1. No category

Journal of Contemporary Management Sciences
Volume 3 (1) 108-121
JCMS Publication, 2014
Journal of
Contemporary
Management
Sciences
JUST IN TIME APPROACH FOR THE REINFORCEMENT
WORKS TOWARDS PROJECT MANAGEMENT
IMPROVEMENT
WAN ASMIZAN WAN HUSSIN & SYUHAIDA ISMAIL
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Universiti Teknologi, MALAYSIA
[email protected]
Razak School of Engineering and Advanced Technology
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA
[email protected]
http://www.syuhaidaismail.com
ABSTRACT
Just in Time (JIT) philosophy holds tremendous potentials for improving project management and construction
activities in construction industry. Poor procurement planning, inefficient communication, unreliable supplier and
late delivery of materials are among factors contributing to the poor project management that often resulted in the
delay, cost overruns and poor quality of the project. From a pure operational aspect, it calls for materials especially
reinforcement bar to reach the respective site when they are needed and not before. As to its attribute as a
management philosophy, the system calls for a total integration of internal and external resources. By implementing
JIT, the space constraints for storage at the worksite can then be alleviated. Thus, this study is developed with the
aim to appraise JIT approach applicable for the reinforcement works in construction activity in improvising project
management practices. The readiness of Malaysian construction industry for adoption of JIT approach in its
reinforcement bar activities was determined using surveys and interviews with the various stakeholders involved in
few of the selected construction projects. Although the data collected may not be conclusive since the respondents
are confined to few selected construction projects, nevertheless the data collected are sufficient as a base to conclude
the study. As it is expected that the JIT approach is practical to be adopted during reinforcement activities and could
improvise project management, Malaysia should seriously adopt this approach in her future construction projects.
Keywords: Just In Time, Reinforcement Work, Project Management
1. INTRODUCTION
In most construction sites, the issues of demand of good quality, high speed, scale and complexity of construction
projects and the escalating cost of materials are often faced by the project‘s stakeholders including client, its
consultants and contractors involved. This applies across stages in construction schedule and activities. Sambasivan
(2006) identified ten (10) most important causes of delays in construction site including contractors improper
planning, contractors poor site management, problem with sub-contractors, shortage in material, labor supply and
equipment availability, all of which may lead to chain of bad effects to the construction industry including delays
and poor end product quality which often end with disputes between the parties involved. In the case of
reinforcement works, contractors undertaking the scope often have to deal with issues on quality of the end product
of the reinforcement bar, constraint area at site, environment factors, labor shortage and wastage of material. Since
the reinforcement works are part of important elements in construction, these issues often led to delay in the project
completion apart from higher cost impost on the project since all cost in managing the issues above mentioned has
to be factored into the contract price. The industry therefore has to find ways to reduce these issues, but how?
Strategies and planning for the reinforcement works start during the earlier planning stage of a construction. It is
part of the project planning where procurement strategy for the reinforcement activity including its subcontractor
and/or supplier is decided. The scope of works to be undertaken by the subcontractor and/or supplier involve in the
reinforcement works are also decided at the procurement stage of the project planning. Various studies conducted
show that a correct decision or an improvement of procurement activity decided at project management level may
help to lessen the risk of delay in project completion. Van de Rhee et. al (2009) finds that late delivery by supplier is
an important factor determining successful project completion because it will directly affect the completion time of a
project. An earlier study by Ruiz-Torres and Mahmoodi (2006) also made the same conclusion that supplier‘s failure
to deliver on time can disrupt operation and delay the completion of a project. As such, the construction industry is
moving forward in many aspects of project implementation, including improving procurement activity in the attempt
to minimize delay and provide better quality of the construction product. In manufacturing industry, the JIT
approach has been successfully utilized to expedite and provide higher quality of the product manufactured. The
approach is proven to smooth the production process through the efficient handling of materials including by
providing the right materials, in right quantities and quality, just in time for production (Low and Choong, 2001).
Therefore, most successful manufacturers count JIT as part of their successful secret, as can be seen in the case of
Toyota, Dell and Harley Davidson (Wilson, 2013). The question is, can the construction industry utilize the same
JIT approach in its procurement activity to reach the same effect that the JIT did for the manufacturing industry
especially to minimize delay? If the answer is positive, the next question will be: how to implement such approach
within the construction industry?
Recently, construction industry has improvised some of its traditional construction process using the JIT approach,
including in procurement of imminent materials by ensuring that such materials are only made available to the site
when they are required. This is made possible through the usage of Industrial Building System (‗IBS‘) whereby
components are manufactured upfront and are ready for use, instead of the traditional process of the materials
having to be constructed at the point of demand. This strategy has helped reducing possible delay in project delivery
and reduces project cost. Among materials procured this way are precast concrete framing including precast column,
beams and slabs, and steel framing systems including steel beams and column and portal frames. The use of IBS is
well accepted such that the Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) Malaysia is continuing to promote
the usage of IBS, which essentially is using JIT approach to its members (CIDB web). Another good example of the
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
2
usage of JIT approach can be seen in the trend of using precast concrete component in comparison to the traditional
method of concreting in situ. Precast concrete technology offers tremendous benefit in achieving easier and quicker
erection of a building structure (Low and Choong, 2001).
It is seen that JIT approach has been successfully utilised to minimise issue of delay in construction. Can the same
approach be utilised to manage the issues faced in undertaking the reinforcement works in the construction industry?
A positive answer to the above question will lead to prove that the issues can be managed through better
procurement activities, which essentially shows that better project management can improvise the issues of quality,
constraint area at site, environment factors, labor shortage and wastage of material post reinforcement works. To
reach the ultimate aim of this study, the next question will then be how applicable is the JIT approach to be utilised
for Malaysian construction industry? How competent are Malaysian construction professionals and subcontractors in
implementing JIT approach especially in reinforcement works activity at its construction site?
Thus, with the main aim of appraising JIT approach applicable for the reinforcement works in construction activity
in improvising project management within Malaysian construction projects, this paper is materialized in via
literature review and questionnaire survey on respondents involved in projects, namely Women and Children
Hospital Project (HKL), Kuala Lumpur International Airport 2 (KLIA2), Mass Rapid Transit (V8) and Mass Rapid
Transit (S3). This paper also revolves around departments of Engineering and Construction Department (E&C),
Tender and Procurement Department (TPD), Quality Management and Quality Assurance Department (QM/QA)
and Planning Department, as these are the relevant departments directly involved in construction activities.
2. JUST IN TIME APPROACH
Just in Time (JIT) approach has been utilized in procurement activities worldwide, especially within the
manufacturing industry. The approach is proven to smooth the production process through the efficient handling of
materials including by providing the right materials, in right quantities and quality, just in time for production (Low
and Choong, 2001). Many companies especially in the automotive industry has been utilizing this approach, Toyota
and Harley Davidson are among them (Wilson, 2013). Historically, the JIT techniques were already operationalized
during the late 1920s at Henry Ford‘s great industrial complex in River Rouge, Michigan as he streamlined his
moving assembly lines to make automobiles. Ford (1922) wrote: ―We have found in buying materials that it is not
worthwhile to buy for other than immediate needs. We buy only enough to fit into the plan of production... If
transportation were perfect and an even flow of materials could be assured, it would not be necessary to carry any
stock whatsoever‖.
However, the JIT philosophy was left unattended until it was practiced by a Japanese company of Toyota Motor.
Toyota learned a great deal from studying how Ford‘s plant operated and was even able to accomplish something
that Ford could not: a system that could handle variety (Stevenson, 2005). The JIT approach started to be developed
at Toyota by Taiichi Ohno, its vice president of manufacturing, and several of his colleagues since 1940s. At that
time it was called the Toyota Production System (TPS). The system gradually evolved and became a success during
the 1980s when Toyota created impressively high quality, yet lower priced cars compared to their American rivals.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
3
The development of JIT in Japan was probably influenced by Japan being a crowded country with few natural
resources (Lim and Low, 1992). Not surprisingly, the Japanese are very sensitive to waste and inefficiency. They
regard scrap and rework as waste and excess inventory as an evil because it takes up space and ties up resources.
The company had been operating on the conventional assumption that it was most efficient to produce in large lots,
―but that kind of thinking has pushed us close to bankruptcy, because the large lots we were producing couldn‘t be
sold‖, said Toyota‘s president Mr. Fuji Cho (Lehner, 1981). Toyota could not lay off workers – Japan‘s a ―lifetime‖
employment system – so Toyota executives hit upon the simple yet radical idea that still pervades its operations:
overproduction is waste. Based upon that, Toyota refined its production system and perfected the JIT concept. As
the victory of JIT became undeniable, quality experts W. E. Deming and J. M. Juran lectured on the need for
American producers to adopt many JIT principles from their Japanese competitors (Chase et. al, 2006).
The framework suggested by Vollmann et. al (2005) indicates that the ultimate goal of JIT is a balanced system, that
is, one that achieves a smooth, rapid flow of materials and/or work through the system. The idea is to make the
process time as short as possible by using resources in the best possible way. The degree to which the overall goal is
achieved depends on how well certain supporting goals are accomplished (Stevenson, 2005). Disruptions have
negative effects on the whole system by hindering the smooth flow of products; therefore it is inevitable to set
elimination of disruptions as one of the supporting goals. The sources of disruptions may originate from poor
quality, equipment breakdowns, changes to schedule, and late deliveries. As long as these potential sources of
problems are catered for, the uncertainty that the system must deal with will be reduced and there will be a better
chance that the targeted ―balanced, rapid flow‖ will happen.
A flexible system is the one that is robust enough to handle a mix of products, often on a daily basis, and to handle
changes in the level of output while still maintaining balance and throughput speed. This enables the system to deal
with some uncertainty. In other words, a flexible system is a means to keep the ultimate goal practically feasible. To
facilitate the flexibility of the system, reduction of setup and lead times is critical. The last but not least supporting
goal of JIT is to eliminate waste. Waste can be defined as anything other than the minimum amount of resources,
which are absolutely essential to add value to the product (Rawabbdeh, 2005). It represents the unproductive
resources, thus a systematic and continuous identification and elimination of waste can free up resources and lead to
increased efficiency, improved productivity and enhanced competitiveness.
Generally, companies that work towards the elimination of waste in their manufacturing processes realise the
following benefits: lower raw material stock, work-in process and finished goods inventories which reduce the
associated holding cost; higher levels of product quality; increased flexibility and ability to meet customer demands;
lower overall manufacturing costs; and increased employees‘ involvement (Chase et. al, 2006). Reduction of all
non-productive activities eventually saves time and allows more resources to be allocated to improving throughput
and profitability.
Ohno (1987), founder of the JIT concept, defined JIT as a flow process where the right parts needed in assembly
reach the assembly line at the time they are needed and only in the amount needed. Schonberger (1982), an
American scholar on operation management, shared the same standpoint as Ohno (1988) when he referred to JIT as
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
4
a system which produce and deliver finished goods just in time to be sold, sub-assemblies just in time to be
assembled into finished goods, fabricated parts just in time to go into sub- assemblies and purchased materials just
in time to be transformed into fabricated parts.
As it can be seen from the above definitions, initially the term JIT merely referred to the movement of raw materials,
work-in-process and finished goods within a production system. However over time, the scope of JIT broadened and
the term became associated with lean production. In order to distinguish this difference in terms of the operational
hierarchy, the JIT concept is classified into ―little JIT‖ and ―big JIT‖. ―Little JIT‖ is simply a scheduling production
system, which focuses more narrowly on scheduling goods, inventories and providing service resources where and
when needed. The main purpose of ―little JIT‖ is to reduce the level of required inventories.
―Big JIT‖ (now often mentioned interchangeably as lean production) refers to a highly coordinated, repetitive
manufacturing or services system designed to produce a high volume of output with fewer resources than traditional
repetitive system, but with the ability to accommodate more variety than the traditional system (Chase et. al, 2006).
―Big JIT‖ represents a total corporate philosophy, which encompasses every aspect of the process, from design to
after the sale of a product; from materials and inventories management to vendor relationships, human resources,
technology management, etc. (Lim and Low, 1992). The philosophy is to pursue a system that functions well with
minimal levels of inventories, minimal waste, minimal space, and minimal transactions: truly, a lean system. As
such, it must be a system that is not prone to disruptions and is flexible in terms of the product variety and range of
volume that it can handle (Stevenson, 2005).
The JIT concept has been scrutinised by world-wide researchers and practitioners for decades. After hundreds of
studies and books on JIT, the manufacturing world seems to agree upon the macro strategic level of JIT, yet at the
lower level, there has been no universal tactical framework of what exact principles and techniques JIT comprises
(Fullerton et. al, 2003). Lim and Low (1992) presented that ―there is no one way of conceptualizing and classifying
the principles of JIT‖, the same as Zipkin (2000) who claimed that ―asking any two managers what JIT does will get
you two different answers‖. This inability to explain systematically and theoretically JIT manufacturing methods
may be due to JIT‘s emphasis on practice and implementation (Monden, 1981). Each researcher provided a different
set of guidelines on what principles were included in the JIT concept (Spencer, 1995).
Schonberger (1982) presented nine lessons to learn from Japanese manufacturing: 1) management technology is a
highly transportable commodity; 2) just-in-time production exposes problems otherwise hidden by excess
inventories and staff; 3) quality begins with production, and requires a company-wide "habit of improvement‖; 4)
culture is no obstacle; techniques can change behaviour; 5) simplify, and goods will flow like water;
6) flexibility
opens doors; 7) travel light and make numerous trips — like the water beetle;
8) more self-improvement, fewer
programmes, less specialist intervention; and 9) simplicity is the natural state.
Monden (1981) asserted that TPS included eight principles:
1) Kanban system to maintain JIT production;
2)
production smoothing to adapt to demand changes;
3) shortening of the setup time for reducing the production lead
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
5
time; 4) standardization of operations to attain line balancing; 5) process layout and ―multi-functional workers‖ for
the flexible work force concept; 6) improvement activities by small groups and suggestion system (quality control
circle) to reduce the work force and increase worker; 7) ―visual control system‖ (andon) to achieve autorotation
concept; and
8) ―functional management system‖ to promote company-wide quality control.
Ohno (1988) provided no clear framework but rather a collection of various techniques that were practised at Toyota
plants, such as cost reduction via elimination of wastes, kanban system, automation, emphasis on teamwork instead
of individual work assignment, production levelling, small lot sizes, and quick setup. O‘Grady (1988) came up with
four main pillars of the JIT philosophy, attack fundamental problems; eliminate waste; strive for simplicity; and
devise systems to identify problems. Low and Chan (1997) reckoned eight distinctive features and broad principles
were embedded in the JIT concept: 1) attacking fundamental problems; 2) elimination of waste;3) the ―kanban‖ or
―pull‖ system; 4) uninterrupted work flow;
5) total quality control concept;
6) top management commitment and
employee involvement; 7) supplier and client relations; and
8) continuous improvements.
In addition, Chai and Nooh (2001) in their study state that JIT purchasing concept can provide competitive
advantages in manufacturing and service-orientated firms. One of the critical success factors of a manufacturing
organization in producing quality products is its ability to acquire quality materials at the right time and with the
right quantity. Although this observation was made in the context on manufacturing activity, it is found later that the
benefit of JIT is also applicable to construction activity.
In manufacturing, the need for flexibility comes from a potential difference between forecast and actual demand.
Many products are being produced, so it is important to minimize the time required to produce any specific type of
product demanded. In construction, there is only one product produced once, and in the case of industrial
construction, that product is the facility for producing manufacturing's products. It is consequently important to
reduce the time needed to produce the facility, not necessarily the time to produce any component. Further, changes
arise from progressive definition of customer wants, so flexibility is needed in order to respond to late breaking
changes. The application of JIT to construction differs substantially from its application to manufacturing because
construction and manufacturing are different types of production, and because of the greater complexity and
uncertainty of construction.
3. REINFORCEMENT WORKS
Reinforcement works activity is critical process in construction industry. Thus, reinforcement bar supply chains
need to be well-managed. One way of streamlining reinforcement supply chains is off-site fabrication. Off-site
fabrication of reinforcement bar offers several significant advantages. However, so far, there has been no study
conducted on the implementation of JIT approach for reinforcement works activity in Malaysian construction
industry. In fact, the researcher only managed to identify one specific study relevant to the matter, but with regards
to Turkish construction industry.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
6
The study concluded that Turkish contractors can employ off-site fabrication of reinforcement bar extensively as
long as the cost of fabricating reinforcement bar off-site gets lower than fabricating reinforcement bar on-site (GulPolat and Ballard, 2005). The total cost of reinforcement bar fabrication practice is directly influenced by the special
conditions of a project environment, which are either for or against the deployment of off-site fabrication of
reinforcement bar, prevailing in the current state of the Turkish construction industry. While the driving forces for
the deployment of off-site fabrication practices in the Turkish construction industry include major reductions in
initial investment costs, worker costs, waste encountered throughout on-site fabrication practice, carrying costs,
project duration and substantial enhancements in productivity, quality and work process, the restraining forces
encompass nationwide obstacles (Turkish Social Security Law, great fluctuations in the unit price, high shipping
cost), industry wide obstacles (low wages of workers, high cost of implementing technology) and companywide
obstacles (uncertainty in the procurement process, low productivity of workers unethical behaviours and resistance
to change). While nationwide and industry wide obstacles are uncontrollable factors, two of the companywide
obstacles, namely uncertainty in the procurement process and low productivity of workers are relatively controllable
factors and may likely be overcome through implementing various organizational changes including establishing a
proper ordering procedure, establishing long-term relationships with suppliers or rebar fabricators, conducting
training programs and employing qualified workers.
The simulation results revealed that fabricating reinforcement bar off-site is more economical than fabricating
reinforcement bar on-site in a project environment in which storage and waiting costs are taken into account. The
contractor would have preferred off-site fabrication of reinforcement bar rather than on-site fabrication in a project
environment in which most of those restraining forces were reduced or eliminated as the cost of fabricating
reinforcement bar off site might have been much lower than fabricating reinforcement bar on site.
The supply chain concept deals with all operations and functions performed by all entities, which include suppliers,
manufacturers, distributors, retailers, etc. participated in the process of manufacturing a product that meets the
customer requirements. In order to achieve this goal, the coordination of the manufacturing, logistics and material
management operations through the supply chain process consisted of downstream material flow and upstream
information flow is required (Croom et. al, 2000). In line with this definition, reinforcement bar supply chains
include downstream material flow and upstream information flow through design, production, supply and assembly
(construction) processes (Kalian et. al, 2000).
However, within the scope of this study, the supply chain of reinforcement bar was considered as the activities
associated with the flow of materials supply to site and the on-site work flow. In this view, main participants in the
supply chain of reinforcement bar include contractors, rolling mills and reinforcement bar fabricators. Gul-Polat
and Ballard (2003) identified that five different types of reinforcement bar supply chain configurations prevail in the
Turkish construction industry and supply chain participants perform different roles in this chain related to needs of
the project, and the characteristics and the capacities of the participants. They also found that these different supply
chain configurations can be categorized in two main supply chain configurations, namely on- and off-site fabrication
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
7
practices of reinforcement bar. There are two main differences between the practices of on-site fabrication and offsite fabrication. First, in the on-site fabrication practice, the contractor procures straight reinforcement bar from the
rolling mill and takes responsibility for fabricating (i.e. cutting and bending in accordance with the project
requirements) and installing them, whereas the contractor acquires cut and bent reinforcement bar from the
fabricator and does the installation in the off-site fabrication practice. Second, while contractors typically operate
with large lot sizes in the on-site fabrication, contractors achieve just-in-time (JIT) deliveries in the off- site
fabrication practice.
It was therefore concluded that the usage of JIT approach in reinforcement bar in Turkey can help to reduce the cost
of construction since it minimises the cost of reinforcement works through minimisation of cost for reinforcement
bar. Although the study focuses only on the cost element, the nature of fabrication off – site will also reduce waiting
time and delay significantly and therefore, improvise the possibility of delay in the construction.
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This paper began with a comprehensive literature review on the Just In Time practices for reinforcement works in
Malaysian construction projects. Questionnaires were designed based on the issues as highlighted in the problem
statement to address the aim of the paper. Initially, a pilot study was conducted on 15 respondents, which is 10
percent of the 150 respondents in this paper. The Cronbach Alpha results generated via pilot study to test the
reliability of questionnaires were recorded between 0.820 and 0.946 which indicates that the questionnaire survey
were appropriate and reliable for the actual survey.
Subsequently, the data was analyzed via Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) Version 17 using Relative
Importance Index (RII). A focus group with five experts in construction industry was selected to validate the data.
All the experts agreed that the findings of this paper were acceptable.
4. FINDINGS
The findings as tabulated in Figure 1 show that the respondents find that all ten statements on JIT benefits to the
construction projects are equally important. This is evidenced from the statistics data where the mean of the
statements vary from 3.95 (the highest) to 3.58 (the lowest) indicating that each of the statements are important.
Although all respondents mutually agree with the statements, it could be noted that for the purpose of ranking, the
respondents opine that the most important benefit from the implementation of JIT is improvement of workers while
the less important benefit is increment of long term competitiveness. Furthermore, the value of standard deviation
for each of the statements is small showing that the respondents‘ opinions are consistent. The positive feedback
received shows that the respondents agree that implementation of JIT in construction as a whole is beneficial to the
industry.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
8
9
Increase long term competitiveness
Increase long
term
competitiveness,
3.58
Reduce working
space at site,
3.63
3.58
0.852
43
Improve
workers
efficiency, 3.95
Reduce
construction
cost, 3.93
Reduce labour
requirement at
site, 3.74
Increase profit
margin, 3.88
56
Improve product
Reduce lead
quality, 3.74 question number 13, the respondents‟
Through
opinions were sought on the time, 3.86
main problems for Increase
implementationReduce
of JIT in a construction site ranging from “not workers
inventory, 3.79
motivation, 3.77
important” to “most
important” on ae st of t n problems listed. Again, the mean from
Table 4.6 and Figure 4.13 : Ranking of the Benefits for the Implementation of
Figure
1. Ranking data
of the as
benefits
for thein
implementation
of JITFigure 4.14 shows that the
the statistical
tabulated
Table 4.7 and
JIT
respondents opine all ten problems as important as the problem in implementation of
On the other hand, the respondents‘ opinions were sought on the main problems for implementation of JIT in a
JIT in a construction
site. Although
the highest
amongonthe
listed
problems
construction
site ranging from
―not important‖
to ―mostscore
important‖
a set
of ten
problemsislisted. The mean from
„lack
of supplier‟s
a mean
of 3.88
the lowestopine
scoreall iseight
„employees
the
statistical
data as support‟
tabulated with
in Table
1 shows
that while
the respondents
problems as important as the
resistance
of the JIT” with
of 3.37, a site.
pointAlthough
to note the
is that
all ten
items
fallthe listed problems is
problem
in implementation
of the
JIT mean
in a construction
highest
score
among
‗lack
of supplier‘s
with a mean
of 3.88 important‟.
while the lowest
is ‗employees
within
the rangesupport‘
of „important‟
and „much
The score
standard
deviationresistance
for this of the JIT‖ with the
mean
of 3.37,
a point
to note small,
is that indicating
all eight items
the range
of ‗important‘
and ‗much important‘. The
question
is also
relatively
thatfall
thewithin
respondents
have
similar opinions
standard
deviation for
this questionofisJIT
alsoinrelatively
small,
that the respondents have similar opinions on
on the problems
in application
a construction
f indicating
site.
the problems in application of JIT in a construction site.
Rank Main Problem Applying JIT in
Mean Standard
Construction
N
Deviation
1
Lack o supplier‟s support
3.88
0.823
43
2
Inability to meet schedule
3.81
1.029
43
3
Poor information/data accuracy
3.72
0.908
43
3
Lack of top management commitment
3.72
0.934
43
4
Lack of training
3.67
0.837
43
4
Long time to get positive results
3.67
0.993
43
5
No assurance of cost benefits
3.65
1.044
43
6
Lack of internal expertise
3.53
0.935
43
7
Lack of support and cooperation from site
3.44
1.201
43
3.37
1.024
43
workers
8
Employees resistance for JIT
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
9
successfully implemented in reinforcement works. Although the questionnaire did not
request the respondents to state the reason for their answer for this question, the
Table 1. Ranking of main problems when applying JIT in a construction site
survey revealed that the 4 respondents who disagree on the successful implementation
of JIT
concept inwere
reinforcement
those from
other
and structural
The
respondents
then asked works
on theirareopinion
whether
JITthan
can civil
be successfully
implemented in reinforcement
and mechanical
background.
Since agreement
reinforcement
involved
only
civil and or 90.1percent answered
works.
This question
shows a strong
by theworks
respondents
with
39 respondents
structural andwhile
mechanical
background,
result isout
anticipated
the respondents
affirmatively
only 4 personnel
or this
9.9 percent
of the 43since
respondents
who have heard on the JIT concept
other than
two disciplines
has minimum
or no
on reinforcement
disagree
thatfrom
the these
JIT could
be successfully
implemented
in knowledge
reinforcement
works. Although the questionnaire did not
works thus
unable to to
linkstate
the implementation
JITanswer
with thefor
reinforcement
works.
request
the are
respondents
the reason for of
their
this question,
the survey revealed that the 4
respondents who disagree on the successful implementation of JIT concept in reinforcement works are those from
Question
Yesreinforcement
(%) No (%)
other
than 14
civil and structural and mechanical background. Since
works involved only civil and
Could JITand
concept
be successfully
implemented
39 90.1
4 9.9 other than from these two
structural
mechanical
background,
this resultforisthe
anticipated since
the respondents
reinforcement
works
disciplines
has minimum
or no knowledge on reinforcement works thus are unable to link the implementation of JIT
with the reinforcement works.
Could JIT concept be succesfully
implemented for the reinforcement
works?
No
1
Safety&Health
2
2
Architect
1
Contract&Procurement
Mechanical
0
Civil&Structural
0
Yes
3
4
12
18
Table 4.8 and Figure 4.15 : Implementation of JIT Concept for the
Figure 2. Implementation of JIT concept for the reinforcement works
Reinforcement Works
On the other hand, the respondents were asked to rank major factors that contribute to the good project management
practise according to five levels of importance, the least being ‗not important‘ and the most being ‗most important‘.
The result on this question is shown in the statistic data in Table 2, which shows that the respondents find that all ten
major factors listed are equally important. This is because the mean for each of the major factors listed shows a
result of ‗much important‘, with effective communication skills being the most important factor with a mean of 4.47
and the least important factor is compliance to planning and problem solving with a close mean of 4.03. The result
also shows that the standard deviation for each of the major factors listed are relatively small, indicating that the
respondents share similar opinions on this question.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
10
for each of the major factors listed is relatively small, indicating that the respondents
share similar opinions on this question.
Rank
Level of Contribution to the Good
Mean
Project Management Practise
Standard
N
Deviation
1
Effective communication skills
4.47
0.643
112
2
Effective teamwork
4.39
0.752
112
2
Good technical management
4.39
0.712
112
3
Good financial management
4.36
0.746
112
4
Effective supervision
4.33
0.799
112
5
Strong resource management
4.29
0.788
112
5
Good quality management
4.29
0.790
112
6
Compliance to schedule
4.16
0.876
112
7
High productivity
4.13
0.865
112
8
Compliance to planning and problem
4.03
0.822
112
solving
Table 2. Ranking of level of contribution of JIT to the good project management practice
6-CONCLUSION
This paper has successfully achieved its aim of appraise JIT approach applicable for the reinforcement works in
construction activity in improvising project management in Malaysian construction industry, with the hope to
improvise her project management practices. Implementation of JIT approach in reinforcement works is seen as a
tool to address construction‘s site issues of late delivery of material, storage space and labour requirement, which if
successfully implemented, could ultimately improve project management and benefit the company.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
11
7- ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Ministry of Education Malaysia, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM) and the Research Management Centre (RMC) of UTM for providing the financial support for this
paper to be published. This study is financed by the Grant for Research University (GUP) of UTM for research
funding under Cost Centre No. Q.K.130000.2540.03H87.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
12
REFERENCES:
1- Chai Khin Chung and Nooh Abu Bakar (2001). The Relevancy of Just In Time (JIT) Concept in
Government Purchasing. Jurnal Teknologi, 35(A) Dis. 2001: 1–8
2- Chase, R. B., Jacobs, F. R, and Aquilano, N. J. (2006). Operations Management for Competitive
Advantage. (11th ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
3- Croom, S.R. (2005). The Impact of E-Business on Supply Chain Management. International Journal of
Operations and Production Management. Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 55-73.
4- Ford, H. (1922). My Life and Work. USA: Samuel Crowther Publisher Doubleday, Page and Company.
5- Fullerton, R. R., McWatters, C.S., and Fawson, C. (2003). An Examination of the Relationships between
JIT and Financial Performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21, 383–404.
6- Gul-Polat and Glen Ballard (2005). Construction Supply Chain- Turkish Supply Chain Configuration for
Cut and Bent Rebar. Turkey: Istanbul Technical University (Maslak, Istanbul , Turkey).
7- Kalian, A., Thorpe, A. and Austin, S.A. (2000). Improving Rebar Information and Supply (IRIS‖). UK:
Building Research Establishment, Garston, Watford. ISBN 1860814115.
8- Lehner, U. C. (1981) The Nuts and Bolts of Japan's Factories. The Wall Street Journal.
9- Lim, L. Y. and Low, S. P. (1992). Just-In-Time Productivity for Construction. Singapore: SNP Publishers.
10- Low Sui Pheng and Choong Joo Chuan (2001). A study of the Readiness of Precasters for Just In Time
Construction. 2001 pp131-141
11- Monden, Y. (1981). What Makes the Toyota Production System Really Tick?. Industrial Engineering,13
(1), 38-46.
12- O'Grady, P. J. (1988). Putting the Just-In-Time Philosophy into Practice: A Strategy for Production
Managers. London: Kogan Page
13- Ohno, T. (1987). Toyota Production System. Productivity Press.
14- Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Cambridge, Mass:
Productivity Press.
15- Rawabbdeh, I. A. (2005). A Model for the Assessment of Waste in Job Shop Environments. International
Journal of Operations and Production Management, 25 (8), 800-822.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
13
16- Ruiz-Torres, A., and Mahmoodi, F. (2006). A Supplier Allocation Model Considering Delivery Failure,
Maintenance and Supplier Cycle Costs. International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 103, 2006,
755-766.
17- Sambasivan, M. (2006). Causes and Effects of Delays in Malaysian Construction Industries UPM:
Graduate School of Management.
18- Schonberger, R.J. (1982). Japanese Manufacturing Technique: Nine Hidden Lessons in Simplicity. New
York: The Free Press, New York.
19- Spencer, M. S. (1995). Production Planning in a MRP/JIT Repetitive Manufacturing Environment.
Production Planning and Control, 6 (2), 176.
20- Stevenson, W. J. (2005) Operations Management (8th ed.) Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
21- Van der Rhee, B., Verma., R. and Plaschka, G. (2009). Understanding Trade-Offs in the Supplier Selection
Process: The Role of Flexibility, Delivery, and Value-Added Services/Support. International Journal of
Production Economics 120(1): pp. 30-41.
22- Vollmann, T. E. Berry, W. L, Whybark, D. C. and Jocobs, F. R. (2005). Manufacturing Planning and
Control Systems for Supply Chain Management (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
23- Wilson,
J.
(2013).
Real
Examples
of
Successful
JIT.
Retrieved
on
June
15,
2014
http://www.brighthubpm.com/methods-strategies/71540-real-life-examples-of- successful-jit-systems/
24- Zipkin, P. H. (2000). Foundations of INVENTORY MANAGEMENT. New York: Irwin/ McGraw-Hill.
IRC-2014 DUBAI-UAE
14