This may be the author’s version of a work that was submitted/acceptedfor publication in the following source:

Sarhan, Jamil Ghazi I, Xia, Bo, Fawzia, Sabrina, Karim, Azharul, & Ola-nipekun, Ayokunle Olubunmi(2018)Barriers to implementing lean construction practices in the Kingdom ofSaudi Arabia (KSA) construction industry.Construction Innovation, 18(2), pp. 246-272.

This file was downloaded from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/116388/

c© Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters

This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under aCreative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use andthat permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the docu-ment is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then referto the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recog-nise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe thatthis work infringes copyright please provide details by email to qut.copyright@qut.edu.au

Notice: Please note that this document may not be the Version of Record(i.e. published version) of the work. Author manuscript versions (as Sub-mitted for peer review or as Accepted for publication after peer review) canbe identified by an absence of publisher branding and/or typeset appear-ance. If there is any doubt, please refer to the published source.

https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-04-2017-0033

Barriers to implementing lean construction practices in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabian

(KSA) construction industry

Jamil Sarhan, Bo Xia, Sabrina Fawzia, Azharul Karim & Ayokunle Olanipekun

Abstract

Purpose- The purpose of this study is to identify the barriers to implementing lean construction, and prioritise the principal factors that constitute these barriers in the KSA construction industry.

Design/methodology/approach – A literature review was initially employed to reveal the global barriers to implementing lean construction. Subsequently, the global barriers were operationalised in a well-structured questionnaire, and surveyed among 282 conveniently sampled construction professionals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabian construction industry. The data obtained was analysed with mean item score (MIS), Mann Whitney U test and Principal Component Analysis (PCA).

Findings – The findings reveal that there are 22 barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the KSA construction industry. In addition, the principal factors that constitute these barriers are traditional practices, client related, technological, performance and knowledge and cost related barriers in descending order of pervasiveness in the KSA construction industry. This study also proposes solutions to overcome these principal barriers in the KSA construction industry.

Originality - This study provides a global overview of the barriers to implementing lean construction. It contributes to the body of knowledge, as it uncovers for the first time the barriers to implementing lean construction in the KSA construction industry with reference to the socio-cultural, economic and operational context of the KSA. Thus, it is relevant to other countries in the Middle East because of their shared similarities to the KSA. Furthermore, the solutions proposed to overcome these barriers in the KSA construction industry can be applied in other countries where similar barriers are identified.

Keywords: Barriers, Implementation, Lean construction, Saudi construction industry, Principal component analysis

Paper type: Research paper

1. Introduction

Over the years, the Toyota Way principles (Liker, 2004) and equivalent terms such as lean

thinking (Womack and Jones, 1996) have gained popularity and have become recognised as

strategic means that can lead to substantial improvements in productivity, quality and other

performance indicators (Karim, 2009). Consequently, efforts have been initiated to seek their

implementation both in and outside of manufacturing organisations. Success in implementing

lean practices can be attributed to several factors, including a shift in organisational behaviour

(Sim and Rogers, 2009), a shift in thinking (Atkinson, 2010; Shook, 1997) and a culture that

focuses equally on the development of human resources and waste elimination (Liker, 2004).

The construction industry appears to be one of the first industries to embrace lean concepts and

techniques, following the manufacturing/automotive industry (Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014).

The lean construction method was developed (Ballard and Howell, 1998) and built heavily on

lean principles (Womack and Jones, 1996) and the Toyota Production System (TPS) (Ohno,

1988). Effective methods of lean implementation in manufacturing industries have also been

suggested (Karim and Arif-Uz-Zaman, 2013). Despite some criticisms of lean construction

(Green, 2002), such as it being complex and requiring a lengthy period of implementation, the

construction industry has recognised the opportunity to embrace improvements through lean

implementation (de Souza and Pidd, 2011; Egan, 1998; Salem et al., 2006). During the growth

of lean practices in the construction industry, the same types of challenges have been commonly

witnessed in the execution phase as those encountered in other industries (Alinaitwe, 2009,

Forbes et al., 2002).

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has experienced an unprecedented rise in construction

projects during the past 20 years (Ikediashi et al., 2014). It has the largest construction industry

in the Middle East and is booming with current expenditure rising to more than US$120bn a

year (Alrashed et al., 2014). Currently, the Kingdom’s construction industry encompasses 15

per cent of its workforce and consumes more than 14 per cent of the country’s energy (Dhahran

International Exhibition Company, 2015). However, the KSA construction industry is facing

problems in measuring and improving its performance (Bannah et al., 2012). Common

problems include, but are not limited to, time delays (Assaf and Al-Hejji, 2006), cost overruns

(Harris, 2014) and poor safety and quality issues (AMEInfor, 2014).

To address these problems, the lean construction concept was introduced into the KSA

construction industry (AlSehaimi et al., 2009). Al-Sudairi (2007) reported that lean practices

have significantly improved project performance, especially at the trade level by reducing the

waste involved. Despite this, lean construction in Saudi Arabia is still in its infancy. The

implementation of lean construction concepts in large and complex projects has not yet taken

place (Sarhan et al., 2017; Sarhan et al., 2016). Organisational problems, social change, local

culture, deficiency of skills and the challenge of selecting the right lean tools could all

contribute to problems when attempting to engage lean concepts. Nevertheless, no research has

been carried out to date to systematically investigate the barriers to the implementation of lean

construction in the KSA construction industry. It has been shown that cultural and geographical

differences may contribute to fundamentally different manufacturing strategies (Samson and

Ford, 2000; Voss and Blackmon, 1998). Owing to a lack of research on the subject, operators

such as respective construction organisations and professionals are unaware of the barriers to

implementing lean construction which are specific to the socio-cultural, economic and

operational context in the KSA construction industry. Consequently, it is difficult to appropriate

potential solutions to these barriers.

Therefore, the objective of this study is to identify the barriers to implementing lean

construction in the KSA construction industry and to prioritise the principal factors that

constitute these barriers. This study is significant because it contributes to the existing body of

knowledge of lean construction, first by prioritising the barriers to lean construction in terms

of their level of pervasiveness and, second, by revealing how the socio-cultural, economic and

operational contexts of a country can contribute to the barriers to implementing lean

construction. This will enable operators in the KSA construction industry and others likewise

in the Middle East to develop appropriate solutions for overcoming the barriers to

implementing lean construction. Meanwhile, this study proposes some universally applicable

solutions to address the principal barriers to lean construction with recommendations that they

should be holistically implemented to encompass the participation of the many operators such

as the management and employees of construction organisations and professional bodies in the

KSA construction industry.

In terms of structure, the paper starts with a description of the lean construction concept, how

it compares to lean manufacturing and its benefits to construction projects and the construction

industry. This is followed by a literature review of the global barriers to implementing lean

construction in both developed and developing countries. After presenting the research

methodology, the results are discussed before conclusions are made and recommendations

proposed.

2.Concept of lean construction

The success of the lean production philosophy of the TPS to ensure improved organisational

performance in the manufacturing industry has encouraged the uptake of the concept in the

construction industry in the form of lean construction (Moghadam, 2014; Kanafani, 2015).

Thus, lean construction extends the lean production philosophy to the construction industry in

the form of maximising value and minimising wastes in the construction project delivery

process (Ogunbiyi et al., 2014). Therefore, according to Ogunbiyi (2014), lean construction is

a philosophy as well as a production management system that uses unique tools and techniques

to cause changes to the culture within an organisation while also maximising value to clients

by identifying and eliminating waste and aiming for perfection in the delivery of construction

projects, as well as contributing towards a sustainable and greener environment (Marhani et al.,

2012).

According to Abdullah et al. (2009), the uptake of lean construction in the construction industry

has been very beneficial. Corroboratively, many studies have been able to demonstrate the

benefits of lean construction (Alarcón et al., 2011; Nahmens and Ikuma, 2009; Nahmens and

Ikuma, 2012, Locatelli et al., 2013; Ogunbiyi et al., 2014). For example, Nahmens and Ikuma

(2012) analysed the effects of lean construction on the sustainability of modular homebuilding.

By applying the lean tool Kaizen on the project, the study revealed that lean construction

positively affected the environmental, social and economic performance of the project by

reducing material wastes, safety hazards and production hours (Nahmens and Ikuma, 2012).

Bashir et al. (2011) focused on a theoretical analysis of lean construction tools such as the Last

Planner System and the 5S (housekeeping) methodology. The study demonstrates that the

features of lean construction tools are significantly relevant to promoting safety on construction

sites. For instance, the 5S methodology emphasises workplace organisation and cleanliness

which, if implemented, helps to address poorly organised and unkempt sites (Bashir et al.,

2011). In fact, industrialised home builders in the USA confirm that applying the continuous

improvement (CI) principle of lean construction significantly lowers the injury incidence rates

during construction project delivery (Nahmens and Ikuma, 2009). The Last Planner System is

a particularly important lean construction tool, and by implementing lean construction on an

industrial project in Egypt, Issa (2013) showed that this tool helped to reduce the project

completion time by 15.57 per cent. On most construction projects where lean construction is

implemented, the constant benefits are shorter delivery time, and increased project performance

arising from lean construction principles enhanced productivity of workforce, better

coordination and communication, minimisation of reworks and zero value-adding activities

(Locatelli et al., 2013). These principles guide the implementation of lean construction in the

construction industry (Marhani et al., 2012).

While the implementation of lean construction contributes directly to the successful delivery

of construction projects (Ogunbiyi, 2014), the greater benefit is ensuring best practices in the

construction industry. According to Abdullah et al. (2009), the uptake of lean construction has

increased the level of innovation in the construction industry over time. Furthermore, by

directly tapping into relevant production theories (Omran and Abdulrahim, 2015), lean

construction changes the manner in which construction projects are delivered in construction

organisations to be more systematic and effective (Abdullah et al., 2009). This encourages best

practices in the construction industry whereby the ineffective traditional processes of project

delivery in many construction organisations are altered, while the lean construction approach

is embraced for enhanced project performance (Abdullah et al., 2009). Furthermore, based on

the perspectives of construction professionals in the UK construction industry, Ogunbiyi et al.

(2014) found that lean construction, especially when integrated with sustainable construction,

helps construction organisations to improve their corporate image, competitive advantage,

productivity and effective compliance to customers’ expectations.

The above accounts indicate that although lean construction is a concept that originated in the

manufacturing industry, it is very beneficial at the project, industry and organisational levels in

the construction industry. Despite the benefits, there is very low implementation of lean

construction in the construction industry in many developing countries owing to various

barriers. For instance, Marhani et al. (2012) revealed an infancy level implementation of lean

construction in the Malaysian construction industry. Abdullah et al. (2009) corroborates the

limited implementation of lean construction in the Malaysian construction industry, which is

the same situation in other developing countries like Ghana (Ayarkkwa et al., 2012) and Libya

(Omran and Abdulrahim, 2015). Notably, certain barriers are responsible for the low

implementation of lean construction in these countries. Therefore, global barriers to the

implementation of lean construction are reviewed in the following section. The intention is to

verify these barriers in the KSA construction industry, where there is equally low

implementation of lean construction (Al-Nafil, 2013).

3.Global barriers to implementation of lean construction

Previous studies on the barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the construction

industry can be categorised into those carried out in developed countries (four) and in

developing countries (six). The developed countries were the UK, where two studies were

carried out, Germany and Singapore. The developing countries were Malaysia, India, China,

Libya, Ghana and Uganda. In addition, the majority of the developing countries (three) are

African countries. This may suggest that, globally, the barriers to the implementation of lean

construction are more pervasive in developing countries, especially those in Africa. The first

study was carried out in the construction industry in Singapore among medium to large

contracting firms (Dulaimi and Tanamas, 2001), and a significant barrier identified was the

unwillingness of the management in contracting firms to train their workers about lean

construction techniques, which is also linked to legislative bottlenecks against the training of

workers, especially foreign workers in the country. Furthermore, there was high averseness to

change or to embrace new ideas or innovations such as lean construction among the contracting

organisations, while there was an unfavourable procurement system which pushed the risks

involved in implementing new ideas to only the contractors. Although this study identifies

averseness to change as the most critical barrier, there is no statistical analysis to support this.

Thus, this conclusion may be unreliable and more so given that the country is currently an

economically and technologically advanced country, which is different from when this study

was carried out. According to Johansen and Walter (2007), the level of economic and

technological development in a country influences the implementation of lean construction. In

this regard, Johansen and Walter (2007) found that the barrier of averseness towards

implementing lean construction among the construction companies in Germany is attributed to

the high technological advancement of the country. However, the study advocates further

verification of this finding because lean construction has been successfully implemented in

other technologically advanced countries such as the USA and Australia (Ballard and Howell,

2003).

The two other studies in developed countries focused on the UK. This is important because

these studies will help determine whether, in developed countries, the barriers to the

implementation of lean construction in the construction industry change with time. After

surveying the opinions of 140 construction professionals, Sarhan and Fox (2013) found that the

barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the UK construction industry are cultural

in nature. The significant cultural barriers are lack of adequate lean awareness and

understanding, lack of top management commitment and cultural and human attitudinal issues,

in descending order of severity. In addition, owing to its lowest severity, lack of financial

capital is not considered to be a threatening barrier to the implementation of lean construction

(Sarhan and Fox, 2013). Bashir et al. (2015) appear to corroborate these findings of Sarhan and

Fox (2013). It was found that human-related issues, particularly the unwillingness of

construction industry operators to change their behaviour and practices, are the most critical

barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the UK construction industry.

Consequently, to successfully implement lean construction in the UK construction industry, the

greatest emphasis should be on establishing a lean culture that supports lean transformations in

construction organisations (Sarhan and Fox, 2013). According to Bashir et al. (2015), the

responsibility lies with the management of construction organisations to implement strategies

such as providing training avenues for employees/workers to develop their skills, as well as

providing the required facilities and incentives which can serve as motivation. The

workers/employees in these organisations also have a role to play, specifically to be open to

emerging changes, and persist in adopting changes such as lean construction that may be

beneficial to improve project, organisational and industry performance in the construction

industry (Bashir et al., 2015).

Other barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the UK construction industry are

management-related issues such as lack of management commitment and high expectations,

technical issues such as the complexities of lean construction implementation, educational

issues such as lack of knowledge of lean construction concepts amongst construction industry

operators and financial issues such as the high cost of implementing lean construction (Bashir

et al., 2015). It is also interesting to note that no government-related issues such as

inconsistency in policies are found to be barriers to the implementation of lean construction

despite the expanded government role in the UK construction industry since the Egan report

(1998). Against expectations, the prevalence of human and cultural barriers over a 15-year

period (2001-2015) signifies that barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the

construction industry do not appear to change over time in developed countries.

Despite the indication of greater prevalence, as pointed out earlier, the focus on the barriers to

the implementation of lean construction in developing countries began much later than in the

developed countries, with the first studies in Malaysia (Abdullah et al., 2009) and Uganda

(Alinaitwe, 2009) both published in 2009. In Malaysian construction companies, the barriers

to the implementation of lean construction were found to be similar to those in the developed

countries, namely, lack of management commitment, limited understanding of the concept of

lean construction and averseness to adopting new ideas (Abdullah et al., 2009). For medium to

top managers in large contracting organisations in Uganda, the critical barriers to the

implementation of lean construction are both financial and management-related such as

management’s inability to provide lean construction inputs and technical features when

required (Alinaitwe, 2009). In addition, the barriers that are most difficult to overcome are

related to the inability of management in these organisations to provide an enabling

environment whereby employees/staffers can develop relevant skills and work together to

implement lean construction (Alinaitwe, 2009). The emphasis on these particular barriers could

be a result of the number of respondents being in higher management roles. In other words, it

is possible that barriers to the implementation of lean construction may be different from the

point of view of non-managerial-level respondents or employees/workers in construction

organisations in the Ugandan construction industry. Further, similar to the UK construction

industry, the greater onus lies on the management of the construction organisations to commit

more financial resources and managerial responsibility towards the implementation of lean

construction in the Ugandan construction industry.

The barriers to implementing lean construction in the Ghanaian (Ayarkkwa et al., 2012) and

Libyan (Omran and Abdulrahim, 2015) construction industries are no different from those of

other developed and developing countries. Likewise, the barriers to implementing lean

construction in smaller construction organisations in India (Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014) are

similar to those in larger construction organisations in other countries such as Uganda. In

contrast to the UK, in China, Shang and Sui Pheng (2014) found government-related issues

such as stringent requirements and approvals to be barriers to the implementation of lean

construction. Similarly, Olamilokun (2015) revealed that corruption and/or corruptive

tendencies from government agencies is a barrier to the implementation of lean construction in

Nigeria. And similar to the Singaporean construction industry (Dulaimi and Tanamas, 2001),

Shang and Sui Pheng (2014) found adversarial relationships and/or lack of cooperativeness

among construction professionals to be a barrier to the implementation of lean construction in

the Chinese construction industry.

From the above, it could be deduced that the barriers to the implementation of lean construction

in the construction industry in both developed and developing countries around the world are

similar (Table I). Nevertheless, as there are no studies from the Middle East countries, these

barriers may not be applicable to the construction industry in the countries in this region. Even

though the KSA has the largest construction market in the Middle East and the construction

industry is a major economic driver (AlSehaimi, 2011), there have been no studies focusing on

the barriers to implementing lean construction in the construction industry in this country. In

comparison to other countries where barriers to implementing lean construction have been

determined, the culture in KSA is different. For instance, in contrast to western countries like

the UK, it is a cultural norm in the KSA to not adhere to time commitments, and this has effects

on the performance of the construction industry (AlSehaimi, 2011). Furthermore, being an oil-

rich country, lack of financial resources may not be a problem in the KSA construction industry

as much as it might be, for example, in many African countries. In addition, the KSA is an

Islamic country with strict conservative values that are not expressly open to adopting Western

ideas without scrutiny. It is thus important to identify and prioritise the barriers to implementing

lean construction in the KSA construction industry. It is expected that the barriers will be more

reflective of the socio-cultural and operational contexts of the KSA construction industry, as

well as those of the Middle East.

4.Research objectives

The main objectives of this study are as follows:

to identify the barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the KSA construction

industry; and

to establish and prioritise the principal factors that constitute these barriers.

The achievement of these objectives in this study will help relevant stakeholders in the KSA

construction industry to develop appropriate solutions to overcome these barriers. The

quantitative methodology that comprises a survey method of data collection and the application

of statistical techniques to analyse the data was used to achieve the objectives.

5.Research methodology

The objective of this study is to identify and prioritise the barriers to the implementation of lean

construction in the KSA construction industry. Similar to Durdyev and Mbachu (2017), the

objective focuses on assessing the association among the variables identified as having an

impact on the implementation of lean construction. The aim is to evaluate whether there are

inter-correlations among these variables and, should this be so, to extract the principal factors

that could explain the variances among the variables.

To gather data for analysis, the survey questionnaire method of data collection was used. This

research method is commonly used for obtaining data about the barriers to the implementation

of lean construction because it helps to gather a wide range of views from individuals across

the construction industry (Omran and Abdulrahim, 2015; Ayarkkwa et al., 2012; Shang and

Sui Pheng, 2014). Moreover, this method aligns with the quantitative research methodology

which enables the statistical testing of data to derive varied but meaningful explanations that

increase the understanding of the subject of investigation (Abawi, 2008).

The survey questionnaire was structured into two sections. The first section contained questions

requesting general information from the participants, including their primary designation,

academic qualifications and the type of organisations they were engaged in. The second section,

which was the main section, was based on the 22 global barriers to the implementation of lean

construction that were identified from the literature and are summarised in Table I. The

participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the 22 barriers in the KSA

construction industry context. The barriers were displayed in a tabular format with a five-point

Likert scale ranking that ranged from 1 as ‘strongly disagree’ to 5 as ‘strongly agree’. In

addition, a ‘don’t know’ option was also provided as a standard procedure for participants who

were unable to answer the question.

Industry-wide data collection is very important to identify the barriers to lean construction and

to encompass the views of a broad range of construction professionals and organisations in the

KSA construction industry. The Saudi Council of Engineers (SCE) is the largest professional

group in the KSA construction industry, and members include specialty contractors, general

contractors, subcontractors, architects, project managers, clients and suppliers. In the KSA

construction industry are other construction professionals who are not members of the SCE but

are engaged in different contracting, consulting and client organisations, as well as government

agencies. Thus, there is no definitive population of construction professionals and organisations

in the KSA construction industry. Given this position, a convenience sampling of construction

professionals that were willing and accessible was carried out in the KSA construction industry

(Teddlie and Yu, 2007).

The administration of the questionnaire commenced in March 2015, and the targeted

construction professionals were approached in two different ways. In the first approach, an

online questionnaire survey using Survey Monkey was conducted to survey members of the

SCE, including suppliers, specialty contractors, general contractors, subcontractors, architects,

project managers and clients. An invitation letter and a questionnaire template were initially

sent to the management of SCE to seek their assistance in the survey. Realising the importance

and urgency of this study, the SCE agreed to help by administering the questionnaire among

their members, and as a result, 155 responses were obtained. In the second approach, hardcopy

questionnaires were sent out to 300 construction professionals ranging from employees of

contracting and consulting companies, academics, government representatives and clients. This

strategy resulted in 127 responses. In total, 282 responses were obtained and used for analysis.

Data analysis was carried out using the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) software

(version 22). Frequency distribution and percentage were used to summarise the background

information of respondents (Olanipekun, 2012), while the mean item score (MIS) was used to

analyse the main responses. The MIS, based on equation (1), is the sum of item scores for each

identified barrier to lean construction divided by the number of items contributing to it (Taffe

et al., 2008). Therefore, MIS represents the average of the agreement among respondents about

the barriers to lean construction in the KSA construction industry (Olanipekun et al., 2014;

Watt and Van den Berg, 1995). Given that a five-point Likert scale was used, the current

barriers to lean construction are those with an MIS higher than the midpoint (≥2.5) of the

Likert scale used (Johns, 2010). In addition, the MIS is used to rank the level to which the

respondents agree with (or are concerned about) the pervasiveness of the barriers (Olanipekun,

2012).

Furthermore, Mann–Whitney U test was used to evaluate whether the barriers to implementing

lean construction were significantly different in terms of the individual and organisational

characteristics common to the respondents (Olanipekun et al., 2017). Examples are the level of

education of respondents (individual characteristics) and the size of organisation in which the

respondents were engaged (organisational characteristics). Finally, exploratory factor analysis

(EFA) with the principal component analysis (PCA) extraction method was used to explore the

underlying dimensions of the barriers to implementing lean construction in the KSA

construction industry (Norusis, 1992), while the Cronbach’s alpha (α) test was used to examine

the internal consistency of the variables that were loaded on each component (Ngacho and Das,

2014).

6.Results

6.1Background information of respondents

Table II presents the background information of the respondents. Regarding the

organisational characteristics of respondents, 39 per cent work in project management

organisations, 23 per cent in general contracting organisations, 10 per cent in architectural

firms, 9 per cent in speciality contracting firms and 5 per cent in client, academic and

government organisations. Other respondents work in subcontracting (3 per cent) and supplier

(1 per cent) organisations. In the KSA construction industry, these organisations represent the

consulting, contracting, client and government divisions. Thus, the majority of respondents

work in the consulting division (49 per cent), which comprises the project management and

the architectural organisations, followed by those in the contracting division, comprising

general contracting, subcontracting, speciality contracting and supplier organisations (36 per

cent).

In the KSA construction industry, construction organisations with more than 1,000 employees

are categorised as ‘large’, those with 201-1,000 employees are categorised as “medium”,

while those with less than 200 employees are categorised as “small” (Sarhan et al., 2017).

Table II shows that the majority of the respondents work in large organisations (46 per cent),

followed by those in small organisations (24 per cent), while the least number work in

medium-sized organisations (20 per cent). A descriptive analysis of the annual revenue size

of the construction organisations where the respondents work showed that 36 per cent of the

organisations generate an annual revenue of more than US$20m, followed by those with

revenue between US$4m and US$20m (17 per cent) and those with revenue of less than

US$2m (9 per cent). While this result indicates that there are more large construction

organisations in the KSA construction industry, 38 per cent of the respondents did not

indicate the annual revenue of their organisations.

In terms of the individual characteristics of the respondents, a slight majority of them had

more than 10 years’ experience in the KSA construction industry (51 per cent), while the rest

had experience ranging from 1 to 10 years (49 per cent). In terms of academic qualifications,

the majority of the respondents had either a bachelor’s degree or diploma (80 per cent), while

the rest had postgraduate qualifications in the form of master’s degree or PhD (20 per cent).

Overall, the background information of the respondents added to the feedback quality and

reliability of the findings in this study (Durdyev and Mbachu, 2017).

6.2Mean item score analysis

Table III shows the MIS analysis results for the barriers to implementing lean construction in

the KSA construction industry. Overall, all the 22 identified barriers to lean construction have

MIS > 2.50. The highest-ranking barriers are influence of traditional management practice

(MIS = 3.84; 1st), followed by unfavourable organisational culture (MIS = 3.74; 2nd), lack of

technical skills about lean techniques (MIS = 3.73; 3rd) and lack of understanding of lean

construction approaches (3.68; 4th). The lowest ranking barriers are lack of provision of

benchmark performance (MIS = 3.32; 18th), lack of support from the government for

technological advancements (MIS = 3.28; 19th), uncertainty in construction production

process (MIS = 3.28; 20th), use of non-standard components (MIS = 3.08; 21st) and

uncertainty in the supply chain (MIS = 3.01; 22nd).

Furthermore, as shown in Table III, the highest, middle and the lowest rankings of the

barriers to lean construction by respondents with different organisational and individual

characteristics are similar. For instance, in terms of type of organisation, “influence of

traditional management practice” is ranked in 1st position by respondents working in

consulting organisations and in 3rd position by those working in contracting organisations,

while “uncertainty in the supply chain” is ranked in 22nd position by the respondents from

both types of organisations. In terms of size of organisation, “lack of knowledge of lean

construction approaches” is ranked in 3rd position by respondents from both large and small-

to-medium construction organisations, while “lack of provision of benchmark performance”

is ranked in 18th position by the former and in 17th position by the latter. With respect to

individual characteristics, “unfavourable organisational culture” is ranked in 2nd position by

respondents that have up to 10 years of experience and in 3rd position by those with more

than 10 years of experience, while both categories ranked “use of non-standard components”

in the 21st position. In addition, the respondents that have a bachelor’s degree or a lower level

of education ranked “lack of technical skills about lean techniques” in 3rd position and those

with a postgraduate qualification ranked the same barrier in the 1st position, while both

categories ranked “uncertainty in the supply chain” in the 22nd position.

The Mann–Whitney test results in Table IV confirm that the barriers to implementing lean

construction are not significantly different among the respondents working in either

consulting or contracting organisations (U = 8388.500, p = 0.723 > 0.05) and in either large

or small-to-medium organisations (U = 7490.500, p = 0.283 > 0.05). In addition, the barriers

are not significantly different among respondents who have a bachelor’s degree or less and

those who have postgraduate qualifications (U = 9200.500, p = 0.665 > 0.05), as well as

among respondents who have up to 10 years’ experience and those with more than 10 years’

experience (U = 6475.000, p = 0.543 > 0.05). Therefore, the barriers to the implementation of

lean construction are not significantly different in terms of both organisational (type and size

of organisation) and individual (experience and academic qualifications of respondents)

characteristics of construction professionals in the KSA construction industry.

6.3Principal component analysis

PCA with varimax rotation was used to explore the underlying dimensions of barriers to

implementing lean construction given that the objective was to establish the principal factors

and prioritise them in the KSA construction industry. A Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value

of 0.909 indicated sufficient sampling adequacy or the appropriateness of the data for PCA

(Fields, 2000). This result indicates that multicollinearity structures among the variables were

sufficient to justify aggregating the barriers into related sets for the purpose of extraction of

principal components (Durdyev and Mbachu, 2017). The Bartlett’s test of sphericity (χ2 =

3670.939; df = 378) was significant at ρ < 0.01, indicating that the correlations were

sufficiently large for PCA (Hooper, 2012). Furthermore, the ratio between the 282 data points

and the 22 variables was 13:1, indicating a stable factor structure (Ferguson and Cox, 1993).

In conformity with the scree plot test, PCA revealed the presence of six principal components

with eigenvalues greater than 1. These principal components accounted for 61.273 per cent of

the data set. Principal component 1 with an eigenvalue of 3.632 explains 13.493 per cent of

the variance in the identified barriers to lean construction. Component 2 with an eigenvalue of

3.524 explains 12.164 per cent, while Components 3, 4, 5 and 6 have eigenvalues 3.137,

2.761, 2.626 and 1.275, respectively, that explain 11.075, 10.007, 8.877 and 5.657 per cent of

the variance, respectively. The extracted components listed in Table IV show that no item

correlation was less than 0.5, suggesting a strong inter-item correlation (Hon et al., 2012). In

addition, there was no incidence of cross-loading, indicating a uni-dimensionality of items as

reliable measures of extracted components (Durdyev and Mbachu, 2017). Furthermore,

according to Ngacho and Das (2014), the Cronbach’s alpha (α) test showed that all the

extracted components achieved high internal consistency, i.e. >0.70 (with the exception of

Component 6 which had only one variable and was not tested for internal consistency). Still,

the internal consistency of all the variables was very high with a Cronbach’s alpha value of

0.915.

As shown in Table V, the majority (five) of the variables (22.73 per cent) loaded strongly on

Component 1, and they are labelled ‘traditional practice barriers’. Four variables each (or

18.18 per cent of total variables) loaded on Components 2, 3, 4 and 5, and they are labelled

“client-related barriers”, “standardisation barriers”, “technological barriers” and

“performance and knowledge barriers”, respectively. Lastly, one variable (4.55 per cent of

total variables) loaded on Component 6, labelled as cost-related barrier. These six

components constitute the principal factors that are barriers to the implementation of lean

construction in the KSA construction industry.

7.Discussion of findings

The objective of this study was to identify the barriers to the implementation of lean

construction and to establish and prioritise the principal factors that constitute these barriers

in the KSA construction industry. This section discusses the findings and compares them to

the body of knowledge in the following sub-sections.

7.1Identified barriers to implementing lean construction

Table III shows the 22 barriers to the implementation of lean construction in the KSA

construction industry, as identified by the respondents in this study, having different

organisational and individual characteristics. The overall MIS for each of the barriers was

>2.50 which suggests, in accordance to Johns (2010), that they are all current barriers to

implementing lean construction in the KSA construction industry. However, the higher the

MIS of the barriers, the greater (the level to which the respondent construction professionals

are worried/concerned/agreed about) is their pervasiveness (Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014).

Therefore, similar to previous studies such as Omran and Abdulrahim (2015) and Ayarkkwa

et al. (2012), this study used MIS to rank the barriers to implementing lean construction in the

KSA construction industry. The highest-ranking barriers to implementing lean construction in

this country are influence of traditional practices (B1), unfavourable organisational culture

(B2), lack of technical skills about lean techniques (B3) and lack of understanding of lean

approaches (B4). Their rankings suggest that they are of the greatest concern to the

construction professionals in the KSA construction industry. Similar to the findings of Shang

and Sui Pheng (2014), these barriers signify the importance of top management of

construction organisations to the implementation of lean construction. For instance,

establishing a lean culture and providing resources for training employees to increase their

lean construction skills are responsibilities of the top management.

The rankings of the middle barriers (B5-B17), those ranked 5th to 17th, suggest that the

construction professionals are only moderately concerned about their pervasiveness in the

KSA construction industry. Most of rankings (B5, B7, B10, B11, B12, B13, B14 and B17)

signify that actions taken during project delivery by the project participants are important to

the implementation of lean construction. The barriers which construction professionals in the

KSA construction industry are least concerned about are lack of benchmark performance,

lack of support from the government for technological advancements, uncertainty in

construction production process, use of non-standard components and uncertainty in the

supply chain. These barriers signify the importance of both the activities of construction

participants during project delivery (e.g. B20) and industry-level support and coordination

(e.g. B22 and B18) on the implementation of lean construction.

In contrast to previous studies (Johansen and Walter, 2007; Alinaitwe, 2009), the barriers

were compared on the basis of the organisational and individual characteristics of

construction professionals in the KSA construction industry. Therefore, based on the Mann–

Whitney test result, the barriers to implementing lean construction are not significantly

different for both the organisational (type and size of organisation) and individual (experience

and academic qualifications of respondents) characteristics of construction professionals in

the KSA construction industry. This suggests that the effects of the barriers to lean

construction are experienced in the same way irrespective of the differences in the

organisational and individual characteristics of construction professionals in the KSA

construction industry. Therefore, a holistic solution which encompasses the organisational

and individual differences of construction professionals is more appropriate to overcoming

the barriers to lean construction in the KSA construction industry.

7.2Principal barriers to implementing lean construction

This study established and prioritised the principal factors which constitute the barriers to

implementing lean construction. It is expected that the potential solutions to overcoming the

barriers to implementing lean construction will focus on these principal factors in the KSA

construction industry. From the PCA, six principal factors were established: traditional

practice, client-related, standardisation, technological, performance and knowledge-related

and financial barriers. With the exception of client-related barriers, these principal factors are

similar to those identified in other developing countries, especially in the construction

industry contexts in Ghana and China (Ayarkkwa et al., 2012; Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014).

The client-related barrier indicates the limited client involvement in lean construction

implementation (B12) and their inability to clearly specify their lean construction

requirements (B17), preference (B13) and expected performance level (B18). It has often

been the case that client involvement in lean construction (or otherwise) has never been

considered a barrier to lean construction in the construction industry (Alinaitwe, 2009;

Hussain et al., 2014). Therefore, the identification of “client-related barrier” in this study

suggests that it is a new kind of barrier to implementing lean construction in the construction

industry. However, as this study focused on the KSA construction industry, more research is

required to determine the pervasiveness of the client-related barrier to lean construction in the

construction industry in other countries, especially the developed ones.

Regarding the prioritisation of the principal factors which constitute the barriers to

implementing lean construction, the traditional practice barrier with an eigenvalue of 3.632

that explains 13.493 per cent of the variance in the data set is the most pervasive barrier to

lean construction in the KSA construction industry. This is the first attempt at empirically

supporting Dulaimi and Tanamas (2001) that traditional practices, mainly in the form of

averseness of operators to change from the traditional approach in managing construction

activities, are the major barrier to implementing lean construction (Abdullah et al., 2009;

Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014). With this barrier, the top and middle management in construction

organisations are often unyielding to adopting lean construction ideas (B5) (Abdullah et al.,

2009; Sarhan and Fox, 2013), as well as not promoting lean culture among their employees

(B2) (Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014). In addition, many construction organisations are rooted to

the traditional design approach of dichotomous design and construction of projects (B10)

(Sarhan and Fox, 2013) which prevents effective communication among the construction

team members (B6), thereby becoming a hindrance to the implementation of lean

construction (Ayarkkwa et al., 2012). In the KSA construction industry, the plausible reason

for the pervasiveness of this barrier is the conservative nature of the KSA as an Islamic

society, whereby the reluctance to change from traditional ways of doing things to the

detriment of lean construction in the KSA construction industry is highly likely.

The client-related barrier, with an eigenvalue of 3.524 that explains 12.164 per cent of the

variance in the data set, is the second most pervasive barrier to implementing lean

construction in the KSA construction industry. Despite the important role of the client in

making decisions and providing oversight to ensure successful implementation of lean

construction (Ballard, 2008), this barrier reveals the failure of clients to contribute adequately

towards implementing lean construction in the KSA construction industry. Thus, a greater

client contribution is necessary to ensure successful implementation of lean construction in

this country.

According to Ballard et al. (2002), standardisation in components, inputs and processes is

very crucial to the successful implementation of lean construction. Interestingly, it is the third

most pervasive barrier to lean construction in the KSA construction industry, with an

eigenvalue of 3.137 that explains 11.075 per cent of the variance in the data set. The lack of

standardisation has been previously revealed as a barrier to implementing lean construction

(Abdullah et al., 2009; Alinaitwe, 2009). For instance, this barrier prevents the successful

deployment of lean construction principles and tools in the Ghanaian and Nigerian

construction industries (Olamilokun, 2015; Ayarkkwa et al., 2012). In the Indian construction

industry, this barrier is the second most pervasive, mainly in the form of uncertainty in the

production process (B20) and supply chain (B22) (Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014). Therefore,

given the lack of evidence in developed countries, the standardisation barrier may be limited

to developing countries only, including the KSA construction industry. This contradicts

literature evidence that barriers to implementing lean construction in developed and

developing countries are similar.

The technological barrier, with an eigenvalue of 2.761 that explains 10.007 per cent of the

variance in the data set, is the fourth most pervasive barrier to implementing lean construction

in the KSA construction industry. This level of pervasiveness is very moderate, which is

similar to the Malaysian context. Abdullah et al. (2009) identified the technological barrier to

implementing lean construction as one of the least pervasive in the Malaysian construction

industry, in the form of long implementation periods due to the extensive time taken for

operators to understand the associated technological sophistications (B11). In a developed

country context, Bashir et al. (2015) identified the technological barrier to implementing lean

construction in contracting organisations in the UK in the form of operators experiencing

difficulties in understanding the technological sophistication associated with many lean

construction tools and techniques (B9). Furthermore, similar to the Chinese construction

industry (Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014), in the KSA construction industry, the lack of

government support is a barrier to implementing lean construction, in the form of lack of

government support for technological advancements (B19).

With an eigenvalue of 2.626 that explains 8.877 per cent of the variance in the data set, the

“performance and knowledge barrier” to implementing lean construction in the KSA

construction industry is minimally pervasive, in the fifth position. Mostly, this barrier

suggests limited knowledge of lean construction among operators in the construction industry

(B4), which is aggravated by lack of training and training avenues to increase the level of lean

construction skills in the industry (B3) (Ayarkkwa et al., 2012; Abdullah et al., 2009). As a

result, there remains a greater emphasis on the outcome-based traditional performance system

of cost, time and quality, as compared to the process-based performance system in lean

construction which evaluates the flow of project delivery to eliminate non-value-adding

activities (B7) (B13). The minimal level of pervasiveness of this barrier contradicts many

studies (Abdullah et al., 2009; Sarhan and Fox, 2013; Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014; Omran and

Abdulrahim, 2015). For instance, Shang and Sui Pheng (2014) revealed that lack of proper

knowledge of lean philosophy is the major barrier to lean construction in the Chinese

construction industry, while in Ghana, it is one of the top barriers to lean construction

(Ayarkkwa et al., 2012). Shang and Sui Pheng (2014) linked this barrier to lack of education.

This suggests that construction professionals in the KSA construction industry are well

educated about lean construction, and as a result, they perceive the performance and

knowledge barrier to be minimal.

The least pervasive barrier to implementing lean construction in the KSA construction

industry is the cost barrier. It has an eigenvalue of 1.275 that explains the variance of 5.657

per cent in the data set. This finding is similar to those in many studies which reveal the

influence of the high cost of providing lean construction tools and equipment and that

incentivising and empowering employees for increased lean culture is a very low barrier to

implementing lean construction (Ayarkkwa et al., 2012; Abdullah et al., 2009; Sarhan and

Fox, 2013; Alinaitwe, 2009). Equally, the low pervasiveness of this barrier in the KSA

construction industry could be attributed to the rich economic status of the KSA as an oil-

producing country. As one of the sectors which contributes hugely to the economy and one

which is strategic focus of the KSA Government to deemphasise reliance on oil, the KSA

construction industry is well funded for increased development (AlSehaimi, 2011; Husein,

2013). Hence, the respondent construction professionals perceive the cost barrier as very low

hindrance in the KSA construction industry.

7.3Proposed solutions to barriers to lean construction

To overcome the principal barriers to lean construction, universally applicable solutions are

proposed. As the most pervasive barrier to implementing lean construction, the greatest effort

should be concentrated on traditional practices in the KSA construction industry. Within

construction organisations, the management should be open and committed to making

changes in the construction field (Ayarkkwa et al., 2012). According to Devaki and Jayanthi

(2014), this could be achieved by making changes to the culture in construction organisations

to accommodate lean construction principles as part of organisational policy. If this were to

occur, employees and organisational partners would be compelled to embrace a lean

construction culture. As part of cultural changes, Bashir et al. (2015) suggested that

construction organisations should use very simplified terms to convey ideas about lean

construction in the organisation policy. Similarly, as part of a commitment to lean

construction practices, the management should acquire the necessary managerial skills to

oversee the successful implementation of lean construction during project delivery (Shang

and Sui Pheng, 2014). For instance, using a participatory style of management which allows

employee participation in decisions leading to lean construction is likely to build their trust

and support for the implementation of lean construction (Bashir et al., 2015; Shang and Sui

Pheng, 2014; Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014). Furthermore, both Sarhan and Fox (2013) and

Shang and Sui Pheng (2014) suggested that the traditional design approach to project delivery

should be replaced with an integrated design approach to reduce dichotomy between the

design and construction stages of project delivery for the easy implementation of lean

construction.

As the client-related barrier is a new kind of barrier, solutions to overcoming it rest largely on

construction clients. First, they need to insist on the adoption of lean construction in the

delivery of their projects. By inserting lean construction clauses in their contracts, contractors

will automatically be obliged to implement the concept (Dulaimi and Tanamas, 2001; Bashir

et al., 2015). However, this may increase the project cost for the clients. Therefore, second,

construction clients need to desist from evaluating the success of their projects primarily on

the basis of cost and time, as both of these are inconsistent with lean construction principles

(Sarhan and Fox, 2013). Instead, construction clients should emphasise on achieving value in

their projects through waste minimisation.

Most potential solutions to overcoming the standardisation barrier to lean construction relate

to reducing the uncertainties in the construction supply chain. Devaki and Jayanthi (2014)

advocated that construction organisations should engage in long-term relationships among

themselves to strengthen their working relationships in the construction supply chain to be

aware of each other’s style of managing projects with minimal uncertainties. The use of

standards to define construction project requirements and relationships in the supply chain is

also projected to reduce the standardisation barrier to lean construction. For instance, Dulaimi

and Tanamas (2001) recommended the use of standards such as the International Standards

Organisation (ISO) frameworks to benchmark performance requirements in a standardised

format in the construction supply chain. Common metrics which can be followed by operators

to implement lean construction should also be developed in the construction supply chain

(Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014).

According to Bashir et al. (2015), rather than an aggressive and one-off implementation

approach, a step by step or simplified implementation of lean construction is necessary to

enable operators to adapt to the technological sophistications involved. These sophistications

can also be reduced by supporting the implementation of lean construction with visualisation

mechanisms such as building information modelling (BIM) to enable operators to easily

monitor the process (Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014; Sacks et al., 2009). Furthermore, the

government has a role to play to overcome the technological barrier to lean construction,

especially in terms of enacting policies that will make lean methods more feasible (Ayarkkwa

et al., 2012). For instance, such policy would set an agenda and provide a direction for

construction organisations to identify and implement feasible lean construction methods

(Bashir et al., 2015; Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014; Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014).

Although the performance and knowledge barrier is minimally pervasive in the KSA

construction industry, it can be overcome by training construction professionals to increase

their knowledge and skills about lean construction (Omran and Abdulrahim, 2015). Such

training should emphasise not only lean construction tools such as the last planner system but

also lean construction principles, especially the principles of waste minimisation and JIT, to

ensure a balanced understanding required to undertake the concept (Abdullah et al., 2009;

Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014). According to Bashir et al. (2015), the management of

construction organisations should take greater responsibility in providing and sponsoring

avenues such as seminars, conferences and workshops to train their employees about lean

construction. It is important because the employees are responsible for the daily operation and

implementation of lean construction activities. Nevertheless, lean construction training should

be implemented across the board in construction organisations, especially to include middle-

level managers and sub-contractors and suppliers, to ensure that the concept percolates to all

levels (Devaki and Jayanthi, 2014). The management of construction organisations should

also seek to retain skilled and newly trained employees by incentivising them with

competitive wages to achieve ongoing lean construction (Shang and Sui Pheng, 2014).

8.Conclusions and recommendations

This study has identified the barriers to the implementation of lean construction and, at the

same time, prioritised the principal factors that constitute these barriers in the order of their

pervasiveness in the KSA construction industry.

Overall, there are 22 barriers currently hindering the implementation of lean construction in

the KSA construction industry. Based on the MIS, the top-ranking barriers that are of the

greatest concern to construction professionals in the KSA construction industry are the

influence of traditional management practices, unfavourable organisational culture, lack of

technical skills, training and understanding of lean techniques and lack of knowledge of the

lean construction approaches, and together, they signify the importance of the involvement of

the top management in construction organisations in implementing lean construction. The

middle-ranking barriers that make up the majority of the barriers such as lack of a robust

performance measurement system, traditional design approach, long implementation period

of the lean concept in construction processes, lack of client and supplier involvement and end

user preference are of moderate concern to construction professionals in the KSA

construction industry (organisational level). Nonetheless, they signify that the actions (and

inactions) of project participants during project delivery are important to the implementation

of lean construction (project level). The barriers which construction professionals in the KSA

construction industry are least worried about are lack of provision of benchmark performance,

lack of support from government for technological advancements, uncertainty in the

production process, use of non-standard components and uncertainty in the supply chain, and

they mainly signify the importance of construction-industry-level support and coordination in

the implementation of lean construction (industry level). Furthermore, despite having

different individual and organisational characteristics, the respondent construction

professionals were undivided in their agreement with the above rankings. Therefore, in

conclusion, construction professionals perceive that the implementation of lean construction

can be influenced at the organisational, project and industry levels in the KSA construction

industry.

The six principal factors that constitute the barriers in the KSA construction industry are

traditional practice, client-related, standardisation, technological, performance and knowledge

and cost-related barriers, in descending order of pervasiveness. Thus, the traditional practice

barrier is the most pervasive, while the cost-related barrier is the least pervasive. In addition,

literature evidence suggests that these principal barriers exist in other countries, with the

exception of the client-related barrier, which appears to be a new kind of barrier to the

implementation of lean construction in the construction industry. In the KSA construction

industry, the client-related barrier indicates the failure of clients to contribute adequately

towards implementing lean construction. Elsewhere, more research is required to determine

the pervasiveness of the client-related barrier in lean construction.

The socio-cultural, economic and operational context in the KSA is reflected in the level of

pervasiveness of some of the barriers to implementing lean construction. For instance, the

high pervasiveness of traditional practices as a barrier to implementing lean construction is

linked to the conservative nature of the KSA as an Islamic society, while the least pervasive,

the cost-related barrier, is related to the economic prosperity of the country. Therefore, the

socio-cultural and economic contexts in different countries potentially influence the barriers

to implementing lean construction. Given the similarities in socio-cultural processes, as well

as economic prosperity and mode of operation, the principal barriers to implementing lean

construction in the KSA construction industry may be relevant to other countries in the

Middle East. However, a qualitative research is necessary to explore this causal relationship

empirically and identify the specific socio-cultural, operational and economic factors that

induce the barriers to lean construction in the construction industry in other countries outside

the Middle East.

Finally, as identified in Section 7, solutions to overcoming the barriers to lean construction in

the KSA construction industry are proposed. This study recommends that these solutions

should focus on the traditional practice, client-related, standardisation, technological and

performance and knowledge barriers while excluding the cost-related barrier owing to its

minimal pervasiveness in the KSA construction industry.

8.1Areas of further research

With findings that the conservative nature of the KSA as an Islamic society contributes to the

high pervasiveness of the traditional practice barrier in implementing lean construction in the

KSA construction industry, this study provides an insight to the role of socio-cultural issues

such as national culture to the pervasiveness of barriers to lean construction. Although the

national culture is very influential on the operations in the construction industry in different

countries, studies exploring the role of national culture in the implementation of lean

construction are very limited. More research is therefore necessary to understand the role of

national culture in the implementation of lean construction, as well as how the national

cultures in different countries constitute barriers to the implementation of lean construction.

Furthermore, this study found that the client-related barrier to lean construction is new to the

current body of knowledge. As this study is limited to the KSA, future studies should be

conducted to verify the existence of the client-related barrier in implementing lean

construction in other countries.

Table 1. Barriers to lean construction as found by the researchers

Barriers

Bashir et al.,

2015

Ayarkk

wa et

al.,

2012

Shang

and Sui

Pheng,

2014

Alinai

twe,

2009

Olamil

okun,

2015

Dulaimi

and

Tanamas,

2001

Johanse

n and

Walter,

2007

Dev

aki,

201

4

Omran

and

Abdulra

him,

2015

Sarha

n and

Fox,

2013

Abdull

ah et

al.,

2009

1. The influence of traditional

management practices

2. 2. Unfavourable organisational

culture

3. Lack of technical skills, training and

understanding of lean techniques

4. Lack of knowledge of the lean

construction approaches

5. Lack of committed leadership of top

management

6. Ineffective communication channels

between construction teams

7. Lack of a robust performance

measurement system

8. Lack of technological adaptations

9. Difficulties in understanding the

concepts of lean construction

10. Traditional design approach

11. Long implementation period of lean

concept in construction processes

12. Lack of client and supplier

involvement

13. End user preference

14. Additional cost and high inflation

rates

15. Slow decision making processes due

to a complex organisational

hierarchy

16. Improper resource management

17. Lack of clear job specification from

the client

18. Lack of provision of benchmark

performance

19. Lack of support from government for

technological advancements

20. Uncertainty in the production process

21. Use of non-standard components

22. Uncertainty in the supply chain

Table 2. Profiles of survey respondents

Profile Categories Frequency Percent (%)

Organisation Project management 111 39

General contractor 66 23

Architect 28 10

Specialty contractor 25 9

Client 13 5

Academia 14 5

Government 13 5

Subcontractor 9 3

Supplier 3 1

Experience

1–5 years 71 25

5–10 years 69 24

10–20 years 84 30

Over 20 years 58 21

Education

Diploma 18 6

Bachelor’s degree 208 74

Master’s degree 49 17

Doctor’s degree 7 3

Size of organisation (based on number of employees)

Small (1–200) 68 24

Medium (201–1000) 57 20

Large (More than 1000) 131 46

Don’t know 26 10

Annual revenue of the company (year 2014)

Less than US$2 million 26 9

US$4 million to US$20 million 49 17

More than US$ 20 million 102 36

Don’t know 105 38

ISO certification Yes 137 49

No 49 17

Don’t know 96 34

Table 3. MIS analysis of the barriers to implementing lean construction in the KSA construction industry

Consul

t Ran

k Contra

c Ran

k Small/

M Ran

k Larg

e Ran

k 1-

10y Ran

k >10

y Ran

k Bach

e Ran

k Post

G Ran

k Overal

l Ran

k

Barriers

B1 The influence of traditional management practice 3.94 1 3.72 3 3.71 1 3.92 1

3.78 1 3.94 1 3.85 1 3.82 3 3.84 1

B2 Unfavourable organisational culture 3.77 2 3.75 1 3.70 2 3.74 3

3.71 2 3.80 3 3.72 2 3.82 2 3.74 2

B3

Lack of technical skills, training and understanding of lean techniques 3.75 4 3.66 4 3.67 3 3.86 2

3.66 3 3.85 2 3.69 3 3.89 1 3.73 3

B4 Lack of knowledge of the lean construction approaches 3.76 3 3.52 7 3.62 4 3.72 4

3.65 4 3.72 4 3.65 4 3.79 4 3.68 4

B5 Lack of committed leadership of top management 3.52 11 3.74 2 3.51 7 3.64 6

3.55 7 3.66 7 3.63 5 3.47 14 3.59 5

B6

Ineffective communication channels between the construction teams 3.59 5 3.55 5 3.56 5 3.61 7

3.56 6 3.65 8 3.57 6 3.68 5 3.59 6

B7 Lack of a robust performance measurement system 3.57 6 3.49 11 3.5 8 3.61 8

3.42 14 3.72 5 3.55 7 3.52 10 3.53 7

B8 Lack of technological adaptations 3.54 9 3.46 12 3.39 13 3.68 5 3.63 5 3.33 15 3.53 8 3.45 15 3.51 8

B9 Difficulties in understanding the concepts of lean construction 3.54 10 3.45 13 3.49 9 3.61 10

3.41 15 3.67 6 3.48 11 3.63 7 3.51 9

B10 Traditional design approach 3.54 8 3.50 10 3.48 10 3.48 14

3.45 13 3.57 9 3.48 10 3.55 9 3.49 10

B11

Long implementation period of lean concept in construction processes 3.55 7 3.41 14 3.48 11 3.56 12

3.50 11 3.48 11 3.47 13 3.58 8 3.49 11

B12

Lack of client and supplier involvement 3.42 13 3.54 6 3.45 12 3.59 11

3.54 8 3.40 12 3.51 9 3.39 17 3.48 12

B13 End user preference 3.39 15 3.51 8 3.38 14 3.61 9

3.52 10 3.38 13 3.40 14 3.68 6 3.46 13

B14

Additional cost and high inflation rates 3.38 16 3.50 9 3.53 6 3.43 15

3.52 9 3.37 14 3.47 12 3.42 16 3.46 14

B15

Slow decision-making processes due to a complex organisational hierarchy 3.29 19 3.37 16 3.34 16 3.41 16

3.38 16 3.31 17 3.31 17 3.48 13 3.35 15

B16 Improper resource management 3.31 17 3.32 17 3.28 20 3.49 13

3.25 20 3.50 10 3.35 15 3.34 19 3.34 16

B17

Lack of clear job specification from the client 3.45 12 3.16 20 3.35 15 3.29 24

3.35 18 3.32 16 3.29 18 3.48 12 3.33 17

B18

Lack of provision of benchmark performance 3.24 20 3.39 15 3.34 17 3.35 18

3.37 17 3.25 19 3.32 16 3.34 20 3.32 18

B19

Lack of support from government for technological advancements 3.41 14 3.14 21 3.30 19 3.38 17

3.49 12 2.98 22 3.22 20 3.52 11 3.28 19

B20

Uncertainty in the production process 3.31 18 3.17 18 3.33 18 3.35 19

3.29 19 3.29 18 3.26 19 3.37 18 3.28 20

B21 Use of non-standard components 3.01 21 3.17 19 2.93 22 3.34 20

3.14 21 3.00 21 3.03 21 3.29 21 3.08 21

B22 Uncertainty in the supply chain 2.98 22 3.01 22 3.08 21 3.06 21

3.02 22 3.01 20 2.99 22 3.11 22 3.01 22

Table 4: Mann Whitney test results

Categories Mean rank U statistic Sig. Remarks

Organisational and indivual

characteristics of respondents

Consulting organisations 134.45

8388.500 0.723 Not

significant Contracting organisations 131.08

Large organisations 132.82

7490.500 0.283 Not

significant Small/medium organisations 122.91

>10 years experience 144.11

9200.500 0.665 Not

significant 1-10 years experience 139.80

Postgraduate qualification 147.06

6475.000 0.543 Not

significant

Bachelor degree qualification or lesser 139.93

Note: Statistical significance at 5%

Table 5: Principal barriers to the successful implementation of lean construction in the Saudi Arabian construction industry

Components 1 2 3 4 5 6

Traditional practices barriers

Client related barriers

Standardisation barriers

Technological barriers

Performance and knowledge barriers

Financial related barrier

Cronbach's alpha (α) 0.934 0.912 0.891 0.887 0.812 1 B2 Unfavourable organisational culture 0.827

2 B1 The influence of traditional management practices 0.736

3 B6 Ineffective communication channels between the construction teams 0.694

4 B5 Lack of committed leadership of top management 0.673

5 B10 Traditional design approach 0.522 6 B18 Lack of provision of benchmark performance 0.783 7 B17 Lack of clear job specification from the client 0.756 8 B12 Lack of client and supplier involvement 0.731 9 B13 End user preference 0.501 10 B20 Uncertainty in the production process 0.685 11 B21 Use of non-standard components 0.683

12 B15 Slow decision-making processes due to a complex organisational hierarchy 0.673

13 B22 Uncertainty in the supply chain 0.638

14 B19 Lack of support from government for technological advancements 0.778

15 B11 Long implementation period of the lean concept in construction processes 0.58

16 B8 Lack of technological adaptations 0.571

17 B9 Difficulties in understanding the concepts of lean construction 0.549

18 B7 Lack of a robust performance measurement system 0.769

19 B4 Lack of knowledge of the lean construction approaches 0.559

20 B3 Lack of technical skills, training and understanding of lean techniques 0.553

21 B16 Improper resource management 0.520 22 B14 Additional cost and high inflation rates 0.68

Eigen values 3.632 3.524 3.137 2.761 2.626 1.275 Percentage of variance explained 13.493 12.164 11.075 10.007 8.877 5.657

Cumulative percentage 13.493 25.657 36.732 46.739 55.616 61.273 Extraction method: principal component analysis

Rotation method: varimax rotation KMO = 0.909 Bartlett's test of sphericity = 3670.939 Significance = 0.000

References

Abawi, K. (2008). Qualitative and quantitative research. World Health Organization/Geneva

Foundation for Medical Education and Research, Geneva.

http://www.gfmer.ch/Medical_education_En/Afghanistan_2008/pdf/Qualitative_quantitativ

e_research_Abawi_Afghanistan_2008.pdf

Abdullah, S., Abdul Razak, A., Bakar, A., Hassan, A., & Sarrazin, I. (2009). Towards Producing

Best Practice in the Malaysian Construction Industry: The Barriers in Implementing the

Lean Construction Approach. In Proceedings of International Conference Of Construction

Industry, 30 July-1 August 2009, Padang, Indonesia.

Alarcón, L. F., Diethelm, S., Rojo, O., & Calderon, R. (2011). Assessing the impacts of

implementing lean construction. Revista ingeniería de construcción, 23(1), 26–33.

Alinaitwe, H. M. (2009). Prioritizing lean construction barriers in Uganda's construction

industry. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 14(1), 15–30.

Al-Nafil, M. (2013). Lean Concept Practices In Saudi Arabian Organization. (Bachelor thesis),

Effat University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Alrashed, A., Taj, S., Phillips, M., & Kantamaneni, K. (2014). Risk Assessment for Construction

Projects in Saudi Arabia. Research Journal of Management Sciences, 3(7), 1-6.

AlSehaimi, A. (2011). Improving Construction Planning Practice In Saudi Arabia By Means Of

Lean Construction Principles And Techniques. (PhD thesis), University of Salford,

Salford, UK. Retrieved from http://usir.salford.ac.uk/42997/

AlSehaimi, A., Tzortzopoulos, P., & Koskela, L. (2009). Last Planner System: Experiences from

Pilot Implementation in the Middle East. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the

International Group for Lean Construction, pp. 53–56.

Al-Sudairi, A. A. (2007). Evaluating the effect of construction process characteristics to the

applicability of lean principles. Construction Innovation, 7(1), 99–121.

AMEInfor. (2014). Building in Saudi Arabia good for up to 50 years. Retrieved March 3, 2015,

from AMEInfor: http://ameinfo.com/construction-real-estate/other-construction-real-

estate/buildings-saudi-arabia-good-50-years-sce/

Atkinson, P. (2010). Lean is a cultural issue. Management Services, 54(2), 35–41.

Assaf, S. A., & Al-Hejji, S. (2006). Causes of Delay in Large Construction Projects.

International journal of project management, 24(4), 349-357.

Ayarkkwa, J., Agyekum, K., & Adinyira, E. (2012). Barriers to Successful Implementation of

Lean Construction in the Ghanaian Building Industry. Journal of Construction, 5(1), 3–11.

Ballard, G. (2008). The lean project delivery system: An update. Lean Construction

Journal, 2008, 1–19.

Ballard, G., & Howell, G. (1998). What kind of production is construction. Proceedings of the

6th Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC-6), Guarujá.

Ballard, G., & Howell, G. (2003). Lean project management. Building Research & Information,

31(2), 119-133. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210301997

Ballard, G., Tommelein, I., Koskela, L., & Howell, G. (2002). Lean construction tools and

techniques. Chapter 15, 227–255.

Bannah, A., Elmualim, A., & Tang, L. (2012). Benchmarking and key performance indicators

for the construction industry in Saudi Arabia. In Proceedings of the International

Conference on Facilities Management, Procurement Systems, and Public-Private

Partnership.

Bashir, A. M., Suresh, S., Oloke, D. A., Proverbs, D. G., & Gameson, R. (2015). Overcoming

the Challenges facing Lean Construction Practice in the UK Contracting Organizations.

International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction, 4(1), 10-18.

Bashir, A. M., Suresh, S., Proverbs, D. G., & Gameson, R. (2011). Critical, Theoretical, Review

Of The Impacts Of Lean Construction Tools In Reducing Accidents On Construction Sites.

Paper presented at the 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2011, Bristol,

UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 249-258.

De Souza, L. B., & Pidd, M. (2011). Exploring the barriers to lean health care implementation.

Public Money & Management, 31(1), 59–66.

Devaki, M. P., & Jayanthi, R. (2014). Barriers to Implementation of Lean Principles in the

Indian Construction Industry. International Journal of Engineering Research &

Technology (IJERT), 3(5), 1189–1192.

Dhahran International Exhibition Company (2015). International Exhibition for Building and

Construction to be Held in Eastern Region. Saudi Press Agency U6 (Newspaper Article)

pp. 1-6

Dulaimi, M. F., & Tanamas, C. (2001). The principles and applications of lean construction in

Singapore. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference of the International Group for

Lean Construction (IGLC). Kent Ridge Crescent, Singapore, , 6–8 Aug 2001.

Durdyev, S., & Mbachu, J. (2017). Key constraints to labour productivity in residential building

projects: evidence from Cambodia. International Journal of Construction Management, 1-

9.

Egan, J. (1998). Rethinking Construction: The Report of the Construction Task Force. Deputy

Prime Minister, John Prescott, on the scope for improving the quality and efficiency of UK

construction. Retrieved from http://constructingexcellence.org.uk/wp-

content/uploads/2014/10/rethinking_construction_report.pdf

Ferguson, E., & Cox, T. (1993). Exploratory factor analysis: A users’ guide. International

Journal of Selection and Assessment, 1(2), 84-94.

Fields, A. (2000). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS for Windows, Sage, London.

Forbes, L. H., Ahmed, S. M., & Barcala, M. (2002). Adapting Lean Construction Theory for

Practical Application in Developing Countries. In Proceedings of the first CIB W107

International Conference: Creating a Sustainable Construction Industry in Developing

Countries. Stellenbosch, South Africa.

Green, S. D. (2002). The human resource management implications of lean construction: critical

perspectives and conceptual chasms. Journal of Construction Research, 3(1), 147–165.

Harris, E. (2014). UAE's construction market to remain strong in 2014, according to EC Harris.

Zawya, Thomson Reuters. Retrieved from

http://www.zawya.com/story/UAEs_construction_market_to_remain_strong_in_2014_acc

ording_to_EC_Harris-ZAWYA20140818053801/

Hon, C. K., Chan, A. P., & Yam, M. C. (2012). Determining safety climate factors in the repair,

maintenance, minor alteration, and addition sector of Hong Kong. Journal of Construction

Engineering and Management, 139(5), 519-528.

Hooper, D. (2012). Exploratory factor analysis. In H. Chen (Ed.), 'Approaches to Quantitative

Research – Theory and its Practical Application: A Guide to Dissertation Students. Cork,

Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Husein, A. (2013). Construction and Projects in Saudi Arabia: Overview. Construction and

Projects Multi-jurisdictional Guide 2013/14.

Hussain, S. A. M., Nama, A. M., & Fatima, A. (2014). Barriers to implementing lean principles

in the Indian construction industry. International Journal of Innovation Research in

Advanced Engineering, 3(1), 1–6.

Ikediashi, D. I., Ogunlana, S. O., & Alotaibi, A. (2014). Analysis of Project Failure Factors for

Infrastructure Projects in Saudi Arabia: A Multivariate Approach. Journal of Construction

in Developing Countries, 19(1), 35.

Issa, U. H. (2013). Implementation of lean construction techniques for minimizing the risks

effect on project construction time. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 52(4), 697-704.

Johansen, E., & Walter, L. (2007). Lean Construction: Prospects for the German construction

industry. Lean Construction Journal, 3(1), 19–32.

Johns, R. (2010). Survey question bank: Methods Fact Sheet 1, Likert items and scales.

University of Strathclyde.

Kanafani, J. (2015). Barriers To The Implementation Of Lean Thinking In The Construction

Industry – The Case Of Uae. (Master thesis ), University of Leicester, UK.

Karim, M.A. (2009). A conceptual model for manufacturing performance improvement, Journal

of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, Vol 35, Issue 1 pp. 87-94.

Karim, M.A., Kazi Arif-Uz-Zaman, (2013). A methodology for effective implementation of lean

strategies and its performance evaluation in manufacturing organizations. Business Process

Management Journal, Vol. 19 Iss: 1, pp. 169–196.

Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World’s Greatest

Manufacturer, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Locatelli, G., Mancini, M., Gastaldo, G., & Mazza, F. (2013). Improving Projects Performance

With Lean Construction: State Of The Art, Applicability And Impacts. Organization,

Technology & Management in Construction: An International Journal, 5(Special), 775-

783

Marhani, M. A., Jaapar, A., & Bari, N. A. A. (2012). Lean Construction: Towards enhancing

sustainable construction in Malaysia. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 68, 87-98.

Moghadam, M. (2014). Lean-Mod: An Approach To Modular Construction Manufacturing

Production Efficiency Improvement. (Doctor of Philosophy), University of Alberta,

Edmonton, Alberta.

Nahmens, I., & Ikuma, L. H. (2009). An empirical examination of the relationship between lean

construction and safety in the industrialized housing industry. Lean Construction Journal,

2009, 1-12.

Nahmens, I., & Ikuma, L. H. (2012). Effects of Lean Construction on Sustainability of Modular

Homebuilding. Journal Of Architectural Engineering, 18(2), 155-163.

Ngacho, C., & Das, D. (2014). A performance evaluation framework of development projects:

An empirical study of Constituency Development Fund (CDF) construction projects in

Kenya. International Journal of Project Management, 32(3), 492-507.

Norusis, M. J. (1992). SPSS for Windows, professional statistics, Release 5, SPSS, Chicago.

Ogunbiyi, O. E. (2014). Implementation of the lean approach in sustainable construction: a

conceptual framework. PhD, University of Central Lancashire.

Ogunbiyi, O., Oladapo, A., & Goulding, J. (2014). An empirical study of the impact of lean

construction techniques on sustainable construction in the UK. Construction Innovation,

14(1), 88-107.

Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-scale Production, Productivity Press,

Cambridge, MA.

Olamilokun, O. (2015). Investigating Facilitators and Barriers for Adopting Lean Construction

Principles in the Nigerian Building Consulting Firms. International Journal of Innovative

Research & Development, 4(12), 234–239

Olanipekun, A. O. (2012). Effects of Organisational Culture on the Performance of Quantity

Surveying Firms in Lagos, Nigeria. Master Degree Thesis submitted to the School of

Postgraduate Studies, Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria.

Olanipekun, A. O., Abiola-Falemu, J. O., & Aje, I. O. (2014). Dimensions of Organisational

Culture in Quantity Surveying Ffirms in Nigeria. Australasian Journal of Construction

Economics and Building, 14(4), 54-70.

Olanipekun, A. O., Xia, B., Hon, C., & Hu, Y. (2017). Project Owners’ Motivation for

Delivering Green Building Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and

Management, 143(9), 04017068.

Omran, A., & Abdulrahim, A. (2015). Barriers to prioritizing lean construction in the Libyan

construction industry. Acta Technica Corviniensis-Bulletin of Engineering, 8(1), 53.

Sacks, R., Treckmann, M., & Rozenfeld, O. (2009). Visualization of work flow to support lean

construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(12), 1307-1315.

Salem, O., Solomon, J., Genaidy, A., & Minkarah, I. (2006). Lean construction: From theory to

implementation. Journal of Management in Engineering, 22(4), 168–175.

Sarhan, J., Xia, B., Fawzia, F., & Karim, A. (2017). Lean Construction Implementation in the

Saudi Arabian Construction Industry. Construction Economics and Building, 17(1), 46-69

Sarhan, J. G., Olanipekun, A. O., & Xia, B. (2016). Critical Success Factors for the

Implementation of Lean Construction in the Saudi Arabian Construction Industry. In

International sustainable built environment conference SBE16 (pp. 338-341).

Sarhan, S., & Fox, A. (2013). Barriers to implementing lean construction in the UK construction

industry. The Built & Human Environment Review, 6(1), 1-17.

Shang, G., & Sui Pheng, L. (2014). Barriers to lean implementation in the construction industry

in China. Journal of Technology Management in China, 9(2), 155–173.

Shook, J. Y. (1997). Bringing the Toyota production system to the United States: a personal

perspective. In Becoming Lean: Inside Stories of US Manufacturers, Liker, J. K. (ed),

Productivity Press, Portland.

Sim, K. L., & Rogers, J. W. (2009). Implementing lean production systems: barriers to change.

Management Research News, 32(1), 37–49.

Taffe, J. R., Tonge, B. J., Gray, K. M., & Einfeld, S. L. (2008). Extracting more information

from behaviour checklists by using components of mean based scores. International

Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 17(4), 232-240

Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of

mixed methods research, 1(1), 77-100.

Watt, J. H., & Van den Berg, S. A. (1995). Research methods for communication science. Allyn

& Bacon.

Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1996). Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your

Corporation, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY.