scale 1 2 3 4

4.3. Analysis Method Used

In order to facilitate the study, after the Literature Review and the focus interviews, a

plan was formulated for collecting field information and creating an evaluation process and

numerical values. It was necessary to provide straightforward communication to respondents to

ensure a clear understanding of all the applicable definitions, procedures, and guidelines that

were used in collecting data. Because the data-collection process included individuals, the study

was conducted in accordance with the regulations of the Department of Health and Human

Services, the Food and Drug Administration, and North Dakota State University (NDSU) Policy

25
 #345 under the supervision of the NDSU Institutional Review Board (IRB). Two different

ways were used to analyze the survey results.

i. Ranking of the various factors according to their significance, and calculating their

Relative Importance Index (RII)

ii. Analyze the factors in the questionnaire are significant or non-significant.

The Relative Importance Index (RII) was used to decide various professionals’ opinions of

the RII in construction projects. RII is calculated as stated below (Cheung et al., 2004; Iyer and Jha, 2005; Ugwu

and Haupt, 2007):

= ×

W is the weight given to each factor by the respondents and ranges from 1 to 4.

W ranges 1. Not applicable 3. Somewhat affects it

2. Does not affect it 4. Directly affects it × Number of respondents for each degree
A is the highest weight = 4.

6 N is the total number of responses collected for the ordinal scale.

4.4. Size of Organization (Employees)

The average number of employees in an organization was 36. Only building construction

projects were considered for the study.

4.5. Number of Projects per Year

The average number of construction projects undertaken per year was 3. Only building

construction projects were considered for the study.

4.6. Type of Construction Projects

The type of construction organizations that responded is shown in Table 4.1. Only

building construction project were considered.

26
 Table 4.3. Types of Organizations that Responded
Construction Organizations Respondents
Residential 6
Commercial 6
Industrial 5
Government 1
Engineering 2
Architecture 5
Owner 3

4.7. Job Title

Respondents’ job titles are shown in Table 4.2. Various professional in building

construction projects were contacted to gather the information from web-survey.

Table 4.4. Job Title of the Respondents

Job Title of the Respondents Number of Respondents
Project Manager 4
Project Engineer 11
Architecture 3
Others (APM, APE, Scheduler, and Estimator) 10

7 4.8. Typical Size of Projects

The size of the projects in US$ (Million) undertaken by the respondents’ companies is

shown in Table 4.3. Only building construction projects were considered for the study.

Table 4.5. Typical Size of Projects

Typical Size of Project No. of Projects
0-5 Millions 11
5-10 Millions 9
10-100 Millions 7
> 100 Millions 1

Research was performed considering, 40 factors affecting labor productivity for building

construction were identified, and their RII was calculated. These factors were classified into five

groups: manpower factors, external factors, communication factors, resources factors, and

miscellaneous factors. Different groups used in the study are discussed in detail.

27
 4.9. Manpower Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

Table 4.4 and Figure 4.1 shows the ranking of the various factors for the manpower

group. A lack of labor experience was ranked first in the manpower group, with an RII value

of 488.7, and twelfth among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11).

Lack of labor experience has a great influence on productivity. This result is supported by

Paulson (1975) who found that the craftsmen’s experience affects labor productivity. This

conclusion is also supported by (Heizer and Render 1990) who established that the knowledge of

the craftsman affects job-site productivity. This result is acceptable because experience improves

both the intellectual and physical abilities of laborers which, consequently, increases labor

productivity.

th
Labor disloyalty had a great effect on labor productivity and ranked in the 7 position for
th
the manpower group, with an importance index of 373.75, and 39 among all 40 factors in terms

of negatively affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11).

8
Table 4.6. Manpower Factors
Factors RII Rank
Lack of experience 488.75 1
Absenteeism 477.25 2
Alcoholism 425.50 3
Misunderstanding among laborers 419.75 4
Age 408.25 5
Lack of competition among the laborers 379.50 6
Disloyalty 373.75 7
Personal problems 368.00 8

28
 Figure 4.1. Manpower Factors.

th
Misunderstanding among laborers was ranked 4 in the manpower group, with an RII of
nd
419.75, and 32 among all 40 factors that affected labor productivity (Table 4.11). This result
is acceptable because misunderstanding among laborers can creates disagreement among them
and about the responsibilities for each laborer, which leads to a lot of mistakes in work and,
9
th
consequently, affects labor productivity. A lack of competition among laborers ranked 6 , with
th
an RII of 379.50, and ranked 38 among all 40 factors for negatively affecting labor
productivity (Table 4.11.).
th th
Labors’ age was ranked 5 in the manpower group, with an RII of 408.25, and 34

among all 40 factors that affected labor productivity (Table 4.11). (Heizer and Render 1990)

supported this result, citing that the age factor generally affects job-site productivity. This

result is justified because speed required to perform particular task and strength decline over

time affecting labor productivity.

nd
Labor absenteeism was ranked 2 in the manpower group, with an RII of 477.25, and in
th
18 among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). This result is justified given

29
 the transient nature of the local workforce and the ease with which construction contractors could

hire additional laborers to cover absenteeism.

th
Personal problems were ranked 8 in the manpower group, with an RII of 368.00, and
th
40 among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). This result might be justified

because personal problems cause mental disturbance for laborers, and thus can affect labor safety

more than labor productivity.

rd th
Alcoholism ranked 3 in the manpower group, with an RII of 425.50, and 30 among

all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Consuming alcohol at the construction

site may lead to various negative effects on other laborers who are working. Alcohol

consumption may lead to rework, misplacing the job work, and accidents, thus completely or

partially stopping the construction work and affecting labor productivity.

4.10. External Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

Table 4.5 and Figure 4.2 illustrate the ranking of factors for the external group.
0
st th
Supervision delays were ranked 1 in the external group, with an RII of 488, and 13 among
all 40 factors that negatively affect labor productivity (Table 4.11).

Table 4.7. External Factors

Factors RII Rank
Supervision delays 488.75 1
Variations in the drawings 488.75 2
Incomplete drawings 483.00 3
Rework 471.50 4
Design changes 465.75 5
Inspection delays from the authorities 448.50 6
Payment delays 442.75 7
Complex designs in the provided drawings 437.00 8
Implementation of government laws 419.75 9
Training sessions 414.00 10

30
 Figure 4.2. External Factors.
th
Inspection delays from the authorities were ranked 6 in the external group, with an RII
1
nd
of 448.50, and 22 among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Past study

(Guhathakurta and Yates., 1993; Olomolaiye et al., 1996) proves that inspection delays are an

important process; for example, because contractors cannot cast concrete before inspection of

formwork and steel work, the inspection delay contributes to delays in work activities. It

completely stops the task that require the presence of supervisors, such as casting concrete

and backfilling. Additionally, it delays the inspection of completed work which, in turn, leads

to a delay in the commencement of new work.

nd
Variations in the drawings were ranked 2 in the external group, with an RII of 488.75,
th
and 14 among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Incomplete drawings
rd th
were ranked 3 in the external group, with an RII of 483.00, and 16 among all 40 factors that

31
 th
affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Design changes were ranked 5 in the external group,

st
with an RII of 465, and 21 among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). A

th th
complex design in drawings ranked 8 in the external group, with an RII of 437.00, and 27

among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). (Thomas et al. 1999) stated that

“there is a 30% loss of efficiency when work changes are being performed. This result can be

interpreted as changes to specifications and drawings that require additional time for adjustments

of resources and manpower so that the change can be met. Also known as designer errors and

omissions, these changes relate to plans that are incomplete or contain errors that are difficult to

find until the construction contractor finds them well after the construction phase of the project

has started. With most construction contracts, where the contractor bids on designs that are

completed prior to contract award, the owner is liable for the designer’s errors and omissions”.

th th
Payment delays were ranked 7 in the external group, with an RII of 442.75, and 24

among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Payment delays in the
2
construction industry are adversarial and disastrous. Late payment affects a company’s cash

flow and may ultimately lead to a business’s failure. Timeliness of payment is important to

avoid the risk of the late-payment problem. A study by Zou et al. 2007 pointed out that project-

funding problems have been identified as cost-related risks, time-related risks, and quality-

related risks which can significantly influence the delivery of a construction project. The risk of

delayed payment from the owner impacts the duration and cost of the project. These risks causes

the project’s cost to increase abnormally and, subsequently, delay the project’s progress.

th th
Rework ranked 4 in the external group, with an RII of 471.50, and 19 among all

40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Past study from (Makulsawatudom and
Sinthawanarong 2004) confirmed that rework is one of the major factors in the construction

32
 industry to affect labor productivity in building construction. The study also listed rework as

one of the critical factors effecting productivity and stated that rework is due to incompetent

craftsmen and supervisors.

th
Implementing government laws was ranked 9 in the external group, with an RII of

st
419.79, and 31 among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). For most

projects, government authorities refer to specific versions and construction standards of their

design. Sometimes, government authorities, who have documented standards for design and

construction, may decide to revise those standards after the job has been awarded, based on a

previous version, thus affecting the overall labor productivity of the building construction.

th th
Training sessions were ranked 10 in the external group, with an RII of 414.00, and 33

among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Past studies from (Lema and

Samson 2002), (Cheung et al. 2004), and (Iyer and Jha 2005) stated that persons entering the

construction industry directly from high school usually start as inexperienced in construction
3
industry or as laborers. They can learn from their job quickly by working closely with

experienced people. Whereas, skilled laborers, such as carpenters, bricklayers, plumbers, and

other construction trade specialists, most often get their formal instruction by attending a local

technical school or through an employer-provided training program.

4.11. Communication Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

Table 4.6 and Figure 4.3 show the ranking of the factors for the communication

st
group. Change order from the Design Engineer ranked 1 in the communication group with

th
an RII of 465.75, and 20 among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11).

33
 Table 4.8. Communication Factors
Factors RII Rank
Change orders from the designers (DE) 465.75 1
Change orders from the owners (OW) 442.75 2
Misunderstanding among OW, Contractors (CO), and DE 431.25 3
Disputes with the DE 396.75 4
Disputes with the OW 391.00 5

nd
A change order from the OW ranked 2 in the communication group, with an RII of
th
442.75, and 23 among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). Disputes with
th th
the OW were ranked 5 in the communication group, with an RII of 391.00, and 37 among all
40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). Misunderstanding among the OW, CO, and
rd th
DE ranked 3 in the communication group, with an RII of 431.25, and 29 among 40 factors
affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11).

465.75
475.00
442.75
4
450.00
431.25

425.00
396.75 391.00
RII

400.00
375.00

350.00 A B C D E

Communication Factors
A. Change orders from the designers (DE) B. Change orders from the owners (OW)
C. Misunderstanding among OW, Contractors (CO), and (DE) the designer
D. Disputes with the (DE) E. Disputes with the owner

Figure 4.3. Communication Factors.

34
 th
Disputes with the DE were ranked 4 in communication factors, with an RII of 396.75,

th
and 35 among all 40 factors affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). This result can be justified

because DE shortages are changes that result from defective or confusing aspects of construction

designs and specifications which cannot be discovered until the contractor begins performing

task sketched on drawing sheets. Design deficits are frequently the result of poor quality control

in the design process, and they are manageable. The owner is also responsible for the

contractor’s costs due to designer errors, such as unreasonable delays in reviewing shop

drawings, failure to provide drawings or design information in a timely fashion, failure in timely

inspections, and other delays due to the designer’s contract-administration problems (Bramble

and Callahan, 2000).

4.12. Resource Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

Table 4.7 and Figure 4.3 show the ranking for factors of the resource group. A lack of

required construction material was ranked first in the resource group, with an RII of 558.00, and
5
was first among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11)

Table 4.9. Resource Factors

Factors RII Rank
Lack of required construction material 558.00 1
Lack of required construction tools/equipment 540.00 2
Insufficient lighting 510.00 3
Poor site condition 510.00 4
Differing site condition from plan 504.00 5
Material storage location 504.00 6
Poor access within construction site 492.00 7
Violation of safety laws 486.00 8
Quality of required work 480.00 9
Inadequate transportation facilities for workers 438.00 10
Inadequate construction material 437.00 11
Increase in the price of material 396.00 12

35
 Figure 4.4. Resource Factors.

th
Inadequate construction material was ranked 11 in the resource group, with an RII of

6 437.00, and 28 th
among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). An increase in
th th
the price of material was ranked 7 in the resource group, with an RII of 396.00, and 36
among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11).

(Damodara, 1999) Since material resource contribute 40-60% of the total project cost, it is

supposed to be one of the most important factors which required good knowledge to improve labor

productivity in construction. Past study shows, required consideration is not given to material

resource management and its effects on labor productivity. It is impossible to complete any

particular task without availability of required materials. A material shortage is ranked first position

among factors affecting labor productivity in the United States, United Kingdom, Indonesia,

Nigeria, Singapore, and Kenya (Guhathakurta and Yates, 1993; Lim and Alum, 1995;

Olomolaiye et al., 1996). A lack of material refers to the inaccessibility of certain

materials or 36
 the excessive time expended to obtain them. (Thomas et al. 1999) estimated that poor material

management caused an 18% work-hour overrun. This study found a total of 35.6 man hours of

unproductive time attributed to material unavailability, which amounts to 9.5% of the total

wasted time.

A lack of required construction tools/equipment was ranked second in the resource group,

with an RII of 540.00, and fourth among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11).

This result can be justified as major equipment on the site, including cranes, passenger/cargo lift,

trailer concrete pump, truck mixer, and safety scaffolding. The entire construction process

depends heavily on this equipment. For example, cranes are needed to move and position

formwork, and to hoist and place reinforcement; the truck mixer and concrete pump are

indispensable to transport and place concrete. Any interruption in the use of the equipment leads

to serious material-handling problems as well as a slowdown or a stoppage of operations.

Therefore, the availability of equipment is regarded as important for construction progress. Past
7
studies (Guhathakurta and Yates, 1993); (Olomolaiye et al., 1996) prove that a lack of equipment

is one of the principal factors that negatively affect labor productivity.

The material storage location was ranked sixth in the resource group, with an RII of

504.00, and ninth among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). A past study

(Sanders and Thomas, 1991) stated that the size and the organization of the materials’ storage

location has a significant impact on masonry productivity. This result is justified because

laborers need more time to bring required materials from unsuitable storage locations, negatively

affecting productivity.

Insufficient lighting was ranked third in the resource group, with an RII of 510.00, and sixth

among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). Proper lighting is one of the

37
 basic requirements for obtaining fair labor productivity with any construction work. Failure to

have adequate lighting may lead to different consequences, such as misplacing a particular job,

or even serious accidents and the death of laborers at construction sites, thus negatively affecting

labor productivity.

Poor access within a construction site was ranked eighth in the resource group, with an

RII of 492.00, and eleventh among all 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). Study

from (Sanders and Thomas 1991) proves one of the common reasons for low productivity is poor

access within the construction site. Poor access reduces the free movement of labor and,

consequently, reduces labor productivity. Interference between crews and laborers is caused by

mismanagement on construction sites, with steel fixers suffering more of the mismanagement,

possibly because they are more dependent on other trades. For example, if the carpenters have

not completed the formwork, steel fixers have to wait before fixing the reinforcement rods.

Differing site conditions from the plan was ranked fifth in the resource group, with an RII
8
of 504.00, and eighth among the 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11), Poor site

condition ranked was ranked fourth in the resource group, with an RII of 510.00, and sixth

among the 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). A differing site or unpredicted

condition occurs when underlying site conditions for a construction project are uncovered after

the contract between the contractor and the owner has been executed and were not previously

expected or included in the design documents. Differing site conditions are worth making note of

only if the contractor experiences an increased cost and/or delay. Common examples of differing

site conditions occur when a contractor performs earth excavation and uncovers objects or soil

types that were previously unforeseen, requiring extraordinary measures to accommodate. These

38
 extraordinary measures can easily cost the contractor extra money and/or time above that for

which was originally contracted.

th
Violation of safety laws was ranked 9 in the resource group, with an RII of 480.00,

th
and 15 among the 40 factors affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Construction is one of the

most unsafe industries (Suazo and Jaselskis, 1993). The major causes of accidents are related to

the unique nature of the industry, human behavior, difficult work-site conditions, and poor

safety management, which result in hazardous work methods, equipment, and procedures.

Preventing occupational injuries and illness should be a primary concern among both

employees and employers. In the construction industry, the working environment is constantly

changing sites that exist for a relatively short time as well as activities and inherent risks that

change daily. Within a short time of a hazard being identified and dealt with, typically, the

workplace has changed, bringing new hazards. (Davies and Thomas, 1990).

Quality of the required work was ranked 10th in the resource group, with an RII of
9
480.00, and 17th among the 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table 4.11). In many cases,

the quality of the product is not present and results in rework. The time required to construct

particular task using poor quality material is greater than the time required to build with better

quality materials. Additionally, wasting poor-quality materials is high, particularly at the time of

handling. In addition, using materials of poor quality generally leads to poor-quality work which

can be rejected by the supervisor. Cheung et al. (2004) remarked that the work quality certainly

affects the performance of construction projects. Iyer and Jha (2005) observed that performance

quality affects the cost performance of construction projects. Quality is also one of the three

main constraints, together with cost and time.

39
 th
An inadequate transportation facility for workers was ranked 12 in the resource

th
group, with an RII of 438.00, and 17 among the 40 factors affecting labor productivity (Table

4.11). Past study from (Lema and Samson 1995) states that a transportation facility also affects
labor productivity. If the construction site is located on the outskirts of a city/town with
inadequate public transportation facilities, labors find it difficult to reach the construction site.

4.13. Miscellaneous Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

Table 4.8 and Figure 4.5 shows the ranking factors for the miscellaneous group. A

st
shortage of water and/or power supply was ranked 1 in the miscellaneous group, with an RII

st nd
of 1 552.00, and 2 among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Accidents

during construction were ranked second in the miscellaneous group, with an RII of 546.00, and
third among all 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11).

A study from (Sanders and Thomas, 1991) showed that accidents have a significant
impact on labor productivity. The authors stated three different types of accidents:
0
i. Total stoppage of performing task for number of days due to accidents resulting in

death of injured labors.

ii. Injured labor or labors hospitalized for at least 24 hrs. It can decrease the productivity

at the site or can result in complete stoppage of the work.

iii. Few cases where productivity can be affected marginally is accidents resulting from

nail and steel wired at the job task.

Table 4.10. Miscellaneous Factors

Factors RII Rank
Shortage of water and/or power supply 552.00 1
Accidents during construction 546.00 2
Weather conditions 510.00 3
Working overtime 504.00 4
Project objective is not well defined 442.75 5
40
 Figure 4.5. Miscellaneous Factors.

Weather conditions were ranked third in the miscellaneous group, with an RII of 510.00, and

seventh among the 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). A majority of the

construction-related activities are performed in an open atmosphere and can be seriously affected by

unexpected, extreme weather. Past studies (Koehn and Brown, 1985; Sanders and Thomas,

1
1991) prove that temperature and humidity have an adverse effect on productivity. Performing the
o o
construction task under extreme weather conditions (below -10 F and above 110 F) is
generally difficult. Thomas et al. (1999) show that almost 30% of the productivity loss for steel-
erection construction occurred due to a winter climate.

Working overtime was ranked fourth in the miscellaneous group, with an RII of 504.00,

and tenth among the 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Working overtime

can be a negative factor causing various problems such as increase in absenteeism and reduced

in safety (Horner and Talhouni, 1995). Number of hours worked beyond 40 hours per week is

termed as overtime. It is generally introduced to achieve acceleration of the assigned task. It is

41
 generally used to make up for delays in projects. The extra work under overtime is usually paid

time and half of the regular wages.

th
The project objective not being well defined ranked 5 in the miscellaneous group, with
th
an RII of 442.75, and 25 among the 40 factors that affect labor productivity (Table 4.11). Poor
planning, inadequate estimates, lack of training, lack of productivity standards, and poor project
management are the factors involved with the project objective not being well defined.

4.14. Overall Factors Affecting Labor Productivity According to RII Value

The result in Table 4.11 and Figure 4.6 shows overall ranking of 40 factors

that negatively affect labor productivity, identified in this study.

Table 4.11. Overall Ranking of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

Factors affecting labor productivity in construction RII Rank
Lack of required construction material 558.00 1
Shortage of power and/or water supply 552.00 2
Accidents during construction 546.00 3

2 Lack of required construction tools/equipment 540.00 4

Poor site condition 510.00 5
Insufficient lighting 510.00 6
Weather condition 510.00 7
Differing site conditions from plan 504.00 8
Material storage location 504.00 9
Working overtime 504.00 10
Poor access within construction site 492.00 11
Lack of experience 488.75 12
Supervision delays 488.75 13
Variations in the drawings 488.75 14
(continued)

42
 Table 4.11. Overall Ranking of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity (continued)

Factors affecting labor productivity in construction RII Rank

Violation of safety laws 486.00 15
Incomplete drawings 483.00 16
Quality of required work 480.00 17
Absenteeism 477.25 18
Rework 471.50 19
Design changes 465.75 20
Change orders from the designer 465.75 21
Inspection delays from the authorities 448.50 22
Payment delays 442.75 23
Change orders from the owner 442.75 24
Project objective not well defined 442.75 25
Inadequate transportation facilities for workers 438.00 26
Complex design in the provided drawings 437.00 27
Inadequate construction material 437.00 28

3 Misunderstanding among owner, contractor, and designer 431.25 29

Alcoholism 425.50 30
Misunderstanding among laborers 419.75 31
Implementation of government laws 419.75 32
Training sessions 414.00 33
Age 408.25 34
Disputes with designer 396.75 35
Increase in material price 396.00 36
Disputes with the owner 391.00 37
Lack of competition among laborers 379.50 38
Disloyalty 373.75 39
Personal problems 368.00 40
43
44

Figure 4.6. Overall Forty Factors.

 4.15. Group of Factors Affecting Labor Productivity

Group ranking according to the respective factors affecting labor productivity is shown in

Table 4.10 and Figure 4.7. It was calculated by taking into consideration the average RII value

for all the factors that affect labor productivity in construction. Miscellaneous factors was the top

group, with an average RII of 510.95, and the manpower group was at the bottom, with average

RII value of 417.59

Table 4.12. Group Factors

Factors RII Rank
Miscellaneous 510.95 1
Resources 487.91 2
External 455.98 3
Communication 425.50 4
Manpower 417.59 5

Figure 4.7. Group Factors.

45
 4.16. Statistical Method

A study was used to collect observations about areas of interest, and statistical analysis

was performed. Statistics were a supportive tool for this study concerning the analysis and

interpretation of the data. The approach used for this study was the Large-Sample Test of

Hypothesis used for population proportion, which is a two-tailed test. Population proportions

(or percentages) are often made in the context of the probability, p, of success for a binomial

distribution (Mc Clave, 2006).

4.17. Test Formula

The test is formulated as Ho: p = po Ha: p ≠ po,

Where, p = population proportion

po = null-hypothesized proportion

Test statistic:

z = Sample proportion - Null hypothesized proportion

6 Standard deviation of sample proportion

Rejection region when Ha: p ≠ po. Reject Ho if T is greater than z.05 = 1.96 or less than −1.96.
4.18. Examples of Test

Test was accomplished according to Equation 4.2. Test results are shown in Table 4.11.

All the T’s that are bigger than 1.96 mean significant factors affecting labor productivity in

building construction.

4.19. Identification of Significant and Non-Significant Factors

Identified significant and non-significant are shown in Table 4.13. Testing Ho: p = 0.50

vs. Ha: p ≠ 0.50, where p represents that the proportion of respondents who suggested the factor

affects labor productivity is significant or non-significant. (T is the test statistic.)

46
 Table 4.13. Identification of Significant and Non-Significant Factors
Factor Result Comment
Lack of required construction material T=6.0 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Shortage of power and/or water supply T=4.9 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Accidents during construction T=5.1 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Lack of required construction T = 3.1.0 More than 50% suggest
tools/equipment Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Poor site condition T = -1.4 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Insufficient lighting T=4.9 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Weather condition T=2.8 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Differing site conditions from plan T=4.2 More than 50% suggest

7 Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor

productivity
Material storage location T=3.8 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Working overtime T=3.0 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Poor access within construction site T = 1.02 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Lack of experience T=1.1 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Supervision delays T=4.4 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
(continued)

47
 Table 4.13. Identification of Significant and Non-Significant Factors (continued)

Factor Result Comment

Variations in the drawings T=3.3 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Violation of safety laws T = -1.08 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Incomplete drawings T=2.3 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Quality of required work T=1.8 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Absenteeism T = -1.3 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Rework T=5.5 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Design changes T=3.9 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity

8 Change orders from the designer T=2.1

Rejection of T
More than 50% suggest
significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Inspection delays from the authorities T=2.9 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Payments delays T=4.1 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Change orders from the owner T=2.6 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Project objective not well defined T=0.2 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Inadequate transportation facilities for T = -1.9 Not enough evidence. Non-
workers No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
(continued)
48
 Table 4.13. Identification of Significant and Non-Significant Factors (continued)

Factor Result Comment

Complex design in the provided T=2.8 More than 50% suggest
drawings Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Inadequate construction material T=2.0 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Misunderstanding among owner, T=1.9 Not enough evidence. Non-
contractor, and designer No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Alcoholism T = -1.4 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Misunderstanding among laborers T = -1.9 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Implementation of government laws T = -1.1 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Training sessions T=5.9 More than 50% suggest
Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity

9 Age T=2.9
Rejection of T
More than 50% suggest
significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Disputes with designer T=0.6 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Increase in material price T = -1.4 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Disputes with the owner T=1.2 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Lack of competition among laborers T=1.4 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Disloyalty T=1.3 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
Personal problems T=1.1 Not enough evidence. Non-
No Rejection of T significant factor affecting labor
productivity
49
 4.20. Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Other Countries Studied in the Past

Finally, the study also compares the survey results with other countries. Results of the

comparative analysis show that the findings of each study are different from the others. These

dissimilarities prove that the factors affecting construction productivity change based upon

geographical locations and different project types (industrial, commercial, industrial, and

highways). The study concludes that these dissimilarities are due to differences in climatic

conditions, construction methods, use of materials, availability of innovative technology, and

contractual procedures. However, there are some common factors observed among the studies,

including a delay in approving the design and drawings, a delay for payments from the owner to

contractors, equipment-related delays, improper construction methods, rework due to errors

during construction, poor planning and scheduling by the contractor, labor-related delays, a lack

of communication and coordination among all parties, material-related delays, extreme weather

conditions, and slowness in the owner’s decision to approve the design. Table 4.12 lists the top

0
ten factors affecting labor productivity in construction.

50
 Table 4.14. Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Different Countries Studied in the Past
Rank USA (Present Nigeria (Olomolaiye Egypt (Enshassi et Malaysia (Abdul Singapore (Lim and
Study) et al., 1987 ) al., 2006) Kadir et al., 2005) Alum, 1995)
1 Lack of required Inadequate or poor Material shortage Material shortage at Difficulties recruiting
construction material planning project site supervisors8
2 Shortage of power Mismanagement of funds Lack of labor Stoppage of material Difficulties recruiting
and/or water supply experience delivery due to workers
financial problems.
3 Accidents during Delay making decisions Lack of labor Change order by CO High rate of labor
construction and approvals by the surveillance causing project turnover
owner delay
4 Lack of required Affection for the use of Misunderstanding Non timely issuance Labor absenteeism at
construction low-quality material between laborers and of drawings by the work site.
tools/equipment superintendents consultants.
5 Insufficient lighting Poor coordination and Drawings and Not able to organize Communication
1
5

communication specifications change site activities. problems with

during execution foreign workers
6 Poor site condition Late deliveries Payment delays Late issuance of Inclement weather
payment by client
7 Weather condition Contractor's lack of Labor disloyalty Late supply of Health issues
experience materials.
8 Differing site Discrepancies among Inspection delays Non-availability of Material storage
condition from plan architectural, structural, labors for
mechanical, etc. drawings construction tasks.
9 Material storage Inadequate and unclear Working seven days a Coordination Alcoholism and
location drawings week with no holiday. problems with similar problems
subcontractor among workforce
10 Working overtime Bad weather conditions Tool and equipment Equipment shortage Disruption of
shortages power/water supply
2
CHAPTER 5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

5.1. Recommendations

Construction tasks are expensive and frequently cause in arguments and claims, which

generally affects progress of construction projects. The environment of construction

organizations should be suitable to implement projects with successful completion. In the

construction industry, it is necessary to find the weaknesses of particular task in order to solve

and overcome them. Mentioned below are the recommendations which were found to be

important factors for improving labor productivity in the construction industry.

i. A detail schedule of material supply schedule for each project should be provided by the

contractors. It should contain the time required to supply materials and the availability

of the local market to furnish the required materials in time. Extra attention is required

on quality of construction materials and tools used in their projects because using

suitable materials and tools reduces both the time taken to finish the work and wastage

of materials. Using suitable materials and tools also has a positive effect on the task and

thus, better labor productivity can be achieved.

ii. Organizations should make sure there is enough lighting present at the construction sites

which can indirectly reduce the number of accidents. Continuous safety training and

meetings should be arranged to achieve better performance in labor productivity.

iii. Purchased material should be stored at appropriate location and should be easily

accessible and close to constructed buildings to avoid wasting labor time for

multiple-handling materials.

iv. Recruiting manager and project managers should recruit appropriate candidate to

particular task. Friendly relations should be maintained with labors and made aware of

their importance to the organization

52
3
v. To achieve desired results, time required to implement change orders and to make

corrections in drawings and specifications should be estimated and scheduled

without affecting the project-time completion. Regular meetings should be arranged

with the project authorities.

vi. Various external and natural factor risk should be considered in the budget estimation to

minimize delays due to closures and material shortages. There should be suitable

emergency budget to cover cost of increased material.

vii. A financial incentive in the form of best employee of the year should be implemented to

create competition among the employees, thus achieving better productivity.

viii. Strict drug and alcohol tests should be implemented on a surprise basis and strict action

should be taken with the employees who test positive.

ix. Complex design and incomplete drawings should be avoided and care should be taken

to avoid confusion among the various construction agencies.

x. If the construction sites are present in remote geographical locations where public or

employees’ own transportation facilities cannot be made available, appropriate organized

transportation should be given to the employees.

xi. Change orders and design error should be avoided as much as possible. These factors can

be costly and time consuming if the work has been done. Work sequences can also be

affected due to rework.

xii. Absenteeism at work site can be reduced with inclusion of appropriate paid time off

and vacations to all employees.

5.2. Conclusion

In today’s world, the construction industry is rated as one of the key industry. It helps in

developing and achieving the goal of society. Study and knowledge of construction
productivity 53
4
are very important because they cause losses to the governing agencies and also influence the

economics of the construction industry. Prior knowledge of labor productivity during

construction can save money and time. Investments for these projects are very high and because

of the complexity in construction, various factors can highly affect overall productivity, thus the

project can end up adding even more time and money in order to be completed. This research is

intended to identify the causes of probable factors affecting labor productivity in building

construction. This study investigates all possible factors through a structured questionnaire

administered all over the USA. The survey results are subjected to analysis, and the ranking of

factors is calculated using the Relative Important Index. The basic ideas of the research is to

study various factors affecting labor productivity on construction.

Forty factors considered for the study were categorized in five different groups’

manpower, external, communication, resources, and miscellaneous groups. The target groups

in this study were construction professionals. Total of 255 questionnaires were distributed, and

28 questionnaires (11.00% response rate) were returned. Because project engineers, project

managers have vast experience in construction, their adequate experiences were a proper

suggestion to study about the various construction factors affecting labor productivity.

5.3. Future Research

The current research study was limited to the building construction industry in the USA.

Future study could be done in other parts of the world and could emphasize specific types of

building construction, including commercial, education, government buildings, skyscrapers, etc.

A study similar to the present research is needed for transportation projects to find factors that

affect the productivity of highway construction, which will help departments of transportation to

minimize unnecessary cost escalations and project-schedule delays. Federal and state

governments invest significant amounts of capital on road construction.

54
5
REFERENCES

Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE), International Recommended

Practice No. 25R-03 (2004). Estimating Lost Labor Productivity in Construction Claims

Abdul Kadir, M. R., Lee, W. P., Jaafar, M. S., Sapuan, S. M., and Ali, A. A. (2005). “Factors
affecting construction labor productivity for Malaysian residential projects.” Structure
Survey, 23(1), 42-54.

Adrian, J. (1987). Construction Productivity Improvement. Elsevier Science Publishing,

Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Adrian, J. (1990). Improving Construction Productivity Seminar, Minneapolis, MN.

The Association of General Contractors of America.

Alarcon, L. F Borcherding, J. D., and. (1991). “Quantitative effects on construction

productivity.” The Construction Lawyer, American Bar Association, 11(1), 35-48.

Alinaitwe, H., Mwakali, J., and Hansson, B. (2005). Labor productivity in the building
construction, Proceedings of CIB 2006, W065/W055/W086 – Construction in the XXI
century: Local and global challenges, October 2006, Rome, Italy.

Al-Shahri, M., Assaf S., A., Atiyah S., and AbdulAziz.A, (2001). “The management of
construction company overhead costs.” International Journal of Project Management, 19, 295-
303.

Alum, J., and Lim, E. C. (1995). "Construction productivity: Issues encountered by contractors
in Singapore." International Journal of Project Management, 13(1), 51-58.

Bernstein, Harvey M., and Lemer, A. C. (1996). Solving the Innovation Puzzle: Challenges
Facing the U.S. Design and Construction Industry, New York: 35, 1, 37-50.

Bohrnstedt, G, and Knoke, D (1994). Statistics for Social Data Analysis (3rd Edition). F.E.
Peacock Publishers, Inc., Itaska IL.

Borcherding, J. D Chang, L.-M., and. (1985). “Evaluation of craftsman questionnaire.” Journal

of Construction Engineering and Management, 111(4), 426-439.

Borcherding, J. D, and Liou, F.-S. (1986). "Work sampling can predict unit rate
productivity." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 112(1), 90-103.

Bramble, B. B., and Callahan, M. T. (2000). Construction Delay Claims. Aspen Publishers

Cheung, S. O., Suen, H. C. H., and Cheung, K. K. W. (2004). "PPMS: A web-based construction
project performance monitoring system." Automation in Construction, 13(3), 361-376.

55
6
Construction Industry Institute (2000). “Quantifying the cumulative impact of change orders for
electrical and mechanical contractors.” Research Summary 158-1, Cumulative Change Order
Impact Research Team, Construction Industry Institute (CII), University of Texas at Austin.

Damodara, K. P. E. (1999). “Materials management: The key to successful project

management.” Journal of Management in Engineering, American Society of Civil
Engineering, 15(1), 30-34.

Davies, V. J., and Thomas. K. (1990). Construction Safety Handbook. Telford,

London, England.

DeCenzo, D, and Holoviak, S. (1990). Employee Benefits. Prentice Hall, City, New Jersey, 55-
56.

Drewin, F. J. (1982). Construction Productivity: Measurement and Improvementthrough Work

Study, Elsevier Science Ltd., NewYork.

Enshassi, A., Al-Hallaq, K. and Mohamed, S. (2006). “Causes of contractor’s business failure in
developing countries: The case of Palestine.” Journal of Construction in Developing Countries,
11(2), 1-14.

Fowler, F. J. (1993). Survey Research Methods (2nd Edition). Sage Publications, Inc.,
Newbury Park, CA.

Ginther, R. S. (1993). “The effect of work environment on labor performance.” ME thesis,

Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.

Guhathakurta, S. and Yates, J. (1993). “International labor productivity.” Journal of Construction

Engineering, 35(1), 15-25.

Halligan, D. W., Demsetz, L. A., Brown, J. D., and Pace, C. B. (1994). “Action-response models
and loss of productivity in construction.” Journal of Construction Engineering Management,
120(1), 47-64.

Hanna, A. S., and Heale, D. G. (1994). "Factors affecting construction productivity:

Newfoundland versus rest of Canada.” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 21(4), 663-673.

Hanna, A. S., Taylor, C. S., and Sullivan, K. T. (2005). “Impact of extended overtime on
construction labor productivity.” ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering
Management, 131(6), 734-740.

Harris, F. C., Holt, G. D., Olomolaiye, P. O. and Zakeri, M., (1996). "A survey of constraints
on Iranian construction operatives' productivity." Construction Management and Economics,
14(5), 417-426.

Harris, F, Holt, G., Kaming, E., and. Olomolaiye, P. (1998). “Factors influencing craftsmen's
productivity in Indonesia.” International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), 21-30.
56
7
Harris, F., Jayawardane, A. K. W., and Olomolaiye, P. O., (1998).Construction Productivity
Management. Harlow, Addison Wesley Longman, 182-186 pp.

Hassanein, A., and Melin, J. (1997). "Crew design methodology for construction contractors."
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 123(3), 203-207.

Heizer, J., and Render, B. (1990). Production and Operations Management “Strategic
and Tactical Decisions.” Prentice Hall, NJ.

Hinze, J. W. (1999). Construction Planning & Scheduling. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,
NJ.

Horner, R. M. W., and Talhouni, B. T. (1995). Effects of Accelerated Working, Delays,

and Disruptionson Labor Productivity. Chartered Institute of Building, London.

Israel, G. D. (2003). “Sampling the evidence of extension program impact,” Agricultural

Education and Communication Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute
of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville.

Iyer, K. C., and Jha, K. N. (2005). “Factors affecting cost performance: Evidence from Indian
construction projects.” International Journal of Project Management, 23, 283-295.

Jarkas, A. M. (2005). “An investigation into the influence of build-ability factors on productivity
of in situ reinforced concrete construction.” Ph.D. thesis, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.

Kaming, P. F., Olomolaiye, P. O., Holt, G. D., and Harris, F. C. (1997). "Factors influencing
craftsmen's productivity in Indonesia." International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), 21-
30.

Kim, D. H. (1993), "The individual and organizational learning," Sloan Management Review,
38:49

Koehn, E., and Brown, G. (1985). "Climatic effects on construction." Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 111(2), 129-137.

Kumar A (2004) Ch. 9 Cited in V.D Desai Small Scale Enterprises, Himalaya Publication,
th
5 edition New Delhi 233-234

Lema, N. M., and Samson, M. (1995). “Construction of labor productivity modeling.” University
of Dar Elsalaam, Tanzania

Lema N., and Samson M. (2002), Development of construction contractors performance

measurement framework, 1st International Conference of Creating a Sustainable

Leonard, C. A. (1987). “The Effect of Change Orders on Productivity.” The Revay Report, On-
line. World Wide Web Revay Rep., 6(2), 1-4.

57
8
Makulsawatudom, A., and Emsley, M. (2002). Critical factors influencing construction
productivity in Thailand. Proceedings of CIB 10th International Symposium on
Construction Innovation and Global Competitiveness, Cincinnati, OH.

Makulsawatudom, A. and Sinthawanarong, K. (2004). "Critical factors influencing

construction productivity in Thailand.” The Journal of King Mongkut's Institute of Technology
North Bangkok 14(3), 1-6

Mc Clave, J. T., (2006). Statistics (10th Edition).

Mechanical Contractors of America. (1976). “Factors Affecting Productivity.”

Mechanical Contractors of America, Bulletin No. 58, January.

Moore, D., McCabe, G., Duckworth, W., and Sclove, S. (2003). The Practice of Business
Statistics, Freeman, New York, NY.

National Electrical Contractors Association. (1983). Rate of Manpower consumption in

Electrical Construction, Electrical Construction Peak Workforce Report, 2nd edition, page 5

National Electrical Contractors Association. (1989). Overtime and Productivity in

Electrical Construction. NECA, 2nd Edition, Washington, DC.

Neil, J. M., and Knack, L. E. (1984). “Predicting productivity.” Transactions of

American Association of Cost Engineers, H.3.1-H.3.8.

Oglesby, C. H., Parker, H. W., and Howell, G. A. (2002). Productivity Improvement

in Construction. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Olomolaiye, P. O., Wahab, K., and Price, A. (1987). “Problems influencing craftsman
productivity in Nigeria.” Building Environment, 22(4), 317-323.

Ovararin, N., and Popescu, C. M. (2001). “Field factors affecting masonry productivity.”
The 45th Annual Meeting of AACE International, Association for the Advancement of Cost
Engineering, June 17-20, 2001, Miami, FL.

Park, H. (2002). “Development of a construction productivity metrics system PMS.” Ph.D.

dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.

Paulson, B. C. (1975). Estimation and control of construction labor costs. Journal

of Construction Division, 101(CO3), 623-633.

Pilcher, R. 1992. Principles of Construction Management. 3rd ed. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Poh, P. S. H., and Chen, J. (1998). “The Singapore Buildable Design Appraisal System:
A preliminary review of the relationship between buildability, site productivity and cost.”
Construction Management and Economics, 16(6), 681-692.
58
9
Polat, G., and Arditi, P. (2005). “The JIT Management System in developing countries.”
Construction Management and Economics, 23(7), 697-712.

Portas, J., and AbouRizk, S. (1997). “Neural network model for estimating construction
productivity.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, December, 399-410.

Rojas, E. M., and Aramvareekul, P. (2003). "Is construction labor productivity really
declining?" Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(1), 41-46.

Rowlinson, M., and Proctor, S. (1999). ‘Organizational Culture and Business

History’ Organization Studies 20(3) pp.369-96.

Sanders, S. R. and Thomas, H. R. (1991). “Factors affecting masonry productivity.” Journal

of Construction Engineering Management, 117(4), 626-644.

Stall, M. D. (1983). “Analyzing and improving productivity with computerized questionnaires

and delay surveys.” Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Annual Seminar

Symposium 1983, Project Management Institution, Drexel Hill, PA, V.M.1-V.M.11.

Suazo, G. A., and Jaselskis, E. J. (1993). "Comparison of construction safety codes in the United
States and Honduras." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 119(3), 560-572.

Sumanth, D. J. (1984). Productivity Engineering and Management. McGraw-Hill, New York,

NY.

Thomas, H. R. (1991). "Labor productivity and work sampling: The bottom line." Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 117(3), 423-444.

Thomas, H. R., and Kramer, D. F. (1988). “The manual of construction productivity

measurement and performance evaluation.” Source Document 35, Construction Industry
Institute, The University of Texas at Austin.

Thomas, H. R., and Oloufa A. A. (1995). “Labor productivity, disruptions, and the ripple effect.”
Cost Engineering, 37(12), 49-54.

Thomas, H. R., Riley, D. R., and Sanvido, V. E. (1999). "Loss of labor productivity due to
delivery methods and weather." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
125(1), 39-46.

Thomas, H. R., and Sakarcan, A. S. (1994). "Forecasting labor productivity using the factor
model." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(1), 228-239.

Ugwu, O. O., and Haupt, T. C. (2007). "Key performance indicators and assessment methods for
infrastructure sustainability—A South African construction industry perspective." Journal of
Engineering Design and Technology. 42(2), 665-680.

59
0
United Nations Committee on Housing, Building and Planning. (1965). Effect of Repetition
on Building Operations and Processes on Site. United Nations, New York, NY.

Vaggi, G. (1987). The Economics of Francois Quesnay. Duke University Press, Durham, NC.

Wilcox, S., Stringfellow, B., Harris, R., and Martin, B. (2000). Management and Productivity.
Transportation Research Board, Committee on Management and Productivity, Washington, DC.

Zou, P. X. W., Zhang, G., and Wang, J. (2007). “Understanding the key risk in construction
projects in china,” International Journal of Project Management, 25(6): 601-614.

60
1
APPENDIX A. IRB APPROVAL

61
2
APPENDIX B. WEB-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Title of Research Study: Labor Productivity in Building Construction.

Mr. Mahesh Gundecha (Graduate Student/Researcher) and Eric Asa (Academic Advisor)

North Dakota State University

Department of Constructin Management and Engineering

Room 106, AR/LA Building, Main Campus Fargo, ND 58102

USA Ph. 701 231-7246 Fax: 701-2317431. E-mail:

Eric.Asa@ndsu.edu, or Mahesh.Gundecha@ndsu.edu

You are being contacted to request your participation in a research investigation that is being

conducted by student working in the Construction Management Department at North Dakota

State University, Fargo. North Dakota. New management concepts such as labor productivity

improvement provide innovative techniques that could result in more efficient labor and cost

performance. Construction labor productivity differs between every project because of different

climatic conditions, availability of resources and supervisor personnel for every project. A

literature review of articles related to building construction indicated that a lit to support that the

lower productivity of craftsmen is one of the causes of cost and delays on building projects. Low

productivity of labor is significant particularly in developing countries where majority of

construction task is performed manually.

Basic aim of this study project is to collect data on various factors affecting labor

productivity in building construction. The reliable data will be collected from contractors,

engineers, construction managers, and other professionals in the construction industry. Your

valuable participation will allow the research team to document factors affecting labor productivity

in building construction, and their effects on project completion. Your contribution

62
3
to this study would be appreciated and it would contribute additional knowledge on the

subject of productivity improvement. The questions refer to the following scale.

1 Not Applicable 2 Does-not affect it 3 Some-what affect it 4 Directly affect it.

The information you provide will be kept confidential and your name and affiliation will

be removed from your survey ant data will be included in the published research.

Please submit your responses by November 07, 2009.Please e-mail, fax, or mail the

completed questionnaire to the above listed address. Thank you for your time and input.

If you have any questions about this project, please contact the researchers, or

contact North Dakota State University Human Research Protection Program at

701.231.8908, ndsu.irb@ndsu.edu, or by mail at: North Dakota State University HRPP

Office, NDSU Dept 4000, and P.O. Box 6050, Fargo, ND 58108-6050.Sincerely,

Mahesh Gundecha.

63
4
Labor Productivity in Building Construction Survey Questions

Section 1:- General Information

Name Title
Work Phone Fax
E-mail Address Organization
Mailing Address
Type of Construction Residential Commercial Industrial Government

Organization
Engineering Architecture Owner Commercial
Others (Please Specify)

Annual Total Number of Employees working in

Installed Cost (TIC) company
Number of Projects

per year
Typical Size of 0-5 million 5-10 million 10-100 million >100 million
Projects($)

Section 2:- Specific Questions of Labor Productivity in Building Construction

A) How would you define Labor productivity in the Construction industry?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

64
3) Please indicate to what extent following factors affect labor productivity at construction
site 1 – Not applicable; 2 – Does not affect it; 3 – Somewhat affects it; 4 – Directly affects it

No. Factors Affecting Labor Productivity in Building Construction Data Measurement

1 Manpower 1 2 3 4
a) Lack of experience.
b) Disloyalty.
c) Misunderstanding among laborers.
d) Lack of competition between the Laborers.
e) Age.
f) Personal problems.
g) Alcoholism.
h) Absenteeism.
2 External
a) Implementation of government laws.
b) Rework
c) Supervision delays
d) Inspection delays from The authorities.
e) Variations in the drawings.
f) Complex designs in the provided drawings.
g) Incomplete drawings
h) Payment delays.
i) Training sessions.
j) Design Changes.
3 Communication
a) Change orders from the designers.
b) Change orders from the owners.
c) Disputes with owner.
d) Disputes with designer.
e)Misunderstanding between the owner, the contractor and the
4 Resources
a) Lack of required construction materials.
b) Increase in the price of materials.
c) Lack of required tools and/or equipment’s.
d) Poor site conditions
e) Differing site conditions from the plan
f) Poor access within construction job site
g) Violations of safety laws.
h) Insufficient lighting.
i) Inadequate construction method
j) Inadequate transportation facilities for workers.
k) Material storage location
(continued)
65
Table Factors Affecting Labor Productivity in Building Construction (continued)
No. Factors Affecting Labor Productivity in Building Construction Data Measurement
l) Quality of required work.
5 Miscellaneous
a) Shortage of water and/or power supply.
b) Working overtime.
c) Weather conditions
d) Accidents during construction
e) Project objective is not well defined

4) Other Comments on Factors affecting Labor Productivity at Construction Job sites

a) ____________________________________________________________________
b) ____________________________________________________________________
c) ___________________________________________________________________
d) ___________________________________________________________________

66