Questionnaire Response Analysis
a) Profession Weightage (out of 100)
Site Engineer/ Manager - 40
Site Supervisor - 30
Architect - 20
Labour - 05
Material Supplier - 05
WEIGHTAGE
Labour;
5
Architec
t; 20 Site Engineer/Manager
Site Site Supervisor
Engineer
/Manag Architect
er; 40 Labour
Material Supplier
Site
Supervis
or; 30
b) Experience Weightage (out of 100)
0-3 years - 10
3-5 years - 20
5-10 years - 30
More than 10 years - 40
WEIGHTAGE
0-3 years
>105-10
3-5 3-5 years
yearyear
year
0-3 5-10 years
s; s;s;
year >10 years
40; 30;
s;20;
40%30%
20%
10;
10%
c) No. of Responses (Google forms + Physical forms)
Site Engineers/ Managers - 84
Site Supervisors - 38
Architects - 43
Labours - 15
Material Suppliers - 32
Total - 212
d) Most waste producing stage in construction
(Weightage of Rank: 1st =40, 2nd =30, 3rd =20, 4th =10)
1st Rank
Procurement of Materials - 24
Handling of Materials - 48
Culture of Organisation - 17
Construction - 123
2nd Rank
Procurement of Materials - 38
Handling of Materials - 77
Culture of Organisation - 56
Construction - 42
3rd Rank
Procurement of Materials - 62
Handling of Materials - 54
Culture of Organisation - 72
Construction - 24
4th Rank
Procurement of Materials - 101
Handling of Materials - 21
Culture of Organisation - 74
Construction - 16
e) Most wastage causing process in Procurement of Material phase
(Weightage of Rank: 1st =30, 2nd =25, 3rd =20, 4th =15, 5th =10)
1st Rank
Delivery methods - 41
Delivery Schedules - 11
Purchase of inadequate materials - 86
No take back schemes - 22
Poor advice from suppliers - 52
2nd Rank
Delivery methods - 39
Delivery Schedules - 35
Purchase of inadequate materials - 51
No take back schemes - 55
Poor advice from suppliers - 32
3rd Rank
Delivery methods - 29
Delivery Schedules - 38
Purchase of inadequate materials - 54
No take back schemes - 38
Poor advice from suppliers - 53
4th Rank
Delivery methods - 52
Delivery Schedules - 58
Purchase of inadequate materials - 22
No take back schemes - 44
Poor advice from suppliers - 36
5th Rank
Delivery methods - 34
Delivery Schedules - 65
Purchase of inadequate materials - 21
No take back schemes - 42
Poor advice from suppliers - 50
f) Most wastage causing process in Handling of Material phase
(Weightage of Rank: 1st =30, 2nd =25, 3rd =20, 4th =15, 5th =10)
1st Rank
Damages due to Transportation - 51
In-appropriate Storage - 73
Poor Product Knowledge - 45
Equipment Failure - 11
In-appropriate tools - 32
2nd Rank
Damages due to Transportation - 48
In-appropriate Storage - 54
Poor Product Knowledge - 52
Equipment Failure - 21
In-appropriate tools - 37
3rd Rank
Damages due to Transportation - 30
In-appropriate Storage - 49
Poor Product Knowledge - 62
Equipment Failure - 26
In-appropriate tools - 46
4th Rank
Damages due to Transportation - 38
In-appropriate Storage - 27
Poor Product Knowledge - 38
Equipment Failure - 58
In-appropriate tools - 51
5th Rank
Damages due to Transportation - 46
In-appropriate Storage - 28
Poor Product Knowledge - 17
Equipment Failure - 83
In-appropriate tools - 38
g) Most wastage causing reason in Culture of Organisation
(Weightage of Rank: 1st =30, 2nd =25, 3rd =20, 4th =15, 5th =10)
1st Rank
Lack of Awareness - 76
Lack of Incentives - 13
Lack of support from Senior-Management - 21
Lack of Training - 64
Lack of will to work - 38
2nd Rank
Lack of Awareness - 52
Lack of Incentives - 33
Lack of support from Senior-Management - 38
Lack of Training - 61
Lack of will to work - 28
3rd Rank
Lack of Awareness - 29
Lack of Incentives - 41
Lack of support from Senior-Management - 68
Lack of Training - 33
Lack of will to work - 41
4th Rank
Lack of Awareness - 20
Lack of Incentives - 46
Lack of support from Senior-Management - 57
Lack of Training - 41
Lack of will to work - 48
5th Rank
Lack of Awareness - 25
Lack of Incentives - 79
Lack of support from Senior-Management - 25
Lack of Training - 19
Lack of will to work - 64
h) Most wastage causing process in Handling of Operation/Construction phase
(Weightage of Rank: 1st =30, 2nd =25, 3rd =20, 4th =15, 5th =10)
1st Rank
Poor Workmanship - 71
Design, Rework and variation - 56
Inexperienced staff - 39
Poor communication & management - 32
Act of God - 14
2nd Rank
Poor Workmanship - 47
Design, Rework and variation - 55
Inexperienced staff - 70
Poor communication & management - 31
Act of God - 09
3rd Rank
Poor Workmanship - 53
Design, Rework and variation - 32
Inexperienced staff - 72
Poor communication & management - 40
Act of God - 15
4th Rank
Poor Workmanship - 33
Design, Rework and variation - 46
Inexperienced staff - 33
Poor communication & management - 88
Act of God - 12
5th Rank
Poor Workmanship - 06
Design, Rework and variation - 14
Inexperienced staff - 02
Poor communication & management - 33
Act of God - 157
1) Total Marks & Stage in descending order of marks (Phase):
Rank Stage Marks (Out of 100)
1st Construction 54.7
2nd Handling of Materials 23.6
3rd Culture of Organisation 12.3
4th Procurement of Materials 9.4
Marks (Out of 100)
Procu
Cultur reme
e of nt of
Organ Mater
isatio ials
n 9%
12%
Const
ructio
n
Handl 55%
ing of
Mater
ials
24%
Construction Handling of Materials Culture of Organisation Procurement of Materials
Calculation-
For example, According to Site Engineer (40 marks) Abuzer who have experience of 5
years (20 marks) said construction phase causes more wastage in a project. So, construction
phase gets (40*20=800 marks)
Similarly, all responses are measured likewise and total points scored by all categories/factors
is calculated.
Now, these points scored by the different factors are scaled down out of 100 to get a
comparative view.
2) Total Marks & Process in descending order of marks (Procurement Phase):
Rank Process Marks (Out of 100)
1st Purchase of Inadequate 25.8
Materials
2nd Poor Advice from 21.0
Suppliers
3rd Delivery Methods 18.4
4th No take-back Schemes 18.2
5th Delivery Schedules 16.6
Purc
has
e of
Marks
Deli(Out ofInad
100)
equ
very ate
NoSch Mat
takedul eria
e- es ls
bac17% 26%
k
Sch
em
es Poo
18. Deli r
2 very Advi
18 Met ce
% hod fro
s m
18% Sup
Purchase of Inadequate Materials Poor Advice from Suppliers Delivery Methods
plie
No take-back Schemes Delivery Schedules
rs
21%
Calculation: -
For example, according to Site Supervisor (30 marks) Rahul have experience of 5 years (20
marks) said purchase of inadequate materials in procurement stage causes more wastage in
a project. So, Purchase of inadequate materials gets (30*20*10=6000 marks)
Similarly, all responses are measured likewise and total points scored by all categories/factors
is calculated.
Now, these points scored by the different factors are scaled down out of 100 to get a
comparative view.
3) Total Marks & Process in descending order of marks (Handling Phase):
Rank Process Marks (Out of 100)
1st In-appropriate Storage 24.5
2nd Damages due to 21.8
Transportation
3rd Poor Product 20.5
Knowledge
4th In-appropriate Tools 18.6
5th Equipment failures 14.6
Marks out of 100
Equipm In-
ent appropr
failures iate
15% Storage
25%
In-
appropr
iate
Tools
19%
Damag
Poor es due
Product to
Knowle Transpo
dge rtation
21% 22%
In-appropriate Storage Damages due to Transportation Poor Product Knowledge
In-appropriate Tools Equipment failures
4) Total Marks & Process in descending order of marks (Construction Phase):
Rank Process Marks (Out of 100)
1st Poor Workmanship 23.2
2nd In-experienced Staff 22.9
3rd Design, Rework and 21.3
Variation
4th Poor Communication & 19.7
Management
5th Act of God 12.9
Marks (Out of 100)
Poor
Act of Work
mans
Poor God hip
Com 13% 23%
muni
catio
n&
Mana
geme
nt In-
20%Desig exper
n, iened
Rewo Staff
23%
rk
and
Varia
tion
21%
Poor Workmanship In-experiened Staff
Design, Rework and Variation Poor Communication & Management
Act of God
5) Total Marks & Reason in descending order of marks (Culture of Organisation):
Rank Process Marks (Out of 100)
1st Lack of Training 23.2
2nd Lack of Awareness 22.2
3rd Lack of support from 19.0
Senior-Management
4th Lack of will to work 18.9
5th Lack of Incentives 16.7
Marks (Out of 100)
Lack of
Incentives Lack of
17% Training
23%
Lack of Training
Lack of Awareness
Lack of Lack of support from Senior-
will to Management
work
19% Lack of will to work
Lack of Incentives
Lack of
Awareness
Lack of 22%
support
from
Senior-
Managem
ent
19%
6) Final result (Total):
Rank Process Stage Marks (Out of
100)
1) Poor Workmanship Construction 9.6
2) In-experienced Staff Construction 8.3
3) In-sufficient Storage Material Handling 7.6
4) Lack of Training Culture of Organisation 7.2
5) Damages due to Material Handling 6.9
Transportation
6) Purchase of Inadequate Material Procurement 6.6
Materials
7) Design, Rework and Construction 6.1
Variation
8) Lack of Awareness Culture of Organisation 5.8
9) Poor knowledge of Material Handling 5.1
Products
10) Poor Communication & Construction 4.7
Management
11) Poor Advice from Material Procurement 4.6
Suppliers
12) In-appropriate Tools Material Handling 4.3
13) Lack of support from Culture of Organisation 3.9
Senior-Management
14) Lack of will to work Culture of Organisation 3.3
15) Delivery Methods Material Procurement 3.1
16) No take-back Schemes Material Procurement 3.0
17) Lack of Incentives Culture of Organisation 2.8
18) Equipment Failures Material Handling 2.7
19) Delivery Schedule Material Procurement 2.6
20) Act of God Construction 1.9
Marks out of 100
Act of God 1.9
Delivery Schedule 2.6
Equipment failures 2.7
Lack of incentives 2.8
No take-back schemes 3
Delivery Methods 3.1
Lack of will to work 3.3
Lack of support from senior-management 3.9
In-appropriate tools 4.3
Poor advice from suppliers 4.6
Poor communication & management 4.7
Poor knowledge of products 5.1
Lack of Awareness 5.8
Design, Rework & Variation 6.1
Purchase of Inadequate Materials 6.6
Damages due to Transportation 6.9
Lack of Training 7.2
In-sufficient Storage 7.6
In-experienced Staff 8.3
Poor Workmanship 9.6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Series 1
Calculation: - For example, according to Nikita (Architect-20 marks) have experience of 7
years (30 marks) said in construction phase process of poor workmanship causes more
wastage in a project. Since the overall marks by poor workmanship is maximum so it gets
another 30 marks. So, Poor workmanship gets (20*30*40*30) =7,20,000 marks.
Similarly, all responses are measured likewise and total points scored by all processes is
calculated.
Now all these scores are scaled down to get marks out of 100 to get the comparative view.
