Kaming, P F (1996) A productivity audit system for construction management in Indonesia. PhD thesis, University of Wolverhampton, UK.
Abstract
The aim of this research is to develop an audit system (a diagnostic and advisory system) for construction productivity improvement in the Indonesian construction industry. The development of the productivity audit system covered five stages: 1 identification of the characteristics of the construction industry in the country through literature reviews; 2 prioritization of construction industry problems by the main industry participants; 3 investigation of factors influencing productivity through craftsmen, foremen, and project managers; 4 identification and prioritization of factors for improving on-site productivity; and 5 development of a computerised system for diagnosing and providing advice for improving on-site productivity. A preliminary study was conducted to identify some characteristics of the Indonesian construction industry such as size, organisation, procurement methods and human resource issues. Problems confronting the industry were then identified through a survey of major industry participants who are conversant with structural issues. It was conclusively found that human resource development issues predominate and must be addressed for any meaningful development of the industry. The prime movers all agree that the priority in addressing the human resource problem should be the enhancement of their productivity through training and motivational strategies. The main human resource groups (craftsmen, foremen, and project managers) were then surveyed through structured questionnaire supported by interviews, to identify their productivity related problems, skill and motivation. The productivity problems identified by the workers were compared with results of activity sampling. Lack of material, rework, absenteeism, and crew interference are the major productivity problems faced by the three groups of workers. A comparative study of productivity problems in seven regions in the country provided indices in terms of the craftsmen production output, working time spent productively, craftsmen skill, motivation and remuneration, as well as supervision competencies of foremen. The priority and relative indices of the factors that predominantly influence on-site productivity were used to develop a productivity audit system for construction management in Indonesia. After diagnosing productivity problems by asking productivity related question the system proceeds to a consultation session that provides suggestion and best practices for improving construction productivity.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | audit; Indonesia; interview; productivity; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | productivity, audit, procurement method, Indonesia, project manager, construction industry, construction productivity, craft worker, supervision, comparative study, best practice, investigation, sampling, literature review, strategy, rework, survey, motivation, interview, absenteeism, computerized system, human resource, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, Geography, management, performance measurement, data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements, psychology, operations management, practitioner, computing systems, control systems, data collection methods, profession, business, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Procurement, Roles and Professions, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Human Resources, Quality Management, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here