Lean Construction: A Sustainability Operation for Government Projects

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is a nicely written manuscript. 

Me and everyone reading from the field or outside the field. Is able. To read, identify the information clearly. 

The manuscript is well. Organized and decently targeted to reach the conclusion and this something I appreciate. 

It gives a good time while reading because of the coherent structure and strategicalanalysis.

However I felt as a reader that I need. More. 

Some more conclusions derived.. Some. More analysis.. 

Author Response

Reviewer 1

Me and everyone reading from the field or outside the field. Is able. To read, identify the information clearly. 

The manuscript is well. Organized and decently targeted to reach the conclusion and this something I appreciate. 

It gives a good time while reading because of the coherent structure and strategicalanalysis.

However I felt as a reader that I need. More. 

Some more conclusions derived.. Some. More analysis.. 

Already adding in manuscript thank you

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript, entitled 'Lean Construction: Sustainability Operation for Government Project', addresses an important research issue. However, the study itself has many flaws. It is necessary to analyse the structure of the text and put it in order. Materials and methods are insufficiently described as is the Results section. The manuscript needs significant improvements to be published. I considered rejecting the study, so if the authors are interested in publishing the manuscript, they must be aware that a lot of work lies ahead. 

1) L13-14

"State budget allocation currently have achieved more than 10% in infrastructur development". - in the first sentence please write which country you are referring to.

2) Abstract

Please revise the abstract in accordance with the journal's guidelines, which limit it to max. 200 words. The abstract should present the problem statement, the purpose of the study, the methods and materials, the results and the main conclusions. It is usually on the basis of the abstract that the reader decides whether to read the article, a good abstract is extremely important.

3) L40

"The players in construction industry in most countries are the government [1], [2]. [3]"

The manuscript is scientific in nature, so specialised and scientific language should be used. The quoted sentence has the character of colloquial speech and even a kind of slang. Furthermore, please correct the punctuation dividing the literature references.

4) L73-75

"Building failures often happen caused by service providers/contractors related to their skills and trainings, usage of materials below standard, planning error (not up to technical standard and requirements) [26]."

Are there well-functioning construction supervision institutions in Indonesia? Such organisations can effectively counter building failures and usage of materials below standard....

5) L103

The first time the abbreviation APBN/APBD is used, its full name must be given.

6) L140-144

"Research methodology done in this research consist of quantitative and qualitative method that consist of schematic literature review that formulates lean construction to measure the effectiveness of government projects, this measure is related with variables and factors that directly influence in increasing productivity and reduce waste in government projects to increase performance in construction projects."

Some of the multiple sentences should be divided as they are not very readable in their current form.

7) 2. Materials and Methods

This section should describe the survey research conducted in more detail. Information about the research should be described in the past tense rather than the future tense. In addition, please describe the Delphi method.

8) Please correct the numbering of the following sections - it is incorrect.

9) The authors ostensibly describe the data collection procedure, but they do so in such a way that it is ultimately unclear how it was carried out. Were they interviews? Online surveys? The authors should also provide statements at the end of the article regarding the conduct of research using human subjects and the conditions of confidentiality.

10) The numbering of the tables is also incorrect. Please correct this.

11) An interview questionnaire/questions should be made available for reviewers in the supplementary materials.

12) According to the journal's guidelines, numbers should be written in exponential notation with a full stop rather than a comma.

13) The results are not sufficiently well described.

14) The conclusions are, in my opinion, very general, do not refer to the results of the research and are inadequate. 

The entire manuscript needs to be checked by a native speaker. There are many typos in the study, even very common phrases like Building Information Modelling is spelt incorrectly.

Author Response

1The manuscript, entitled 'Lean Construction: Sustainability Operation for Government Project', addresses an important research issue. However, the study itself has many flaws. It is necessary to analyse the structure of the text and put it in order. Materials and methods are insufficiently described as is the Results section. The manuscript needs significant improvements to be published. I considered rejecting the study, so if the authors are interested in publishing the manuscript, they must be aware that a lot of work lies ahead. 

1) L13-14

"State budget allocation currently have achieved more than 10% in infrastructur development". - in the first sentence please write which country you are referring to.

State budget allocation  in Indonesian Government project currently have achieved more than 10% in infrastructure development

2) Abstract

Please revise the abstract in accordance with the journal's guidelines, which limit it to max. 200 words. The abstract should present the problem statement, the purpose of the study, the methods and materials, the results and the main conclusions. It is usually on the basis of the abstract that the reader decides whether to read the article, a good abstract is extremely important.

State budget allocation  in Indonesian Government project currently have achieved more than 10% in infrastructure development. The large amount of budget requires construction industry management in Indonesia to be more professional, so that a better performance (cost, time, quality, safety and environment) may achieved. Lean construction is believed as a philosophy in increasing productivity and reduce wastes in a project. Government project executed using Design and Build have the advantage in integrating the planning and execution phase of a project. This research aims to production lean construction knowledge that currently only focus on project execution that will be expanded to planning and execution phase in a Design and Build (DB) project where these two entities are integrated in the main contractor. This research used quantitative and qualitative methods, quantitative was carried out by analyzing secondary data from Six DB project locations and qualitative methods were carried out using Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with panel experts using Delphi Method for consensus. The results of this research are the factors and variables that influence the implementation of lean construction on government projects in Indonesia.

3) L40

"The players in construction industry in most countries are the government [1], [2]. [3]"

The manuscript is scientific in nature, so specialised and scientific language should be used. The quoted sentence has the character of colloquial speech and even a kind of slang. Furthermore, please correct the punctuation dividing the literature references.

In various countries the government holds the dominant budget allocation for development infrastructure [1-3]

4) L73-75

"Building failures often happen caused by service providers/contractors related to their skills and trainings, usage of materials below standard, planning error (not up to technical standard and requirements) [26]."

Are there well-functioning construction supervision institutions in Indonesia? Such organisations can effectively counter building failures and usage of materials below standard.…

In Indonesia, the use of substandard materials is monitored by Quality Control (QC) in each Contractor's Organization.

5) L103

The first time the abbreviation APBN/APBD is used, its full name must be given.

Design and Build (DB) project on Government finance-based

6) L140-144

"Research methodology done in this research consist of quantitative and qualitative method that consist of schematic literature review that formulates lean construction to measure the effectiveness of government projects, this measure is related with variables and factors that directly influence in increasing productivity and reduce waste in government projects to increase performance in construction projects."

Some of the multiple sentences should be divided as they are not very readable in their current form.

Research methodology done in this research consist of quantitative and qualitative method. the quantitative method that consist of schematic literature review that formulates lean construction to measure the effectiveness of government projects. Factors obtained from the qualitative method are factors that have a direct influence on increasing productivity and reducing project waste. While the quantitative method is carried out by analyzing project progress report data on a monthly basis

7) 2. Materials and Methods

This section should describe the survey research conducted in more detail. Information about the research should be described in the past tense rather than the future tense. In addition, please describe the Delphi method.

Collecting data is carried out in two stages, namely:

1. Secondary data as a quantitative method is carried out by analyzing monthly progress reports from DB projects that have been completed in 6 (six) locations.
2. In depth interviews were conducted with respondent owners, contractors and academics to explore their perceptions about lean construction on government projects. Next, FGD was carried out with consensus drawing using the Delphi method.

When digging information through interviews and Delphi method, profiles from each experts are determined.  The Delphi method can be used for the following purposes: .

1. obtain accurate information that is unavailable or expensive to obtain;
2. deal with complex problems that require more judgmental analysis;
3. study or define areas where there is considerable uncertainty and/or lack of knowledge or agreed disagreement;

• Please correct the numbering of the following sections - it is incorrect.

Already correction in manuscript

9) The authors ostensibly describe the data collection procedure, but they do so in such a way that it is ultimately unclear how it was carried out. Were they interviews? Online surveys? The authors should also provide statements at the end of the article regarding the conduct of research using human subjects and the conditions of confidentiality.

1. Secondary data as a quantitative method is carried out by analyzing monthly progress reports from DB projects that have been completed in 6 (six) locations.
2. In depth interviews one on one were conducted with respondent owners, contractors and academics to explore their perceptions about lean construction on government projects. Next, FGD was carried out with consensus drawing using the Delphi method.

• The numbering of the tables is also incorrect. Please correct this.

Already correction In manuscript

• An interview questionnaire/questions should be made available for reviewers in the supplementary materials

Thank you for suggestion

12) According to the journal's guidelines, numbers should be written in exponential notation with a full stop rather than a comma.

Already correction In manuscript

• The results are not sufficiently well described.

Already adding in manuscript

14) The conclusions are, in my opinion, very general, do not refer to the results of the research and are inadequate. 

Already adding and correction in manuscript

Reviewer 3 Report

Please shorten the abstract to grab the main elements of the papers focusing on the current state of the research problem, the aim, the method of analysis (which is not presented), the main findings, and implications. Some parts were addressed but keep it simple and concise here.

You mentioned the aim in the abstract. But this is a summary of the paper. Thus, you should restate the research aim based on the research gap in the introduction itself. I would also suggest the author to divide between the introduction and literature review. In this case, the introduction should be more concise. You mentioned what is the current state of the project construction industry, but please specify the aim and research focus. The aim given in the abstract is not clear.

You mentioned Design and Build projects. Is this study relevant only to those types of projects? It is unclear and this section is somehow “hanging in the air” without a proper introduction and clarifying the aim. Why only these projects are analyzed, and why do you think are the most problematic?

In the methodology, be more precise about the timeline for collection of data, which data, which types of companies, and other demographic information. What you were asking for? Discuss the variables and their descriptions. Why did you select the structure of the sample as you presented in the methodology?

The writing style is not on an adequate level. E.g. “When digging information through interviews and Delphi method, profiles from each expert are determined.” We should not dig for information.

The results are only presented in a table view without in-depth elaboration. The discussion section should be more in-depth making a retrospective of your findings in the light of the current situation in the industry as well as the existing literature.  The conclusion should not revert us to the previous literature, rather it should summarise the findings, implications on the industry, and some limitations. 

The writing style is not on an adequate level. E.g. “When digging information through interviews and Delphi method, profiles from each expert are determined.” We should not dig for information.

Author Response

Please shorten the abstract to grab the main elements of the papers focusing on the current state of the research problem, the aim, the method of analysis (which is not presented), the main findings, and implications. Some parts were addressed but keep it simple and concise here.

State budget allocation  in Indonesian Government project currently have achieved more than 10% in infrastructure development. The large amount of budget requires construction industry management in Indonesia to be more professional, so that a better performance (cost, time, quality, safety and environment) may achieved. Lean construction is believed as a philosophy in increasing productivity and reduce wastes in a project. Government project executed using Design and Build have the advantage in integrating the planning and execution phase of a project. This research aims to production lean construction knowledge that currently only focus on project execution that will be expanded to planning and execution phase in a Design and Build (DB) project where these two entities are integrated in the main contractor. This research used quantitative and qualitative methods, quantitative was carried out by analyzing secondary data from Six DB project locations and qualitative methods were carried out using Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with panel experts using Delphi Method for consensus. The results of this research are the factors and variables that influence the implementation of lean construction on government projects in Indonesia.

You mentioned the aim in the abstract. But this is a summary of the paper. Thus, you should restate the research aim based on the research gap in the introduction itself. I would also suggest the author to divide between the introduction and literature review. In this case, the introduction should be more concise. You mentioned what is the current state of the project construction industry, but please specify the aim and research focus. The aim given in the abstract is not clear.

The Indonesian government project is experiencing big challenges, the development of the Indonesian Capital City (IKN) with a large amount of infrastructure must be managed well. The trend in government projects towards Design and Build (DB) is both an opportunity and a challenge, which if not managed well will result in low productivity and high waste. DB projects have the advantage of designer and builder being single entry, management should consider the unity of designer and builder. Currently, lean construction from various literature is implemented in the implementation (builder) phase so it is a new challenge if it can be adopted in DB projects where lean implementation is carried out in the design and construction phase. This gap is what we want to research further to apply lean construction to government DB projects. In this stage, a number of factors and variables that influence the implementation of lean construction on DB projects in the Government are analyzed.

You mentioned Design and Build projects. Is this study relevant only to those types of projects? It is unclear and this section is somehow “hanging in the air” without a proper introduction and clarifying the aim. Why only these projects are analyzed, and why do you think are the most problematic?

Mapping results from 2018 to 2022 in a state-owned enterprise there are 30 projects in total, of which 35% are DB projects. Of the 35% of DB projects, 50% of DB projects experience losses, so this research is important because DB projects based on literature studies usually have better performance than Design Bid Build (DBB). This anomalous condition is what we want to repair and improve by implementing lean construction which is believed to be a philosophy and principle for reducing waste and increasing productivity.

In the methodology, be more precise about the timeline for collection of data, which data, which types of companies, and other demographic information. What you were asking for? Discuss the variables and their descriptions. Why did you select the structure of the sample as you presented in the methodology?

Collecting data is carried out in two stages, namely:

1. Secondary data as a quantitative method is carried out by analyzing monthly progress reports from DB projects that have been completed in 6 (six) locations.
2. In depth interviews were conducted with respondent owners, contractors and academics to explore their perceptions about lean construction on government projects. Next, FGD was carried out with consensus drawing using the Delphi method.

When digging information through interviews and Delphi method, profiles from each experts are determined.  The Delphi method can be used for the following purposes: .

1. obtain accurate information that is unavailable or expensive to obtain;
2. deal with complex problems that require more judgmental analysis;
3. study or define areas where there is considerable uncertainty and/or lack of knowledge or agreed disagreement;

The writing style is not on an adequate level. E.g. “When digging information through interviews and Delphi method, profiles from each expert are determined.” We should not dig for information.

  Already delete and replace in manuscript

The results are only presented in a table view without in-depth elaboration. The discussion section should be more in-depth making a retrospective of your findings in the light of the current situation in the industry as well as the existing literature.  The conclusion should not revert us to the previous literature, rather it should summarise the findings, implications on the industry, and some limitations. 

Already correction In manuscript

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

1) Figure 2 should be corrected. Literature references in Fig. 2 should be described in the correct form and should be included in the literature list.

2) L166-201

Please correct 'Collecting data' as plagiarism has been detected in this section, which may contribute to the rejection of the manuscript.

3) Please correct the numbering of each section. Currently the Introduction does not have a number, the numbering appears in the section "2. Materials and Methods". The subsections should also be numbered accordingly. I refer authors to the journal's guidelines for drafting a manuscript. 

4) There is a header of Table 5 and a blank page below it (page 9/21), but the table does not appear. This is probably the header for the table that is shown above. The structure of the manuscript needs to be sorted out.

5) In my opinion, the manuscript has been insufficiently corrected. Please also mark the corrected passages. Currently, the authors have marked only a few of the changes they have made.

Author Response

REVIEWER 2

• Figure 2 should be corrected. Literature references in Fig. 2 should be described in the correct form and should be included in the literature list.

Already correction in manuscript

• L166-201

Please correct 'Collecting data' as plagiarism has been detected in this section, which may contribute to the rejection of the manuscript.

Data collection was carried out in two stages, namely

1. Quantitative methods were used to analyse secondary data through monthly progress reports from DB projects completed at six different DB project locations in Java and Kalimantan.
2. In-depth, face-to-face interviews were conducted with owners, contractors, designers and academics to explore perceptions of lean construction in government projects. Next, an FGD was carried out using the Delphi method to reach consensus.

During the data collection process, respondents were grouped based on their respective functions in the construction project. The next step is to reach a consensus to identify certain variables for deeper analysis to obtain accurate results. To facilitate comprehensive analysis, all interviews were recorded, allowing accurate translation and data cleaning to occur. The Delphi method is used for the following purposes.

1. obtain accurate information that is not available based on the experience of the respondent (expert);
2. handle complex problems that require more in-depth analysis.

The collected data was analysed using standard qualitative method procedures, including data cleaning, data calibration, verification, presentation and then conclusions. The first round carried out measurements to then measure the prerequisites, strengths and weaknesses, challenges, and obstacles, as well as the experience of each respondent during the implementation of the DB project in the implementation of lean construction and the possibility of deeper factors influencing DB practices in LC implementation experienced by the participants. respondents. Next, the data is classified based on the lean construction dimensions found in the literature, namely high productivity, and low waste. Follow-up discussions were held with several respondents to strengthen the validity of the analysis and draw definite conclusions.

• Please correct the numbering of each section. Currently the Introduction does not have a number, the numbering appears in the section "2. Materials and Methods". The subsections should also be numbered accordingly. I refer authors to the journal's guidelines for drafting a manuscript. 

Already correction in manuscripts.

• There is a header of Table 5 and a blank page below it (page 9/21), but the table does not appear. This is probably the header for the table that is shown above. The structure of the manuscript needs to be sorted out.

Already correction in manuscripts.

• In my opinion, the manuscript has been insufficiently corrected. Please also mark the corrected passages. Currently, the authors have marked only a few of the changes they have made.

Thanks for your suggestions.

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have responded to my feedback, and I am satisfied. The aim is clarified. Furthermore, the focus on Design and Build projects is clarified in the manuscript. The methodology is further explained with more elaboration on how data are collected. Also, the clarification about the usage of the Delfi method is done. More clarity in writing is used this time. 

Author Response

REVIEWER 3  

The authors have responded to my feedback, and I am satisfied. The aim is clarified. Furthermore, the focus on Design and Build projects is clarified in the manuscript. The methodology is further explained with more elaboration on how data are collected. Also, the clarification about the usage of the Delfi method is done. More clarity in writing is used this time. 

Thank you for your review