logistics

Article
Considering Materials Management in Construction:
An Exploratory Study
Zakaria Dakhli ID
and Zoubeir Lafhaj *
Civil Engineering, Ecole Centrale de Lille, 59651 Villeneuve d’Ascq, France; zakaria.dakhli@centralelille.fr
* Correspondence: zoubeir.lafhaj@centralelille.fr; Tel.: +33-20-33-53-53

Received: 1 February 2018; Accepted: 2 March 2018; Published: 5 March 2018

Abstract: While materials count for a considerable amount of construction costs, the way materials
are managed seems to be improvised rather than approached methodically. This study investigates
the practice of novel techniques used to manage materials in the construction industry. Techniques
that have already proven themselves to be efficient ways to manage the production pace within the
industry include the pull system, Just-In-Time, Kitting and off-site fabrication. These are explained
and assessed in the context of the French construction industry through an exploratory study,
supported by a questionnaire completed by contractors. The results reveal that a clear plan to
manage materials on-site is lacking among the respondents, creating common inventory problems.
This research provides evidence to support the central role played by an efficient management of
material flow on-site. It also highlights the obstacles that hinder the adoption of innovative techniques,
such as sub-contractor coordination.

Keywords: materials management; construction; kitting; pull planning; supplier; inventory

1. Introduction
This study begins with the following observations: the realization of a building appears most
of the time to be a strenuous process. Construction methods, trades, and processes have much in
common (except in terms of security and the use of increasingly frequent tablet/mobile applications).
One gets the impression that many problems are managed only after they appear, and that construction
managers rely on improvisation more than they should [1].
Considering these observations, several actors are now trying to revolutionize the profession
using all the modern means at their disposal [2]. In this process of modernization, we initially think of
digital ultra-modern means, including the BIM (Building Information Modeling) [3]. The BIM is a 3D
“intelligent” digital projection where each element of the structure is not just a solid image in 3D, but
an object with many attributed characteristics (materials, dimensions, etc.).
In addition to the BIM, there are other ways to innovate the construction industry. For instance,
techniques from other industries (such as the food industry or the car dealer industry . . .) could
be adopted to optimize the supply chain [4]. In this respect, we could apply techniques such as
“Just-in-time”, “Kitting”, and “pull planning” to the construction industry. This work stems from the
interest in replicating those techniques in the construction field.
With this idea in mind, we believe it is important to first understand the needs of construction
managers in terms of innovative tools for organizing the construction site. Their experience/feedback
could be leveraged to draw a guide indicating the effectiveness of the current supply chain in
construction while providing perspectives on potential improvements.

Logistics 2018, 2, 7; doi:10.3390/logistics2010007 www.mdpi.com/journal/logistics

Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 13

Logistics 2018, 2, 7 2 of 13
Materials Management
Materials Management refers to an optimal way of coordinating, planning, supplying,
Materials
purchasingManagement
and storing construction materials, as well as providing quality control. The purpose of
Materials Management
Materials Management is to ensure
refers to anthat the correct
optimal way of products are supplied
coordinating, planning, exactly when
supplying, they are
purchasing
needed:
and at the
storing right time, materials,
construction at the rightasplace,
well with the right quality
as providing quality,control.
and at the right
The price. of
purpose It consists
Materialsof
having perfect control over the flow of the products, which will allow an optimal functioning
Management is to ensure that the correct products are supplied exactly when they are needed: at the of the
supply
right chain
time, [5].right place, with the right quality, and at the right price. It consists of having perfect
at the
control over the flow of the products, which will allow an optimal functioning of the supply chain [5].
2. Motivation
2. Motivation
This research was initiated following the findings of a recent study from McKinsey [6] that
This potential
reported research was initiated improvement
productivity following the paths
findingsfor ofthea construction
recent study sector.
from McKinsey
According[6] to that
this
report, Procurement
reported and Supply
potential productivity Chain Management
improvement could generate
paths for the construction sector.a According
potential toproductivity
this report,
improvementand
Procurement from 7 to 8%.
Supply Chain Management could generate a potential productivity improvement
from Additional
7 to 8%. studies [7] suggest that the typical problems of construction logistics are as follows:
missing or delayed
Additional deliveries,
studies no direct
[7] suggest that unloading
the typicalof transporters,
problems ineffective management
of construction logistics are asoffollows:
storage
space, installation
missing or delayed of wrong and
deliveries, damaged
no direct material,
unloading and no or insufficient
of transporters, separation of of
ineffective management emerging
storage
waste. installation
space, Additionally, of material
wrong and flowdamaged
is challenging sinceand
material, it involves different trades
no or insufficient working
separation in parallel
of emerging
and thus,
waste. is subjected
Additionally, to a high
material potential
flow for optimization
is challenging [8].
since it involves different trades working in parallel
and thus, is subjected to a high potential for optimization [8].
3. Explanation of the Issues at Hand
3. Explanation of the Issues at Hand
3.1. Pull System
3.1. Pull System
The concept behind Pull Planning (or Pull System) is to produce only the amount of goods that
The concept
are expected to bebehind Pull paying
sold while Planning (or PulltoSystem)
attention avoid any is to produce or
stock-outs only the amount of[9].
overproduction goods that
In doing
are expected to be sold while paying attention to avoid
so, the demand forecast study needs to be as exact as possible. any stock-outs or overproduction [9]. In doing
so, the demandtoforecast
Contrary a Push study
System needs to begoods
in which as exact
areasproduced
possible.and stocked before the client purchase,
Contrary
the Pull System to aisPush System
entirely in which
dependent ongoods are produced
the demand. and stocked
One good example before
of a the
Pullclient
System purchase,
can be
the Pull System is entirely dependent
found within the car dealer industry. on the demand. One good example of a Pull System can be
foundCar within the usually
dealers car dealer industry.
have a minimal number of cars in stock. Thus, when we want to buy a car
that Car dealers
is not usually
the “best have achances
seller”, minimal number
are low thatof cars
we infindstock.
one Thus,
in thewhen
garage we at
want
thetonearest
buy a carcar
that is not the “best seller”, chances are low that we find one in the garage at the
dealership. It usually takes a couple of days for the car dealer to contact the automaker to request nearest car dealership.
Itone.
usually takes a couple of days for the car dealer to contact the automaker to request one.
There
There exist many levels
exist many levelsatatwhich
whichPullPull Planning
Planning could
could be implemented.
be implemented. Figure
Figure 1 presents
1 presents those
those
levels.levels.

Figure 1. Supply chain strategies in the construction sector (adapted from: [10]).
Figure 1. Supply chain strategies in the construction sector (adapted from: [10]).

1- The Push System corresponds to the “Make-to-stock” (MTS) system, which consists of
1- The Push System
producing corresponds
according to the “Make-to-stock” (MTS) system, which consists of producing
to forecasts.
according to forecasts.
- Pros: the goods are stored and are immediately available for the client (there is no waiting
- time
Pros:for
thethe client).
goods are stored and are immediately available for the client (there is no waiting
- Cons: there
time for theare sometimes significant storage costs and remaining unsold products.
client).
- Cons: there are sometimes significant storage costs and remaining unsold products.
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 3 of 13

2- The first level of the “Pull System” corresponds to the “Assemble-to-order” (ATO) system, which
consists of assembling the final product on client demand. Intermediate parts are, however,
produced according to forecasts. The car dealer industry follows this system.

- Pros: there is less stock and the possibility of customized products.

- Cons: it requires a fast reaction to the demand and a short final assembly time.

3- The second level of the Pull System corresponds to the Make-to-order (MTO) system, which
consists of starting to produce the whole product (intermediate parts + final assembly) on client
demand. This configuration is adapted for customized products such as windows or doors.

- Pros: only raw materials are available in stock.

- Cons: this requires an even faster response time to the client’s demand. The production
time needs to be as low as possible.

4- The last level of the Pull System corresponds to the Engineer-to-order (ETO) system. In the ETO
system, the product is designed and produced on client demand. As an example, the production
of 3D modules of construction parts (such as bathrooms or kitchens) is an example of an ETO
product. If we consider “construction” at the project level, it could be considered as an ETO
system since every project is somewhat different (localization, characteristics, engineering, design,
stakeholders, etc.).

3.2. Just-In-Time
JIT (Just-In-Time) is a method for organizing and monitoring production. It is well known within
the manufacturing sector and aims at reducing inventory and Work In Progress (WIP). This method
is mostly used to manage supply and consists of ordering the raw materials only when they are
to be used immediately. Accordingly, one purpose of this method is to cut down on intermediate
stocks. The Just-In-Time method is based on a Pull System. Thus, good quality coordination between
the manufacturer and the client, on one hand, and the manufacturer and the supplier, on the other,
is required.
Additionally, for a successful implementation of JIT, the following is required: (1) a relatively
precise forecast study of the needs in terms of production; (2) a reliable transportation and delivery
network, and (3) a strict management of the demands.

3.3. Kitting
The Kitting is a process within which related but separate parts are gathered, packed, and
delivered as one package or unit. In other words, it is a method of supply that consists of packing and
delivering together parts that are meant to be assembled together. From a logistic perspective, the
Kitting method is expected to make the organization within the site easier and is expected to provide
the grounds for the smooth implementation of the Pull System by reducing the quantity of the stocks.
Many studies have investigated the effect of logistics on construction performance [11,12].
For instance, the study of Skjelbred, S. et al. in 2015 compared different approaches to construction
site logistics [13]. The research analyzed four case studies where the material supply systems were
different. Kitting was among those systems.

3.4. Off-Site Fabrication

This method consists of manufacturing some parts of the final product off-site (for example, walls,
stairs, etc.). This technique minimizes the stocks on-site. While off-site fabrication usually refers to
modular construction in which entire parts (3D elements) are built off-site and brought afterwards to
the site to be directly assembled, it also refers to prefabrication (2D elements).
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 4 of 13

4. Research Objectives
Current research shows that construction can be considered as a kind of production [14]. Logistics,
however, is not considered the primary concern or interest of construction managers [15], especially
since the cost of materials constitutes a large proportion of construction costs.
Construction logistics have captivated the interest of several researchers around the world [16–18].
While several studies show the limitations of current logistics systems in construction [13], a
comprehensive exploratory study on procurement issues has not yet been done in detail. The absence
of these studies makes it difficult to rethink current logistics practices in construction. Thus, the
purpose of this research is to provide scientific and professional communities with practical insights
into how to improve construction logistics.

5. Research Methodology
To meet this objective, we followed an exploratory research method that aims at clarifying a
problem that has been defined. A priori, it appears that exploratory research is used to produce
knowledge about unknown phenomena. The difference with “descriptive research” is that the latter
is used for known phenomena or to deepen the understanding of a given concept. In our case,
the exploratory study is backed by a survey that aims at evaluating the awareness of contractors
regarding the material management practices cited above. The questionnaire was developed and sent to
construction managers and work directors (work directors are one hierarchical level above construction
managers: they manage several construction managers). C-levels of construction companies were
contacted and approved the survey before sending it to construction managers and work directors.
The questionnaire was divided as follows:

5.1. Population’s Characteristics

The first part of the research consisted of collecting information on people responding to our
questionnaire (job title, work experience, nature of the site, size of the building, etc.). To keep the
respondent’s privacy and to increase the response rate, the questionnaires were anonymous.

5.2. Materials Management in Construction

5.2.1. Suppliers
The suppliers are crucial for the implementation of an optimal logistics system. Therefore, it is
important to assess their reliability and their reactivity.
Additionally, the surveyed construction managers were asked if they were familiar with the
notion of Kitting.

5.2.2. Transport and Delivery

In this section, we investigated whether the construction site had characteristics (due to the nature
of the different actors involved in it, or the location) which may have obstructed the implementation of
the Kitting and the JIT methods. For instance, a construction site that is located in the heart of Paris
will be more challenging to deliver than another construction site located in a less populated region.

5.2.3. On-Site Inventory

Most construction managers recognize that objects are commonly lost and broken on site, and
that this can cause serious problems. Additionally, if there is not enough room for storage within the
site (if the site is at the heart of a city for instance), many logistic challenges can arise. In this study, we
used the managers’ responses to justify the necessity of developing/using new methods for managing
the stock within the site.
 Most construction managers recognize that objects are commonly lost and broken on site, and
that this can cause serious problems. Additionally, if there is not enough room for storage within the
site (if the site is at the heart of a city for instance), many logistic challenges can arise. In this study,
we used the managers’ responses to justify the necessity of developing/using new methods for
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 5 of 13
managing the stock within the site.

5.2.4.
5.2.4. Prefabrication
Prefabrication
Our questionnaireincluded
Our questionnaire includedquestions
questions about
about thethe managers’
managers’ perception
perception of prefabrication.
of prefabrication. We
We were
were interested in knowing if most managers approved of this technique, and most importantly
interested in knowing if most managers approved of this technique, and most importantly why they why
they did
did or didornot
didapprove
not approve
of it. of it.

5.2.5. Subcontracting
Subcontracting
If a method is to be implemented, the feedback of all actors involved in the process should be
considered.
considered. In
In materials
materials management,
management, subcontractors
subcontractors are
are concerned
concerned by
by the
the changes
changes wewe intend to
implement. Thus, it is essential for us to anticipate their needs/concerns
needs/concernsbefore
beforeinitiating
initiatingany
anychange.
change.

and Discussion
6. Results and

6.1. Population’s
6.1. Population’s Characteristics
Characteristics
The study
The study concerned
concerned aa sample
sample of
of 30
30 respondents from five
respondents from five different
different construction
construction companies
companies
(Figure 2). We divided the current worksite location into three parts: Paris area, Province (outside
(Figure 2). We divided the current worksite location into three parts: Paris area, Province (outside the
the Paris area) and outside France. Figure 3 shows the “Paris Area”. This area is known
Paris area) and outside France. Figure 3 shows the “Paris Area”. This area is known for very forheavy
very
heavy traffic.
traffic.

Figure 2. Populations’ characteristics: sample profile.

Figure 2. Populations’ characteristics: sample profile.
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 6 of 13
Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 13

Figure 3. “Paris area” surrounded by a red circle. (Adapted from: GoogleMaps).

Figure 3. “Paris area” surrounded by a red circle. (Adapted from: GoogleMaps).
6.2. Materials Management in Construction
6.2. Materials Management in Construction
6.2.1. Suppliers
6.2.1. Suppliers
Figure 4a: The definition of “Kitting” was provided to the respondents in case they did not know
Figure
what 4a: The
the term definition
meant. of “Kitting”
The suggested was provided
definition is: to the respondents in case they did not know
what the term meant. The suggested definition is:
The Kitting is a process within which related but separate parts are gathered, packed, and delivered
as one
The package
Kitting is a or unit. In
process otherwhich
within words,related
it is a method of supply
but separate partsthat
areconsists of packing
gathered, packed, and delivering
delivered as
together parts that are meant to be assembled together.
one package or unit. In other words, it is a method of supply that consists of packing and delivering
together partsofthat
The results ourare meantsuggest
survey to be assembled
that almost together.
half of participants were not familiar with the term
Kitting. Some respondents recognized that they were using this technique (whether they called it
The results of our survey suggest that almost half of participants were not familiar with the term
Kitting or not). Some of the respondents, who were familiar with the Kitting concept, asked if such a
Kitting. Some respondents recognized that they were using this technique (whether they called it
system was cost effective.
Kitting or not). Some of the respondents, who were familiar with the Kitting concept, asked if such a
Implementing the Kitting method requires a considerable amount of initial planning,
system was cost effective.
particularly with the suppliers who are supposed to demonstrate their ability to supply goods in
Implementing
packages or Kits.the Kitting
Thus, method
asking requires a considerable
the participants about theiramount of initial
suppliers’ planning, particularly
responsiveness becomes
with the suppliers who are supposed to demonstrate their ability
important to assess the propensity of the suppliers to implement Kitting. to supply goods in packages or Kits.
Thus, asking
Figure the participants
4b: Few about
construction their suppliers’
managers expressed responsiveness
their disappointmentbecomes important
with to assess
the quality of theirthe
propensity
suppliers oforthewith
suppliers to implement
responsiveness. SuchKitting.
findings suggest that the relationship between the
Figure 4b:managers
construction Few construction managers
and the suppliers expressed
is good their disappointment
on average and that if asked with the quality
to implement of their
Kitting,
suppliers or with
the suppliers mayresponsiveness.
be willing to doSuch
somefindings suggest
additional workthat the relationship
to sustain between the construction
a good relationship.
managers and theconstruction
In general, suppliers isfirms
goodhave
on average
a network and
of that if asked
privileged to implement
suppliers with whomKitting,
theythe suppliers
sign long-
term
may becontracts,
willing tocalled framework
do some agreements.
additional work toThis typeaof
sustain contract
good represents reciprocal commitment
relationship.
from
In both sides.construction firms have a network of privileged suppliers with whom they sign
general,
Figure
long-term 4c: It makes
contracts, sense
called that these agreements.
framework privileged suppliers
This type(withofframework agreements)reciprocal
contract represents would
be even more willing to
commitment from both sides. implement Kitting if the virtues of this technique are well founded.
Figure
Figure 4c:4d: Construction
It makes managers
sense that are moresuppliers
these privileged satisfied (with
with framework
the contracted supplierswould
agreements) (with be
framework agreements) than with normal suppliers with whom they do not
even more willing to implement Kitting if the virtues of this technique are well founded. have partnerships. Thus,
the ideal—for implementing Kitting and innovative materials management systems—is to start first
Figure 4d: Construction managers are more satisfied with the contracted suppliers (with framework
with the contracted suppliers who are expected to demonstrate less resistance.
agreements) than with normal suppliers with whom they do not have partnerships. Thus, the
ideal—for implementing Kitting and innovative materials management systems—is to start first with
the contracted suppliers who are expected to demonstrate less resistance.
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 7 of 13
Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13
7 of 13

Figure 4. Questions for contractors related to suppliers’ management.

Figure 4. Questions for contractors related to suppliers’ management.
6.2.2. TransportFigure
and Delivery
4. Questions for contractors related to suppliers’ management.
6.2.2. Transport and Delivery
The application of Pull systems depends on the premise that delivery delay risks are mitigated.
6.2.2. Thus,
Transport and Delivery
it is important to assess the frequency
The application of Pull systems dependsofon delays.
the premise that delivery delay risks are mitigated.
Figure 5a: The responses suggest that delays in delivery are common within the surveyed sites.
The application of Pull systems
Thus, it is important to assess the frequency of delays. depends on the premise that delivery delay risks are mitigated.
More specifically, around half the participants stated that they got used to delays. This indicates the
Thus, it is 5a:
Figure important
The to assesssuggest
responses the frequencythat of delays.
delays in delivery
necessity of further investigations into recurrent delays, so as toare common
bring within
about viable the surveyed sites.
solutions.
Figure
More specifically, 5a: The responses suggest that delays in delivery are common
Figure 5b: Most sites located in the Paris region suffer from difficulties related to theThis
around half the participants stated that they got used towithin
delays.the surveyed It sites.the
indicates
delivery.
More
necessity specifically,
of further
seems around half
that thisinvestigations the participants
into recurrent
difficulty is characteristic stated
delays,
of the Paris that they got
soinaswhich
region used
to bring
heavy to
aboutdelays.
viable
traffic, This space, and the
indicates
lack ofsolutions.
necessity
other of further
logistical investigations
problems are into recurrent
predominant. We delays,
hypothesizeso as to
that
Figure 5b: Most sites located in the Paris region suffer from difficulties related to bring
the highabout
rate viable
of delayssolutions.
in delivery
the delivery.
It seems that this difficulty is characteristic of the Paris region in which heavy traffic, lack delivery.
Figure
found in 5b: Most
Figure sites
5a located
is correlated in the
with Paris
the siteregion
location:suffer
sites from
located difficulties
in Paris are related to the
more susceptible to
of space, It
and
seems high
that rates
this of delay
difficultybecause
is of accessibility
characteristic of challenges.
the Paris region in which heavy traffic, lack of space, and
other logistical problems are predominant. We hypothesize that the high rate of delays in delivery
Figure problems
other logistical 5c: We noticed that delays were
are predominant. Weless common outside
hypothesize that the thehigh
Parisrate
region. Since Kitting
of delays in delivery
found in Figure
heavily 5a is correlated
depends on the abilitywith
of thethe site location:
supplier sitesitlocated
to avoid delays, is fair to in Paris that
presume are caution
more susceptible
should to
found in Figure 5a is correlated with the site location: sites located in Paris are more susceptible to
high rates of delay
be taken because of Kitting
in implementing accessibility challenges.
in congested locations. The Kitting system relies on the reduction
high rates of delay because of accessibility challenges.
of the5c:
Figure number of deliveries
We noticed as shown
that delays in Figure
were 6, thus reducing
less common outside work
the delay
Parisrisks.
region. Since Kitting heavily
Figure 5c: We noticed that delays were less common outside the Paris region. Since Kitting
depends on the ability of the supplier to avoid delays, it is fair to presume that caution should be
heavily depends on the ability of the supplier to avoid delays, it is fair to presume that caution should
taken in implementing Kitting in congested locations. The Kitting system relies on the reduction of the
be taken in implementing Kitting in congested locations. The Kitting system relies on the reduction
number of deliveries
of the number as shown
of deliveries in Figure
as shown 6, thus6,reducing
in Figure work work
thus reducing delaydelay
risks.risks.

Figure 5. Questions for contractors related to transport and delivery.

Figure5.5.Questions
Figure Questions for
for contractors
contractors related
relatedto
totransport
transportand
anddelivery.
delivery.
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 8 of 13
Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13

Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13

FigureFigure 6. Kitting
6. Kitting system
system based
based onona aconsolidation
consolidation center
centerbefore final
before delivery
final to theto
delivery worksite.
the worksite.

Figure FigureOf5d:
5d:Figure3/4Ofof3/4the
6. Kitting
of the surveyedpeople,
surveyed
system
people, other
otherstakeholders
based on a consolidation stakeholders
center
than the suppliers
before finalthan
intervened
thetosuppliers
delivery
in the in the
intervened
the worksite.
delivery process. It is important then to further investigate this proposition in future research
delivery process. It is important then to further investigate this proposition in future research projects.
projects.
Figure 5d: Of 3/4 of the surveyed people, other stakeholders than the suppliers intervened in the
deliveryInventory
6.2.3. On-Site process. It is important then to further investigate this proposition in future research
6.2.3. On-Site Inventory
projects.
The implementation
The implementation of the techniques
of the techniquesmentioned earlier
mentioned earlier (Kitting
(Kitting andand Just-In-Time)
Just-In-Time) is contingent
is contingent
on one’s6.2.3. On-Site
onability
one’s Inventory
to minimize
ability intermediate
to minimize intermediatestocks.
stocks.
FigureTheFigure 7a:answers
The answers
7a:implementation
The totheto this
this questiondemonstrate
question demonstrate the need for for
newnew
methods for organizing
of techniques mentioned earlier the need
(Kitting methods
and Just-In-Time) for organizing
is contingent
storage facilities within the site. Indeed, about 67% of the participants declared that they encountered
storageonfacilities within
one’s ability the site.intermediate
to minimize Indeed, about 67% of the participants declared that they encountered
stocks.
storage problems on a regular basis.
Figure 7a:
storage problems on The
a answersbasis.
regular to this question demonstrate the need for new methods for organizing
Figure 7b: two-thirds of the participants suggested that the constructions site’s location made it
storage
Figure facilities
7b: within of
thethe
site.participants
Indeed, aboutsuggested
67% of the participants declared that they encountered
difficult totwo-thirds
store materials. This finding strengthens that thethat
the premise constructions site’s
the storage issue location made it
is important
storage problems on a regular basis.
difficultand
to store
shouldmaterials.
be managed.This finding strengthens the premise that the storage issue is important and
Figure 7b: two-thirds of the participants suggested that the constructions site’s location made it
shoulddifficultFigure 7c: Managing the stock is among the many tasks that a construction manager is supposed
be managed.
to store materials. This finding strengthens the premise that the storage issue is important
to
Figurehandle. According the
7c: Managing to the survey answers, only 30% of the participants believed that the issue of
and should be managed. stock is among the many tasks that a construction manager is supposed
storage was settled during the planning phase. The rest of the participants managed their stock
to handle. Figure 7c: Managing
According to thethe stock isanswers,
survey among theonly
many30%tasks of
thatthe
a construction
participants manager is supposed
believed that the issue
throughout the whole construction period.
to handle. According to the survey answers, only 30% of the participants
of storage was settled during the planning phase. The rest of the participants managed their believed that the issue of stock
storage was settled during the planning phase. The rest of the participants managed their stock
throughout the whole construction period.
throughout the whole construction period.

Figure 7. Questions for contractors related to on-site inventory.

Figure 7. Questions for contractors related to on-site inventory.

Figure 7. Questions for contractors related to on-site inventory.

Figure 7d: The answers to this question prove that the problem of broken/stolen products is
relatively serious. The problem of storage is correlated with the number of broken/stolen objects
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 9 of 13

Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 13

according to the data; having a minimum intermediate stock (security stock) as a buffer may partially
Figure 7d: The answers to this question prove that the problem of broken/stolen products is
mitigate this problem.
relatively serious. The problem of storage is correlated with the number of broken/stolen objects
according to the data; having a minimum intermediate stock (security stock) as a buffer may partially
6.2.4. Prefabrication
mitigate this problem.
The benefits of prefabrication have already been established [19]: this technique allows for the
6.2.4. Prefabrication
manufacturing of parts in a safe environment (without any risk of bad weather for instance), to
minimizeThe thebenefits
stock within the site, have
of prefabrication to better
alreadymanage/recycle
been establishedthe [19]:waste, and more
this technique importantly
allows for the to
manufacturing
minimize the workloadof parts
(andinthe
a safe environment (without
Work-In-Progress: any riskthe
WIP) within of site.
bad Indeed,
weather the
for only
instance),
taskstoleft for
minimize
the worker onthe
sitestock
are towithin theand
receive site,totoassemble
better manage/recycle the waste,
the prefabricated parts.and more importantly to
minimize the workload (and the Work-In-Progress: WIP) within the site. Indeed, the only tasks left
Figure 8a: The figure shows that prefabrication is common within the profession.
for the worker on site are to receive and to assemble the prefabricated parts.
The following question sheds light on the managers’ satisfaction with this method.
Figure 8a: The figure shows that prefabrication is common within the profession.
Figure 8b: The results show that construction managers are widely in favor of prefabrication.
The following question sheds light on the managers’ satisfaction with this method.
According Figure those
to 8b: Thesurveyed,
results show thethatquality of prefabricated
construction managers areitems widelyisinmost
favor often irreproachable.
of prefabrication.
Few According
managers to seem to disapprove of prefabricated materials, but still mention that
those surveyed, the quality of prefabricated items is most often irreproachable. some economies
Few of
scalemanagers
can be possible
seem tousing this technique
disapprove if the number
of prefabricated materials,ofbut
prefabricated
still mentionitems is important.
that some economies of
scale
Figurecan8c:
be possible
Almost using this technique
the entire surveyed if the number ofwas
population prefabricated
in favor of items
theisuse
important.
of prefabrication in
Figure 8c: Almost the entire surveyed population was in favor of the use of prefabrication in the
the future.
future.
Figure 8d: The use of prefabrication was widely praised by the construction managers, however,
not all ofFigure
them8d: The use of prefabrication was widely praised by the construction managers, however,
seemed to have a say in the decision to use them or not. This result is particularly
not all of them seemed to have a say in the decision to use them or not. This result is particularly
important to investigate in future research, so as to determine a clear map of the decision-making
important to investigate in future research, so as to determine a clear map of the decision-making
process related to the use of such a system.
process related to the use of such a system.

Figure 8. Questions for contractors related to prefabrication.

Figure 8. Questions for contractors related to prefabrication.
6.2.5. Subcontracting
6.2.5. Subcontracting
The main contractor relies on subcontracting for different reasons: lack of expertise in a certain
construction trade (exterior
The main contractor reliescarpentry, floor tile, etc.),
on subcontracting for not enoughreasons:
different time to manage
lack of aexpertise
certain trade
in a in
certain
construction trade (exterior carpentry, floor tile, etc.), not enough time to manage a certain for
detail, or in some cases, for cost and quality reasons. The selected subcontractor is responsible trade in
achieving the subcontracted work under the main contractor’s supervision.
detail, or in some cases, for cost and quality reasons. The selected subcontractor is responsible for
achieving the subcontracted work under the main contractor’s supervision.
Figure 9a: Those surveyed felt that storage management from subcontractors was not good on
average. This finding strengthens the idea that the storage issue is an important one and should be
managed with high priority.
Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 13

Figure 9a: Those surveyed felt that storage management from subcontractors was not good on
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 10 of 13
average. This finding strengthens the idea that the storage issue is an important one and should be
managed with high priority.
Figure 9b: The The quality
quality ofof communication
communication with with subcontractors
subcontractors seemed
seemed decent
decent overall, indicating
indicating
that mutual collaboration is possible to solve the problem of storage.
Figure 9c: On On average,
average, the quality of subcontractors’ work is perceived as correct.
Figure
Figure 9d: IfIf the the quality
quality of of communication
communication between between thethe construction
construction managermanager and and the
subcontractors is perceived as good, that among subcontractors is assessed as bad. This This finding
finding brings
brings
challenges
challenges to our attempt to implement Kitting. Indeed, Indeed, Kitting
Kitting requires a sustainable collaboration
among
among the thesubcontractors
subcontractorswho whoare supposed
are supposed to work
to work on the delivered
on the delivered kits (or
kitspackages)
(or packages) at theatsame
the
time.
same time.
Figure 10a: WithWith few exceptions, coordination meetings involving all the interested actors were
regularly
regularly heldheld within the site. It It is important
important to sustain this habit especially when communication
among
among the subcontractors
subcontractors is perceived as bad. Coordination meetings provide subcontractors subcontractors with
more opportunities
opportunities to to interact.
interact. OnOn thethe other
other hand,
hand, the
the efficiency
efficiency of those coordination meetings meetings is
questionable due to the results in Figure 9c.
Figure
Figure 10b: Most Most of of the coordination meetings were held on on aa weekly
weekly basis.
basis. Construction
managers argued
argued thatthatthe
thefrequency
frequencyofof those
those meetings
meetings should
should be adapted
be adapted to correspond
to correspond withwith the
the pace
pace of
of work. work.
Figure 10c: ThisThis figure
figure strengthens
strengthens the the statement
statement thatthat communication
communication among among the the subcontractors
subcontractors
requires improvement. Even Even more,
more, it suggests
suggests that subcontractors
subcontractors do do not
not use
use aa positive
positive approach to
collaborate with their their peers
peers(according
(accordingtotothe theconstruction
constructionmanagers).
managers).One Oneofofthe the proposed
proposed solutions
solutions in
in literature
literature is use
is the the of
use
theof“Last
the Planner System®
“Last Planner System
” (LPS)®”introduced
(LPS) introduced
by [1]. The byLast[1]. Planner
The Last ® is
Planner
System
System
based on ® is based on principles of leaning production to minimize the waste in a system through
principles of leaning production to minimize the waste in a system through assignment-level
assignment-level
planning or detailed planning or detailed
look-ahead look-ahead
scheduling [20]. scheduling [20]. of
It is comprised It is comprised
four elements: of afour elements:
master plan, a
master plan,a alook
phase plan, phase plan,
ahead a look
plan, andahead
a weekly plan,
workandplan
a weekly work
[21]. The useplan
of LPS [21]. The use
coupled withof Kitting
LPS coupled
could
with
be a solution to the lack of communication between subcontractors. In their research, Shokri, S.their
Kitting could be a solution to the lack of communication between subcontractors. In et al.
research,
suggested workShokri,onS.process suggested
et al. interfaces work on
(including process interfaces
subcontractors’ management) (including
to optimizesubcontractors’
the flow of
management)
construction [22]. to optimize the flow of construction [22].
Figure 10d: In In general,
general, subcontractors
subcontractors have have their
their own
own private
private space
space within
within thethe site
site toto store
store their
their
items. Thus,
Thus, itit seems
seems useful
useful toto sensitize
sensitize and and to
to make
make them
them involved
involved in in the
the overall
overall management
management of the
stock on site.

Figure 9. Questions for contractors related to subcontracting practice.

Figure 9. Questions for contractors related to subcontracting practice.
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 11 of 13
Logistics 2018, 2, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13

Figure
Figure 10.10. Questionsfor
Questions for contractors
contractors related
relatedtotosubcontractors’ coordination.
subcontractors’ coordination.

7. Conclusions
7. Conclusions
The responses highlighted the problem of on-site inventory. Inventory problems are common
The responses highlighted the problem of on-site inventory. Inventory problems are common
and are illustrated by the common occurrence of broken/stolen products and by unused products.
and Construction
are illustrated by the common
managers occurrence
therefore deplore havingof to
broken/stolen
manage this issueproducts andprogresses
as work by unused products.
on-site
Construction
when those managers
problemstherefore
should bedeplore
addressedhaving
and to
wellmanage
managedthisupstream.
issue as work
Theseprogresses
problems areon-site
more when
thosecommon
problems should
in the Paris be addressed
region becauseand
of thewell managed
difficulties upstream.
imposed by theThese problems
location, but theyare
aremore common
also very
present in the province (outside the Paris region in France). Despite a dedicated
in the Paris region because of the difficulties imposed by the location, but they are also very present storage area,
construction
in the managersthe
province (outside overwhelmingly
Paris region consider theirDespite
in France). subcontractors to be poorly
a dedicated storagemanaging their
area, construction
stocks.overwhelmingly consider their subcontractors to be poorly managing their stocks.
managers
TheThe establishment of well-designed materials management techniques could help to overcome
establishment of well-designed materials management techniques could help to overcome
these storage problems.
these storage problems.
Suppliers’ responsiveness, and those with whom framework agreements have been signed are
Suppliers’ responsiveness, and those with whom framework agreements have been signed are
well graded according to the survey. Therefore, this type of supplier is more appropriate for the
wellestablishment
graded accordingof a JITto(Just-In-Time)
the survey. Therefore, this typemanagement.
system for materials of supplier Kitting
is moreisappropriate
a concept stillfor the
establishment
unknown to most contractors, which means materials management techniques are not the priority of still
of a JIT (Just-In-Time) system for materials management. Kitting is a concept
unknown to most
construction contractors,
companies. Onwhich means
the other hand,materials
the use management techniques
of efficient techniques hasare notvery
been the priority
well of
received companies.
construction as demonstratedOn thebyother
the hand,
use oftheprefabricated elements.
use of efficient techniques Withhascommunication
been very wellwithreceived
subcontractors by
as demonstrated being
therather
use good, the French construction
of prefabricated elements. industry is in a favorable context
With communication to explain
with subcontractors
and bring new approaches to various construction stakeholders to adopt novel techniques.
being rather good, the French construction industry is in a favorable context to explain and bring new
However, the application of Kitting could be jeopardized in particular because of the many
approaches to various construction stakeholders to adopt novel techniques.
delays in the delivery of materials. In addition, poor communication between contractors is an
However, the application of Kitting could be jeopardized in particular because of the many delays
obstacle to the necessary coordination in a Kitting system. Finally, the idea to diminish stocks by
in the delivery
setting up a of materials.kits
“predefined Indelivery
addition, poor
time” maycommunication
increase costs. between contractors is an obstacle to
the necessary coordination in a Kitting system. Finally, items
This exploratory research identified a set of research the idea
that to
needdiminish stocks by setting up a
more investigation:
“predefined kits delivery time” may increase costs.
- The current challenges of on-site inventory management of construction sites.
This exploratory research identified a set of research items that need more investigation:
- The link between the use of prefabrication and delays.
- - TheThe identification
current of cost
challenges allocations
of on-site related to
inventory the Kitting system.
management of construction sites.
- The investigation of the decision-making process related to the use of materials management
- The link between the use of prefabrication and delays.
systems during design and construction phases.
- The identification of cost allocations related to the Kitting system.
- The investigation of the decision-making process related to the use of materials management
systems during design and construction phases.
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 12 of 13

- The link between the subcontracting practice in construction and delays.

- The creation of the matrix of delay frequency and severity as a function of product typologies
in construction.

Acknowledgments: The authors kindly thank M. Thibaut SIMONEK for his contribution. The authors also thank
the companies interviewed for their involvement. Our special recognition to the editor and the two anonymous
reviewers who helped us to improve our paper significantly with their valuable comments and feedback.
Author Contributions: The authors contributed equally to this work.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ballard, G. The Last Planner System of Production Control. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Birmingham,
Birmingham, UK, 2000.
2. Bock, T. The future of construction automation: Technological disruption and the upcoming ubiquity of
robotics. Autom. Constr. 2015, 59, 113–121. [CrossRef]
3. Jung, Y.; Joo, M. Building information modelling (BIM) framework for practical implementation.
Autom. Constr. 2011, 20, 126–133. [CrossRef]
4. Koskela, L. Application of the New Production Philosophy to Construction; Technical Report; CIFE: Stanford, CA,
USA, 1992; pp. 37–62.
5. Augiseau, V.; Barles, S. Studying construction materials flows and stock: A review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
2017, 123, 153–164. [CrossRef]
6. Barbosa, F.; Woetzel, J.; Mischke, J.; Ribeirinho, M.J.; Sridhar, M.; Parsons, M.; Bertram, N.;
Brown, S. Reinventing Construction: A Route to Higher Productivity, 2017. Available online: https:
//www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Capital%20Projects%20and%20Infrastructure/
Our%20Insights/Reinventing%20construction%20through%20a%20productivity%20revolution/MGI-
Reinventing-construction-A-route-to-higher-productivity-Full-report.ashx (accessed on 5 March 2018).
7. Lange, S.; Schilling, D. Reasons for an Optimized Construction Logistics. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual
Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, At Perth, Australia, 29–31 July 2015; IGLC
2015 Organizing Committee: Perth, Australia, 2015; pp. 733–742.
8. Safa, M.; Shahi, A.; Haas, C.T.; Hipel, K.W. Supplier selection process in an integrated construction materials
management model. Autom. Constr. 2014, 48, 64–73. [CrossRef]
9. Galbraith, L.; Miller, W.A.; Greene, T.J. Pull system performance measures: A review of approaches for
system design and control. Prod. Plan. Control 1991, 2, 24–35. [CrossRef]
10. Hoekstra, S.; Romme, J. Integral Logistic Structures: Developing Customer-Oriented Goods Flow; Industrial Press
Inc.: Norwalk, CT, USA, 1992.
11. Albaloushi, H.; Skitmore, M. Supply Chain Management in The UAE Construction Industry. Int. J.
Constr. Manag. 2008, 8, 53–71. [CrossRef]
12. Rameezdeen, R.; Chileshe, N.; Hosseini, M.R.; Lehmann, S. A qualitative examination of major barriers in
implementation of reverse logistics within the South Australian construction sector. Int. J. Constr. Manag.
2016, 16, 185–196. [CrossRef]
13. Skjelbred, S.; Fossheim, M.E.; Drevland, F. Comparing Different Approaches to Site Organization and
Logistics: Multiple Case Studies. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the International Group
for Lean Construction, At Perth, Australia, 29–31 July 2015; pp. 13–22.
14. Koskela, L.; Rooke, J. The TFV theory of production: New developments. In Proceedings of the 15th
Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Lansing, MI, USA, 18–20 July 2007; pp. 2–12.
15. Dakhli, Z.; Lafhaj, Z. Efficient logistics enabled by smart solutions in tunneling. Undergr. Space 2017, 2,
227–233. [CrossRef]
16. Bataglin, F.S.; Viana, D.D.; Formoso, C.T.; Bulhões, I.R. Application of Bim for Supporting Decisionmaking
Related to Logistics in Prefabricated Building Systems. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction, Heraklion, Greece, 9–12 July 2017; pp. 71–78.
17. Mossman, A. More than materials: Managing what’s needed to create value in construction. In Proceedings
of the 2nd European Conference on Construction Logistics, Dortmund, UK, 8 May 2008; pp. 1–13.
Logistics 2018, 2, 7 13 of 13

18. Sundquist, V.; Gadde, L.E.; Hulthén, K. Reorganizing construction logistics for improved performance.
Constr. Manag. Econ. 2018, 36, 49–65. [CrossRef]
19. Goulding, J.S.; Rahimian, F.P.; Arif, M.; Sharp, M.D. New offsite production and business models in
construction: Priorities for the future research agenda. Archit. Eng. Des. Manag. 2014, 11, 163–184. [CrossRef]
20. Issa, U.H. Implementation of lean construction techniques for minimizing the risks effect on project
construction time. Alex. Eng. J. 2013, 52, 697–704. [CrossRef]
21. Ballard, G.; Howell, G. Implementing Lean Construction: Stabilizing Work Flow; Lean Construction Institute:
Arlington, VA, USA, 1994; pp. 101–110.
22. Shokri, S.; Safa, M.; Haas, C.T.; Haas, R.C.G.; Maloney, K.; MacGillivray, S. Interface Management Model for
Mega Capital Projects. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2012, West Lafayette, Indiana,
21–23 May 2012; ASCE Library: Reston, VA, USA, 2012; pp. 447–456.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).