sign in sign up
<<
Home , Interior design

International Journal of Civil and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 9, Issue 13, December 2018, pp.918–931, Article ID: IJCIET_09_13_0922 Available online at http://iaeme.ccom/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=9&Issue=13 ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

EFFECTIVE UTILIZING -BUUILD VS. DESIGN-BID-BBUILD METHODS; 5-FEATURE APPRAISAL (TIME- DRAWINGS-CALENDAR-COMMUNICATION- CHANGES)

Ihab M. Katar Construction Managemment Program, Department of Engineering Management, College of Eng., Prince Sultan University, Riyadh,

Dina R. Howeidy Department of , College of & Design, Royal University for Women, Bahrain

ABSTRACT Design and construction are measured as the main stages of thhe construction project, which fundamentally starts with the engineering design and closes with construction. The achieveement of the complete set is subject to how to further the project achieved its main objectives: highest quality, least cost, and the least time. These objectives are significantly affected by the connection’s strength amongst the two stages of the set: design and construction. It’s monitored that most of the difficulties facing the proper implementation of those objectives are related to the weak connection between the two main stages of the project. Since theen, this research paper decided to investiggate the main influences associated with the correlation between both stages through applying the lean construction concepts. Furthermore, it seeks the feasible actions that could support this relationship as an approach to enhance the project objeectives, which are definitively dedicated tto the construction product at the end results. Focusing more, this reseae rch compares evaluates two selected keyy factors that believed to affect the connection of both design and construction stages: The Design-Build (DB) and the Design-Bid-Build (DBB) methods/contracts. For more concentration, an appraisal is appliedd throughout a selected group of (5) principal factors: design time, construction drawings, construction calendar, ccommunication channels, and change orders. This is considered as a partial stuudy, which could be expanded later throughout more factors. Finally, results and conclusion are presented to propose the recommmendation based on the performed statistical analysis.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 918 [email protected] Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy

Keywords: Lean construction - Project design - construction project-design objectives-Design-Build (DB) -Design-Bid-Build (DBB). Cite this Article: Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy, Effective Construction Utilizing Design-Build Vs. Design-Bid-Build Methods; 5-Feature Appraisal (Time- Drawings-Calendar-Communication-Changes), International Journal of and Technology (IJCIET) 9(13), 2018, pp. 918–931. http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=9&Issue=13

1. INTRODUCTION For discussing the possible factors that might affect the connection between the two stages of a construction project, it worth having more information concerning both Design and Construction. The information will help in enhancing the destined connection, which would be returned to the objectives of construction project. In this regard, the study will highlight both stages independently, and then show the main factors that affect the connection strength amongst them, which are the DB and the DBB methods/contracts.

1.1. Design Process In the design process, three “roles” are played as the design discloses: There is a client, who is a person or group or firm that desires design concepts; There is also a user to operate or utilize what is designed; and there is a whose job is to solve the client’s problem (set the design) in a way that meets the user’s requirements [1]. The are almost physical objects. Also, e-versions such as drawings, computer software, or their “paper” products, plans, articles, and books are objects in this logic. Here, it’s crucial to highlight the importance of owning the needed knowledge prior starting a new design throughout searching and reading; “reading is not only crucial for a person's self- cultivation, but also an important way for people to mould themselves, perfect their characters, elevate their minds, and gain wisdom” [2]. Reaching a proper design approach by thorough readings and researches within the first steps of its complete process, leads to accomplish the economic aspect in this important stage; many construction cost and project management practices already use ‘target costing’ terminology or repeat target value design (TVD) in some part of the process[3].

1.2. Construction Go into the field where you can see the machines and methods at work that make the modern , or stay in construction direct and simple until you can work naturally into building- design from the nature of construction [4]. The should have construction at least as much at his fingers’ ends as a thinker his grammar [5]. There is an underlying assertion that improving construction performance need not be the outcome of primarily pursuing procurement solutions [6]. For any but the smallest buildings, the next step for the owner of the prospective building is to engage, either directly or through a hired construction manager, the services of professionals. Here, the owner should recognize that being competent is not the same as being strong in relation to the competition [7], [8], and [9]. Although a building begins as a concept, it is built in a world of material actualities. The building , and work constantly from an awareness of what is possible and what isn’t. They are able to employ an apparently limitless list of building materials and a number of structural systems to produce a building of any desired form and

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 919 [email protected] Effective Construction Utilizing Design-Build Vs. Design-Bid-Build Methods; 5-Feature Appraisal (Time-Drawings-Calendar-Communication-Changes) texture; Leading to wide-use of new construction materials that fix current concerns about the conventional ones [10], in this stage, designers should consider specifying such kinds of materials. However, this research is concerned primarily with the options of construction; what process will be followed in terms of contracting sequence, demonstrating the effects of each on the design objectives. These should be studied, however, with reference to many other factors that bear on design of buildings, some of which require explanation here.

1.3. Lean Construction Lean management system success is largely and directly attributed to their sole approach of cutting waste and added value [11]. Lean Construction’s (LC) growing popularity is even acknowledged by those who question the applicability of lean to the construction sector [12]. Green also draws our attention to his critical definition of LC as a “complex cocktail of ideas” [13]. Moreover, most construction managers agree that the is susceptible to multiple wastes, overruns, delays, errors, and inefficiency. As a result, construction projects seldom finish on time, within budget, and at a quality accepted by the customer [14]. Thus, several project management approaches have emerged to improve construction performance including lean construction, lean project management, and value-engineering [15]. Recent years have seen a growing international academic interest in lean construction [16], [17], and [18]. On the other hand, some other researches gave alerts when dealing with this concept; “Rather than providing a step forward to the future, the concept of lean construction may well provide a step backwards to the past [19]. However, the majority confirmed that it is a combination of operational research and practical development in design and construction with an adaption of its principles and practices to the end-to-end design and construction process. Dissimilar to , construction is a project-based production process. Lean construction – a term by the International Group for Lean Construction in 1993 [20], was highlighted recently few years back. This refers to the application of lean production principles and practices in design-construction processes to maximize value and to reduce waste [16], [17], [21], and [22]. Lean is valued for its ability to identify waste [23] and [24]. Together, Lean and Green have the ability to identify waste and evaluate its environmental impact, but they often do not provide an actual method to reduce waste [25]. Also, the benefits in a certain study were identified, analysed and the outcomes suggest that there is a direct linkage between and lean Construction [26]. Many papers before, were working on extending the simulation approaches by employing the lean construction concepts, such as IKEA model, and others [27]. In Europe, the idea of improving value is leading to an exploration of how Lean construction might deliver some improvement at least within the European Construction Institute (ECI) and its members [28]. Last but not least, Lean principles in general and lean construction in particular are approaches developed to improve the productivity of the construction industry and its projects [29]. This approach tries to manage and improve construction processes with minimum cost and maximum value by considering the client’s needs.

1.4. Construction Methods This research figures out the main possible factors that might contribute significantly to the relationship of both stages: design and construction. It aims to enhance their connection to become stronger, which will be reflected to the project and design objectives. Aiming more concentration, the study chose different contracts/methods used worldwide in implementing the construction projects: DBB, DB, and others. Following, are the main

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 920 [email protected] Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy ideas of these methods, which should be subject to the appraisal, in order to gain the needed results that will recommend the best.

1.5. Construction Project Delivery Methods Construction projects have different delivery methods in terms of contractual arrangements. It’s important to investigate how companies in the construction sector deal with the phenomenon of ‘quality’ and develop quality management approaches [30], as quality is a core management factor while dealing with the project delivery method.

1.5.1. DBB Method/Contract In typical DBB project structure (Figure 2), the owner hires first a team of architects and engineers to offer design services, which lead to develop drawings and technical specifications referred to construction documents that describe the facility to be built. Afterwards, construction firms are invited to bid on the project. Each bidding firm reviews the construction documents and then proposes a cost to construct this project. The owner then evaluates the submitted offers and awards the construction contract to the bidder believed most suitable. This selection may be based on bid price only, or sometimes other factors related to bidders’ qualifications may also be considered. Next, the construction documents become a part of the construction contract, and the selected firm proceeds with the work. On all except small projects, the winner firm acts as the GC, coordinating and managing the overall construction process. However, it may be relying on smaller, more specialized subcontractors to perform significant parts or even all of the construction work. During construction, the design team keeps on providing services to the owner, serving to ensure that the project is adhering to the requirements of the documents, as well as answering queries related to the design, payments to the contractor, changes to the work, and similar issues. Amongst the advantages of DBB, project structure is easy-to-understanding, well- established legal practices, and easy to be managed. The direct relationship between the owner and the design team ensures that the owner preserves control over the design and delivers a healthy set of checks and balances during the construction process. Moreover, with design work completed prior the project is bid, owner starts construction with a fixed cost and a high degree of confidence regarding the final cost of the project. Finally, in DBB project structure, the owner contracts with two entities, in which both design and construction responsibilities remain divided among them during the project.

1.5.2. DB Method/Contract In DB project structure, one entity ultimately undertakes responsibility for both design and construction (Figure-2). A DB project initiates with the owner developing a that describes the functional or performance requirements of the proposed project but doesn’t detail its form or how it would be constructed. Following, using this conceptual information, a DB firm is selected to complete all remaining parts of the project including different project activities like planning and scheduling. Also, it is obvious that the activities at site is influenced at a higher order by the planning and scheduling of activities in order to achieve smooth workflow throughout the project[31]. Selection of the DB may be based on a competitive bid process similar to that described above for DBB projects, on negotiation and evaluation of a firm’s qualifications for the projected work, or on some combination of both. DB companies themselves can take a variety of forms: a single firm incorporating both design and construction expertise, a joint venture (JV) between two firms, one is specialized in construction and the other in design, or a

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 921 [email protected] Effective Construction Utilizing Design-Build Vs. Design-Bid-Build Methods; 5-Feature Appraisal (Time-Drawings-Calendar-Communication-Changes) firm that subcontracts with a separate design firm to provide those services. Regardless of the internal structure of the DB firm, the owner contracts with a single entity through the rest of the project, which shoulders responsibility for all remaining design and construction services. DB project structure offers the owner a single source of accountability for all aspects of the project. It also places the designers and constructors in a collaborative correlation, introducing construction know-how into the design phases of a project and allowing the earliest possible consideration of constructability, cost control, scheduling, and similar issues. This structured method also accommodates fast-track construction, a scheduling technique for reducing construction time. Managing an increasing complexity of construction delivery requires a myriad of collective activities of a group of people than individual could accomplish separately [32]. In the same line, project delivery followed a design-and-build (D&B) approach, with a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) and fixed dates for the handover of the building to the tenants, and here, a penalty could be agreed between the investor and the main contractor in case of missing the due dates [33].

Figure 2.DBB vs. DB Construction Structures [34].

1.5.3. Different Methods/Contracts There is a possibility for other delivery methods: the owner may sign separate contracts with a design team and a construction manager. As in DB construction, the construction manager contributes to the project earlier to the start of construction, conducting construction knowledge during the design stage. Construction management project delivery could take several forms and is frequently associated with especially sizeable or complex projects (Figure-3). In turnkey construction, an owner contracts with a single entity that provides financing for the project and not only design and construction services. In other practices, design and construction could be undertaken by a single-purpose entity, in which the owner, architect, and contractor are all joint members. Moreover, other project delivery methods could also be combined; permitting several possible organizational schemes offering design and construction services that suit a diversity of owner desires and project conditions.

Figure 3. Construction management project delivery forms [34].

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 922 [email protected] Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy

Regardless variances in these production environments, construction industry is watching lessons learned in factory production for approaches to enhance the quality and efficiency of its own processes. These concepts and alike are called lean construction methods (as mentioned earlier in this research), that attempt to: • Remove any wasteful activities • Structure the procedures of production and the supply chain of materials and products in order to achieve the fastest and most reliable workflow • Decentralize the information and decision making in to pass the control of construction processes to the hands of those most familiar with the work and most capable of refining it Present estimates of labour inefficiency in building construction run as high as 35 - 40%, and estimates of materials waste are 20% or so [35]. Also, it’s found that job rotation, job enrichment, planning cultural activities for the employees and the labours can enhance the efficiency [36]. The challenge of lean construction is to reorganize the way in which construction materials and components of the building are manufactured, delivered, and assembled in a way to reduce these inefficiencies and expand the quality of the delivered product.

2. RESEARCH PROBLEM Repeated problems are taking place when the awarded consultant of supervision starts their tasks. Most of the time, this consultant is referring any weaknesses in the project to the consultant of design. It’s a common practice that may occur between any entities of the same area of specialization. This attitude is resulting in misleading to the project objectives due to the weakness in performance of the supervision consultant, which is most probably justified by having incomplete or faulty outputs from the design consultant. Moreover, several factors need to be revisited within the project cycle, as they influence its main objectives that touch all of the construction time, cost, and quality. For more concentration, part of these factors is discussed in this study by measuring their impact on the given objectives. The chosen factors are: design time, construction drawings, construction calendar, communication channels, and change orders.

3. OBJECTIVE Figure out the best construction delivery method by applying the concepts of lean construction, which is believed to improve the project’s main objectives.

4. HYPOTHESES Collecting both project delivery stages: design and construction, in one place under the responsibility of a singular entity (DB) will contribute to accomplish the concepts of lean construction, and thus, the main construction project objectives will be achieved properly as planned. This approach is also ideal for solving most of the project delivery issues that used to take place by distributing the tasks of design and construction among different entities considering the weak communications.

5. RESEARCH APPROACH While stages, design and construction are the main contractual components of a construction project, and are also sequential, so it’s wise to have a strong connection amongst them. By experience, and due to contractual reasons, a kind of weakness shows up due to the lack of coordination between both stages. The source of this weakness is believed to be caused by first: the two consultants (of design and supervision) that are not working for the same entity.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 923 [email protected] Effective Construction Utilizing Design-Build Vs. Design-Bid-Build Methods; 5-Feature Appraisal (Time-Drawings-Calendar-Communication-Changes)

Second: the collaborative work between the (design consultant) and constructor (contractor) is somehow weak as they are also working for separate entities and places. Third: the coordination between the engineer (supervision consultant) and the constructor (contractor) carries some negative signs even if they are working in the same place, as each of them has an individual contract with the owner, which make the consultant, by role nature, working “against” the contractor to get the owner’s confidence. The approach depends on measuring the difference between two cases: • The consultant of design and the consultant of supervision are different, and both are not belonging to the contractor entity (the common practice) represented in the DBB contract type. • The consultant of design and of supervision and the contractor are all represented in one entity (less likely practice) represented in the DB contract type. Since the second case above is not the common practice, the research will show and measure the positive/negative reflections of using it to the project objectives throughout an appraisal of certain features’ group. Furthermore, the quality management approaches has been previously shown[30] to provide rich data relating to the views and actions of stakeholders involved in a real ‘live’ project in respect of Lean [37]. Case-based research is also appropriate where there is little prior empirical evidence about a phenomenon [38]. The study here followed the approach in which participant observations, archival records, which provided information on performance, and semi structured interviews, were used to obtain qualitative data [39] and [40]. Therefore, an investigation will be the action that suits this case, and to make it applicable, the study sample was selected carefully from the same area: construction project main players (owners, consultants of design/construction, and contractors). It will state the impact of including both stages in one entity: design and construction (DB method/contract), then compare its results with the other method: separate design and construction stages with different consultants of design and supervision (DBB method/contract). To apply the approach’s concept above, a group of (5) features was selected carefully to measure the differences between both methods/contracts. The following design of question structure was distributed to the population chosen (mentioned below) to collect their feedbacks: “For each of the following features, score both of project construction contracts (1-5). The scoring is based on thorough investigations for each type of contracts, and therefore, each feature scores should be supported by accepted information through a clear argument. As a result, after filling the table, there should be arguments for each feature. 1. Design time (less) 2. Construction drawings (simplicity) 3. Construction calendar (less) 4. Communication channels (less) 5. Change orders (less) Score scale : 1 is the lowest and 5 is the highest” The last questions were organized and tabulated for the purpose of collecting back the average scores (Table-1).

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 924 [email protected] Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy

Table 1. the attached table within the survey distributed among the population Data Collection. Name: No.: S Features Construction Contract (more score for description between parentheses) Design-Build Design-Bid- Build 1 Design time (less) 2 Construction drawings (simplicity) 3 Construction calendar (less) 4 Communication channels (less) 5 Change orders (less) Total Scores Rank Through unstructured interviews with design and construction players: owners, consultants (of design and supervision), and contractors, the data were collected by filling the given forms (appendix-1). They were asked to give their feedbacks regarding the (5) chosen factors among the two delivery methods: DB & DBB. The interviewees were asked to elaborate about their scoring justifying them.

6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results obtained from the feedbacks of the interviewees (appendix-1) were as follows: Feedbacks were collected, tabulated, and classified to give the needed statistics for analysing the results. Table-2 below, shows the feedbacks for the DB contract, which overall scored it 21.00 / 25.00 among the “five” features’ evaluations.

Table 2. Feedbacks collected for DB Contracts

S. Features \ Feedbacks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Average Round 1 Design time (less) 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 4.384615 4.38 2 Construction drawings (simplicity) 5 3 1 4 2 5 4 2 4 4 3 2 4 3.307692 3.31 3 Construction calendar (less) 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 5 4.384615 4.38 4 Communication channels (less) 5 4 5 4.5 5 4 5 5 4 4.5 4.5 5 5 4.653846 4.65 5 Change orders (less) 5 3 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 4.5 4 4 4 4.269231 4.27 TotalS cores 23 18 20 20.5 21 23 23 19 21 21 19.5 21 23 ######## 21.00 Likewise, table-3 below, shows the feedbacks for the DBB contract, which overall scored it 12.96 / 25.00 among the “five” features’ evaluations.

Table 3. Feedbacks collected for DBB Contracts

S. Features \ Feedbacks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Average Round 1 Design time( less) 2 2 3 3 1 3 3 2 2 3 3.5 3 2 2.5 2.5 2 Construction drawings (simplicity) 4 4 5 3 4 4 3 5 3 3 2.5 4 3 3.653846 3.65 3 Construction calendar ( less) 1 2 2 2.5 2 3 3 2 2 3.5 3.5 3 1 2.346154 2.35 4 Communication channels (less) 2 3 3 2.5 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 2.423077 2.42 5 Change orders (less) 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 3.5 2 1 2.038462 2.04 Total Scores 10 13 15 13 9 15 14 14 10 15.5 16 15 9 12.96154 12.96 Design Time (less: DB = 4.38, DBB = 2.50), Figure-4 With reference to the time required for design stage, DB had the upper hand mainly as a result of incorporating both design and construction in one entity. The existence of the design team nearby the construction team had a great gain. There is no need to prepare the full-set of design drawings, BOQs, and specifications as supposed to do in DBB. In this case, and while the construction begins, any missed or ambiguous information could be gathered effortlessly from the design team, because they are working together, which is considered a harsh mission

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 925 [email protected] Effective Construction Utilizing Design-Build Vs. Design-Bid-Build Methods; 5-Feature Appraisal (Time-Drawings-Calendar-Communication-Changes) in DBB. On the other hand, in DBB the complete design documents should be completed entirely and neatly prior proceeding to the construction stage. One more add; switching to the construction stage desires an intermediate stage: bidding, which demands an extra time added to the project schedule.

Figure 4. Design time of DB vs. DBB Charts

Construction Drawings (simplicity: DB = 3.31, DBB = 3.65), Figure-5 As mentioned in (1) above, the simplicity of the design drawings needed for construction (part of the design documents), goes for DB. However, and as watched from the overall scoring of this feature, the feedbacks went to DBB. By screening amongst the (13) evaluators, it’s clear that most of them (8/13) scored DB over DBB, which is supports the logic. On the contrary, a less number (5/13) scored DBB over DB, which contradicts the logic. It was an essential action to contact (personally) those evaluators who went for DBB to have more information about their feedbacks. All of the collected answers from this group underlined a misunderstanding of this feature; they didn’t consider the word “simplicity” and thought that they would score the amount and completeness of the drawings, so they scored the opposite trend. However, the overall scoring didn’t award this feature a big difference towards DBB, and there was also an option to rescore these feedbacks, but the research went for the current scoring to achieve transparency, besides having a margin of mistakes. Finally, the trend was clear in spite of these issues.

Figure 5.Construction Drawings of DB vs. DBB Charts

Construction Calendar (less: DB = 4.38, DBB = 2.35), Figure-6 It’s an interpretation of the time needed for construction stage. Like the time needed for design, discussed in (1) above, almost the same sense goes for construction as it’s one of the two stages of a project completion. The collaborative work of both stages; design and construction in DB, is a witness of acquiring less time when estimating the construction calendar. Evaluators’ scoring went also in this feature to award DB higher, which defends also the appropriateness of depending on DBregarding this feature.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 926 [email protected] Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy

Figure 6. Construction Calendar of DB vs. DBB Charts

Communication Channels (less: DB = 4.65, DBB = 2.42), Figure-7 Clear difference is evident between both contracts considering this feature. It doesn’t need a detailed description to figure out the complexity of communication channels required in DBB amongst both teams; design and construction, as they are located in different establishments. Consequently, DB was scored higher according to the evaluators’ feedbacks.

Figure 7. Communication Channels of DB vs. DBB Charts

Change Orders (less: DB = 4.27, DBB = 2.04), Figure-8 Any modification could take place during the construction stage from the original design documents (design, materials, quantities… etc.) requires a “change order” to become applicable. In practice, projects usually have change orders in their records. The less quantity of such changes reflects either the project studies’ neatness during the design stage including the completeness and accuracy of design documents, or the strong connection between both teams, design and construction. Since the first case is less likely to be accomplished due to several causes, but the second one is a direct outcome of comprising both teams under one entity. Hence, DB has the higher score in this feature.

Figure 8. Change Orders of DB vs. DBB Charts

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 927 [email protected] Effective Construction Utilizing Design-Build Vs. Design-Bid-Build Methods; 5-Feature Appraisal (Time-Drawings-Calendar-Communication-Changes)

With the same line of the hypothesis, DB got the higher scores amongst the population feedbacks. It was a general result, even with regard to each evaluator, that the DB contract was a clear and direct winner in this comparison; please refer to the above results in tables 2 & 3 (the total scores) against each evaluator, who were numbered 1-13 respectively, and Figure-9 below.

Figure 9. Total Scores of DB vs. DBB Charts Furthermore, in spite of the minor differences between items to be scored, but the average went for the concept of integrating both design and construction in a singular entity DB instead of separating them as followed in the DBB method/contract (Table-4).

Table 4. Average scores obtained from the collected population feedbacks Name: Average No.: 1-13 S Features Construction Contract (more score for description between parentheses) Design-Build Design-Bid- Build 1 Design time (less) 4.38 2.50 2 Construction drawings (simplicity) 3.31 3.65 3 Construction calendar (less) 4.38 2.35 4 Communication channels (less) 4.65 2.42 5 Change orders (less) 4.27 2.04 Total Scores 21.00 12.96 Rank 1 2

7. CONCLUSION Throughout the results and discussion, the research hypothesis was confirmed. The DB method/contract works on enhancing the link strength among the project stages: design and construction. In the same time, this method provides an ideal connection between both stages, and also applies the concepts of lean construction to minimize the waste in all of time, cost, and quality of the final product “the project”. As mentioned earlier, the DB method/contract in the construction market is a witness of escalating trend:” between 1980 and 2005 the share of private, non-residential construction work performed as DB construction increased from about 5% of the total market to an estimated 30 - 40%” [41]. This indicator supports the results of this research; in 2018, which leads to the recommendation of expanding the use scale of DB in the same market.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 928 [email protected] Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy

REFERENCES

[1] Edward CLD., Patrick L., Engineering Design: A Project-Based Introduction, Fourth Edition, Wiley, 2013. [2] Katar I. M. (2016). Reading Activity impact on the Engineering Management Learners’ Efficiency in Research Presentation, KICEM Journal of and Project Management, Online ISSN 2233-9582, Vol.6, No.3 / Sep 2016, p. 8-13. [3] Daria Zimina , Glenn Ballard & Christine Pasquire (2012) Target value design: using collaboration and a lean approach to reduce construction cost, Construction Management and Economics, 30:5, 383-398, DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2012.676658. [4] Frank Lloyd Write (1931), Architectural Forum, (Published monthly by National Trade Journals, Inc. New York). [5] Le Corbusier (1927), Towards a New , Dover Publication Inc., New York. [6] Hedley Smyth (2004) Competencies for Improving Construction Performance: Theories and Practice for Developing Capacity, International Journal of Construction Management, 4:1, 41-56, DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2004.10773050. [7] Barney, J. B. and Hansen, M. (1995). “Trustworthiness as a Source of Competitive Advantage”, Paper given at the Australian Graduate School of Management, University of South Wales, Sydney. [8] Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. (1994). Competing for the future, Harvard Business Books, Boston, MA. [9] Smyth, H. J. (2000). Marketing and selling construction services, Blackwell , Oxford. [10] Katar I. M. (2017). Evaluate State-of-the-Art Carbon Fibers’ Composites (CFC) as Finishing Materials in Building Construction, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562, Volume 12, Number 23, p. 13826-13833. [11] Kamarudin S. K.; Nakanishi H. (2017). Lean Construction Management: a Toyota Way for Organisational Learning and Participation. Malysian Construction Research Journal (MCRJ), Special Issue eISSN 2590-4140, Vol. 1. No.1, p. 40-52. [12] Green, S. D., Harty, C., Elmualim, A. A., Larsen, G. D., and Kao, C. C. (2008). On the discourse of construction competitiveness. Building Research & Information, 36(5), pp.426-435. [13] Green, S. D. (2002). The human resource management implications of Lean construction: Critical perspectives and conceptual chasms. Journal of Construction Research, 3(01), pp.147-165. [14] FMI/CMAA Sixth Annual Survey of Owners (2005). Available at: http://www.cmaafoundation.org/files/surveys/2005-survey.pdf. [15] Al-Aomar, Raid (2012) Analysis of lean construction practices at Abu Dhabi construction industry. Lean Construction Journal 2012 pp 105-121. [16] Alarcon, L. ed. (1997). Lean Construction. A.A. Balkema Publishers, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. (Proc. first three annual conf. of the Int’l. Group for Lean Construction). [17] Howell, G. and Ballard, G. (1998). Implementing lean construction: understanding and action. Proceedings Sixth Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. Guaruja, Sao Paulo, Brazil. [18] Koskela, L. (1992) Application of the New Production Philosophy to Construction, Technical Report No. 72, Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Stanford University, CA. [19] S. D. GREEN (1999) The missing arguments of lean construction, Construction Management & Economics, 17:2, 133-137, DOI: 10.1080/014461999371637.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 929 [email protected] Effective Construction Utilizing Design-Build Vs. Design-Bid-Build Methods; 5-Feature Appraisal (Time-Drawings-Calendar-Communication-Changes)

[20] Gleeson, F. and Townend J. (2007). Lean construction in the corporate world of the U.K. construction industry. University of Manchester, School of Mechanical, Aerospace, Civil and Construction Engineering. [21] Koskela, L. (1997). Lean production in construction. In L. Alarcon (Ed), Lean Construction (pp. 1-9). Rotterdam: Balkema. [22] Koskela, L. (2003). Is structural change the primary solution to the problems of construction? Building Research & Information, 31(2), 89-96. [23] Klotz L, Horman M, Bodenschatz M. 2007. A lean modeling protocol for evaluating green project delivery. Lean Construction J. 3:1–18. [24] Lapinski A, Horman M, Riley D. 2006. Lean processes for sustainable project delivery. J Constr. Eng. Manage. 132:1083–1091. [25] Abdulaziz Banawi& Melissa M. Bilec (2014) A framework to improve construction processes: Integrating Lean, Green and Six Sigma, International Journal of Construction Management, 14:1, 45-55, DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2013.875266. [26] Saurav Dixit, Satya N Mandal, Anil Sawhney, Subhav Singh, Area of Linkage Between Lean Construction and Sustainability in Indian Construction Industry. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(8), 2017, pp. 623–636. [27] Heng Li, H L Guo, Yan Li & Martin Skitmore (2012) From IKEA Model to the Lean Construction Concept: A Solution to Implementation, International Journal of Construction Management, 12:4, 47-63, DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2012.10773200. [28] Christine Pasquire (2012) Positioning Lean within an exploration of engineering construction, Construction Management and Economics, 30:8, 673-685, DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2012.689431. [29] Andersen, Belay, Amdahl Seim (2012) Lean construction practices and its effects: A case study at St Olav’s Integrated Hospital, Norway. Lean Construction Journal 2012 pp 122- 149. [30] Delgado-Hernandez, D.J. and Aspinwall, E. (2008) Quality management case studies in the UK construction industry. Total Quality Management, 19(9), 919–38. [31] M.Indira and M. VenkataJyothsna An Approach to Effective Construction Management Based on Lean Construction Techniques, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(4), 2017, pp. 1954-1959. [32] Tey, K. H.; Chai, C. S.; Olanrewaju, A. L.; Aminah, M. Y. (2018). Conceptualising 4Cs in Construction Project Team Integration. Malysian Construction Research Journal (MCRJ), ISSN No.: 1985-3807, Vol. 24. No.1, p. 83-96. [33] David James Bryde& Ralf Schulmeister (2012) Applying Lean principles to a building refurbishment project: experiences of key stakeholders, Construction Management and Economics, 30:9, 777-794, DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2012.700405. [34] Edward A., Joseph I., Fundamentals of Building Construction; Materials & Methods, Fifth Edition, Wiley, 2013. [35] RM Senthamarai; P Devadas M; D Gobinath, Concrete made from ceramic industry waste: Durability properties, Construction and Building Materials, Volume 25, issue 5, May 2011, p. 2413-2419. [36] K. Shyam Chamberlin, SS. Asadi and D. Sai Chaitanya, Evaluation of Latest Trends and Developments in Lean Construction in : A Model Study. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(10), 2017, pp. 461–471. [37] McIvor, R., Humphreys, P., McKittrick, A. and Wall, T. (2009) Performance management and the outsourcing process: lessons from a organisation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(10), 1025–48. [38] Barrett, M. and Barrett, R. (2011) Exploring internal and external supply chain linkages: evidence from the field. Journal of Operations Management, 29(5), 514–28.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 930 [email protected] Ihab M. Katar and Dina R. Howeidy

[39] Yin, R.K. (2003) Applications of Case Study Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. [40] Yin, R.K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. [41] Perry John Forsythe (2007) A conceptual framework for studying customer satisfaction in residential construction, Construction Management and Economics, 25:2, 171-182, DOI: 10.1080/01446190600771439.

APPENDIX-1: A Survey sample collected from the population feedbacks

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 931 [email protected]