Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Lean construction through craftspeople engagement: an evaluation study
(USC Thesis Other)
Lean construction through craftspeople engagement: an evaluation study
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Lean Construction Through Craftspeople Engagement: An Evaluation Study
by
Anthony Muñoz
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2021
© Copyright by Anthony Muñoz 2021
All Rights Reserved
The Committee for Anthony Muñoz certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Susan Foulk
Jennifer Phillips
Adrian Donato, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021
iv
Abstract
This study sought to explore the knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational root causes
of the underutilization of lean construction practices at BGT Construction. Clark and Estes’s
(2008) gap analysis provided the conceptual and methodological framework for this study. Using
a mixed methodology, the relationships between factual, procedural, and metacognitive based
knowledge, goal orientation, cultural model, and cultural settings were investigated as it applies
to the degree of implementation of lean construction practices amongst BGT Craftspeople.
Results from surveys, interviews, and document analysis validated or partially validated six
assumed influences on the problem of practice in these areas. Data from this study revealed that
there is a strong motivation amongst BGT Craftspeople to learn about and apply lean
construction practices. However, this motivation is hampered by a lack of factual and procedural
knowledge that is perpetuated by a lack of organizational support. The implications of these
findings denote the risk of inconsistent operations and inefficient delivery methods due to a lack
of critical knowledge, skills, and organizational resources. The study concludes with
recommendations for context-specific solutions grounded in literature and the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), as well as an integrated implementation
and evaluation plan, strengths and weaknesses of the study, limitations and delimitations, and
recommendations for future study.
v
Dedication
To my sons, Julian and Jaden, you are my reason. If I am nothing more than your Father, I am
everything I could aspire to be.
To my mother and father, for nurturing me, challenging me, and believing in me.
To my sisters and brother, for teaching me lessons and values beyond any degree.
I am Me because of You.
vi
Acknowledgements
I would like to gratefully acknowledge the support and guidance from my committee
members, Dr. Susanne Foulk and Dr. Jennifer Phillips, and my encouraging chair, Dr. Adrian
Donato. I am thankful for the time, attention, and care that they provided to me and my work
throughout this process.
vii
Table of Contents
Abstract...........................................................................................................................................iv
Dedication........................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................vi
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................x
List of Figures.................................................................................................................................xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study...............................................................................................1
Organizational Context and Mission ...................................................................................2
Organizational Goal.............................................................................................................2
Related Literature ................................................................................................................2
Importance of the Evaluation...............................................................................................3
Description of Stakeholder Groups .....................................................................................3
Stakeholders Groups’ Performance Goals...........................................................................5
Stakeholder Group for the Study .........................................................................................6
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..................................................................................6
Methodological Framework ................................................................................................7
Definition of Terms .............................................................................................................7
Organization of the Project..................................................................................................9
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature.........................................................................................10
Influence on the Problem of Practice.................................................................................10
Role of Stakeholder Group of Focus .................................................................................20
The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Framework .....................................................21
Conceptual Framework......................................................................................................35
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................37
Chapter Three: Methodology.........................................................................................................38
viii
Research Design ................................................................................................................38
Participating Stakeholders .................................................................................................39
Data Collection and Instrumentation.................................................................................39
Data Analysis.....................................................................................................................43
Validity and Reliability .....................................................................................................44
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................45
Ethics .................................................................................................................................46
Chapter Four: Results and Findings ..............................................................................................47
Participating Stakeholders .................................................................................................47
Data Validity......................................................................................................................49
Results and Findings for Knowledge Influences...............................................................52
Results and Findings for Motivation Influences................................................................60
Results and Findings for Organizational Influences..........................................................64
Summary............................................................................................................................70
Chapter Five: Solutions, Implementation, and Evaluation............................................................73
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................73
Organizational Goal...........................................................................................................74
Description of Stakeholder Groups ...................................................................................74
Stakeholder Group for the Study .......................................................................................75
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................75
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences............................................76
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan................................................................84
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach......................................................................99
Limitations and Delimitations .........................................................................................100
Future Research ...............................................................................................................101
ix
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................102
References....................................................................................................................................104
Appendix A: Survey Items ..........................................................................................................117
Appendix B: Interview Protocol..................................................................................................119
Appendix C: Existing Data..........................................................................................................121
Appendix D: Sample Post-Training Survey Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1 and 2 ........122
Appendix E: Sample Delayed Blended Evaluation Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1,
2, 3, and 4 ....................................................................................................................................123
x
List of Tables
Table 1: Stakeholder Groups’ Performance Goals 5
Table 2: Definitions of Lean Construction 11
Table 3: Summary of Barriers to Implementing Lean Construction 17
Table 4: Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Knowledge Gap
Analysis
26
Table 5: Motivation Influences and Assessment for Motivation Gap Analysis 30
Table 6: Organizational Influences and Assessment for Organizational Gap
Analysis
34
Table 7: Distribution of Study Participants by Role and Level of Experience 48
Table 8: Organization and Stakeholder Goals Evaluated in This Study 51
Table 9: Summary of Validated, Partially Validated, and Not Validated
Influences
71
Table 10: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 77
Table 11: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 80
Table 12: Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations 82
Table 13: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 86
Table 14: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing and Evaluation 88
Table 15: Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 89
Table 16: Eight-Part Training Module 92
Table 17: Components of Learning for the Program 94
Table 18: Components to Measure Reactions the Program 95
Table A1: Survey Items by Construct 118
Table B1: Interview Questions 120
xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Lean Project Delivery System 15
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework 36
Figure 3: Response to Item: “Identify the Lean Construction Practices From
This List Below.”
53
Figure 4: Response to Item: “Leadership Provides Me the Training Needed
to Support Implementing Lean Construction Practices.”
55
Figure 5: Response to Item: “I Actively Plan Out the Incorporation of Lean
Construction Practices on My Projects.”
58
Figure 6: Response to Item: “I Assess How Successful I Am in Applying
Lean Construction Practices on My Projects.”
59
Figure 7: Response to Item: “I am Confident That I Can Master Lean
Construction Practices.”
61
Figure 8: Response to Item: “Though at Times Challenging to Learn, Lean
Construction Makes My Job Easier.”
63
Figure 9: Response to Item: “I Feel Like My Input Is Considered When
Making Project Decisions.”
66
Figure 10: Response to Item: “Leadership Provides Me the Training Needed
to Support Implementing Lean Construction Practices.”
68
Figure 11: Response to Item: “I Understand How My Project and Progress
Are Being Evaluated for Success.”
69
Figure 12: Proposed Dashboard for Lean Learning Module Participation and
Completion Rates
97
Figure 13: Proposed Dashboard for Lean Construction Practices
Implementation Rates
98
1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Over a period of the last 60 years, construction productivity has declined 19% (Changali
et al., 2015). Traditional construction delivery methods have failed to address the downward
trend in productivity or mitigate the increased costs associated with this trend. These projects
have been found to be completed behind schedule 61% of the time and over 57% of resources
employed are considered non-productive (Changali et al., 2015). Consequently, these projects
are over budget 49% of the time (Pemberton, 2018). Over this same period, productivity in the
manufacturing industry has increased 153% using lean principles (Changali et al., 2015). Lean
principles are operationalized as: define value from the customer’s view; identify value stream;
specify value-creating flow; achieve customer pull at the right time; and pursue perfection for
continuous improvement (Womack & Jones, 2006). These same principles have proven to be of
equal benefit in their application in the construction process. Lean construction is a
predetermined objective to produce the greatest value for a customer at the project level, from
design to delivery, through the application of consistent production and process control to
improve efficiencies (Howell, 1999). Projects with high lean intensity are three times more likely
to be completed ahead of schedule and two times more likely to be completed under budget
(Pemberton, 2017). Despite these proven benefits, industry survey results have found that fewer
than 25% of respondents know of lean construction and fewer than 6% utilize lean construction
practices; this represents a 94% performance gap (Wandahl, 2014).
Ultimately, without intervention, the historical decline in productivity of traditional
construction will continue to contribute to inflating construction durations and costs, which in
effect inflates the global cost of living. This problem is important to address considering that the
construction industry represents a $10T economy (Global Construction Outlook, 2020). A 1%
2
improvement through construction efficiencies would result in a savings of approximately $100B
annually (World Economic Forum, 2016). However, and as history would suggest is more likely,
a continued decline in productivity would result in an equal amount of wasted money each year.
Organizational Context and Mission
BGT Construction is an Engineering News-Record Top 10 technical contractor
specializing in delivering complex building projects for sophisticated and collaborative owners
using lean methods. BGT services various clients and their specific needs across 31 locations: 28
domestic and three international offices. Further, BGT has adopted a decentralized leadership
model to serve the local markets and specific client subset of these markets most effectively.
Recent process audits have highlighted inconsistent operations and delivery methods
resulting from BGT Construction’s decentralized organizational structure, leading to variable
quality of service. Clark and Estes (2008) have identified that these inconsistencies suggest a
lack of adequate work processes and effective measures that standardize operations within an
organization.
Organizational Goal
BGT has a performance goal that 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and
foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level by the end of the year, 2021.
Related Literature
Lean construction does not have an agreed definition; it has several (O’Neill, 2016). The
lack of a consistent definition is an obstacle to contractor adoption and limits the application and
effectiveness in applying lean construction principles and concepts (Gao & Low, 2013; Leong et
al., 2015; Stevens, 2014). The lack of a clear definition has been a barrier to the implementation
of lean construction since its inception (Pettersen, 2009). Wandahl (2014) identified that
3
inadequate working knowledge of lean construction has critically contributed to the 94%
performance gap in the underutilization of lean practices in design and construction. This
underutilization combined with an inconsistent application of lean construction concepts has
contributed to a lack of confidence in and demand for these delivery methods and skillsets from
both owners and contractors alike (Ahiakwo et al., 2013; Alves et al., 2016; CMAA, 2012; LCI,
2017). This perpetual relationship, including its cause and effects, is observed and discussed
further in Chapter Two: Literature Review.
Importance of the Evaluation
It is essential to evaluate the organization’s performance in relation to the performance
goal that 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and foremen) utilize lean concepts at the
project level by the end of 2021. Suppose the organization is not making progress towards this
goal. In that case, it may indicate that lean practices are not effectively being disseminated from
management level personnel to the field leadership, potentially contributing to longer schedule
durations and higher project costs.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
For this evaluation, four stakeholders have been identified. These include the following:
BGT Construction (Corporate), BGT Self-perform Workgroup, the Lean Leadership Team, and
the BGT Craftspeople.
BGT Construction (Corporate)
This stakeholder group may also be referred to as top management. This group is
responsible for directing the strategy and overall development of the organization. Their
contribution to the objective is to allocate and provide support resources for the stated initiatives.
BGT Self-Perform Workgroup
4
This stakeholder represents an operating group that is responsible for all construction
services, as opposed to management services, that BGT offers its clients. This BGT work group
represents as much as 50% of the company’s annual gross margin and is a critical differentiator
from competition who only offers management services. As it pertains to the objective, this
group is responsible for organizing and providing the craft with the resources needed to
productively provide services.
Lean Leadership Team
The BGT Lean Leadership Team includes a network of individuals who have
successfully satisfied BGT Construction’s Lean Leadership Training Program requirements. This
program blends online training sessions with in-person mentoring/coaching sessions to teach and
advocate for the fundamental ideas of lean construction, i.e., respect for people, continuous
improvement, value stream thinking, flow, problem-solving, and productivity management. As it
pertains to the objective, this group advocates for promoting lean practices beyond the
coursework and into the workforce.
BGT Craftspeople
BGT Craftspeople comprise Self-Perform Workgroup Superintendents, General
Foreman, and Foreman. As previously noted, as much as 50% of the organization’s gross margin
comes from self-perform services by BGT Craftspeople. As such, the capability and productivity
of this workforce critically define the company’s business outcomes. As it pertains to lean
construction, this stakeholder group is most directly responsible for implementing these practices
in everyday functions and actualizing the potential benefits.
5
Stakeholders Groups’ Performance Goals
Table 1 identifies each of the stakeholders’ goals and how they support the overall
organizational mission.
Table 1
Stakeholders Groups’ Performance Goals
Organizational mission
BGT Construction’s mission is to be one of the most admired companies by the year 2030;
whose people practices will be as inclusive, progressive, and influential as Hewlett Packard’s
were over the last 50 years.
Organizational performance goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
BGT Construction BGT Self-Perform
Workgroup
BGT Lean Leadership BGT Craftspeople
By December 2020,
establish a national
craft engagement
program influenced
by employee
satisfaction survey
(ESS) results.
By June 2021,
establish a national
craft training program
that is focused on
both soft & hard
skills.
By October 2021,
develop a lean course
focusing on
craftspeople
application.
BGT has a
performance goal that
100% of its field
leadership
(superintendents and
foremen) utilize lean
concepts at the project
level by the end of
2021.
6
Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the contribution of each of the defined stakeholder groups is critical to the success
in completing BGT Construction’s organizational goal, BGT Craftspeople is the stakeholder
group of focus for this study. The BGT Craftspeople goal, supported by all the other defined
stakeholder groups, is that 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and foremen) will utilize
lean concepts at the project level by end of 2021. Failure to accomplish this goal may contribute
to a continued variation in work output and negative impacts on project performance, including
schedule and cost of work.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which BGT is achieving its goal of
having 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and foremen) utilize lean concepts at the
project level by end of 2021. The analysis focused on knowledge, motivation and organizational
elements related to achieving the organizational goals. While a complete evaluation project
would include all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholders to be focused on in this
analysis are BGT Craftspeople. As such, the questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. What is the BGT Craftspeople’s knowledge and motivation related to utilizing lean
concepts at the project level?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and BGT Craftspeople’s
knowledge and motivation?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organization?
7
Methodological Framework
This project employed a mixed-method data collection and analysis to identify and better
understand the knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational influences on the problem.
BGT Craftspeople’s current aptitude and performance in correlation with the organizational goal
was assessed using data collected through surveys, interviews, and document analysis. This
mixed-methods study aims to gather rich data on the relationship between mastery, self-efficacy,
and the other presumed knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational influences on the
craftspeople’ s viewpoint of the problem. Research-based solutions are recommended and
comprehensively evaluated. The methodology framework is discussed in greater depth in
Chapter Three.
Definition of Terms
5 Why Analysis refers to a problem-solving technique used to identify the root cause of a
condition by asking why successively (at least 5 times) whenever a problem exists to get
beyond the apparent symptoms. As each answer to the why question is documented, an
additional inquiry is made concerning that response (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
Contractor refers to the person or collective that provide materials or skilled craftspeople.
Just-in-time refers to a system for delivering the right amount of product at the time it is
needed for production (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
Last Planner® System refers to the collaborative, commitment-based planning system
that integrates should-can-will-did planning based upon reliable promises and learning
based upon analysis of percent complete (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
Lean refers to a culture of respect and continuous improvement aimed at creating value
for the customer by identifying and eliminating waste (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
8
Howell (1999) noted that lean construction is defined by its application of the production
management principles attributed to lean production systems. This definition will be
discussed in greater depth in Chapter Two.
Lean Project Delivery System refers to an organized implementation of lean principles
and concepts combined to create flow (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
Owner refers to the person or authority assuming the financing and contracting of design
and construction services required for a project. Also referred to as the customer (LCI
Glossary, n.d.).
Pull is a method of advancing work when the next in line customer is ready to use it (LCI
Glossary, n.d.).
A self-perform general contractor is a term used to describe a contracting company that
uses its own team to take care of key construction activities (such as masonry or
framing), rather than hiring third-party contractors to complete the on-site work
(Campbell-construction.com, 2018).
Value refers to the tasks or activities that the organization performs that the customer is
willing to pay for. It is a step required to make the product or service function properly
when used or experiences by the customer (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
Value stream refers to the sequence of activities required to deliver a product or service
to a customer (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
Visual management suggests placing tools, parts, production activities, plans, schedules,
measures, and performance indicators in plain view, assuring that the status of the system
can be understood immediately by stakeholders and actions taken locally in support of
system objectives (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
9
Waste, as defined from the customer's perspective, refers to anything that does not add
value to the final product or service (LCI Glossary, n.d.).
Organization of the Project
Five chapters organize this study. Chapter One provides the reader with the key concepts
and terminology commonly found in a discussion about the dissemination of lean construction.
The organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders and the framework for the project are also
introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature surrounding the scope of the
study. An overview of lean construction including definitions, history, principles, concepts, and
critical barriers are addressed. Chapter Three details the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational elements examined and methodology when it comes to the choice of participants,
data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and analyzed.
Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and literature, for closing the perceived gaps and
recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.
10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Chapter Two reviews the literature on lean concept implementation and identifiable gaps
between management and field-level personnel to inform possible influences on the 94%
performance gap in the use of lean construction practices by BGT Craftspeople. This discussion
includes a review of the research related to lean construction and the concept of self-efficacy and
leadership. This chapter concludes with a review of the methodological gap analysis framework
which explores the possible knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational root causes for
the noted performance gap and underutilization of lean construction practices by BGT
Craftspeople according to the Clark and Estes (2008) framework.
Influence on the Problem of Practice
The lack of a working definition has constrained the application and effectiveness of lean
construction principles and concepts throughout the industry (Gao & Low, 2013; Leong et al.,
2015; Stevens, 2014). Wandahl (2014) identified that inadequate working knowledge of lean
construction has critically contributed to the 94% performance gap in the underutilization of lean
practices in the design and construction. Furthermore, it has resulted in the inconsistent
application of concepts, undermining confidence in and demand for lean construction as a
delivery method (Ahiakwo et al., 2013; Alves et al., 2016; CMAA, 2012; LCI, 2017). This
apparent relationship is observed and discussed further in this chapter. This includes defining
lean construction; examining the history of lean, from its roots in production and its transposition
in construction; identifying lean construction principles, concepts, and tools; exploring the
benefits of lean construction; and identifying barriers to implementation.
11
Defining Lean Construction
Marhani et al. (2013) have presented several lean construction definitions as identified
through literature reviews; refer to Table 2. These variations indicate the varying perceptions and
understanding of lean construction, rendering the effective use of lean practices in construction
difficult for an industry that literally and figuratively relies on a definitive blueprint to build from
(Marhani et al., 2013; Pettersen, 2009).
Table 2
Definitions of Lean Construction
Lean construction definition Source
A new production philosophy of productivity and quality, used to enhance
the rapid diffusion of the new principles.
Koskela (1992)
Lean construction is much like traditional construction with the added goal
of better meeting customer needs while reducing waste.
Howell (1999)
Lean construction is about optimizing resources. This allows companies to
reduce costs, eliminate waste and deliver projects on time and on budget.
Lim (2008)
Lean construction is the practical application of lean manufacturing
principles to construction.
Lukowski (2010)
Lean construction is a production management-based approach to project
delivery. Lean construction originates from the objectives of a lean
production system to maximize value and minimize waste, using specific
techniques.
Lean Construction
Institute (2012)
Note. Adapted from “Sustainability Through Lean Construction Approach: A Literature
Review,” by M. Marhani, A. Jaapar, N. Bari, and M. Zawawi, 2013, Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 101, p. 90-99. Copyright 2013 by the Authors. Adapted with permission.
12
Lean: In Production
Howell (1999) has noted that the definition of lean construction continues to evolve but is
generally distinguished from traditional construction practices by applying management
principles founded in lean manufacturing and production. Womack et al. (1990) observed that
lean manufacturing originated in the Japanese automobile industry. Lean production principles
were developed in the late 1950s under the production centric leadership of Taiichi Ono (Cullen
et al., 2005).
Toyota drew from Henry Ford’s Model T production processes, dating back to the early
1900s, to mass-produce quality vehicles (Cullen et al., 2005). Ford Motor Company paired
standardized components with moving conveyance to create flow production through a moving
assembly line. While revolutionary, Ford’s assembly line produced a singular product very well;
however, this process constrained variability and the scaling of product lines (Cullen et al.,
2005).
Taiichi Ono set out to remove this constraint and design a production system that would
deliver a car to the unique requirements of a specific customer while eliminating inventory on
hand (Lim, 2008); this is now known as the Toyota Production System (TPS). TPS is centered on
waste elimination, resource optimization, and continuous improvement through stakeholder
engagement and decentralized decision-making. In employing this Deming’s Cycle, activities,
processes, systems, and organizations are optimized to maximize value.
Lean: In Construction
Lean manufacturing concepts began to transpose into the construction industry in the
early 1990s through several research studies (Ballard & Howell, 1994; Koskela, 1992).
13
The term lean construction was first introduced by the International Group for Lean
Construction (IGLC) when it was founded in 1993 (Mossman, 2018). IGLC is a network of
researchers in design and construction whose goal is to improve processes by applying new
principles and processes specific to design and construction but derived from the proven
concepts of lean manufacturing (IGLC, n.d.). Drawing from these concepts, Howell (1999)
presented that lean construction is a predetermined objective to produce the greatest value for a
customer at the project level, from design to delivery, through the application of consistent
production and process control. Gregory Howell and Glenn Ballard founded the Lean
Construction Institute (LCI) in 1997 with the objective to transfer research concepts and theory
into practical application (Howell, 1999).
Lean Construction Principles
Koskela (1992) introduced 11 universal principles of lean construction. These include
reduce non-value adding activities; increase value as defined by customer requirements; reduce
variability; reduce cycle time; minimize the number of steps, parts, and linkages; increase output
flexibility; increase process transparency; focus control on the complete process; build
continuous improvement into the process; and balance productivity with quality. Womack and
Jones (2006) later consolidated these into five principles: define value from the customer’s view;
identify value stream; specify value-creating flow; achieve customer pull at the right time; and
pursue perfection through continuous improvement. Continuous improvement is the incremental
yet continuous effort to improve products, processes, and services (Imai, 1986).
Lean Construction Concepts and Tools
There are many concepts and tools that a could project team may use in its lean
execution. Concepts include just-in-time delivery, Total Management, the Deming Cycle,
14
Integrated Concurrent Engineering, and Value-Based Management (Alinaitwe, 2009; Harris &
McCaffer, 1997). Salem et al. (2005) summarized the most common tools to support these
concepts. These tools include: The Last Planner® System, increased visualization, daily hurdle
huddle meetings, first run studies, and 5 Why discussions. These concepts and tools are paired
and implemented in a Lean Project Delivery System.
Lean Project Delivery System
Lean construction projects can be identified by their use the Lean Project Delivery
System (LPDS). Ballard (2000) proposed LPDS as both a philosophy and project-based
production system. LPDS utilizes work structuring in both qualifying and quantifying processes
and systems. This planning mechanism identifies and creates flow amongst the various activities
by specifying how and when work is to be done within the confines of the project schedule,
thereby optimizing productivity (Ballard, 1999). In a LPDS, a project is viewed and managed as
a value-generating process in which pull techniques are used to manage handoffs between
stakeholders.
Ballard and Howell (2003) proposed that production schedules are products of work
structuring that specify goals and the handoffs required to achieve those goals. LPDS facilitates
this process by organizing a project into five distinct phases. Ballard and Howell (2003)
established the first phase as Project Definition. In this phase, stakeholders identify what is
wanted, the means to provide this, and any constraints that may hinder project goal(s). This
information is used in the second phase, Lean Design, as stakeholders develop the process and
project design with a focus on maximizing value and minimizing waste. This resource
optimization is delivered through the third phase of LPDS: Lean Supply. This phase requires
planning and coordination to minimize the inventory, reduce lead time, and optimize the
15
information and material handoffs. The fourth phase, Lean Assembly, includes the planned
installation of delivered materials. In this phase, construction activities are performed at the last
responsible moment to avoid waste. LPDS ends in the fifth phase with the turnover and Lean
Use of the facility (Ballard & Howell, 2003).
Figure 1 depicts these phases and steps characteristic of LPDS. Each triangle represents a
project phase. The overlap of these triangles identifies steps that are part of two phases; this
highlights the interconnectedness of the overall process and how decisions of one phase affect
the next.
Figure 1
Lean Project Delivery System
Note: Adapted from “The Last Planner System of Production (PHD Thesis),” by G. Ballard,
2000, University of Birmingham. In the public domain. Adapted with permission.
16
Validating Lean Construction
Lean construction methods have been validated to be a better approach to optimize value
than traditional construction delivery methods; however, the benefits and need for lean
construction are seemingly unrecognized. Lean construction offers many benefits when
implemented in construction projects (Jorgensen & Emmitt, 2008). The primary advantage of
lean practices includes construction cost reduction due to the use of correct materials and less
waste on the project site (Suresh et al., 2011). Projects with high lean intensity are three times
more likely to be completed ahead of schedule and two times more likely to be completed under
budget (Pemberton, 2018). Despite these empirical findings, 55% of individuals with no
awareness of lean construction practices have identified that the industry is highly efficient in its
current state (Pemberton, 2018). Conversely, 86% of practitioners at least familiar with lean
construction practices have identified that the design and construction industry is highly
inefficient (Pemberton, 2018). In the face of historically decreasing productivity while using
traditional delivery models, this difference validates creating a greater awareness of lean
construction practices throughout the industry.
Barriers to Implementing Lean Construction
A review of current literature identified technical, attitudinal, organizational, and cultural
barriers to the implementation of lean construction (Alinaitwe, 2009; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014).
Alinaitwe (2009) summarized 34 commonly identified barriers to implementing lean
construction. These barriers are presented in Table 3. Further classification as it pertains to this
study is addressed according to the following categories: knowledge, motivation, organizational
barriers, and external barriers.
17
Table 3
Summary of Barriers to Implementing Lean Construction
Barriers to lean construction; grouped by KMO and external influences
Knowledge and skills
Inadequate knowledge and skills Ambiguous nature of inputs and outputs
Lack of knowledge on how to implement Inability to measure performance/progress
Lack of understanding of customer needs Lack of prefabrication
Ill-defined focus
Lack of attention to resources procurement in
supply chain
Lack of agreed approach and methodology Poor infrastructure in delivery coordination
Inadequate planning Lack of client involvement
Lack of accurate pre-planning Poor communication
Inadequate resources
Motivation
Unmotivated people Misaligned reward systems
Individual needs and differences of team
Organization
Lack of organizational culture supporting
equality through teamwork
Lack of capability of a team to maintain
alignment with other teams
Lack of group culture and shared value Lack of management leadership
Inadequate teamwork Lack of continuous improvement
Diversity in organizational makeup Lack of management support
Organizational culture
External
Cyclic nature of the industry Discounts of prices of materials
Fragmented nature of the industry Uncertainty in the production process
Uncertainty in the supply chain High inflation rates
Note: Adapted from “Prioritizing Lean Construction Barriers in Uganda’s Construction Industry”
by H. Alinaitwe, 2009, Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 14(1), p. 15-30. CC
BY-SA. Adapted with permission.
The path to the organizational transformation of adopting lean practices is less routed
through the tools that it may need to learn, but rather the cultural barriers that may present.
Sarhan and Fox (2013) found that the primary barriers include the lack of lean awareness and
18
understanding, lack of top management support, and the resulting human attitudinal issues. The
greatest barrier to implementing lean construction is the lack of engagement and involvement of
field-level personnel (Bashir et al., 2015; Brady et al., 2009). This barrier is due in part to
inadequate training and ill-defined roles in the overall process. The resulting attitudinal issues, or
unwillingness to change behaviors and practices, were the most critical constraints.
These cultural barriers can be attributed to a lack of leadership and management support
in establishing value in implementing lean construction processes and an organization’s inability
to provide an enabling environment (Alinaitwe, 2009; Porwal et al., 2010). As a result, lean
construction principles are often partially or otherwise incorrectly implemented (Ahiakwo et al.,
2013; Alves et al., 2016; CMAA, 2012; LCI, 2017).
The Ecological Economy of Lean Education
Krauss (2013) suggested that demand is a critical factor in the motivation to supply
education. As it applies to the supply chain representing the design and construction industry,
owners do not value lean construction practices or the outcomes that they might provide; this is
as evidenced by the lack of owner use of these project delivery methods (LCI, 2017).
Consequently, the greater construction industry and higher education are not inclined to supply
or demand these skill sets from their members (Alves et al., 2016).
Demand-Side; Owners
Owners, or customers, have not yet recognized the value of lean construction. Owner
representation within LCI has never been greater than 11% (LCI, 2017). Their selected project
delivery methods further support this lack of Owner engagement and adoption of lean
construction practices. The Construction Management Association of America (2012) conducted
a research-based study, finding that fewer than 16% of projects were delivered utilizing lean
19
delivery methods and less than 1% using the Integrated Project Delivery, which is considered the
ideal lean contracting method.
Supply-Side; Industry
The lack of owner demand for projects to be delivered using lean construction practices
has resulted in a lack of urgency or willingness for the design and construction industry to supply
education or the qualified personnel to support this initiative. Representing over 64% of the lean
construction community, the overwhelming perception of Contractors and Trade Partners is that
lean construction is less of an actual improvement process and more of a marketing accessory
(Brandt, 2005; Konchar & Manshum, 2017). Alves et al. (2016) conducted an analysis of job
listings from a sampling of general contractors, who are also LCI Corporate Members, that
supported this perception. The analysis presented the following: less than 16% of organizations
included lean terminology in their job descriptions; less than 10% of job listings expected
candidates to have some lean aptitude, and less than 3% of the posted opportunities required
candidates to have lean qualifications.
Supply-Side; Higher Education
Higher education is not incentivized to introduce lean construction courses in their
curriculum. As such, there is a knowledge gap between higher education and industry,
contributing to the lack of consensus meaning and efforts to engage students in mastery learning
experiences (Alves et al., 2016; Alves et al., 2010). I was unable to identify any specific tally of
lean construction courses offered through universities. However, Nofera et al. (2015) have
observed that between 1993 and 2014, there were few if any Lean Construction Journal (LCJ)
papers that subject university-based lean construction teaching. This disparity results in the next
20
generation of design and construction professionals starting with little to no understanding of
lean construction practices.
Leadership and Lean Construction
Effective leadership is critical to increasing the employee capacity to use lean
construction practices (Carmeli et al., 2013). Leaders prepare organizations for change and
empower employees as they address challenges (Kotter, 2001). Only leadership can influence
behaviors by anchoring them in the very culture of an organization (Kotter, 1996). Cassino
(2013) identified the primary challenges to disseminating lean construction practices: the
perceived lack of support by leadership and resulting employee resistance. Implementing lean
practices is more successful when leaders create an engaging culture across the organization
(Sterling & Boxall, 2013). Trust, commitment, and an engaged and empowered workforce are
vital factors in a successful lean organization (Veech, 2017).
Role of Stakeholder Group of Focus
The stakeholders of focus for this study are BGT Craftspeople. Bandura (1986) discussed
that environmental factors influence self-efficacy development. While the contribution of each of
the defined stakeholder groups is critical to the success in completing BGT Construction’s
organizational goal, it is important to evaluate the BGT Craftspeople and where they are
currently regarding their performance goal. In the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis that
follows, the knowledge-based and motivational barriers to the increased use of lean construction
practices amongst Craftspeople will be studied alongside the broader organizational and cultural
barriers that may prevent it.
21
The Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analytic Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) presented a gap analysis framework for identifying and
understanding the causes of organizational performance problems. They identified three factors
for performance gaps: knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers. Knowledge gaps
include what a stakeholder group does not know or cannot do (Clark & Estes, 2008; Krathwohl,
2002). Motivations gaps present stakeholder choice, persistence, and effort (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Krathwohl, 2002). The theories of self-efficacy can help to understand why these motivation
gaps exist. The final potential source for performance gaps is organizational barriers. This
includes obstructive policies, lack of resources, or unsupportive cultures that contradict
organizational goals (Clark & Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). This section explores literature
around these three possible sources for the 94% performance gap in Craftspeople using lean
construction practices.
Knowledge and Skills
Krathwohl (2002) and Clark and Estes (2008) categorized four types of knowledge:
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Factual knowledge is the “what;” conceptual
knowledge is the “why;” procedural knowledge is the “how;” and meta cognitive knowledge is
the understanding of self (Krathwohl, 2002). Factual knowledge includes isolated information
and specific details (Clark and Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). Conceptual knowledge consists of
systems of information (Clark and Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). Procedural knowledge
includes methods and processes and an understanding of when they are applicable (Clark and
Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). Metacognitive knowledge refers to thinking processes and
understanding how to employ these processes effectively (Clark and Estes, 2008; Krathwohl,
2002). All these knowledge types have exterior influences, also referred to as environmental.
22
There is a direct relationship between knowledge and environment (Bandura, 2005; Daly,
2006). The social cognitive theory focuses on the triad interaction between behaviors, personal
factors, and the environment and their combined influence on individual cognition (Bandura,
2005). Bandura (2000) has noted that the social cognitive theory allows for examining this
reciprocal determinism, behavior capability, observational learning, reinforcements,
expectations, and self-efficacy of an individual in successfully learning and implementing new
behaviors and practices. As such, the social cognitive theory is appropriate to examine this
problem of practice. In the underutilization of lean construction practices by Craftspeople, the
social cognitive influences are evidenced by the interactions between Craftspeople's knowledge
and skills and their work environments, which ultimately influence their behavior.
Factual: Craftspeople Need to Be Able to Identify Lean Construction Concepts
Inadequate knowledge of lean construction is a primary barrier to effective
implementation (Alinaitwe, 2009; Oladiran, 2008; Omran & Abdulrahim, 2015; Rodewohl,
2014; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014). Factual knowledge is a type of declarative knowledge,
representative of the discrete things that people know and understand (Krathwohl, 2002). More
simply stated, factual knowledge includes the basic elements that must be known about a
discipline to solve problems in it.
Mossman (2018) observed that the term lean construction was coined during the
inaugural IGLC meeting held in 1993. Since that time, there have been many reinterpretations of
its definition; this has constrained the implementation of lean construction. Green (2011) noted
that lean construction rarely lives up to its promise due to definitional vagueness. This
definitional vagueness has made standard application and effectiveness of lean construction
difficult (Mossman, 2018).
23
Procedural: Craftspeople Need to Know How to Apply Lean Construction
A lack of knowledge on how to implement lean construction is a primary barrier of
effective implementation (Alinaitwe, 2009; Oladiran, 2008; Omran et al., 2015; Rodewohl, 2014;
Shang et al., 2014). Procedural knowledge is defined as knowing how to do something (Rueda,
2011). Procedural knowledge includes discipline-specific skills, algorithms, methods, and
techniques for solving problems and other applications of a discipline (Krathwohl, 2002). In
satisfying the factual need of providing an agreed-upon definition, an organization is better
suited to address the procedural needs in defining processes, thereby making it easier to evaluate
its application and effectiveness of lean construction practices (Gao & Low, 2013; Leong et al.,
2015; Stevens, 2014).
The lack of procedural knowledge has led to misconceptions and either incorrect or
partial implementation at the field level (Chesworth, 2015; Wandahl, 2014). Jorgensen and
Emmitt (2008) attributed the lack “know-how” to a lack of a clear definition of “lean
construction.” The evidence highlights that the lack of consensus on a definition of lean
construction confuses both theoretical and practical levels (Pettersen, 2009).
Koskela (2000) concluded that an operational definition is necessary to better enable
consistent success in the construction industry. There is a tendency in many organizations and
individuals to claim to be lean when they are only partially implementing lean construction
concepts and tools (Stevens, 2014; Wandahl, 2014). Chesworth (2015) underlined the
importance of a rooted understanding in implementing lean practices, identifying that a lack
thereof has contributed to an incorrect perception of standardization as a requirement, ill-
supported reasoning for implementation, and implementation without understanding. An
24
alignment on the definition would lead to standard methodologies and increased effectiveness of
lean construction practices (Gao & Low, 2013; Leong et al., 2015; Stevens, 2014).
Metacognitive: Craftspeople Need to Monitor Their Own Ability to Implement Lean
Construction
The inability of Craftspeople to monitor their own progress in implementing lean
construction is a primary barrier to the utilization of lean construction principles (Alinaitwe,
2009; Omran et al., 2015). Metacognitive knowledge is an important characteristic of strategic
behavior in solving problems (Bloom, 2001). Metacognitive knowledge includes an individual’s
awareness of strategies that might be used for different tasks, knowledge of the conditions under
which those strategies might be used and when they are effective, and self-knowledge (Flavell,
1979; Pintrich et al., 2000; Schneider & Pressley, 1997). In addition to knowing which strategies
to use and when an individual with metacognitive knowledge also is better able to ask for
assistance when they lack factual or procedural knowledge.
Metacognitive knowledge is fundamental to the success of lean construction. Ballé and
Powell (2018) have stated that “lean is a set of principles to create the conditions to think more
deeply and learn by constantly trying to improve things and seek a better way, small step by
small step” (para. 20). Through increasing metacognitive knowledge and the systematic
strategies of lean construction, an organization would be better prepared to support and
implement lean efforts. Wig and Reke (2019) have concluded that this starts with enabling
Craftspeople to better understand their own capacity and appreciate their own value as part of the
organization. Inuwa et al. (2019) have found a strong relationship between Craftspeople’s
awareness of their progress utilizing lean construction and project success.
25
The critical success factor for increasing metacognition and awareness of lean
construction is through experiential learning (Orr, 2005); however, it is also a limiting factor.
Howell (1999) has stated that practical knowledge of lean construction is a product of
experiential learning with others. Singular projects are the best platforms for providing these
experiences in the construction industry; however, there are significant limitations to a reliance
on singular projects as a driver (Arbulu & Zabelle, 2006; Neto & Alves, 2007). It has been found
that there is a failure for lessons learned to be shared and used from one project team to another,
creating greater emphasis on already established collaborative relationships in the construction
industry (Christensen & Christensen, 2010). Moreover, many contractors selectively and often
incorrectly applied lean principles in their application (Viana et al., 2010; Wandahl, 2014).
Collectively, these behaviors perpetually hamper the dissemination of practical knowledge of
lean construction, whether correct or not, by limiting experiences to a select group.
Table 4 provides information on the organizational mission, organizational and
stakeholder goals, and the knowledge influences discussed in this paper. The table showcases
sample assessments used to study stakeholder’s knowledge.
26
Table 4
Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Knowledge Gap Analysis
Organizational mission
BGT Construction’s mission is to be one of the most admired companies by the year 2030;
whose people practices will be as inclusive, progressive, and influential as Hewlett Packard’s
were over the last 50 years.
Organizational performance goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
Stakeholder goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
Knowledge
influence
Knowledge
type
Knowledge influence
assessment
Craftspeople need
to be able to
identify lean
construction
concepts.
Factual Survey items:
“Identify the lean construction practices from this list."
Interview items:
“Talk to me about what the different elements of lean
construction projects are.”
Craftspeople need
to know how to
apply lean
construction.
Procedural Interview items:
“Talk to me about the steps you might follow when
developing a schedule on a lean construction project."
“Tell me about a time when you ran into a challenge
implementing lean construction practices during a
project. What did you do to resolve the problem?”
Craftspeople need
to monitor their
own ability to
implement lean
construction
practices.
Metacognitive Survey items:
“I plan out the incorporation of lean construction
practices on my jobs.”
“I assess how successful I am in applying lean
construction practices on my jobs.”
Interview items:
“Explain to me your self-monitoring habits for lean
construction implementation.”
“Talk me through a time that you had to alter your
knowledge of lean construction principles or its steps to
fit your job demands.”
27
Motivation
An unmotivated base, including organizations and their people, is a primary barrier to
utilizing lean construction principles (Alinaitwe, 2009; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014; Sim and
Rogers, 2008). Clark and Estes (2008) consider motivational issues as a possible factor of
organizational problems. Motivation is defined as an internal state that initiates and maintains
goal-directed behavior (Mayer, 2011). Problems may present during any one of the three phases
of task achievement: active choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). Alves et
al. (2010) have argued that the motivational gap for Craftspeople utilizing lean construction
practices occurs in the active choice and persistence phases of task achievement. For this study,
self-efficacy goal orientation theories are explored according to the factors influencing
motivation.
Self-Efficacy Theory: Craftspeople Need Confidence That They Can Successfully Master
Lean Construction Practices
A person’s belief regarding their ability to regulate their performance is known as self-
efficacy (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy can disrupt motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). For
example, low self-efficacy can foster an attitude of accepting failure and undermines one’s
ability to learn and motivation (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy is influenced by multiple factors
including mastery experiences, modeling, social influences, and physiological states. Bandura
(1997) believed mastery experiences to be the most influential factor.
Bandura (1977) observed a link between confidence and experiential outcomes, noting
that a person’s confidence level is correlated with resulting success; this relationship is referred
to as a positive feedback loop. More specifically, when individuals share belief and align efforts,
they are more motivated towards their goals. Conversely, if there is a lack of efficacy, the group
28
will be less effective towards their goals and more likely to accept the status quo. Bandura
(1993) defined this cause and effect as reciprocal causality, or the collective impact reinforcing
behaviors and vice versa.
Donohoo et al. (2018) found that focusing on efficacy as a change point is a path towards
creating greater motivation for providing education, learning, and achievement. DiBenedetto and
Bembenutty (2013) found that participation increases where there is a positive feedback loop
through mastery experiences, resulting in improved performance and inviting additional mastery
experiences. By increasing shared and successful experiences, confidence in abilities and the
associated impact create a foundation of efficacy.
Goal Orientation Theory: Craftspeople Need to Directly Engage in the Implementation of
Lean Construction Practice With the Personal Goal to Master Skills and Knowledge
The Goal Orientation Theory is a social cognitive theory of achievement motivation that
focuses on why people engage in tasks (Bandura, 1993). Widmeyer and Ducharme (1997)
defined goals as guides for action. Latham and Locke (2006) further defined mastery goals as “a
level of performance proficiency that we wish to attain, usually within a specific time period” (p.
705). Mastery goals lead to focusing on learning or mastering a task (Yough & Anderman,
2009). Martin and Elliot (2016) found that mastery goals are most effective at maintaining
motivation throughout a task. Dweck (1986) identified a positive correlation between a growth
mindset (continuous improvement) and mastery goal orientation.
Lean construction practices promote continuous improvement and high performance
through collaboratively defined objectives. Schöttle et al. (2014) defined collaboration as:
an interorganizational relationship with a common vision to create a common project
organization with a commonly defined structure and a new and jointly developed project
29
culture, based on trust and transparency; with the objective to jointly maximize the value
for the customer by solving problems mutually through interactive processes, which are
planned together, and by sharing responsibilities, risk, and rewards among the key
participants. (para. 3)
Mattessich and Monsey (2001) stated that concrete, attainable objectives are the critical success
factor of collaboration. Durham et al. (1997) suggested that collaboratively set objectives are
more likely to lead to high performance. Collaboratively set objectives consider what teams
believe they can achieve, align individual and team objectives, foster the collective beliefs of
efficacy, and increase the belief that collaboration results in positive outcomes (Durham et al.,
1997).
Table 5 provides information on the organizational mission, organizational and
stakeholder goals, and the motivation influences of self-efficacy and goal orientation. The table
highlights examples of assessments that were used to study stakeholder’s motivation.
30
Table 5
Motivation Influences, Types, and Assessments for Motivation Gap Analysis
Organizational mission
BGT Construction’s mission is to be one of the most admired companies by the year 2030;
whose people practices will be as inclusive, progressive, and influential as Hewlett Packard’s
were over the last 50 years.
Organizational performance goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
Stakeholder goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
Motivation influence Motivation influence assessment
Self-efficacy-Craftspeople need
confidence that they can
successfully master lean
construction practices.
Survey items:
“I am confident that I can master lean construction
practices.”
Interview items:
“Do you believe you have enough skills to apply lean
construction practices? Why or Why not?”
“Can you talk to me about your confidence in being able
to implement lean construction practices? Please
explain further.”
Goal Orientation-Craftspeople
need to directly engage in
implementing lean construction
practices with the personal goal
to master skills and knowledge.
Survey items:
“Though difficult to learn, lean construction makes my
job easier.”
Interview items:
“Tell me about your personal goals, if any, concerning
implementing lean construction practices.”
31
Organizational Barriers
The final factor for performance problems is organizational barriers. This includes poor
work processes, limited material resources and dysfunctional interactions between departments
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizational performance gaps are shaped by organizational culture,
including model and setting (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001)
defined cultural models as the values that influence how experiences are collectively interpreted.
Cultural settings are the occasions when people come together to carry out joint activities that
accomplish something they value (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). In this section, cultural
models and settings with mastery orientation are explored as it relates to the performance gap in
the use of lean construction practices by Craftspeople.
Cultural Setting: Craftspeople Need an Organization That Promotes Stakeholder Equality
A lack of organizational culture supporting stakeholder equality through teamwork is a
primary barrier to utilizing lean construction concepts (Alinaitwe, 2009; Bashir et al., 2015). An
organization that supports the implementation of lean construction practices must enable a
culture of stakeholder equality. Specific enablers of this culture include community-based
leadership, encouraging employee initiative, positive and strong relationships between workers,
employee empowerment and developing employees as an integral part of the organization
(Alkhoraif & McLaughlin, 2016; Keyser et al., 2016). Orr (2005) has suggested that equality is a
product of redefining leadership where leaders are not necessarily top management. Leaders may
be representatives of specific work processes or simply trusted and respected leaders because
they inspire others to follow (Orr, 2005). These leaders are better suited to define a shared vision
and translate this vision into tangible measures that measure the effectiveness of progress (Orr,
2005).
32
Cultural Setting: Craftspeople Need Organizational Support
The lack of management support is a primary barrier to utilizing lean construction
concepts (Alinaitwe, 2009; Bashir et al., 2015; Omran & Abdulrahim, 2015; Shang & Sui Pheng,
2014). The organization needs to provide support for increased Craftspeople engagement. An
organization that supports the implementation of lean construction practices must embrace the
opportunity to develop the skills and competencies to advance these principles. Furthermore, it
will value providing an authentic opportunity to apply and measure this skill set. In this setting,
assessments will qualify and quantify progress towards meeting and advancing mastery goals
(Lau & Roeser, 2008; Yough & Anderman, 2006).
Alves et al. (2010) concluded that failure to provide people meaningful learning
opportunities is the primary barrier to implementing lean construction practices. Brandt (2005)
suggested that the perception of lean has mutated from an improvement process into a fashion
accessory for senior executives. The motivation to go lean is thought to be stuck at the top of the
organizational pyramid and does not reach the Craftspeople levels. Matsushita (1979) observed
western industry’s reliance on management to get the ideas out of the heads of bosses and into
the hands of labor instead of directly empowering the labor force. This central controlling
management style is in direct conflict with the decentralized decision-making promoted through
lean principles and is systemically constraining.
An organization’s failure to listen and promote an opportunity for its employees to speak
openly is critically detrimental to disseminating lean construction (Macomber and Howell, 2004;
Lencioni, 2012). Godin (2003) noted that those closest to the problem are not afforded an
opportunity to offer solutions to problems they may be most familiar with in a centrally
controlled organization. In this setting, a person may become discouraged from offering their
33
input or applying their skillset; instead, they are more likely to resign and wait for management
direction. Zuboff and Maxmin (2004) observed the traditional centralized structure of organizing
companies and noted that it is obsolete; moreover, both the organization and employees share
responsibility for transforming into decentralization. Macomber and Howell (2004) concluded
that this transformation begins with an organization listening and creating an environment for
others to actively engage.
Cultural Model: Craftspeople Need the Organization to Valuate Lean Construction Outputs
The lack of shared value is a primary barrier to utilization of lean construction concepts
(Alinaitwe, 2009; Omran & Abdulrahim, 2015; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014). The organization
needs to place a value on lean construction outputs. Principle to lean construction is the
philosophy of continuous improvement (Koskela,1992). To validate improvement, progress must
be measured. Traditionally, project controls entail monitoring and responding to quantitative
results (Aziz & Hafez, 2013; Cleary & Muñoz, 2018; LCI, 2017). In lean construction, project
controls can be redefined as making things happen with a measured and improved planning
process to assure reliability and predictable outcomes; this includes both quantitative and
qualitive factors (LCI, 2017; Muñoz et al., 2019). Traditional measures cannot easily assess the
value of lean construction; rather, valuation is grounded on both physical and qualitative aspects
of production progress (Candido & Neto, 2017; Horman & Kenley, 1996). Lean construction
aims to provide production stability through improved flow, achieve continuous improvement,
and show respect for people (Ballard et al., 1996; Korb, 2016; Sacks et al., 2017).
Table 6 provides information on the organizational mission, organizational and
stakeholder goals, and the organizational influences of stakeholder equality, Craftspeople
engagement, and valuating and measuring lean construction outputs. The table presents both
34
cultural models and settings and highlights samples of assessment used to study these
organizational culture components.
Table 6
Organizational Influences, Types, and Assessments for Organizational Gap Analysis
Organizational mission
BGT Construction’s mission is to be one of the most admired companies by the year 2030;
whose people practices will be as inclusive, progressive, and influential as Hewlett Packard’s
were over the last 50 years.
Organizational performance goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
Stakeholder goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
Organizational influence Organizational influence assessment
Cultural setting: Craftspeople need
the organization to support
stakeholder equality through
teamwork.
Survey items:
“I feel like my input is considered when making project
decisions.”
Interview items:
“What role have you played in determining the training
that you have received?”
Cultural setting: Craftspeople need
organizational support for
increased engagement in lean
construction practices.
Survey items:
“Leadership provides me the training needed to support
implementing lean construction practices.”
Interview items:
“In what ways does your Organization support you in the
goal of increasing lean construction practices?”
Cultural model: Craftspeople need
the organization to assess the
value created by their lean
construction outputs.
Survey items:
“I understand how my project and progress are being
evaluated for success.”
35
Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework represents the interactions between the concepts and theories
that inform the methodological and analysis choices in a research study (Maxwell, 2013). This
framework aims to highlight the relationships between the important concepts, variables, and
theories that frame the study (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). More critically, the
conceptual framework provides an opportunity to explore the connections between the
knowledge, motivation, or organizational influences and establish a working theory to frame a
research question (Maxwell, 2013).
Previously in this chapter, knowledge and motivation influence on the utilization of lean
construction practices by Craftspeople were explored. This discussion on knowledge and
motivation influences was followed by an exploration of the cultural models and settings active
within the organization. Figure 2 represents the interaction between knowledge-based and
motivational influences on the underutilization of lean construction practices by Craftspeople
within the organization. Addressing the stated performance gap will not be possible until the
organization promotes stakeholder equality in developing and delivering lean construction
practices and enacts cultural settings that increase Craftspeople engagement.
36
Figure 2
Conceptual Framework
Craftspeople Knowledge & Skills:
Factual. Craftspeople need to be able
to identify lean construction concepts.
Procedural. Craftspeople need to
know how to apply lean construction.
Metacognitive. Craftspeople need to
monitor their own ability to implement
lean construction practices.
Craftspeople Motivation:
Self-efficacy. Craftspeople need
confidence that they can successfully
master lean construction practices.
Goal-orientation. Craftspeople need to
directly engage in the implementation
of lean construction practices with the
personal goal to master skills and
knowledge.
BGT Construction
Cultural Setting: Equality.
Supports the
implementation of lean
construction practices by
enabling a culture of
stakeholder equity.
Cultural Setting:
Craftspeople Engagement.
Supports the
implementation of lean
construction practices by
enabling a culture of
stakeholder equality.
Cultural Model. Valuates
and monitors lean
construction outputs.
By the end of the year
2021, 100% of BGT
Construction field
leadership will utilize
lean concepts at the
project level.
37
Conclusion
Chapter Two explored the possible root causes of performance gaps in self-efficacy in
understanding and implementing lean construction practices by Craftspeople. While there are a
known correlation between self-efficacy and performance, knowledge-based, motivational, and
organizational influences on the Craftspeople and the performance gap was explored using Clark
and Estes’ (2008) gap analytic KMO methodology. A conceptual framework was then presented
to illustrate the interaction between knowledge-based and motivational influences on
Craftspeople's underutilization of lean construction practices. Chapter Three presents the study’s
methodological framework used to explore the connection between mastery goal orientation and
self-efficacy for Craftspeople in utilizing lean construction practices.
38
Chapter Three: Methodology
Despite empirical studies that provide construction productivity has steadily declined
over the last 60 years, 55% of individuals with no awareness of lean construction practices have
identified that the industry is highly efficient in its current state (Changali et al., 2015;
Pemberton, 2017). Conversely, 86% of practitioners who are at least familiar with lean
construction practices have identified that the design and construction industry is highly
inefficient. The literature suggested that this decline in construction productivity could be
mitigated or reversed with an increased awareness of lean construction practices, particularly
amongst Craftspeople. Therefore, a primary objective of this research was to understand why
lean construction practices education has not been more widely implemented by Craftspeople
within BGT Construction. This research examined the key knowledge, motivational, and
organizational factors that may influence BGT Craftspeople in successfully utilizing lean
construction practices on the project level.
This study focused on the following research questions:
1. What is the BGT Craftspeople knowledge and motivation related to utilizing lean
concepts at the project level?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and BGT Craftspeople knowledge
and motivation?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organization?
Research Design
This project employed mixed-method data collection and analysis to identify and better
understand the knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational influences on the problem.
39
Data was collected through surveys, interviews, and document analysis, then reviewed,
compared, and contrasted to triangulate an unbiased conclusion. Surveys, interviews, and
document analysis are accepted tools for this data collection (Creswell, 2018). Through iterative
comparison, information trends become clearer and a theory that explains the social problem can
be developed (DePoy, 2020; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The goal of this mixed-
methods study is to gather rich data on the relationship between mastery, self-efficacy, and the
other presumed knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational influences on the
Craftspeople’ s viewpoint of the problem.
An aim of this research was to identify the Craftspeople’ s views of the dynamic being
studied. This objective is in line with a constructivist worldview. Creswell (2018) defined
constructivism as an approach to qualitative research that aims to understand the world around us
through the collective interpretation of shared experiences and interactions. Also referred to as
social constructionism, Saunders (2019) concluded that the interpretation of these shared
meanings defines reality.
Participating Stakeholders
Participants of this study were purposively sampled from BGT Construction’s self-
perform workforce. This includes superintendents, foremen, and skilled craftspeople. Purposive
sampling is a non-probability sample selected based on the characteristics of a group and the
study’s objective (Crossman, 2020).
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Literature suggests a researcher should use multiple forms of data for research (Creswell,
2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Three data collection methods were used in this research study:
survey, interviews, and document analysis. Surveys were used to correlate experience with self-
40
assessed proficiency and to provide a representative perception of the stakeholder group to
provide context for the interviews, which focused on a more in-depth understanding of the KMO
influences regarding BGT Construction and the use of lean construction training tools. Surveys,
interviews, and document analysis are commonly used to triangulate observations (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
Surveys
Surveys provide an efficient means to directly solicit stakeholders’ perspective of an
issue (Fink, 2013). The target sample size was targeted at 50 participants; this represents
approximately 25% of the regional SPW workforce, including craftspeople. In addition to
demographic profiling of this sample, the survey data provided a nominal sense of aptitude and
opinions of KMO deficiencies.
The survey consisted of four questions; refer to Appendix A. The survey included
multiple-choice, rating scale, and demographic type questions. These questions were specifically
intended to qualify Research Questions 1, 2 and 3. These survey questions had been peer-
reviewed and grounded in the review presented in Chapter Two.
Interviews
I conducted a 30 to 45-minute interview with the interviewees. In observance of COVID
restrictions, all interviews were conducted by teleconference. Recording of the interview was left
to the discretion of the interviewee. In the event a recording was not permissible, hand notes
were taken for the purposes of transcription.
This research utilized a semi-structured interview protocol; refer to Appendix B. This
approach was taken to provide greater flexibility and substance in interviewee responses.
Moreover, this approach allowed for varying follow-up questions to probe further if needed.
41
The interview protocol consisted of open-ended questions that were derived from the
assumed KMO influences. Questions were developed to not only invite the interviewee to share
their understanding of KMO deficiencies but also to assess their aptitude and motivation. The
final draft of questions was developed considering peer review and feedback.
Interview Sampling Criteria
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) provided that qualitative studies should be purposively
selective to help the researcher learn the most. Creswell (2018) concluded that qualitative
research gains the greatest understanding from individuals with the most knowledge and insight
on the problem. Therefore, specific criteria were used to recruit for interviews.
Criterion 1
The first criterion was to target those in representative roles within BGT Craftspeople.
Roles include management/engineer, superintendent, foreman, and skilled craftspeople.
Criterion 2
The second criterion considered BGT Craftspeople experience. A minimum service
requirement was set at 5 years. Amongst candidates with 5 or more years of experience, time
working with BGT Construction was used to prioritize selection.
Criterion 3
The final criterion used was BGT Craftspeople professional relationships. There was no
direct authoritative relationship between any of the selected participants.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
I worked for BGT Construction as a Healthcare Core Market Project Leader. In this
position, I provide operational support for onsite project teams. Creswell (2018) identified that
research results could become compromised when a researcher works where the study is being
42
conducted. If said researcher holds an authoritative relationship with any of the participants, it
could influence responses due to relationship dynamics. In this study however, there was no
authoritative relationship with the participants. This suggests that the respondents would not feel
threatened if they decided not to share information.
The quantitative survey was sent to a convenience sample of the self-perform workforce
via Qualtrics. Those who responded were reviewed and categorized by the noted criterion for
observation of findings and consideration of selecting interview participants. One participant of
each role type and experience range was invited to participate in an interview. Creswell (2018)
provided that four to five interviews may be adequate to support case studies. There were no
Craftsmen responders as these individuals are not issued a company email address and were
unable to be reached by electronic correspondence. As such, a fourth interview was conducted
with a representative of SPW Leadership to provide a more holistic perspective.
Document Analysis
BGT Construction employs over 3,000 craftspeople nationally. In 2019, a Craft
Engagement Survey was conducted in large part to better understand the Craftspeople’s
perception of organizational culture, identify engagement drivers and opportunities, and create
programs to bridge differences in language and communication techniques. Demographic data
was collected from respondents (n = 2,506), including geographical location, gender, age-
grouping, and tenure. BGT Construction utilized a third-party administrator to conduct this
survey. The results from the Craft Engagement Survey questionnaire were utilized as existing
institutional data to serve as a baseline of BGT Construction’s cultural model in this study; refer
to Appendix C. Such a baseline was compared against select questions in the study survey
43
instrument to assist in the triangulation of data from all research measures as well as the analysis
of the progress on the organizational goals (Bowen, 2009).
Data Analysis
Quantitative Data Analysis
For every survey item, the frequencies were calculated for each of the four possible
Likert scale responses. Overall percent agreement and percent disagreement were used over
means for most analyses and comparisons. This decision was made because keeping the data in
categories of agreement and disagreement rather than calculating averages is more conceptually
aligned with the ordinal nature of the data (Alkin, 2011; Stafford, 2006). Data was analyzed first
for the whole sample, then disaggregated two ways for analysis by role and by experience. The
presentation of the data in Chapter Four provides results for the aggregate and highlights
meaningful disparities discovered through the disaggregation.
All survey items were considered valid representations of the thoughts of the population,
assuming an acceptable response rate. For items with a lower than 100% response rate, the
percent agreement and percent disagreement calculations factor in the adjusted number of
respondents. Survey items are clustered by theoretical construct and analyzed in conjunction
with interview data and document analysis to validate KMO influences on the problem of
practice or to discover assets in the competency-based curriculum. Document analysis of BGT
Construction’s cultural model baseline data was analyzed using the same methods and
descriptive statistics as the study survey.
Qualitative Data Analysis
Interview data was analyzed both throughout and after the interviewing process.
Reflective reviews of each transcript were conducted after each interview using Corbin and
44
Strauss’ (2008) techniques for questioning and constant theoretical comparisons. Interview
protocol was intentionally aligned with the conceptual framework, which facilitated the
correlation of interview responses to the theories of knowledge, motivation, or organization
investigated as influences.
Following the completion of all interviews, a priori coding process was applied to the
phrases identified in open coding. A priori codes were derived from the conceptual framework
and aligned to presumed KMO influences. An iterative process was utilized to review the data
for alignment to a priori codes and question the data for evidence of empirical codes that could
produce additional insights.
Once the axial codebook is constructed, the third phase of analysis involved identifying
patterns, codes, and themes that emerged in relation to the conceptual framework and survey
questions. One method for coalescing axial codes into patterns was the use of typicality,
identifying the percentage of interview subjects who aligned to axial codes. Document analysis
of BGT Construction’s cultural model baseline data also relied on typicality calculations from a
priori codes aligned to the conceptual framework and the presumed KMO influences.
Given the mixed methodology in this study, I ensured that the qualitative and quantitative
data sets interact to produce additional insights or deepen the evidence for assertions.
Validity and Reliability
Surveys provide an efficient means to solicit stakeholders’ perspectives of a problem; by
definition, these opinions cannot be wrong (Fink, 2013). The survey for this research project
sought to provide a representative opinion of the entire stakeholder group and correlate
respondent experience with self-assessed knowledge and motivation. This data’s validity and
reliability are a function of clarity of survey nature and ultimate response rate (Fink, 2013;
45
Salkind & Frey, 2020). A summary of the survey and an explanation of the research were
included in the electronic invite. The surveys were conducted online using Qualtrics which
assures consistently written instruction, minimizes errors, and keeps data secure and anonymous;
no IP addresses were collected (Pazzaglia et al., 2016; Salkind & Frey, 2020). Moreover, an
electronic delivery allows for flexibility in when the responder can reply. Electronic delivery
promotes completion when there are minimal distractions present for the respondent, ultimately
increasing reliability (Salkind & Frey, 2020). Lastly, as BGT Construction sanctioned the survey,
no additional incentive were used to promote completion as BGT Craftspeople were on duty and
compensated for completing the survey. As such, the expectation is that most, if not all,
stakeholders would participate.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
To maximize credibility and trustworthiness, this study triangulated findings by including
multiple methods and data sources. Patton (2015) explained that “triangulation, in whatever
form, increases credibility and quality by countering the concern (or accusation) that a study’s
findings are simply an artifact of a single method, a single source, or a single investigator’s
blinders” (p. 674). Moreover, interview findings were member-checked by respondents.
This is the single most important way of ruling out the possibility of mis-interpreting the
meaning of what participants say and do and the perspective they have on what is going
on, as well as being an important way of identifying your own biases and
misunderstanding of what you observed. (Maxwell, 2013, p. 126–127)
To document how interview data was collected and cataloged, I kept an audit trail of
accounts throughout the data collection process. The audit trail allows readers of the research to
46
observe the process of qualitative research and trust that the researcher does not formulate
unsupported conclusions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
This study stands to serve the interests of all participants including the organization. By
enabling and promoting lean construction practices, productivity is likely to increase (Aziz &
Hafez, 2013). Studies suggest a strong correlation between productivity and employee
motivation (Lazaroiu, 2015); however, this study did not explore to validate that conclusion.
Holding this conclusion to be correct, all parties stand to benefit from exploring and
understanding this social challenge.
Participants were invited to participate in this study voluntarily; no additional
compensation was offered. The invitation included a full disclosure of the study’s purpose such
that all participants would provide their consent by way of volunteering. All findings are
confidential. Published opinions are not attributed to specific individuals. Similarly, surveys are
not traceable to individuals through the published findings, nor through the collection of IP
addresses. Lastly, as there was no authoritative relationship between participants, no power
dynamic is believed to have occurred.
I identify that the above conclusion represents my own perspective. Responsible for both
the design of the questions and framing the overall approach, the study is rooted by my
epistemology and influenced by my positionality. However, through the measures defined
herein, results should be unbiased and the triangulation of data as presented and distributed as a
summation of observation, questionnaires, and Likert-type scales to stakeholders, should support
concluding theories.
47
Chapter Four: Results and Findings
A mixed methodology was utilized for this study, combining survey and interview data
with document analysis to answer the research questions. This chapter presents the results and
findings aligned to the study questions, beginning with a review of the organizational and
stakeholder goals and the degree to which the data indicated meaningful progress towards these
goals. Following the review of goals, the chapter is organized into knowledge-based,
motivational, and organizational assertions supported by quantitative results and qualitative
findings. The chapter concludes with a summary of the validated KMO influences on the
organization’s performance goal that 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and foremen)
utilize lean concepts at the project level that were used to generate recommendations and an
implementation and evaluation plan in Chapter Five.
The questions that guided data collection and which will frame this chapter were as
follows:
What is the BGT Craftspeople's knowledge and motivation related to utilizing lean
concepts at the project level?
What is the interaction between organizational culture and BGT Craftspeople knowledge
and motivation?
The third guiding question will be addressed in Chapter Five is, “What are the recommendations
for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organization?”
Participating Stakeholders
An electronic survey was sent to a convenience sample of 50 persons from the regional
self-perform workforce via Qualtrics. Of these 50, 41 persons (82% response rate) elected to
complete the study survey. Interviews were then conducted with four survey respondents to
48
better understand the KMO influences regarding BGT Construction and the use of lean
construction. Table 7 provides the demographic breakdowns of the survey respondents.
Table 7
Distribution of Study Participants by Role and Level of Experience
Foreman Superintendent Manager/Engineer
Experience
(yrs)
% Responses % Responses % Responses
Total
0-5 0% 0 0% 0 100% 5 5
5-10 0% 0 14% 1 86% 6 7
10-15 60% 3 0% 0 40% 2 5
15+ 14% 3 64% 14 23% 5 22
Total 15% 6 38% 15 46% 18 39
49
The survey respondents included six Foreman, 15 Superintendents, and 18
Manager/Engineers. Three individuals did identify role or experience. There were no responders
from the Craftspeople role as these individuals are not issued a company email address and were
unable to be reached by electronic correspondence. From the 42 survey respondents, interview
subjects were purposively selected, representing one respondent from each of the roles for which
data was available. Respondents were also selected from each category of Experience, which
provided for maximum variation. Participants also consented to an audio-recorded interview.
In the analysis that follows, interview subjects are referred to by their Role:
Superintendent, Foreman, Project Manager, and SPW Leader. Direct quotes from their interview
are used to support assertions.
Data Validity
This study utilized a mixed methodology to investigate the research questions and
explore the validity of the presumed KMO influences on the problem of practice. A survey was a
meaningful measure to gather information about the population’s experience, understanding, and
perception of lean construction practices. The validity of the study was dependent upon a
response rate and percentage of respondents who completed the full survey. The survey response
rate was 82% in this study. This was just short of the 85% threshold necessary to make the
sample responses automatically generalizable to the target population (Pazzaglia et al., 2016). On
the individual item level, the lowest response rate on any of the survey items was 80.49%. An
explanatory-sequential approach was then used both as a data gathering and data analysis
technique, as interview data were explored to better understand survey results. The decision to
interview a single respondent from each role was determined to provide insight into any
disparities amongst these roles that emerged in the survey results.
50
The survey data was grouped by influence construct of the conceptual framework and
was analyzed both in aggregate and disaggregated by Experience and by Role to investigate any
notable differences. Each of the proposed influences had gaps that were either validated, partially
validated or not at all validated based on the data analyzed. An influence was considered
“validated” when survey responses and interviews concurred that the gap in the area needed to
be addressed. An influence was considered “partially validated” when conflicting data was
presented; for example, quantitative data validates, but qualitative data does not. An influence
was considered “not validated” when the data showed no gap to address according to the
influence.
Decisions were made to qualify the significance of constructing arguments during the
data analysis process. When making supporting positions in the sections that follow, a 70%
agreement on survey items was the threshold for agreeing. The cut score was established at this
high mark as the organization stands to benefit from a higher confidence level considering the
peer influence and collaborative nature of lean construction practices and its dissemination more
greatly. Interview data used as evidence generally relied upon 50% alignment among interview
subjects, but code alignment above 75% was considered more conclusive.
Organizational and Stakeholder Goals
BGT Construction has a performance goal that 100% of its field leadership, including
superintendents and foremen, will utilize lean concepts at the project level by the end of the year,
2021. Failure to accomplish this goal may contribute to a continued variation in work output and
negative impacts on project performance, including schedule and work cost. This long-term
organizational goal was supported by a short-term goal of establishing a national craft training
51
program that is focused on developing both hard and soft skills by June 2021; this would lead to
introducing a lean course focusing on Craftspeople application by October 2021.
Table 8 highlights the Organizational and Stakeholders' goals for which progress was
evaluated in this study.
Table 8
Organizational and Stakeholder Goals Evaluated in This Study
Organizational performance goal
By the end of the year 2021, 100% of BGT Construction field leadership (superintendents and
Foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level.
BGT
Construction
BGT Self-Perform
Workgroup
BGT
Lean Leadership
BGT Craftspeople
By December 2020,
establish a national
craft engagement
program influenced
by employee
satisfaction survey
(ESS) results.
By June 2021,
establish a national
craft training program
that is focused on both
soft & hard skills.
By October 2021,
develop a lean course
focusing on
craftspeople
application.
BGT has a
performance goal that
100% of its field
leadership
(superintendents and
foremen) utilize lean
concepts at the project
level by the end of
2021.
52
Data from this study was utilized to assess BGT Construction’s progress toward its
organizational goal that 100% of BGT Craftspeople successfully utilizing lean concepts at the
project level. The findings and results from this study demonstrate room for improvement in both
the long-term goals and short-term goals.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Influences
Knowledge Influence 1: Craftspeople Need to Be Able to Identify Lean Construction
Practices
Finding: Validated. Craftspeople lack factual knowledge in this area. Factual knowledge
of lean construction is critical to effective implementation (Alinaitwe, 2009; Oladiran, 2008;
Omran & Abdulrahim, 2015; Rodewohl, 2014; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014). Factual knowledge is
a type of declarative knowledge, representative of the discrete things that people know and
understand (Krathwohl, 2002). As previously stated, factual knowledge includes the basic
elements that must be known within a discipline to solve problems in it. To gauge Craftspeople
factual knowledge of lean construction, survey respondents were provided a list of 15
construction practices/tools and asked to identify which were lean construction practices. All the
practices/tools provided are lean. However, only one of the 15 practices provided, Pull Planning,
had an identifier rate greater than 70%. Only four of the practices had an identifier rate greater
than 50%; refer to Figure 3.
53
Figure 3
Response to Item: “Identify the Lean Construction Practices From This List Below.”
Note. n = 41.
When asked to identify the elements of lean construction, none of the four interviewees
identified the use of the Lean Project Delivery System as a defining element. SPW Leader noted
that lean construction projects are identifiable by “the team's overall mindset, hand off of
information, and communication.” Foreman noted that projects can be identified as lean by their
use of specific tools, mainly Pull Planning and just-in-time delivery. Both Project Manager and
Superintendent discussed the concept of waste, but Superintendent was the only respondent to
further identify the role of key concepts such as customer value, collaboration, and productivity:
You're looking at plan and specs. We call it value engineering, but you're actually
looking into the drawings and specs to find out what the owner's intent for the space is.
And a lot of times they'll overbuild. They'll put stuff in based on “Well, we might do this,
54
or you might do that.” To help them control costs, you try to say, “Well, do you really
need that?” We provide them a better value; we could plan better, and we could help
eliminate waste. So, by doing that, they identify the value, they identify what they want,
then we could define the value to see how we can help them get what they want and help
them eliminate some cost. Once you have your workflow, then you can pull plan and
make it very collaborative to increase your workflow which increases your productivity.
Knowledge Influence 2: Craftspeople Need to Know How to Apply Lean Construction
Practices
Findings: Partially validated. Craftspeople lack procedural knowledge and are not
systematically trained on the application of lean construction. Knowledge on how to implement
lean construction is critical to effective implementation (Alinaitwe, 2009; Oladiran, 2008; Omran
& Abdulrahim, 2015; Rodewohl, 2014; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014). Procedural knowledge, or
knowing how to do something, includes an aptitude in the skills, methods, and techniques for
solving problems of a discipline (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Eighty percent of respondents
agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that they have been provided the training needed to
support implementing lean construction practices (Figure 4).
55
Figure 4
Response to Item: “Leadership Provides Me the Training Needed to Support Implementing Lean
Construction Practices.”
Note. n = 41.
Document analysis of the 2019 Craft Engagement Survey corroborate this statement. In
that study, 90% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they have been provided sufficient
resources for individual growth. However, as identified through exploring Knowledge Influence
1, there is a lack of foundational knowledge amongst Craftspeople. Without a foundation of
factual knowledge to support this statement, an individual or an organization is not able to
reliably evaluate its aptitude of lean construction practices (Gao & Low, 2013; Leong et al.,
2015; Stevens, 2014).
This paradox of evidence asserted itself when interviewees were asked to discuss the
steps involved in developing a schedule on a lean construction project. SPW Leader discussed
56
the reasoning for lean scheduling; however, their response fell shy of identifying procedural
elements of executing this approach:
I would say the biggest difference is the input from the trades and from the designers and
from the owner and getting everyone in the same room. Whereas a traditional method is
necessarily one 60-year-old superintendent who has a lot of great experience, but he
doesn't know everything. So, he kind of throws numbers at the board and we kind of go
from there. Whereas, I think, a good superintendent who wants a lean schedule would get
input from the beginning from the guys who are actually going to be on the project,
whether that's the designers or the engineers, from the superintendent to the foremen.
Conversely, Superintendent, who was lauded for their holistic understanding of lean construction
previously in this study, perpetuated the “traditional method” that SPW Leader noted above.
Responding to the same question, they offered:
What I'll do is I look at the drawings. I build it on paper the way I know how to build it.
And then we give it to the trades. And then we have them review it. And then we do our
pull plan sessions starting with the farthest out. I can build it however I want. You know
what I mean? I can stack them. I could do whatever. But there's some items always that
need to happen, the predecessor has to happen prior to the next guy going. So, you really
have to dig down in the weeds and that's what you do with Pull Planning. Under
production over production, there's a middle ground there, you have to find. And you find
that through the Pull Planning process.
Chesworth (2015) identified that the lack of a rooted understanding in the implementation
of lean practices has contributed to implementation without understanding. An alignment of
factual and procedural knowledge definition would lead to increased effectiveness of lean
57
construction practices (Gao & Low, 2013; Leong et al., 2015; Stevens, 2014). For example, Pull
Planning is a technique that is used as part of the Last Planner® System that is intended to
develop a coordinated plan for a project-specific production system. It is a highly collaborative
approach that includes those directly responsible for supervising or executing the subject scope
(Ballard, 1999). As it appears to be the case in the Superintendent’s response, Pull Planning is
often mistaken as simply scheduling work working backwards or as a validation to a traditional
schedule approach.
Overall, the gap in procedural knowledge of lean construction was partially validated by
the data.
Knowledge Influence 3: Craftspeople Need to Monitor Their Own Ability to Implement
Lean Construction Practices
Findings: Partially validated. Craftspeople are overconfident in their own awareness and
knowledge of strategies, the conditions under which those strategies might be used, and when
they are effective. Metacognitive knowledge includes an individual’s awareness of factual,
procedural, and self-knowledge (Flavell, 1979; Pintrich et al., 2000; Schneider & Pressley,
1997). In addition to knowing which strategies to use, how and when, an individual with
metacognitive knowledge also is better able to their own lack of knowledge in these areas. Inuwa
et al. (2019) found a strong relationship between Craftspeople’s awareness of their progress
utilizing lean construction and project success.
Greater than 84% of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that
they actively plan out the incorporation of lean construction practices on their own projects
(Figure 5). Similarly, greater than 71% of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement that they assess how successful they are in applying lean construction practices (Figure
58
6). However, as identified through exploring Knowledge Influence 1, there is a lack of
foundational knowledge amongst Craftspeople. Without a foundation of factual and/or
procedural knowledge to support this statement, this strongly positive sentiment appears limited
to the application of specific tools and/or processes and, even still, only partially correct.
Figure 5
Response to Item: “I Actively Plan Out the Incorporation of Lean Construction Practices on My
Projects.”
Note. n = 41.
59
Figure 6
Response to Item: “I Assess How Successful I Am in Applying Lean Construction Practices on
My Projects.”
Note. n = 41.
Wig and Reke (2019) concluded that the successful implementation of lean construction
is dependent on Craftspeople’s ability to understand their own capacity. There is a tendency in
many individuals and organizations to believe that they are being lean when they are in fact only
partially implementing lean construction concepts and tools (Stevens, 2014; Wandahl, 2014). As
a result, they selectively and often incorrectly implement lean principles in their application
(Viana et al., 2010; Wandahl, 2014). Interview responses support this conclusion. Most notably,
Project Manager was identified the apparent knowledge gap when observing Craftspeople
specifically:
60
I personally think that it is very hit and miss in terms of the field personnel that really
understand the value of lean construction. And I think a lot of times, superintendents
think that they are lean when they do a pull plan themselves. They think like, “Oh, I did
Pull Planning. Here's the schedule. I came up with a base plan.” They're not really fully
understanding.
Overall, a gap in Craftspeople metacognitive knowledge was partially validated by the
data.
Results and Findings for Motivation Influences
Motivation Influence 1: Craftspeople Need Confidence That They Can Successfully Master
Lean Construction Practices
Findings: Not validated. Craftspeople are confident they can learn and want to master
lean construction practices. Bandura (1977) identified the positive feedback loop that presents
when a group of individuals share beliefs and align efforts. As a result, they are more motivated
towards their goals. DiBenedetto and Bembenutty (2013) found that participation increases
where there is a positive feedback loop through mastery experiences. By increasing shared and
successful experiences, confidence in abilities and the associated impact create a foundation of
efficacy.
Greater than 94% of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, “I
can master lean construction practices” (Figure 7).
61
Figure 7
Response to Item: “I Am Confident That I Can Master Lean Construction Practices.”
Note. n = 41.
From interview responses, this confidence and motivation was driven by successful
experiences on previous lean construction projects. SPW Leader and Superintendent offered the
greatest reflection on this correlation. SPW Leader shared:
I think having an understanding of what a non-lean project is and how difficult it can be
compared to a Lean project and how smooth it is. And having the leadership above me, at
the time, on those lean projects that pushed it. Really having that contrast really pushes
me to want to implement lean on every project. I got it. And so having that experience, I
do feel bad for people who have always been involved in a lean project. They don’t know
what the other side is like and I do know what the other side is like. So that's where my
passion comes from. Because know how good it can be and how bad it can be.
62
Superintendent corroborated how experience on a lean project influences personal motivation
and efficacy, offering:
I'm pretty confident about it in certain aspects, from my side of it. Like the pull plan,
material deliveries, that kind of stuff. I would like to learn. I deal more with the
downstream side of the effects of what happens on the front side, the upstream side. I'd
like to learn more about the upstream side because that directly impacts the downstream
side. I don't know enough about that front side where we’re looking at the value add. I
understand the concept and I've been involved a little bit, but I think to be more
productive on my side, I need to be involved in that more.
Overall, the data provides that there is sufficient confidence amongst Craftspeople to
learn and master lean construction practices as driven by shared, successful experiences.
Motivation Influence 2: Craftspeople Need to Directly Engage in the Implementation of
Lean Construction Practice With the Personal Goal to Master Skills and Knowledge
Finding: Partially validated. Craftspeople are motivated to directly engage in the
implementation of lean construction practices with a mastery goal. Mastery goals lead to
focusing on learning or mastering a task (Yough & Anderman, 2009). Latham and Locke (2006,
p.705) further defined mastery goals as “a level of performance proficiency that we wish to
attain, usually within a specific time period.” Martin and Elliot (2016) found that mastery goals
are most effective at maintaining motivation throughout a task; this requires individual
engagement and motivation.
Greater than 94% of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement
that, while at times challenging to learn, there is value in mastering lean construction because it
makes my job easier (Figure 8).
63
Figure 8
Response to Item: “Though at Times Challenging to Learn, Lean Construction Makes My Job
Easier.”
Note. n = 41.
Interview responses corroborate the strongly positive sentiments of the survey data.
Superintendent provided:
I think with learning more of the overall concept, it would make me more efficient in
what I do on my side, if that makes sense. By learning the overall, how the whole concept
from start to finish goes. I just think by learning more about that overall approach would
help me be more productive in my planning and execution on the construction side of it
itself.
Project Manager corroborated the value of learning lean practices, but extended it beyond
persona and project impacts onto overall organizational and industry influence, stating:
64
So, my personal goal is I want everybody to work an eight-hour work day in this
industry. I want everybody to be able to walk in at 7:00AM and be gone by 3:30PM with
a half hour lunch break. That's eight hours including 30 minutes for break. That's
currently not even remotely a thought right now. I think honestly, the only way you can
do that is increasing efficiency. So, I'm passionate about efficiency in general, whether
that be a lean construction and actually implementing the work in the field or it could be
how we operate in the office in terms of who we get, the right people in the right room, to
be part of conversations and actually allowing people to leave at 3:30 when the work is
done. I think that would be great if we have this lean practice also apply to the
management side of things, right. So, I'm passionate about efficiency and I feel like lean
ties right into that in terms of the work and how it actually gets done in the field. That
allows productivity to rise in the field, that can maybe even spill over to the office, and
you can have productivity kind of just grow organically in other parts of the industry too.
Overall, the data provides sufficient motivation existed amongst Craftspeople to engage
in the implementation of lean construction practices with a mastery goal. However, this
motivation will go underutilized if the factual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge
Results and Findings for Organizational Influences
Organizational Influence 1: Craftspeople Need an Organization That Promotes Equality
Findings: Not validated. Craftspeople believe that there is equality within the
Organization. A lack of organizational culture supporting stakeholder equality through
teamwork is a primary barrier to the utilization of lean construction concepts (Alinaitwe, 2009;
Bashir et al., 2015). Specific enablers of this culture include encouraging employee initiative,
65
employee empowerment, and developing employees as an integral and equal part of the
organization (Alkhoraif & McLaughlin, 2016; Keyser et al., 2016).
Greater than 94% of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that
their input is considered when making project decisions (Figure 9). Document analysis of the
2019 Craft Engagement Survey corroborates this statement. In that study, 89% of respondents
agreed or strongly agreed that they are valued and involved in project decisions; 88% of
respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they treated fairly; 86% of respondents agreed or
strongly agreed that there is a strong sense of belonging; and 82% of respondents agreed or
strongly agreed that their opinion counts. Moreover, interview responses provided unanimous
consensus that participants believe the Organization empowers its employees with autonomy in
deciding what training is best for them.
66
Figure 9
Response to Item: “I Feel Like My Input Is Considered When Making Project Decisions.”
Note. n = 41.
Overall, the data provide that Craftspeople believe that there is equality amongst the
organization.
Organizational Influence 2: Craftspeople Need Organizational Support
Findings: Partially validated. Craftspeople feel empowered in their development;
however, the Organization has failed to communicate its value on developing areas. An
organization needs to provide support for increased craftspeople engagement. An organization
that supports the implementation of lean construction practices must embrace the opportunity to
develop the skills and competencies to advance these principles. In this setting, assessments will
qualify and quantify progress towards meeting and advancing mastery goals (Lau & Roeser,
2008; Yough & Anderman, 2006). An organization’s failure promote this opportunity is
67
critically detrimental to the dissemination of lean construction (Macomber & Howell, 2004;
Lencioni, 2012).
On this topic, greater than 80% of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement that leadership provides the training needed to support implementing lean construction
practices (Figure 10). However, three of the four interviewees offered consensus opinions that,
while they are afforded autonomy for identifying training, the Organization fails to communicate
value and/or its preference of subjects being pursued. The Superintendent remarked that if they
wanted training, it is made available. At the same time, they did not know which training was
best or who to ask for advice. The Project Manager offered that the Organization offers plenty
training opportunities, but that there is no real “guide.” Remarking that, “It is very much a self-
directed training program, which is appreciated, but puts the burden of identifying value on the
individual which can be tough.” This could create a misalignment between organizational and
individual goals and create a conflicting understanding of what constitutes progress.
68
Figure 10
Response to Item: “Leadership Provides Me the Training Needed to Support Implementing Lean
Construction Practices.”
Note. n = 41.
Overall, the data provide that Craftspeople feel empowered in their individual
development; however, the Organization has failed to communicate its value on developing
areas.
Organizational Influence 3: Craftspeople Need the Organization to Valuate Lean
Construction Outputs
Findings: Partially validated. The Organization has failed to communicate if or how it
values or valuates lean construction practices. A lack of agreed value is a primary barrier to the
utilization of lean construction concepts (Alinaitwe, 2009; Omran & Abdulrahim, 2015; Shang &
Sui Pheng, 2014). An organization needs to place a value on lean construction outputs to validate
69
improvement and measure progress. More so, how these outputs are measured and monitored
must be effectively communicated throughout the organization.
On this topic, greater than 76% of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement that they understand how their project and progress are being evaluated for success.
(Figure 11).
Figure 11
Response to Item: “I Understand How My Project and Progress Are Being Evaluated for
Success.”
Note. n = 41.
70
Interview responses seemingly contradicted this strong positive notion. As discussed in
the previous Organizational Influence, three of the four survey respondents offered consensus
opinions that the Organization fails to communicate how it values advancing lean construction
processes or its implementation on projects. Project Manager offered that there is no real metric
of progress within the organization as it pertains to the use of lean construction and its perceived
value appears dwindling, if at all. They further elaborated:
I think, in a moment in time and over the course of my nine years here, there was a lean
group, but it's kind of dissolved. I think it would be great for them to incorporate more of
that into the business model. And we'll see if they do that or not. I do remember that that
was at one point, it was a big part of BGT’s core values, being part of the lean movement
and not only being part of it but being active in it. But honestly, in the last 5 years, I
haven't seen so much of it here.
Cassino (2013) identified that leadership's perceived lack of support is a primary
challenge to the effective use of lean construction practices. The implementation of lean
practices is more successful when leaders create and communicate an engaging culture across the
organization (Sterling & Boxall, 2013).
Overall, the data provides that the Organization has failed to communicate its values or
valuate lean construction practices.
Summary
Analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data sets either validate, partially validate, or
not validate the KMO influences established in Chapter Two. Table 9 summarizes the validation
state of each influence according to the KMO model.
71
Table 9
Summary of Validated, Partially Validated, and Not Validated Influences
Assumed influence Validated Partially
validated
Not
validated
Craftspeople need to be able to identify lean
construction concepts.
x
Craftspeople need to know how to apply lean
construction.
x
Craftspeople need to monitor their own ability to
implement lean construction practices.
x
Craftspeople need confidence that they can successfully
master lean construction practices.
x
Craftspeople need to directly engage in the
implementation of lean construction practices with the
personal goal to master skills and knowledge.
x
Craftspeople need the organization to support
stakeholder equality through teamwork.
x
Craftspeople need organizational support for increased
engagement in lean construction practices.
x
Craftspeople need the organization to assess the value
created by their lean construction outputs.
x
While data collection and analysis allowed to identify areas of strength that support the
fulfillment of organizational goals also pointed to critical gaps between the current and desired
state within the organization. The knowledge and organizational dimensions require more
attention than the motivation dimension. Overall, Craftspeople exhibited sufficient levels of
motivation and intention. Rather, the gaps in their factual and procedural knowledge of lean
72
construction practices and in the Organization’s cultural settings and models, especially around
valuing lean construction practices.
73
Chapter Five: Solutions, Implementation, and Evaluation
The previous chapter provided an analysis of the data collected in response to the first
two research questions of the study, to evaluate the degree to which BGT is achieving its goal of
having 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and foremen) utilize lean concepts at the
project level by end of 2021. It assessed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that contributed to the goal and provided to validate, partially validate, or not validate
these influences. This chapter addresses the final research question, “What are the
recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organization?”
The Clark and Estes (2008) conceptual framework was used to structure the organization
of the chapter according to the knowledge, motivation, and organizational dimensions. Only
those influences that were validated or partially validated were explored addressed. Kirkpatrick
and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) New World Kirkpatrick Model then served as the basis for following
recommendations and an integrated implementation and evaluation plan. Finally, this chapter
and dissertation close with a discussion of the study’s limitations, delimitations, and possible
areas for future research.
Organizational Context and Mission
Recent process audits have highlighted inconsistent operations and delivery methods
resulting from BGT Construction’s decentralized organizational structure has led to a variable
quality of service. Clark and Estes (2008) have identified that these types of inconsistencies
suggest that there is a lack of adequate work processes and effective measures that standardize
operations within an organization.
74
Organizational Goal
BGT has a performance goal that 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and
foremen) will utilize lean concepts at the project level by end of the year, 2021.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
For this evaluation, four stakeholders have been identified. These include the following:
BGT Construction (Corporate), BGT Self-perform Workgroup, the Lean Leadership Team, and
the BGT Craftspeople.
BGT Construction (Corporate)
This stakeholder group may also be referred to as top management. This group is
responsible for directing the strategy and overall development of the organization. Their
contribution to the objective is to allocate and provide support resources for the stated initiatives.
BGT Self-Perform Workgroup
This stakeholder represents an operating group that is responsible for all construction
services, as opposed to management services, that BGT offers its clients. This BGT work group
represents as much as 50% of the company’s annual gross margin and is a critical differentiator
from competition who only offers management services. As it pertains to the objective, this
group is responsible for organizing and providing the craft with the resources needed to
productively provide services.
Lean Leadership Team
The BGT Lean Leadership Team includes a network of individuals who have
successfully satisfied the requirements of BGT Construction’s Lean Leadership Training
Program. This program blends online training sessions with in-person mentoring/coaching
sessions to teach and advocate for the fundamental ideas of lean construction, i.e., respect for
75
people, continuous improvement, value stream thinking, flow, problem-solving, and productivity
management. As it pertains to the objective, this group advocates for promoting lean practices
beyond the coursework and into the workforce.
BGT Craftspeople
BGT Craftspeople comprise Self-Perform Workgroup Superintendents, General
Foreman, and Foreman. As previously noted, as much as 50% of the organization’s gross margin
comes from self-perform services by BGT Craftspeople. As such, the capability and productivity
of this workforce critically define the company’s business outcomes. As it pertains to lean
construction, this stakeholder group is most directly responsible for implementing these practices
in everyday functions and actualizing the potential benefits.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the contribution of each of the defined stakeholder groups is critical to the success
in completing BGT Construction’s organizational goal, BGT Craftspeople will be the
stakeholder group of focus for this study. The BGT Craftspeople goal, supported by all the other
defined stakeholder groups, is that 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and foremen)
will utilize lean concepts at the project level by end of the year, 2021. Failure to accomplish this
goal may contribute to a continued variation in work output and negative impacts on project
performance, including schedule and cost of work.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which BGT is achieving its goal of
having 100% of its field leadership (superintendents and foremen) utilize lean concepts at the
project level by end of the year, 2021. The analysis focuses on knowledge, motivation and
organizational elements related to achieving the organizational goals. While a complete
76
evaluation project would include all stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholders to be
focused on in this analysis are BGT Craftspeople.
As such, the questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. What is the BGT Craftspeople knowledge and motivation related to utilizing lean
concepts at the project level?
2. What is the interaction between organizational culture and BGT Craftspeople knowledge
and motivation?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organization?
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
The data from this study validated factual, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge
influences on the problem of practice. Despite strengths in applying select processes and tools,
Craftspeople demonstrated factual and procedural knowledge gaps relating to lean construction
practices. In addition, Craftspeople revealed an overconfidence in their own awareness and
knowledge of strategies, the conditions under which those strategies might be used, and when
they are effective. However, this same opinion was not held in the assessment of their peers. It is
predicted that providing training and education on these influences could help narrow the 94%
performance gap in the effective use of lean construction practice and self-efficacy amongst
Craftspeople. Table 10 presents the specific approaches to training and education predicted to
impact this problem of practice. It also references the theoretical principles in support of these
recommendations.
77
Table 10
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Knowledge
influences
Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Factual
Craftspeople need
to be able to
identify lean
construction
concepts.
Information learned meaningfully and
connected with prior knowledge is
stored more quickly and remembered
more accurately because it is elaborated
with prior learning (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
To develop mastery, individuals must
acquire component skills, practice
integrating them, and know when to
apply what they have learned (Denler
et al., 2006; Schraw & McCrudden,
2006).
Training—provide information
on lean construction concepts
and strategies followed by
guided practice and feedback.
Procedural
Craftspeople need
to know how to
apply lean
construction.
Enhancing procedural knowledge using
a job aid when organizations are
responsible for performing tasks in an
area where they already have
declarative knowledge and experience
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
To develop mastery, individuals must
acquire component skills, practice
integrating them, and know when
to apply what they have learned
(Denler et al., 2006; Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Performance feedback given during
learning enhances information
processing (Mayer, 2011).
Training—provide information
about the concepts and
strategies necessary to practice
lean construction, followed by
repeated practice in authentic
inquiry experiences with
frequent formative feedback as
Craftspeople follow the
implementation steps.
Metacognitive
Craftspeople need
to monitor their
own ability to
implement lean
construction
practices.
Individuals need to be provided the
opportunity and structure to create
meaning by connecting their
knowledge to their interests and
beliefs (Denler et al., 2006; Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006; Tuckman, 2009).
Education—provide targeted
learning opportunities that both
demonstrate and ask
Craftspeople to identify their
own monitoring strategies for
lean implementation that they
can use to qualify what they
do/do not understand and to
correct misconceptions
78
Factual Knowledge Solutions, or Description of Needs or Assets
Craftspeople need to be able to identify lean construction concepts. Factual knowledge
refers to the basic elements one must know to be acquainted with a discipline and solve problems
in it (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). It includes both isolated information and knowledge about
specific details (Clark and Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). Craftspeople need to know the basic
elements of lean construction and how to relate these elements within the larger structure of the
organization. Modeling to-be-learned concepts and strategies improves learning and performance
(Denler et al., 2009). Therefore, the recommendation is for Craftspeople to be educated by Lean
Leadership on lean construction concepts and strategies followed by guided practice and
feedback.
Procedural Knowledge Solutions, or Description of Needs or Assets
Craftspeople need to know how to apply lean construction. Procedural knowledge is
defined as knowing how to do something (Rueda, 2011). This includes discipline specific skills,
algorithms, methods, and techniques for solving problems and other application of a discipline
(Krathwohl, 2002). Training is the appropriate tool for addressing a procedural knowledge gap,
in which learners would benefit from the combination of instruction and guided practice (Clark
& Estes, 2008). Mayer (2011) asserted that frequent performance feedback through this
instruction and guided practice stands to reinforce desirable behaviors. Therefore, the
recommendation is to provide instruction to Craftspeople that presents information about the
concepts and strategies necessary to practice lean construction, followed by repeated practice in
authentic inquiry experiences with frequent formative feedback.
79
Metacognitive Knowledge Solutions, or Description of Needs or Assets
Craftspeople need to monitor their own ability to implement lean construction.
Metacognitive knowledge includes an individual’s awareness of strategies that might be used for
different tasks, knowledge of the conditions under which those strategies might be used and
when they are effective, and self-knowledge (Flavell, 1979; Pintrich et al., 2000; Schneider &
Pressley, 1997). Metacognitive knowledge is an important characteristic of strategic behavior in
solving problems (Bloom, 2001). In addition to knowing which strategies to use and when, an
individual with metacognitive knowledge also is better able to ask for assistance when they lack
factual or procedural knowledge. Rueda (2011) asserted that these metacognitive thinking skills
can be taught. It is important to provide Craftspeople with opportunities for self-evaluation and
the skills to optimize and adjust learning strategies (Denler et al., 2006). Therefore, the
recommendation is to provide education to Craftspeople through targeted learning opportunities
that both demonstrate and ask them to identify strategies that they can use to qualify what they
do/do not understand and correct misconceptions.
Motivation Recommendations
Analysis for this study validated a primary motivation influence aligned to the goal
orientation. Motivation can be defined as an internal state that initiates and maintains goal-
directed behavior (Mayer, 2011). It involves the initiating, sustaining, and ensuring goal-oriented
activity (Rueda, 2011). Problems may present during any one of the three phases of task
achievement: active choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). Alves et al.
(2010) concluded that the motivational gap for craftspeople utilizing lean construction practices
occurs in the active choice and persistence phases of task achievement. Table 11 highlights the
80
theoretical principles aligned to addressing the motivation influence and provides context-
specific recommendations.
Table 11
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Motivation influences Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Goal orientation
Craftspeople need to
directly engage in
the implementation
of lean construction
practices with the
personal goal to
master skills and
knowledge.
Focusing on mastery, individual
improvement, learning, and
progress promotes positive
motivation (Yough & Anderman,
2006).
Goals motivate and direct students
(Pintrich, 2003).
Provide Craftspeople with
regular performance
assessments structured
around mastery, learning,
effort, and progress and
emphasize mastery goal
setting with assessment
centered on measuring
individual growth towards
meeting those goals.
81
Goal Orientation
The Goal Orientation Theory is a social cognitive theory of achievement motivation that
focuses on why people engage in tasks (Bandura, 1993). Widmeyer and Ducharme (1997)
defined goals as guides for action. Latham and Locke (2006, p. 705) further defined mastery
goals as “a level of performance proficiency that we wish to attain, usually within a specific time
period.” Mastery goals lead to focusing on learning or mastering a task and promotes positive
motivation (Yough & Anderman, 2009). Martin and Elliot (2016) have found that mastery goals
are most effective at maintaining motivation throughout a task. Moreover, Latham and Locke’s
(2006) concluded that setting goals significantly improve success rates. Therefore, the
recommendation is for the Organization to develop annual SMART goals for Craftspeople that
compliment larger organizational goals and are discussed quarterly on the group level and
regularly on the individual level through performance assessments.
Organization Recommendations
The data from this study validated two organizational influences on the problem of
practice. Organizational performance gaps are shaped by organizational culture, including model
and setting (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) defined cultural
models as the values that influence how experiences are collectively interpreted. Cultural settings
are the occasions when people come together to carry out joint activities that accomplish
something they value (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). The organizational barriers are described
as those which may impact performance, including the overall structure of the organization and
the values that are promoted as compared to those that are prevalent (Clark & Estes, 2008). The
cultural models and settings with mastery orientation were explored as it relates to the
82
performance gap in the use of lean construction practices by Craftspeople. The organizational
influences are listed in Table 12.
Table 12
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Organization
influences
Principle and citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Cultural setting
Craftspeople need
organizational
support for
increased
engagement in
lean
construction
practices.
Effective organizations ensure that
organizational messages, rewards,
policies, and procedures that govern
the organization's work are aligned
with or are supportive of
organizational goals and values (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Organizational performance increases
and trust is promoted when
individuals and leaders communicate
openly and constantly about plans and
progress (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Colquitt et al., 2007).
Implement a communication
model that inspires and
informs Craftspeople and
works well for the
Organization.
Provide an environment for
ongoing dialogue about lean
construction practices, where
evidence of best practices can
be shared and concerns can
be aired.
Cultural model
Craftspeople need
the organization
to assess the
value created by
their lean
construction
outputs.
Accountability serves as a contract
between leaders, who determine
performance objectives, and
supervisees, who are responsible for
carrying them out. (Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004).
Accountability is increased when
individual roles and expectations are
aligned with organizational goals and
mission (Elmore, 2002).
When accountability is avoided, the
consequences for organizations are
low performance standards and
inattention to results (Lencioni, 2002).
Develop strategies to align
individual practices with
organizational goals.
Provide regular performance
assessment centered on
measuring individual growth
towards meeting those goals.
83
Cultural Setting
The Organization needs to provide support for increased Craftspeople engagement. The
lack of management support is a primary barrier to utilization of lean construction concepts
(Alinaitwe, 2009; Bashir et al., 2015; Omran & Abdulrahim, 2015; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014).
An organization that supports the implementation of lean construction practices must embrace
and communicate the opportunity to develop the skills and competencies to advance these
principles. Furthermore, it will value providing an opportunity to apply, measure, and reflect on
this skill set. Macomber and Howell (2004) concluded that transformation begins with an
organization listening and creating an environment for others to actively engage. The
recommendation for helping the Craftspeople understand how they fit into the overall strategy is
to implement a communication model that both inspires and informs Craftspeople and works
well for the Organization. This includes providing an environment for ongoing dialogue about
lean construction practices, where evidence of best practices can be shared and concerns can be
aired.
Cultural Model
The Organization needs to valuate lean construction outputs. The lack of shared value is a
primary barrier to utilization of lean construction concepts (Alinaitwe, 2009; Omran &
Abdulrahim, 2015; Shang & Sui Pheng, 2014). Elmore (2002) stated that accountability is
increased when individual roles and expectations are aligned with organizational goals and
mission. Employees need to understand what they are trying to accomplish, how the changes
they make constitute an improvement, and what other changes can be made to improve the
organization (Langley et al., 2009). Therefore, the recommendation is for the Organization to
develop strategies to align Craftspeople practices with organizational goals and to provide
84
regular performance assessment centered on measuring individual growth towards meeting those
goals.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
The framework used to develop an implementation and evaluation plan for this study is
the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Four levels of reactions,
learning, behavior, and results are considered in reverse in the New World Model, such that
training and education can be reversed engineered to ensure accountability for intended
outcomes. In the sections that follow, Level 4 is considered first as the desired internal and
external outcomes are defined. These outcomes are informed by the organization’s mission and
goals. Level 3 follows identifying the necessary drivers to correct or adjust knowledge and
motivation influences as well as the necessary organizational support structures to enact these
drivers. In Level 2, a program is planned to both target and evaluate factual and procedural
knowledge, confidence, and commitment. Level 1 develops a plan for measuring engagement,
satisfaction, and perception of the relevance of the program.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
Recent process audits have highlighted inconsistent operations and delivery methods
resulting from BGT Construction’s decentralized organizational structure has led to a variable
quality of service. Clark and Estes (2008) have identified that these inconsistencies suggest a
lack of adequate work processes and effective measures that standardize operations within an
organization.
BGT has a performance goal that 100% of its field leadership, including superintendents
and foremen, will utilize lean concepts at the project level by end of the year, 2021. Failure to
accomplish this goal may contribute to a continued variation in work output and negative
85
impacts on project performance, including schedule and cost of work. This long-term
organizational goal was supported by a short-term goal of establishing a national craft training
program that is focused on developing both hard and soft skills by June 2021; this would lead to
introducing a lean course focusing on Craftspeople application by October 2021.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 13 shows the proposed Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators organized into
external and internal outcomes and the metrics and methods that could be used to evaluate them.
The outcomes are the lead indicators of continual, successful attainment of the long-range
performance goal that 100% of its field leadership will utilize lean concepts at the project level,
and the related stakeholder goals to improve the self-efficacy and metacognition of Craftspeople.
Internal indicators are likely to occur if the Lean Leadership stakeholder group can cultivate
critical behaviors of Craftspeople. External indicators should follow upon successful attainment
of internal outcomes.
86
Table 13
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
Internal outcomes
Define lean construction,
considering the
Organization as the
Customer, including
preferred purpose, people,
and processes.
Communicated and published
basis of understanding
including accessible toolkit
and additional resources.
Organizational planning
session including
representatives from all
stakeholder groups is
launched, and a consensus
baseline of understanding is
agreed upon and published
to the organization.
The vision and goals of
implementing lean
construction practices, are
aligned and clear to all
stakeholders.
Number of communicated
and published formal goals
for Craftspeople and
Projects that cascade from
organizational goals and are
aligned with the overall
organizational strategy.
Business strategy planning
session pertinent
stakeholders is launched
and annual goals are agreed
upon and published to the
organization.
Goals are published annually.
Published strategic plan that
identifies, measures, and
improves Craftspeople
implementation of lean
construction practices.
The written strategic plan that
has been presented to
Leadership and approved
for execution.
The published strategic plan
that is being executed,
reviewed, and adjusted
quarterly.
Strategic Plan presented and
approved by Leadership as
indicated by the formal
distribution.
Monthly report from the
Business Units, about
progress and completion of
each tactic and how they
continue to move the
strategic initiatives forward.
Greater involvement by
Craftspeople in training
initiatives.
The number of Craftspeople
involved in these activities.
Attendance records and
rosters.
External outcomes
Improved Owner perception
of quality of construction.
Higher ratings on Customer
Satisfaction Surveys (CSS).
Projects to conduct pre, mid,
and post project CSS.
Increased participation of
stakeholders in external lean
construction initiatives.
The number of project
stakeholders involved in
these activities.
Attendance and participation
records at events organized
by the Lean Construction
Institute.
87
Level 3: Critical Behaviors
The stakeholder group of focus in this study was the BGT Craftspeople. The first critical
behavior identified is that Craftspeople must cultivate the knowledge and skillset necessary to
implement lean construction practices. The second critical behavior is that Craftspeople set goals
aligned to both organizational and individual development. The third critical behavior is to
outline a system for measuring and tracking of these goals as well as communicating the
outcomes. The fourth critical behavior is that Craftspeople sustain self-efficacy through mastery
experiences. Table 14 specifies the metrics, methods, and timing for the evaluation of each of
these critical behaviors. Table 15 identifies the drivers to supports these critical behaviors.
88
Table 14
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing and Evaluation
Critical behavior Metric(s) Methods Timing
1. Cultivate the
knowledge and
skillset
necessary to
implement lean
construction
practices.
The number of relevant
courses or training
hours attended.
Learning transcripts will be
maintained for internally
offered programs.
Craftspeople will be asked to
self-report external training
programs attended.
Quarterly
2. Set goals
aligned to both
organizational
and individual
development.
The frequency of setting
mastery-oriented goals
vs. performance-
oriented goals.
The degree of alignment
of goals to
competencies
Craftspeople will write goals
that are reviewed by their
supervisor for mastery or
performance orientation.
Craftspeople will write goals
that are reviewed by their
supervisor for alignment to
competencies.
Quarterly
Quarterly
3. Outline a
system for
measuring and
tracking of
these goals as
well as
communicating
the outcomes
An approved and
accepted system with
examples of tracking,
measuring, and
publishing results.
Craftspeople will write goals
that are reviewed by their
supervisor to determine how
SMART they are.
Quarterly
4. Sustain self-
efficacy
through
mastery
experiences
Accuracy of self-
assessment of skills and
habits of mind.
Craftspeople will reference
work as evidence of mastery
of competencies. Supervisors
will provide feedback on
accuracy of self-assessment.
Every mid-
quarter
89
Table 15
Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing Critical behaviors supported
Reinforcing
Training about the required skills and habits of
implementing lean construction practices
Monthly 1, 2
Repeated practice Daily 1, 2, 3, 4
Encouraging
Frequent, specific feedback which is aligned
to competencies and includes procedural
advice
Weekly 1, 2, 3, 4
Attributional retraining, particularly around
poor performance on assessments
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4
Rewarding
Provide feedback that measure and reward
individual progress and growth
Weekly 2, 3, 4
Monitoring
Provide regular performance assessment
centered on measuring individual growth
towards meeting organizational goals.
Quarterly 1, 2, 4
Factual Organizational Support
To support the Craftspeople’s critical behaviors, the recommendation is for the
organization must embrace and communicate the opportunity to develop the skills and
competencies to advance these principles. The Organization will provide structure and
opportunity to apply, measure, and reflect on this skillset. This includes setting and managing
strategic goals, creating systems with tracking and measures that help them track against their
goals, and building relationships with both internal stakeholders and external stakeholders.
90
Level 2: Learning
After the recommendations have been implemented, Craftspeople will be able to perform
the following:
1. Identify lean construction practices/tools (K-F)
2. Implement the effective use of lean constructive practices/tools (K-P)
3. Identify organizational goals for the strategic plan in which they directly contribute (K-F)
4. Recognize how individual goals align with the overall strategic goals for the organization
(M-GO)
5. Develop individual performance goals for themselves (K-M)
6. Be able to model best practices on the project level (M-SE)
7. Communicate the resources needed to achieve their goals (O-CS)
8. Be confident in their ability to implement lean construction practices (M-SE)
9. Demonstrate a culture of trust by creating specific opportunities to share best practices,
recent successes, and innovative approaches (O-CS)
Program
The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved with the implementation
of an education and training plan that will be developed and communicated by the Lean
Leadership Team. The objective of the plan will be to identify, measure, and improve
Craftspeople learning and engagement that results in the increased implementation of lean
construction processes on the project level. This plan will be centered on offering a competency-
based curriculum with mastery assessment practices. Craftspeople, including SPW Leadership,
will participate in an eight-part training curriculum, each with specific discussion topics and
deliverables. Table 16 provides a description, expected outcomes, delivery mechanism, and
91
duration for each module. The proposed training program is grounded in curriculum developed
by and facilitated in partnership with the local chapters of Lean Construction Institute and
Associated General Contractors of America. This approach was selected such that the education
and training content extends beyond BGT Construction and is transferrable from project to
project, independent of the specific companies and stakeholders involved.
92
Table 16
Eight-Part Training Module
Module Expected outcomes Duration
Delivery
method
Mod 1: Lean
101
Define lean construction
Explain the origins of lean construction
Discuss the benefits of lean construction
Describe lean construction tools
List examples of lean construction in practice
Identify implementation opportunities
60min e-learning
Mod 2:
Variation
in
Production
Define the different types of variation
Describe the role of variation in production operations
List sources of variation in construction settings
Consider variation mitigation techniques
4hrs Instructor
-led
Mod 3: Pull
in
Production
Distinguish push systems from pull systems
Describe the impact of pull on production systems
Consider pull strategies in construction operations
4hrs Instructor
-led
Mod 4: Lean
Work
Structuring
Describe the concept of Work Structuring
Outline the desired outcomes of Work Structuring
Apply the methods and tools utilized in Pull Planning
4hrs Instructor
-led
Mod 5: The
Last
Planner®
System
Describe the characteristics and application of the Last
Planner® System Apply the Last Planner® System
on a project
Hold weekly work planning sessions
Assess percent plan complete for a project
4hrs Instructor
-led
Mod 6: Lean
Supply
Chain
Differentiate between traditional procurement lean
supply applications
Identify waste and value-adding activities within the
supply chain and assembly
Evaluate the impact of using lean supply chain on
waste elimination, continuous flow, and site
operations pull
List examples of process improvements to the lean
supply chain
Expand lean beyond the individual project
8hrs Instructor
-led
Mod 7: Lean
Preconstru
ction
Define value and methods to maximize it
Discuss waste and methods to minimize it
Differentiate between traditional and lean methods
Identify the various lean tools used in design and how
to deploy them
4hrs Instructor
-led
Mod 8: Lean
Problem-
solving
Tools
Define the difference between traditional and lean
problem solving
Describe how to collaborate to solve problems
Identify root causes of problems
8hrs Instructor
-led
93
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
To determine the effectiveness of the recommended program, assessments of the
participant’s factual and procedural knowledge must be incorporated throughout instruction.
Beyond knowledge, assessment of attitude, confidence, and commitment will be crucial to
evaluate as the competency-based framework requires a lot of self-direction and ownership from
students. If there are gaps in motivation, the cultivation of critical behaviors is less likely. Table
17 highlights the methods and timing for evaluating these knowledge-based and motivational
components of learning.
94
Table 17
Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or activity(ises) Timing
Factual/declarative knowledge: “I know it.”
Knowledge checks through formative quizzes
Knowledge checks in real time through “pair, think,
share” and other individual/group activities
Pre- test and post- tests
Checks for understanding in follow-up calls and
meetings
At the end of each module
From time-to-time during the
instruction session as teams could
brainstorm ideas and solutions
Beginning and end of module
During implementation
Procedural skills: “I can do it right now.”
Facilitator’s observation of those who are leading and
those who are participating in each team discussion
Individual demonstration of understanding about the
outcomes
Demonstration that they can use the job aids to develop
strategic initiatives and tactics for project
During instruction
During instruction
During implementation/on-the-job
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Facilitator observations about engagement
Group discussions among Craftspeople of the value of
what is being learned.
Pre- and post- test assessment
During instruction
During training and follow up
Beginning and end of module
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
Reflective comments and response rates from a post-
module survey
Observations about how the team members use the plans
to guide their day-to-day job tasks
Discussions following application and feedback
At the end of each module
During implementation/on-the-job
During implementation/on-the-job
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions about how this plan will help them in their
jobs
Discussions when participants return to their jobs
Progress against goals using metrics agreed upon
During instruction
During implementation/on-the-job
During implementation/on-the-job
95
Level 1: Reactions
Throughout implementation, it is critical to gather feedback and reactions about the
value, the outcomes, and the impact of the education and training. Table 18 discusses the
methods and tools that will be used to evaluate the components of engagement, relevance, and
satisfaction with the learning and outcomes.
Table 18
Components to Measure Reactions the Program
Method(s) or tools(s) Timing
Engagement
Peer observation and discussion
Workshop evaluation
During implementation/on-the-job
At the end of each module
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants
Workshop evaluation
During implementation/on-the-job
At the end of each module
Customer satisfaction
Brief pulse-check with participants
Workshop evaluation
During implementation/on-the-job
At the end of each module
96
Evaluation Tools
Immediately Following the Program Implementation
Workshop evaluations were listed as examples of ways to measure Level 1 and Level 2
outcomes immediately following program implementation. Level 1 questions were designed to
be reflective of post-course reactions, measuring participant’s’ perceptions of their engagement
while learning, their satisfaction with the experience, and the relevance of what they learned.
Level 2 questions incorporate measures of factual and procedural knowledge, commitment,
confidence, and attitude. This will be done through both pre-course assessments and post-course
reflections. These items will measure the effectiveness of the program in achieving the expected
outcomes and explore opportunities for growth in knowledge, confidence, commitment, and
attitude. Appendix D is a sample of a survey using a Blended Evaluation approach (Kirkpatrick
& Kirkpatrick, 2016), which will be given to all participants to check for Level 1 and Level 2
outcomes.
Delayed for a Period After the Plan Implementation
Approximately eight (8) weeks after the implementation of each module, Lean
Leadership will administer a survey using the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) Blended
Evaluation approach (Appendix E). This assessment will be used to measure progress towards
the overall goal (Level 4: Results); assess behaviors against the expected outcomes (Level 3:
Behaviors); check for an increase in participants’ knowledge, skills, confidence, and
commitment (Level 2: Learning); and measure satisfaction and relevance of each of the training
modules (Level 1: Reactions).
97
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4: Results goal for Craftspeople is measured by participation and completion
of the proposed training modules as well as implementation on the project level. The Lean
Leadership Team will track the number of participants who have completed, not completed, and
not enrolled in each of the respective modules. Additionally, supervisor observation will be used
to monitor and quantify individual implementations on the project level. This complimenting
information will provide a count of craftspeople who know and use lean construction practices.
A quick reference dashboard will be maintained and shared with all stakeholders as a monitoring
and accountability tool; refer to Figure 12 and 13. Similarly, dashboards will be created for
measures of Levels 3, 2, and 1.
Figure 12
Proposed Dashboard for Lean Learning Module Participation and Completion Rates
98
Figure 13
Proposed Dashboard for Lean Construction Practices Implementation Rates
Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model framework used to develop an implementation and
evaluation plan for this study (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The model focuses on
developing solutions, implementing a plan towards identified gorals, and creating a rubric to
evaluate the plan’s effectiveness. The New World Kirkpatrick Model reverse engineers four
levels, including reactions, learning, behavior, and results, into a proposed program to ensure
accountability for intended outcomes. Level 4 is considered first as the desired internal and
external outcomes are defined. These outcomes were informed by the organization’s mission and
goals. Level 3 follows identifying the necessary drivers to correct or adjust knowledge and
motivation influences as well as the necessary organizational support structures to enact these
drivers. In Level 2, a program was planned to both target and evaluate factual and procedural
99
knowledge, confidence, and commitment. Level 1 developed a plan for measuring engagement,
satisfaction, and perception of the relevance of the program.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) identified return on expectations as the critical
indicator of the value of a training program. The New World Kirkpatrick Model ensures this
value by first defining it in partnership with stakeholders. Expected outcomes are then known
from the onset and progress relative to the successful attainment is the measure of success for the
implemented program. As such, Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) emphasized the importance
of analyzing and leveraging data during program implementation to optimize current and future
results. This iterative approach mirrors the five fundamental lean principles: define value from
the customer’s view; identify value stream; specify value-creating flow; achieve customer pull at
the right time; and pursue perfection through continuous improvement. By ensuring Craftspeople
have the knowledge, skills, and organizational support to accomplish their goal, BGT
Construction can ensure continuous improvement towards its ultimate mission.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
This study employed the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework for identifying
and understanding the causes of organizational performance problems. Focusing on knowledge,
motivation, and organizational (KMO) barriers, BGT Craftspeople’s knowledge and motivation
related to implementing lean construction practices and achieving the organizational goal was
assessed using surveys, interview data with key stakeholders, and document analysis. The gap
analysis framework helps strengthen this study by identifying specific KMO gaps that influence
the problem of practice. Research-based and supported solutions were then recommended at the
completion of the study. Potential weaknesses of this gap analysis include its reliance of
100
information provided by participants. If this data is not representative, the real root cause of the
problem may not be resolved.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are potential weaknesses in a study and are out of the researcher’s control.
(Simon & Goes, 2011). Typical limitations of a qualitative study include multiple interpretations
of the same data. Additionally, responses are subject to human error, the mental and emotional
state of participants which may influence their responses, and the researcher’s aptitude and
experience. Conversely, delimitations are those characteristics that limit the scope and define the
boundaries of a study. The delimitations are within the researcher’s control (Simon & Goes,
2011).
This study has some limitations that should be considered in evaluating its relevance.
These include time constraints and survey and interview sample size. Time constraints inherently
limit the breadth of such data collection tools. This may result in limited observations. In the case
of this study, it influenced the data collection approaches as well as defined the target sample
size for feasibility reasons. This limits the scalability of data. For example, the survey response
rate of 82% in this study was just short of the 85% threshold necessary to make the sample
responses automatically generalizable to the target population (Pazzaglia et al., 2016). With more
time, additional survey respondents could have been pursued and a larger number of interviews
could have provided more rich data.
The major delimitation factor of this study is that it focuses on a single organization. This
presents a complimenting limitation, however, as the data cannot be assumed as a generalization
for the design and construction industry. Additional delimitation factors include the limited
scope of the survey and interview. However, the study could still provide insight into the factors
101
that might inhibit the development and delivery of lean construction practices tools. Furthermore,
the KMO gap analysis framework can be used by other researchers for the investigation of a
similar problem within their own organization. Finally, the mixed methodology approach serves
as a delimitation. The use of a mixed methodology and resulting data triangulation strengthens
conclusions drawn from qualitative data and provides greater context of quantitative results. This
provides for greater credibility of qualitative.
Future Research
This study and its findings warrant areas of future research. This study sought to explore
the knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational influences on the underutilization of lean
construction practices, focusing on BGT Construction Craftspeople. In assessing the data, several
assumed influences were partially validated. This was, in part, due to conflicting data. These
influences include: Craftspeople need to know how to apply lean construction; Craftspeople
need to monitor their own ability to implement lean construction practices; Craftspeople need to
directly engage in the implementation of lean construction practices with the personal goal to
master skills and knowledge; Craftspeople need organizational support for increased engagement
in lean construction practice; and Craftspeople need the organization to assess the value created
by their lean construction outputs. The underlying connection of these five partially validated
influences appears to be an overconfidence in Craftspeople. A future study could be conducted to
gain a deeper observation of self-efficacy, collective-efficacy, and metacognitive knowledge of
this stakeholder group. Additionally, research about specific and target subsets of Craftspeople,
including by role, experience, and relevant experience would likely result in a greater
understanding and new ideas to increase Craftspeople engagement in the use of lean construction
practices.
102
Conclusion
Wandahl (2014) identified that an inadequate working knowledge of lean construction
has critically contributed to the 94% performance gap in the underutilization of lean practices in
the design and construction. This underutilization combined with an inconsistent application of
lean construction concepts has contributed to a lack of confidence in and demand for these
delivery methods and skillsets from both owners and contractors alike (Ahiakwo et al., 2013;
Alves et al., 2016; CMAA, 2012; LCI, 2017). This research focused on BGT Craftspeople as a
critical stakeholder group to drive improvements in the implementation of lean construction
practices.
This study explored knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences in this
problem of practice using Clark and Estes’ (2008) KMO framework. A deeper understanding of
these influences provided the opportunity to generate recommendations for increasing
Craftspeople engagement in achieving BGT Construction’s organizational goal. Data from this
study revealed that there is a strong motivation amongst Craftspeople to learn about and apply
lean construction practices. However, this motivation is hampered by a lack of factual and
procedural knowledge. This gap is further perpetuated by a lack of organizational support and
expectations.
The implications of these findings qualify opportunities associated with Craftspeople
implementing lean construction practices on the project level. The primary barrier to the
utilization of lean construction is lack of management support. As such, the Organization must
provide the model and settings necessary to increase Craftspeople engagement. An organization
that supports the implementation of lean construction practices must embrace and communicate
the opportunity to develop the skills and competencies to advance these principles. Specific
103
recommendations include implementing a communication model that both inspires and informs
Craftspeople, creating an environment for ongoing dialogue about lean construction practices,
and providing regular performance assessment centered on measuring individual growth towards
meeting aligned goals. By implementing the proposed solutions of this study, BGT Construction
will ensure progress towards closing the gaps and increasing the utilization of lean construction
practices. Moreover, with additional research, these solutions could be applied outside of the
organization to address the macro problem that has limited productive application on the industry
level.
104
References
Ahiakwo, O., Oloke, D., Suresh, S., & Khatib, J. (2012). A case study of last planner
system implementation in Nigeria." Proceedings IGLC-20, San Diego, CA, USA.
Alinaitwe, H. (2009). Prioritizing lean construction barriers in Uganda's construction
industry. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 14(1), 15-30.
Alkhoraif, A. & McLaughlin, P. (2016). Organizational Culture that Inhibit the Lean
Implementation. https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1826/11985/
Organisational_Culture_that_Inhibit_the_Lean_Implementation-2017.pdf?sequence
=1&isAllowed=y.
altexsoft. (2019). Agile project management: Best practices and methodologies.
https://www.altexsoft.com/whitepapers/agile-project-management-best-practices-and-
methodologies/>.
Alves, T., Azambuja, M., & Arnous, B. (2016). Teaching lean construction: A survey of lean
skills and qualifications expected by contractors and specialty contractors in 2016.
Proceedings IGLC-24, Boston, MA, USA.
Alves, T., Milberg, C., & Walsh, K. (2010). Exploring lean construction practice, research, and
education. Proceedings IGLC-18. Haifa, Isreal.
Anderson, L. & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Aziz, R. & Hafez, S. (2013). Applying lean thinking in construction and performance
improvement. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 52(4), 679–695.
Ballard, G. (1999). Can pull techniques be used in design management? Proceedings of the
Conference on Concurrent Engineering in Construction, Helsinki, Finland.
105
Ballard, G. (2000). The last planner system of production (PhD thesis). University of
Birmingham.
Ballard, G. & Howell, G. (1994). Implementing lean construction: Improving downstream
performance. Proceedings IGLC-2, Santiago, Chile.
Ballard, G. & Howell, G. (2003). An update on last planner. Proceedings IGLC-11,
Blacksburg, VA, USA.
Ballard, G., Howell, G., & Casten, M. (1996). PARC: A case study. Proceedings IGLC-4.
Birmingham, AL.
Ballé, D. & Powell, M. (2018). Good Thinking, Good Products. Planet Lean. https://planet-
lean.com/good-thinking-good-products/.
Bandura. A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148.
Bandura A. (1997). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press; 1997.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 75-78.
Bashir, A., Suresh, S., Oloke, D., Proverbs, D., & Gameson, R. (2015).
Overcoming the challenges facing lean construction practice in the UK contracting
organizations. International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction, 4(1),
106
10-18.
Bloom, B. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing a revision of Bloom's
Taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Bowen, G. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research
Journal, 9(2), 27–40.
Brady, D., Tzortzopoulos, P., & Rooke, J. (2011). An examination of the barriers to last planner
implementation. Proceedings IGLC-19. Lima, Peru.
Brandt, J. (2005). Hooked on lean. Industry Week.
https://www.industryweek.com/workforce/brandt-leadership-hooked-lean.
Campbell-construction.com. (2018). What is a self-performing design-build general contractor.
https://www.campbell-construction.com/news/what-self-performing-design-build-
general-contractor.
Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2013). Leadership, creative problem-solving
capacity, and creative performance: The Importance of Knowledge Sharing. Human
Resource Management, 52(1), 95-121.
Cassino, K. (2013). Lean construction leveraging collaboration and advanced practices to
increase project efficiency (Report). McGraw Hill Construction.
Changali, S., Mohammad, A., & Nieuwland, M. (2015). The construction productivity
imperative. How to build megaprojects better. https://www.mckinsey.com
/industries/capital-projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/the-construction-productivity-
imperative.
Cherian, J. & Jacob, J. (2013). Impact of self-efficacy on motivation and performance of
employees. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(14).
107
Chesworth, B. (2015). Misconceptions of lean: Why implementation fails. Proceedings IGLC-23.
Perth, Australia.
Christensen, R. & Christensen, T. (2010). Lean construction facilitates leaning on all
organizational levels? Proceedings IGLC-18, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
Clark, E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning Research into Results. Information Age Publishing.
Cleary, J. & Muñoz, A. (2018). Reaping the rewards or production tracking. Proceedings
IGLC-26, Chennai, India.
Colquitt, J., Scott, B., & LePine, J. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-
analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927.
Construction Management Association of America. (2012). An owner’s guide to project delivery
methods. https://www.cmaanet.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/owners-guide-to-project-
delivery-methods.pdf.
Creswell, J. & Creswell, J. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Crossman, A. (2020). Understanding Purposive Sampling. https://www.
thoughtco.com/ purposive-sampling-3026727.
Cullen, P., Butcher, B., Hickman, R., Keast, J., & Valadez, M. (2005). The application of lean
principles to in-service support: A comparison between construction and the aerospace
and defense sectors. Lean Construction Journal, 2, 87-104.
DePoy, E. (2020). Introduction to research: understanding and applying multiple
strategies. Mosby.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory.
108
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
DiBenedetto, M. & Bembenutty, H. (2013). Within the pipeline: Self-regulated learning,
self-efficacy, and socialization among college students in science courses. Learning and
Individual Differences, 23, 218-224.
Donohoo, J., Hattie, J., & Eells, R. (2018, March). The power of collective efficacy. Educational
Leadership, 75(6), 40–44.
Durham, C., Knight, D., & Locke, E. (1997). Effects of leader role, team-set goal difficulty,
efficacy, and tactics on team effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 72, 203-231.
Dweck, C. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10),
1040–1048.
Elmore, R. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for
professional development in education. Washington, D.C.: Albert Shanker Institute.
http://www.shankerinstitute.org/sites/shanker/files/Bridging_Gap.pdf
Engineering News Record. (2019). ENR 2019 Top 400 Contractors 1-100. https://www.enr.com/
toplists/2019-Top-400-Contractors1.
Fink, L. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences, revised and updated: An integrated
approach to designing college courses. Jossey-Bass.
Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-
developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Fowler, M. (2014). Maturity model. https://martinfowler .com/ bliki/MaturityModel.html>.
Gallimore, R. & Goldenberg, C. (1993). Activity settings of early literacy: Home and
109
school factors in children's emergent literacy. Contexts for Learning: Sociocultural
Dynamics in Children's Development. 315-335.
Gao, S. and Low, S. (2014). The Toyota way model: An alternative framework for lean
construction. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 25(5-6), 664-682.
Gosen, J. and Washbush, J. (2004). A review of scholarship on assessing experiential learning
effectiveness. Simulation & Gaming, 35(2), 270-293.
Harris, F. & McCaffer, R. (1997). Modern construction management. Wiley Blackwell.
Hentschke, G., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. USC Urban
Education, 17–19.
Hines, P., Silvi, R., & Bartolini, M. (2002). Demand chain management: An integrative approach
in automotive retailing. Journal of Operations Management, 20(6), 707-728.
Horman, M. & Kenley, R. (1996). The application of lean production to project
Management. Proceedings IGLC-4, Birmingham, AL.
Howell, G. (1999). What is lean construction? Proceedings IGLC-7, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: (Ky'zen): the key to Japan's competitive success. McGraw-Hill.
Inuwa, I., Joseph, S., & Musa, M. (2019). Effects of Craftspeople supervisors’ project
management skills on construction project success in Nigeria. IOP Conference Series:
Materials Science and Engineering.
Jørgensen, B. & Emmitt, S. (2008). Lost in transition: The transfer of lean manufacturing to
construction. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 15(4), 383-398.
Keyser, R., Sawhney, R., & Marella, L. (2016). A management framework for understanding
change in a lean environment. Tékhne, 14 (1), 31–44.
Kirkpatrick, J. & Kirkpatrick, W. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
110
ATD Press.
Konchar, M. & Manshum, A. (2017). LCI 2017 Update. Presentation at the 19th Lean
Construction Institute Congress, Anaheim, CA, USA.
Kotter, J. (1996). Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996.
Kotter, J. (2001). What Leaders Really Do. Harvard Business Review, 79, 85-98.
Korb, S. (2016). “Respect for people” and lean construction: Has the boat been missed?.
Proceedings IGLC-24, Boston MA.
Koskela, L. (1992). Application of the new production philosophy to construction. Stanford
University.
Koskela, L. (2000). Application of the new production philosophy to construction. Helsinki
University of Technology.
Krathwohl, D. (2002). A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory Into
Practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Krauss, A. (2013). External influences and the educational landscape: Analysis of political,
economic, geographic, health and demographic factors in Ghana. Springer.
Langley, G., Moen, R., Nolan, K., Nolan, T., Norman, C., & Provost, L.
(2009). The improvement guide: a practical approach to enhancing organizational
performance. Jossey-Bass.
Latham, G. & Locke, E. (2006). Enhancing the benefits and overcoming the pitfalls of
goal setting. Organizational Dynamics, 35(4), 332–340.
Lau, S. & Roeser, R. (2008). Cognitive abilities and motivational processes in science
achievement and engagement: A person-centered analysis. Learning and Individual
Differences, 18(4), 497–504.
111
Lazaroiu, G. (2015). Work motivation and organizational behavior. Contemporary Readings in
Law and Social Justice, 7(2), 66–75.
Lean Construction Institute. (2012). What is lean construction? http://www.leanconstruction.org.
Lean Construction Institute. (2017). Lean Construction Institute 2017 annual report.
https://www.leanconstruction.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/LCI_Annual_ Report_
2017_interactive_pdf.pdf.
Lencioni, P. (2012). The five dysfunctions of a team: facilitator's guide: the official guide to
conducting the five dysfunctions workshops for teams and team leaders. Chichester.
Leong, M., Ward, S., & Koskela, L. (2015). Towards an operative definition of lean
construction onsite. Proceedings IGLC-23, Perth, Australia.
Lim, V. (2008). Lean construction: Knowledge and barriers in implementing into Malaysia
construction industry. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia.
Lukowski, J. (2010). Lean construction PRINCIPLES eliminate waste.
https://www.powermag.com/lean-construction-principles-eliminate-waste/.
Macomber, H. & Howell, G. (2004). The two great wastes in organizations. Proceedings IGLC-
12, Helsingor, Denmark.
Marhani, M., Jaapar, A., Bari, N., & Zawawi, M. (2013). Sustainability through lean
construction approach: A literature review. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences,
101, 90-99.
Martin, A. & Elliot, A. (2016). The role of personal best (PB) goal setting in students' academic
achievement gains. Learning and Individual Differences, 45, 222–227.
Matsushita, K. (1979). Matsushita Electric Industrial Company, Ltd., Japan.
Mattessich, P. & Monsey, B. (2001). Collaboration--what makes it work: a review of research
112
literature on factors influencing successful collaboration. Fieldstone Alliance.
Mayer, R. (2011). Towards a science of motivated learning in technology-supported
environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(2), 301-308.
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Merriam, S. & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: a guide to design and
implementation. Langara College.
Mossman, A. (2018). What is lean construction: Another look. Proceedings IGLC-26, Chennai,
India.
Muñoz, A., Laurent, J., & Dierks, C. (2019). Team health: A measured approach to collective
learning. Proceedings IGLC-27, Dublin, Ireland.
Neto, J. & Alves, T. Strategic issues in lean construction implementation. Proceedings IGLC-15,
East Lansing, Michigan.
Neto, A. & Candido, O. (2018). Measuring the neutral real interest rate in Brazil: a
semi-structural open economy framework. Empirical Economics, 58(2), 651–667.
Nofera, W., Abdelhamid, T., & Lahouti, A. (2015). Teaching lean construction for university
students. Proceedings IGLC-23, Perth, Australia.
Oladiran, O. (2008). Lean-in-Nigerian construction: State, barriers, strategies and ‘Go-To-
Gemba’approach’. Proceedings of the IGLC–16, Manchester, UK.
Omran, A. & Abdulrahim, A. (2015). Barriers to prioritizing Lean construction in the Libyan
construction industry. Acta Technica Corviniensis-Bulletin of Engineering, 8(1), 53.
O’Neill, D. (2016). Understanding lean and lean construction in Ireland. Irish
113
Building Magazine. https://www.irishbuildingmagazine.ie/2016/04 /27/understanding-
lean-and-lean-construction-in-ireland/4Jan17.
Orr, C. (2005). Lean leadership in construction. Proceedings IGLC-13, Sydney, Australia.
Patton, M. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Pazzaglia, M., Haggard, P., Scivoletto, G., Molinari, M., & Lenggenhager, B. (2016). Pain and
somatic sensation are transiently normalized by illusory body ownership in a patient with
spinal cord injury. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 34(4), 603-613.
Pemberton, J. (2018). The business case for lean. https://leanconstructionblog.com/
The-Business-Case-for-Lean.html.
Pettersen, J. (2009). Defining lean production: Some conceptual and practical issues. The TQM
Journal, 21(2), 127-142.
Pintrich, P. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
Pintrich, P., Wolters, C., & Baxter, G. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self-regulated
learning. Issues in the Measurement of Metacognition, 43-97.
Porwal, V., Fernández-Solís, J., Lavy, S., & Rybkowski, Z. (2010) Last planner
system implementation challenges. Proceedings IGLC-18, Haifa, Israel.
ReportLinker. (2020). Global Construction Outlook to 2024 (Q4 2020 Update). GlobeNewswire
News Room. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/01/08
/2155382/0/en/Global- Construction-Outlook-to-2024-Q4-2020-Update.html.
Rodewohl, C. (2014). The presence of Lean Construction principles in Norway’s transport
infrastructure projects. Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
114
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. Teachers College Press.
Sacks, R., Barak, R., & Korb, S. (2018). Building lean, building BIM: Improving construction
the Tidhar way. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Salkind, N. & Frey, B. (2020). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics. SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Sarhan, S. & Fox, A. (2013). Barriers to implementing lean construction in the UK construction
industry. The Built & Human Environment Review, 6(1), 1-17.
Saunders, M. (2019). Understanding research philosophy and approaches to theory
development. In Research Methods for Business Students, 5/e. Pearson Education India.
Schneider, W. & Pressley, M. (2015). Memory development between two and twenty.
Psychology Press.
Schöttle, D., Schimmelmann, B., Karow, A., Ruppelt, F., Sauerbier, A.., Bussopulos, A., …
Lambert, M. (2014). Effectiveness of integrated care including therapeutic assertive
community treatment in severe schizophrenia spectrum and bipolar disorders. The
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 75(12), 1371–1379.
Schraw, G. & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
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.
Simon, M. & Goes, J. (2011). Dissertation and scholarly research: recipes for success.
Dissertation Success, LLC.
Sim, K. & Rogers, J. (2008). Implementing Lean production systems: Barriers to
115
change. Management Research News, 32(1), 37-49.
Sterling, A. & Boxall, P. (2012). Lean production, employee learning and workplace outcomes:
A case analysis through the ability-motivation-opportunity framework. Human Resource
Management Journal, 23(3), 227-240.
Stevens, M. (2014). Increasing adoption of lean construction by contractors. Proceedings IGLC-
22, Oslo, Norway.
Stevenson, H. & Moldoveanu, M. (1995). The Power of Predictability. Harvard Business
Review. Harvard Business School Publishing.
Suresh, S., M. Bashir, A., & Olomolaiye, P. (2011). A protocol for lean construction in
developing countries. SPON Press.
Tuckman, B. (2009). Operant conditioning.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/operant-conditioning/
Tsao, C., Azambuja, M., Farook, H., Menches, C., & Rybkowski, Z. (2013). Teaching lean
construction perspectives on theory and practice. Proceedings IGLC-21, Fortaleza,
Brazil.
Veech, R., Bradshaw, P., Clarke, K., Curtis, W., Pawlosky, R., & King, M. (2017). Ketone
bodies mimic the life span extending properties of caloric restriction. IUBMB Life, 69(5),
305-314.
Viana, D., Mota, B., Formoso, C., Echeveste, M., Peixoto, M., and Rodrigues, C. A Survey on the
last planner system: Impacts and difficulties for implementation in Brazilian companies.
Proceedings IGLC-18, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
Wandahl, S. (2014). Lean construction with or without lean – Challenges of implementing lean
construction. Proceedings IGLC-22, Oslo, Norway.
116
Widmeyer, W. & Ducharme, K. (1997). Team building through team goal setting. Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 9(1), 97–113.
Wig, B. & Reke, E. (2019). Better Thinking for Better Lean Thinking. Planet Lean.
https://planet-lean.com/system-thinking-lean-thinking/.
Womack, J., Jones, D., & Roos, D. (1990). The machine that changed the world. Free
Press.
World Economic Forum. (2016). Shaping the future of construction: A breakthrough in mindset
and technology. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Shaping_the_ Future_of_
Construction_full_report__.pdf.
Yough, M. & Anderman, E. (2006). Goal Orientation Theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/goal-orientation-theory/.
Zhou, X., Pan, D., Angelopoulos, V., Runov, A., Zong, Q., & Pu, Z. (2016). Understanding the
ion distributions near the boundaries of reconnection outflow region. Journal of
Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 121(10), 9400-9410.
Zuboff, S. & Maxmin, J. (2004). The support economy: why corporations are failing individuals,
and the next episode of capitalism. Penguin.
117
Appendix A: Survey Items
The survey was prepared by aligning the KMO influences with both open and closed,
forced choice, 4-point Likert scale items (Fink, 2013). The potential influences are listed
below, followed by a table that outlines the survey items, lists the possible responses, and
maps each item to a KMO construct.
Knowledge Influences
Factual: Craftspeople need to be able to identify lean construction practices.
Procedural: Craftspeople need to know how to apply lean construction.
Metacognitive: Craftspeople need to monitor their own ability to implement lean construction
practices.
Motivation Influences
Self-Efficacy: Craftspeople need confidence that they can successfully master lean
construction practices.
Goal-orientation: Craftspeople need to directly engage in the implementation of lean
construction practices with the personal goal to master skills and knowledge.
Organizational Influences
Cultural Setting; Equality: Supports the implementation of lean construction practices
by enabling a culture of stakeholder equality.
Cultural Setting; Engagement: Supports the implementation of lean construction
practices by enabling a culture of stakeholder equality.
Cultural Model: Valuates and monitors lean construction outputs.
118
Table A1
Survey Items by Construct
KMO
construct
Survey item Response type
K-F Identify the construction practices from this list. Open from list
K-M I actively plan out the incorporation of lean
construction practices on my projects.
Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly
Agree
K-M I assess how successful I am in applying lean
construction practices on my projects.
Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly
Agree
M-SE I am confident that I can master lean
construction practices.
Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly
Agree
M-GO Though at times challenging to learn, lean
construction makes my job easier.
Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly
Agree
O-CS I feel like my input is considered when making
project decisions.
Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly
Agree
O-CS Leadership provides me the training needed to
support implementing lean construction
practices.
Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly
Agree
O-CM I understand how my project and progress are
being evaluated for success.
Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly
Agree
Note: K-F = Knowledge-Factual, K-P = Knowledge-Procedural, K-M = Knowledge-
Metacognitive, M-SE = Motivation-Self- Efficacy, M-GO = Motivation-Goal
Orientation, M-MA = Motivation-Mastery Orientation, O-CM = Cultural Models, O-CS
= Cultural Settings
119
Appendix B: Interview Protocol
The interview will begin with a scripted introduction, in which I welcome the participant
and reminds them of the structures put in place to ensure confidentiality, protection of data, and
voluntary participation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I will then thank the subject for their
participation and discuss a little bit about why this project matters to me, to establish a sense of
rapport (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Following the introduction, I will begin to ask the scripted interview questions. Table B2
provides these questions. Question type has been identified using Patton’s (2015) six types
and/or Strauss et al’s (1981) four types as cited in Merriam & Tisdell, 2016.
120
Table B1
Interview Questions
Q# Question Question type
1 Talk to me about what the different
elements of lean construction projects are.
Knowledge (Patton, 2015)
2 Talk to me about the steps you might follow
when developing a schedule on a lean
construction project."
Knowledge (Patton, 2015); Experience
& Behavior (Patton, 2015)
3 Tell me about a time when you ran into a
challenge implementing lean construction
practices during a project. What did you
do to resolve the problem?
Knowledge (Patton, 2015); Experience
& Behavior (Patton, 2015)
4 Talk me through a time that you had to alter
your knowledge of lean construction
principles or its steps to fit your job
demands.
Knowledge (Patton, 2015); Experience
& Behavior (Patton, 2015)
5 Explain to me your self-monitoring habits
for lean construction implementation.
Experience & Behavior (Patton, 2015)
6 Do you feel like you have enough skills to
apply lean construction practices? Why or
Why not?
Experience & Behavior (Patton, 2015);
Ideal position (Strauss et al., 1981)
7 Can you talk to me about your confidence
in being able to implement lean
construction practices? Please explain
further.
Experience & Behavior (Patton, 2015);
Opinion & Value (Patton, 2015); Ideal
position (Strauss et al., 1981)
8 Tell me about your personal goals, if any,
with respect to implementing lean
construction practices.
Opinion & Value (Patton, 2015); Ideal
position (Strauss et al., 1981)
9 What role have you played in determining
the training that you have received?
Experience & Behavior (Patton, 2015);
Opinion & Value (Patton, 2015); Ideal
position (Strauss et al., 1981)
10 In what ways does your Organization
support you in the goal of increasing lean
construction practices?
Experience & Behavior (Patton, 2015);
Opinion & Value (Patton, 2015); Ideal
position (Strauss et al., 1981)
121
Appendix C: Existing Data
2019 CRAFT ENGAGEMENT SURVEY RESULTS OVERVIEW
(NOT INCLUDED FOR CONFIDENTIALITY)
122
Appendix D: Sample Post-Training Survey Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1 and 2
1. The training held my interest. (Level 1 Engagement)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
2. This training was relevant to the work I do. (Level 1 Relevance)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
3. I am satisfied with my training experience today. (Level 1 Customer Satisfaction)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
4. The goal of lean construction is to increase value by reducing: (Level 2 Factual Knowledge)
a. Budget
b. Schedule
c. Waste
d. Craftspeople
5. Which of the below is not one of the five major steps of the Last Planner System? (Level 2
Procedural Knowledge)
a. Master Planning
b. Pull Planning
c. Make-ready Planning
d. Weekly Work Planning
6. Understanding how to read and interpret PPC is valuable to my work. (Level 2 Attitude)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
123
Appendix E: Sample Delayed Blended Evaluation Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1,
2, 3, and 4
1. The training information continues to be applicable to my recent work. (Level 1 Relevance)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
2. How has your confidence using what you learned changed since training? (Level 2
Confidence)
3. I have successfully applied what I learned in training to my work. (Level 3 Transfer)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
4. If you selected Strongly Disagree or Disagree for #7 above, please indicate the reasons (check
all the apply): (Level 3 Transfer)
a. What I learned is not relevant to my work.
b. I do not have the necessary knowledge and skills.
c. I do not feel confident applying what I learned to my work.
d. I do not have the resources I need to apply what I learned to my work.
e. I do not believe applying what I learned will make a difference.
f. No one is tracking what I am or am not doing anyway.
g. Other (please explain):
5. What else, if anything, do you need to successfully apply what you learned?
(Level 3 Transfer)
6. I feel encouraged to apply what I learned by my supervisor. (Required Drivers-
Encouraging)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
7. I have time with my supervisor and peers to share success stories and troubleshoot
124
challenges related to what I learned. (Required Drivers-Encouraging)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
8. I am incentivized to apply what I learned. (Required Drivers-Rewarding)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
9. I have been or will be rewarded for successfully applying what I learned. (Required Drivers
- Rewarding)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
10. I have my own performance goals related to what I learned. (Required Drivers-Reinforcing,
Monitoring)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
11. I am held accountable for applying what I learned. (Required Drivers-Monitoring)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
12. I am already seeing positive results from applying what I learned. (Level 4 Results)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
13. Please share any suggestions you have for improving this training:
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This study sought to explore the knowledge-based, motivational, and organizational root causes of the underutilization of lean construction practices at BGT Construction. Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis provided the conceptual and methodological framework for this study. Using a mixed methodology, the relationships between factual, procedural, and metacognitive based knowledge, goal orientation, cultural model, and cultural settings were investigated as it applies to the degree of implementation of lean construction practices amongst BGT Craftspeople. Results from surveys, interviews, and document analysis validated or partially validated six assumed influences on the problem of practice in these areas. Data from this study revealed that there is a strong motivation amongst BGT Craftspeople to learn about and apply lean construction practices. However, this motivation is hampered by a lack of factual and procedural knowledge that is perpetuated by a lack of organizational support. The implications of these findings denote the risk of inconsistent operations and inefficient delivery methods due to a lack of critical knowledge, skills, and organizational resources. The study concludes with recommendations for context-specific solutions grounded in literature and the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), as well as an integrated implementation and evaluation plan, strengths and weaknesses of the study, limitations and delimitations, and recommendations for future study.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Gender diversity in optical communications and the role of professional societies: an evaluation study
PDF
Recruiting police diversity
PDF
Optimizing leadership and strategy to develop an expenditure-reduction plan: an improvement study
PDF
Millennial workforce retention program: an explanatory study
PDF
Employee standardization for interchangeability across states: an improvement study
PDF
Taking the pulse on accountability: an innovation study
PDF
Role understanding as a pillar of employee engagement: an evaluation gap analysis
PDF
Keeping virtual team members engaged in their roles: an impossible task or a paramount necessity for an increasingly globalized world
PDF
Leadership in times of crisis management: an analyzation for success
PDF
Exploring the experience of acquired employees within an organization following acquisition
PDF
Restoring justice in urban K-12 education systems: an evaluation study
PDF
Influences on the use of restorative practices in a United Kingdom junior school: an evaluation study
PDF
Universal algebra: an evaluation
PDF
A framework for customer reputation evaluation: an innovation study
PDF
U.S. Navy SEALs resilience needs assessment: an innovation study
PDF
Influencing and motivating employee engagement: an exploratory study on employee engagement in organizational injury-prevention programs
PDF
Executive succession planning: a study of employee competency development
PDF
Critical behaviors required for successful enterprise resource planning system implementation: an innovation study
PDF
Navigating race, gender, and responsibility: a gap analysis of the underrepresentation of Black women in foreign service leadership positions
PDF
Mentoring as a capability development tool to increase gender balance on leadership teams: an innovation study
Asset Metadata
Creator
Muñoz, Anthony Alberto
(author)
Core Title
Lean construction through craftspeople engagement: an evaluation study
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2021-12
Publication Date
08/20/2021
Defense Date
07/13/2021
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
craftsmen,craftspeople,engagement,lean construction,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Donato, Adrian (
committee chair
), Foulk, Susan (
committee member
), Phillips, Jennifer (
committee member
)
Creator Email
aamunoz@usc.edu,aamunoz1@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC15723585
Unique identifier
UC15723585
Legacy Identifier
etd-MunozAntho-10041
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Muñoz, Anthony Alberto
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
craftspeople
lean construction