INTEGRATING LEAN CONSTRUCTION IN PROMOTING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON SITES

Mennatalla Ghonimy 10632040
COURSEWORK COVERSHEET
Student Reference Number: 10632040
Department of Built Environment
School of Art, Design and Architecture
Module Code:
BLDG601
Module Title:
Research Methods in the Built Environment
Coursework Title: Research Proposal
Date Due: 09/01/2019 by 9:00am Number Pages: 26 Number of Words: 4020
(excluding cover sheet and marking criteria)
Member Of Staff Setting Coursework: Professor Pieter de Wilde
Please help the marker give you useful, personally-tailored, feedback by completing the sections below.
Nothing you write here will adversely affect your mark.
What do you think you did
well in the writing of this
essay?
The Literature Review and Background information was gathered from an extensive, relevant and validated
resources
The Research Structure
Efficiently satisfying all the requirement of the research proposal
Modified the contents according to the constructive feedback from my supervisor
What aspects of your
essay do you think need
improvement? The numbering structure of titles and headings
Describe how you have
responded to previous
feedback and note any
aspects you want specific
feedback on for this
essay. What feedback
would be most helpful?
Marker’s Comments:
REMEMBER TO CONVERT YOUR WORK TO PDF FORMAT BEFORE SUBMITTING
Feedback on your BLDG601 Research Proposal consist of a number
of elements:
• Oral and written feedback on the presentations
• Written feedback on the report submission
• General in-class remarks at the start of BLDG602.
The written notes from both academics attending your presentation are
appended as PDF. The presentation mark is 40% of your final mark.
The written feedback on your report also is an appended PDF. The report
mark is 60% of your final mark.
The total mark you have achieved for BLDG601 is: 69%

PRESENTATION (40%) (REPORT (60%)
Mark
allocation
CRITERION 1
Present a research
proposal using
appropriate written and
verbal presentation
techniques.
CRITERION 2
Professional
interaction with
relevant staff,
answering questions
and keeping to time
CRITERION 3
Undertake a focused
literature review and
synthesise information to
identify the possibility of
new concepts within the
built environment
knowledge framework
CRITERION 5
Identify and develop
aims and objectives for
a self-directed research
project.
CRITERION 5
Identify and select
appropriate methodologies
to carry out research in a
specific subject area.
86-100% Outstanding
presentation.
Professional
communication of
research plan, highly
engaging with the
audience.
Outstanding self-
management. Highly
independent and
ensuring project
progress; proactive.
Outstanding literature
review, based on a wide
range of sources. Full
Harvard referencing.
Compares and contrasts
findings from different
sources. Clear
identification of a
knowledge gap.
Outstanding aims and
objectives. High level of
understanding of
subject matter and
analysis, informed
choice of challenging
research direction.
Outstanding methodology,
very clear and innovative
research design. No errors
or omissions.
70-85% Excellent presentation.
Professional
communication of
research plan, for
expected audience.
Excellent self-
management.
Independent and well
in control of progress.
Good contact with
staff.
Excellent literature
review, based on wide
range of sources. Full
Harvard referencing.
Good overview of
existant knowledge.
Clear synthesis and
identification of key
concepts.
Excellent aims and
objectives, providing the
basis for a challenging
and well-directed
research project.
Excellent methodology
that clearly will allow the
student to meet all aims
and objectives. No errors
or omissions.
60-69% Good presentation.
Clear communication of
what research is
planned.
Good self-
management, on time
and making fair
progress.. Regular
contact with staff.
Good literature review,
based on solid number of
sources. Harvard
referencing but with
some errors. Good
overview of existant
knowledge. Some
synthesis.
Good aims and
objectives, providing the
basis for a well-directed
research project.
Good methodology, clearly
describing what research
is to be carried out. Some
minor errors and
omissions.
50-59% Adequate presentation.
Satisfactory clarity but
with some errors and
omissions.
Adequate self-
management, on time.
Some reliance on staff
to ensure project
progress.
Adequate literature
review, based on basic
reading. Harvard
referencing but with
some errors. Fair report
of existant knowledge but
not leading to new
insights.
Adequate aims and
objectives. Will allow a
fair research project but
with some errors or
omissions.
Adequate methodology,
providing a relevant
research design. However,
includes some errors and
omissions.
40-49% Poor presentation.
Some structure but lack
of clarity. Some
grammar and spelling
errors.
Poor self-
management, behind
schedule. However
aware of this issue and
trying to address the
issues.
Poor literature review,
based on few sources
only. No use of Harvard
referencing. Repetitive
use of single sources. No
identification of state-of-
the-art and how that
relates to the dissertation
project.
Poor aims and
objectives. Weak
definition of research
direction, but some
relevant ideas. Weak
knowledge of the
subject matter.
Poor methodology, weak
in terms of research
design. Some relevant
ideas but incomplete and
with omissions.
< 40% Very poor presentation.
Lack of structure,
grammar and spelling
errors. Time overrun of
presentation
Very poor self-
management, behind
on schedule.
Requiring significant
chasing
Very poor literature
review, with little
reference to sources. No
use of Harvard
referencing. No
identification of state-of-
the-art and how that
relates to the dissertation
Very poor aims and
objectives. Weak
definition showing lack
of knowledge of the
subject
Very poor methodology,
weak in terms of research
design. Unclear how data
will be collected
FINAL MARK (%)
(To be completed by marker)
Date by which work, feedback and marks have been
returned (should be no more than 20 working days after the
submission date)

INTEGRATING LEAN CONSTRUCTION IN PROMOTING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON
CONSTRUCTION SITES
_____________________
The Proposal
Presented to
The Department of Architecture and Built Environment
University of Plymouth
_____________________
In Partial Fulfilment
Of the Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Architectural Engineering
_____________________
Mennatalla Ghonimy
January 2019

Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 3
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................ 4
List of Figures............................................................................................................................ 4
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 5
UK Construction industry current situation ............................................................................... 5
Health and Safety within Sustainable construction ................................................................... 5
Lean Construction for sustaining Health and Safety..……………………………………………………………. 6
Research problem ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….7
Research Aim and Objectives …..……………………………………………………………………………………………8
Research Aim………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8
Research objectives……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…8
Background …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….9
Lean Construction Principles ……………………………………………………………………………………………..…..9
Lean Construction tools and their relevance to Health and Safety …………………………………….……9
Last Planner System ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……9
The 5S (house-Keeping) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…10
First Run Studies ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…11
Error-Proofing ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11
Increased Visualization ……………………………………………………………………………………………………...…12
Daily Huddle Meetings DHM ……………………………………………………………………………..…………………12
Literature Review ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……13
Methodology ……..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16
Expected Findings ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………17
Future Work Plan …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17
Structural Map of the paper ……………………………………………………………………………………………………21
References ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………24

List of Figures
Figure 1 link between the keywords of this research paper source: by the author to be published (2018)
Figure 2 applied system of estimating the cost of accidents and ill health at work a review of
methodologies [European Agency for Health and Safety at Work- EU-OSHA 2014] ..Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Figure 3 Non-fatal injuries reported under RIDDOR 2014/15-2016/17 .....................................................11
Figure 4 fatal injuries reported under RIDDOR 2012/13-2016/17 .............................................................11
Figure 5 diagram indicating the flow of LPS planning schedule based on Should-Can-Will Analysis Source
Figure illustrated by the author of this paper (2018) with reference to Briso (2011)................................14
Figure 6 comic illustrating the roles of each method of 5S system Source: Lan Thinkin and 5S by Cireddu
(2015)..........................................................................................................................................................15
Figure 7 -3D Model for on-site practices of Increased Visualization, Lean Construction tool ...................17
Figure 8 Gantt chart scheduling the planned future work for this research..............................................23
Figure 9 demonstration of the structure of Literature Chapter .................................................................24
Figure 10 illustrating the Research Methodology Map ..............................................................................25
Figure 11 Graph of the content included in each chapter..........................................................................26

List of Abbreviations
LC – Lean Construction
HSE – Health and Safety Executive
EASW – European Agency for Safety and Work
SCSH – The Sustainable Construction Safety and Healt
IVMSA – The Integrated Value Model for Sustainability Assessment
COSHH – Control of Substances Hazardous to Health
RIDDOR – Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations
HSAW – Health and Safety Act at Work
CDM15 – Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015

Abstract
Within the UK construction industry, Health and safety problems have always been a
paramount concern. In account of the poor health and safety records conducted from the
numerous reported cases of work-related injuries and fatalities, the construction industry has
been categorized as one of the most hazardous industries. The main problem this paper is
addressing, is the poor health and safety practices on construction sites that lead to numerous
injuries and fatalities. One approach to address the problem is Lean Construction (LC). LC has
been suggested as an effective method to promote health and safety on construction sites.
Existing literature have further confirmed that Lean Construction strategies eliminate, and reduce
occupational accidents –a major health and safety problem on-site. However, the synergies
between Lean Construction tools and health and safety problems have always been controversial.
Thus, the purpose of this paper is to develop a framework for integrating Lean Construction tools
to promote health and safety on construction sites. In order to achieve this aim, the methodology
followed is collecting data from secondary resources as extensive relevant literature review, and
primary data from a qualitative source in form of interviews with top sixty-(60) Lean-certified
contractor and consultant organizations. The findings of this study will help identify the
effectiveness of Lean Construction practices in promoting Health and safety on construction
sites. Figure (1) shows the link between the keywords of this paper.
Keywords: Lean Construction; Health and Safety; Construction industry; Accidents; waste.
Figure 1 link between the keywords of this research paper source: by the author to be
published (2018)

1.0 Introduction
UK Construction industry current situation
For several decades, the construction industry in the UK has been categorized as
one of the most hazardous industries (HSE, 2017), and has consistently been criticized for poor
safety records (Anvari et al. 2011; Moaveni et al., 2018). Construction industry statistics show an
annual average of 80,000 work related injuries and 30 fatalities (LFS, 2017), posing great
demotivation for people working in the industry and constituting a considerable threat to
sustainability and the economy (EASW, 2013). Furthermore, the dynamic and complex nature of
the construction industry increases the risk probability of occupational accidents (Bajjou et al.,
2017; Ghosh et al., 2009, Howell et al., 2009) In an attempt to address the situation, the government
has priorities Health and Safety sustainability into construction policies (Bashir et al, 2011),
consequently moving the construction industry towards sustainability at a significant pace (Cray,
2013).
Health and Safety within Sustainable construction
However, the primary concern of the sustainable development has been managing
the consumption of water, energy, materials and the indoor environmental quality, rather than
health and safety (Bezalel and Issa, 2016). This indicates that little has been done to integrate H&S
considerations within the sustainable construction development (RICS 2016; Greg 2012; Howard
2011). In an effort to promote H&S considerations, several research studies have suggested various
practices and methods aside from the mere compliance with rules and regulations. For instance,
the Corporate Manslaughter Act which was enforced in 2007 (HSE, 2018), the health and safety
rating systems SCSH and IVMSA (RICS, 2016; Rajendran, 2006; Reyes, 2014), “Rethinking
Construction- Egan Report” (Murray and Langford, 2003), “Revitalizing Health and Safety” by
Oloke et al. 2008, “One Death is Too Many” (Donaghy, 2009) and several other reports (McKay,
2010; Gambatese et al., 2008; FISCA, 2006; Haslam et al., 2005; Suraji et al., 2001; Baxendale
and Jones, 2000). Besides the government efforts in developing policies and regulations as
CDM15, HSAW Act 1974, COSHH, RIDDOR, and Working at heights Regulations 2005. These

methods and approaches have improved the statistics of the industry (HSE, 2017); however,
accidents still exist (Bashir, Suresh, Proverbs and Gameson, 2011). The reasons why on-site
accidents still occur; because governmental and traditional approaches adopted in construction
projects tended to separate health and safety planning from the construction planning (Sarhan and
Fox, 2012). Consequently, this urges the need of integrating health and safety considerations in
the execution plans in order to efficiently improve health and safety on construction sites
Lean Construction for sustaining Health and Safety
Lean Construction (LC) is a management strategy pioneered in 1992 by Koskela. LC
is aimed at eliminating waste and increasing value while taking into account safety considerations
(Bashir et al., 2011). Lean principles primarily consider safety as a way to maximize value and
productivity, as well as minimize cost and waste. On-site accidents result in wasting productive
days and adding extra costs for compensations. To demonstrate, Figure (2) represents an applied
system of monetary expenses and loss outcomes from work-related accidents. As a consequence,
Lean Construction consider accidents as waste that must be eliminated. Accordingly, LC strategy
focuses on eliminating safety hazards and addressing construction problems in order to prevent
work-related injuries and fatalities (Al-Aomar, 2011; OGC, 2007). Accordingly, to apply lean
strategy, a diverse of tools have been developed such as, Last Planner System, 5S, Error-Proofing,
Increased Visualization, Daily Huddle meeting and First Run Studies (Marhani, 2013; Edwards,
2015). Several research studies concluded that lean tools are efficient in eliminating main causes
of on-site construction accidents (Bashir et al., 2011; Larios et al., 2012; Ghosh et al, 2009; Anvari
et al, 2011). Nevertheless, the existing literature does not provide a holistic view of the mechanism
of applying Lean Construction tools and principles to promote sustainable health and safety within
the construction industry. This emphasizes the value of this paper, which aimed at investigating
the applicability and potential effectiveness of Lean Construction techniques in promoting
sustainable health and safety on construction sites.

Figure 2 applied system of estimating the cost of accidents and ill health at work a review of methodologies
[European Agency for Health and Safety at Work- EU-OSHA 2014]
1.1 Research Problem
The primary problem this paper is addressing is the poor health and safety
records of the construction industry, and how Lean Construction principles and tools could be
applied on construction sites to address the problem. Poor health and safety practices do not only
impact human health but also reduce project productivity, delay the building delivery and over-
runs budgets through wasted working days on recovery and compensations. Furthermore, safety
envelops every process, material, machinery, any individual involved in the project as well as the
public who are in the vicinity of the working area. Thus, effectively managing it is a matter of
great importance. Lean techniques appear to be an efficient method to address the key causes of
injuries and fatalities on construction sites (Passale and Bagi, 2013). Some of the main causalities
of the non-fatal injuries are illustrated in Figure (3), and the fatalities causes are shown in Figure
(4) below:

Figure (3) and (4) above indicate that most of the common causes of accidents usually occur on
construction sites. Therefore, the research will particularly be focusing on promoting health and
safety on construction sites.
Figure 3 Non-fatal injuries reported under RIDDOR 2014/15-2016/17
Figure 4 fatal injuries reported under RIDDOR 2012/13-2016/17

1.2 Research Aim and Objectives
1.2.1 Research Aim
The principal aim of this paper is to develop a framework of integrating Lean
Construction tools to promote health and safety on UK construction sites.
1.2.2 Research Objectives
In order to sustain the aforementioned aim, the following objective were set:
 Critically review the existing literature related to health and safety within construction
industry, and determine the common causes of accidents and explore how they can be
addressed by lean
 Critically review the current literature related to Lean Construction principles, tools and
techniques and how they are relevant to health and safety considerations on construction
sites
 Determine which Lean Construction Tools and Techniques are most related and best
applicable to health and safety within construction industry
 Develop a conceptual framework of how Lean Construction methods can be implemented
in order to promote sustainable health and safety on construction sites
 Gather data from companies and organizations to test the components of the conceptual
framework
 Develop and validate the integration of the conceptual framework
 Draw a conclusion on the applicability of Lean Construction in promoting sustainable
health and safety within UK construction industry, and provide recommendations to
practitioners for future studies.

2.0 Background
2.1 Lean Construction Principles:
Lean Construction is a management strategy aimed at eliminating any waste of
materials, time, and effort by eliminating accidents and avoiding hazardous risks, as a mean to
achieve the maximum possible value of the project (Abdel-Hamid and Salem 2005). The strategy
was also identified by Zimmer and Salem (2005) as a continuous process of safety and risk
management, by focusing on preventing accidents of loss, or injuries to maintain sustainable
construction. Lean Construction principles perceive any interruption to the value-adding flow, or
any accident that impacts workers; as waste that must be eliminated (Bashir, 2013). Consequently,
LC consists of five main principles determined by Womack and Jones (1996-2003) as; identifying
value from the client’s perspective, value stream, and flow of value, attaining clients pull at the
right time, as well as endeavoring perfection by a continual improvement. moreover, Koskela 1992
has further identified Lean Construction principles as; minimizing variability, lifecycle and
number of process required, maximizing transparency of processes, balancing the conversions and
the flow improvement, and finally focalizing the management on the entire process. In an attempt
of achieving the principles, Lean Construction tools have been developed as following; Last
Planner System, 5s, First Run Studies, Error-proofing, Increased Visualization, and Daily Huddle
Meetings, (Mossman, 2013). Consequently, several studies have concluded that most of the Lean
tools have a great synergies with health and safety standards (Edwards, 2015; Forman, 2010)
2.2 Lean Construction tools and their relevance to Health and safety
2.2.1 Last Planner System (LPS):
One of the most effective ways to improve health and safety conditions on construction
sites is to avoid risks and eliminate hazards; which can be attained through adequate project
planning, managing and scheduling (Larios et al, 2012). Last Planner System was proposed by
Glen Ballard in 2000, who asserted that effective planning is achieved by addressing the
construction problems, and determining the specific tasks as possibly close to the execution date.
Further, several researchers have indicated that LPS techniques include a collaborative planning
between construction and health and safety requirements (Tsao, 2014; Alves, 2010).

Based on existing literature, LPS relies on last planners in form of foremen,
supervisors, engineers as well as health and safety coordinators; whose responsibility is to schedule
and fit tasks according to workers' expertise and capabilities (Tokede et al, 2016; Briso, 2011).
This could assist avoiding hazardous risks and accidents resulting from poor planning and control
(Nahmens and Ikuma, 2009). Moreover, LPS incorporates safety in the “Should, Can, Will”
analysis as shown in Figure (5); in which “Should” represents all the tasks that should be executed,
“Can” determines the tasks that can be carried out while considering site constrains, risks and
hazards, and finally “Will” indicates the tasks to be executed besides empowering workers to
commit themselves to the construction activities that fit their skills (Salem et al, 2005). Thus, this
will greatly promote health and safety on construction sites by eliminating occupational accidents
correlated to physical and mental inabilities and lack of skills (Bashir, 2011; Saurin et al., 2006;
Mitropoulos et al., 2007). In addition, the common occupational accidents caused by time pressure,
excessive stress and organizational pressure can as well be eliminated by the LPS adequate
planning (HSE, 2016; Suraji et al., 2001; Loughborough and UMIST 2003; Haslam et al., 2005;
FISCA 2006)
2.2.2 The 5S (House-keeping):
One of the common causes of incidents on sites is poor organization (CDM15, 2015;
HSE, 2016; Larios et al; 2012; Abdulhamid et al., 2005 and FISCA 2006). Thus, the 5S (House-
Figure 5 diagram indicating the flow of LPS planning schedule based on Should-Can-Will
Analysis
Source Figure illustrated by the author of this paper (2018) with reference to Briso (2011)

keeping) tool based on 5 principles includes (Seiso, Seiton, Seiri, Seiketsu and Shitsuke). The 5S
system was developed by the Japanese Toyoda in 1988 in an effort to address this problem (Osada
and Takashi, 1995). Further, the 5S is a strategic method based on high standard principles of a
clean, organized work environment. As in Figure (6), a simple comic visually presenting the aim
of each method. To illustrate, Seiso (Shine) implies cleaning the construction site from any
machinery, equipment or material that are not currently in-use to avoid site congestions and
obstruction which are major drivers of accidents (HSE, 2017; Abdelhamid et al, 2005; Howell et
al., 2002; Bicheno, 2000). Further, Seiton (Set-in-order) involves placing all materials and
machines in their optimal location in order to sustain their function, smooth the workflow, and to
elminate the chance of tripping or slipping which is another common cause of site incidents (Pasale
et al., 2013; Edwards, 2015). In the same manner, Seiri (Sort) differentiate and categorize items
according to their schedule of operation and place them in suitable locations to maintain a safer
circulation as well as to avoid exposing workers to hazards risks of falls and trips (Singh et al,
2014; Nahmens and Ikuma 2009). Likewise, Seiketsu (Standardize) asserts maintaining the
machines at good maintenance to ensure best performance and prevent the accidents resulted from
machinery problems (Pasale et al., 2013, Bashir, 2013). This is emphasized by Shitsuke (Sustain),
which includes the consistent improvement of safety culture within the workers (Abdelhamid et
al, 2005; Edwards, 2015). Interestingly, some researchers have added ‘Safety’ as the sixth principle
to the methodology changing it to a 6S system. (Gapp, Fisher, and Kobayashi 2008). Therefore, it
can be seen that this methodology has a great potential of eliminating on-site occupational
accidents and thereby promote health and safety on construction sites.
Figure 6 comic illustrating the roles of each method of 5S system
Source: Lean Thinking and 5S by Cireddu (2015)

2.2.3 First Run Studies (FRS)
According to the complex and dynamic nature of the construction industry, some
activities require specific skills and complicated work techniques (Bertelsen, 2003; Wood, 2008).
FRS is a Lean Construction tool utilized for developing alternative methodologies to execute a
critical construction activity (Mossman, 2013). The execution of planning a critical activity
includes studying the procedures and reviewing alternatives to select the most applicable method
with least hazard risk which is compatible with workers skills and convenience (Salem et al, 2006;
Forman, 2010). Thus, First Run Studies could prevent injuries and health related issues resulted
from poor work methods.
2.2.3 Error-Proofing
Statistics shows that human-error is a one of the major causes of occupational accidents
on construction sites (UMIST, 2003; Katsakiori et al., 2009). Consequently, Error-proofing tool
includes all the possible techniques and methods that can avoid human failings and thus contribute
to eliminating occupational accidents (X). To illustrate, Error proofing may include risk analysis,
continual monitoring, visual inspection, as well as devices and gadgets that alarms in case of
detecting error and automatically shut down the operating machinery, or in case of crossing an
unsafe boundary (Bajjou, 2017; Saurin et al. 2005). Thus, human-failings resulted from rushing,
stress, lack of concentration, or negligence can be minimized using error proofing techniques.
2.2.4 Increased Visualization
Existing literature demonstrates that visual management is a principal element of
promoting health and safety on construction sites (Salem et al., 2007; Saurin et al., 2005; Fewings,
2013). Visual management by signs and annotations, can provide the essential communication for
workforce particularly the ones with low level of literacy, and indicate any work hazards as
tripping or slipping risks that are common causes of site accidents (HSE, 2016; Salem et al., 2007;
Tyler and Lamont 2008; Fewings 2013). As illustrated in Figure (7), visual annotations,
signalization tools and billboards are placed as instructions to avoid hazards and risk.

Figure 7 -3D Model for on-site practices of Increased Visualization, Lean Construction tool
2.2.5 Daily Huddle Meetings (DHM)
This is another effective LC tool based on conducting a daily start-up meetings to
collect and revise reports on the current phase of the work (Salem et al., 2007). The reports includes
issues related to the work progress, construction problems, risk and hazards to the health and
safety. DHM is an efficient tool which rapidly address the problems on daily basis rather than
delaying the work to further notice (Bajjou, 2017; Saurin et al. 2005). Furthermore, the meetings
are held between the leader and the team to engage them directly in the problem solving which
increase their job satisfaction and thereby the productivity (Salem et al., 2005).

3.0 Literature Review
Cooney (2016) demonstrated that UK construction industry has an international
reputation for the buildings sustainability and quality, however, occupational accidents and
fatalities still exist in a high percentage. Pursuant to this, Gilding et al 2002 asserted that no
building that neglects avoidable occupational accidents of injuries and fatalities or work-related
illness can pretense to be sustainable. Traditionally, during a project execution, the management
plan is often implemented without any linkage to the health and safety plan, causing a
communicational gap between the coordinator of health and safety and the director of the project
execution (Brioso et al, 2018). On this premise, studies have established that poor communication
within the organization is one of the major drivers of occupational accidents (Cooney, 2016).
Further, Vitharana et al. (2015) deduced that many of the construction workers are self-employed
with low skills and lack the sufficient knowledge about the practices of health and safety standards
on construction sites, and thereby poor health and safety practices are implemented throughout the
project execution which increase the number of occupational accidents. Likewise, The Egan report
Rethinking Construction (Murray, 2003) found that construction accidents resulted from poor
health and safety practices account an average of 6% of the total project expenditures. This
indicates the significant impinge occupational accidents have upon the UK economy and social
sustainability, giving rise to the importance of promoting health and safety on construction sites.
Several researchers have asserted that health and safety is a cardinal/substantial
consideration in regards to the country, clients, contractors, workforce, or any person who is in the
vicinity of the construction execution (Griffith et al, 2014; Nahmens et al 2009). Existing literature
shows that UK government has contributed a noted advance of health and safety integration within
the construction industry through establishing several regulations (Vitharana et al., 2015); for
instance, the HSWA in 1974 (Bashir et al, 2013), and CDM Regulations in 1994 (HSE, 2017).
However, the construction industry still suffer from poor health and safety records according to
the wide number of work-related injuries and fatalities reported annually (HSE, 2017). Lean

Construction was identified by (X) in (20xx) as an efficient method to prevent on-site accidents,
which is one of the paramount drivers of health and safety problems within the construction
industry. Contrarily, Garrahan et al. (1992) and Green (2001) argue that Lean Construction has
exploited workers and exposed them to excessive pressure and stress. In the same manner, Fucini
et al. (1990) and kamata (1982) claimed that Lean Construction strategies deprive workers'
freedom. On the other hand, Lean Construction advocates indicate that applying LC tools rather
empower workers to commit themselves to tasks that match their skills, abilities, and convenience
in an attempt to minimize accidents resulted from physical or mental disability (Brioso et al, 2018).
Furthermore, Nahamens and Ikuma (2009) dictates that LPS, a LC tool, assist controlling, planning
and managing the project execution on monthly and weekly basis, which aid predicting and
avoiding construction problems as hazards risks and occupational accidents.
Lean Construction has been widely criticized by Graham Winch, a leading thinker
in the field of construction management, in the 1st
and 2nd
ed. of Managing Construction Projects
(Winch, 2002; Winch, 2010). Winch (2010) contends that Lean Construction is not applicable for
neither complex, dynamic, large projects nor refurbishments projects. Furthermore, he alleges that
Lean construction have limited capabilities in regards to modern construction techniques and thus
it cannot be implemented in novel construction projects. Lean Construction advocates countered
Winch's argument and clarified LC flexibility and adaptability based on the diverse tools and
techniques that correspond to any project requirements (Ballard and Koskela, 2011). More critics
on Lean Construction includes associating LC with traffic congestion which expose workers to
on-site accidents of injuries and fatalities (Green, 1999; Rehdar, 1994; Fucini et al. 1990). This
assumption was however dismissed by Abulhamid et al (2005), Bashir et al. (2011), Nahmens et
al (2009) and Saurin et al. (2006), by underlining the application impacts of LC tools, as 5S
system and LPS, which rather addressed construction problems including site congestion, risk
probabilities and thus improved the health and safety on construction sites.

Furthermore, Bae and Kim (2007) asserted that Lean Construction tools conduce
smooth execution of the project's construction and eliminate accidents resulted from site
congestion by planning, controlling and maintaining everything in its optimal place. On the same
grounds, Huges et al, (2008), Abdulhamid et al (2005) and Bashir (2013) affirmed that 5S strategy
as a LC tool engage the use of devices, gadgets and alarms that aid preventing an accident from
happening. A growing body of evidence prove that projects which implemented Lean Construction
principles are safer than those implemented traditional practices (Howell et al., 2017; Nahmens
and Ikuma 2009; Leino 2010; Thomassen 2002). Based on that, Othman and his associates (2014)
asserted that traditional practices tend to plan execution processes before studying or elaborating
health and safety concerns. Consequently, Dinesh et al. (2017) and Koskela (2013) demonstrated
that Lean Construction is a management concept which integrates H&S in the construction process
by categorizing accidents as waste ought to be eliminated. The researchers of the 6th
national
conference on innovative practices in construction (2017) concluded that LC has a great potential
for improving health and safety measures on construction sites. Therefore, eliminating accidents
and addressing construction problems seem to be the major elements for promoting health and
safety on site.

4.0 Methodology
The paper will adopt different research methods in order to provide a comprehensive
investigation on the potential effectiveness of Lean construction tools in promoting Health and
safety. First, a critical review through an extensive relevant literature will be conducted to
determine the impacts of Lean Construction practices on Health and Safety on construction sites
and how LC tools are relevant to H&S issues. In addition, analyzing the root causes of accidents
on construction site and how LC tools and techniques could overcome them. Data gathered from
text books, academic journals, conference papers and published PhD/Master thesis.
Furthermore, a qualitative analysis will be attained from structured interviews with the top
(60) sixty Lean-certified contractor and consultant construction organizations, in order to identify
which Lean Construction tools are most applicable to address construction problems related to
health and safety. Besides, determining whether the companies actually use Lean Construction
techniques for the purpose of improving Health and safety on sites and are they aware of its
significance, or is it just a consequence impact of LC practices on H&S. The use of different
methodologies allows the author to avoid over-dependence on statistical information. Where using
qualitative sources beside the existing literature provide in-depth data and eloquent interpretations
based on real-life experiences ( Jogulu and Pansiri, 2011). in addition, using different research
methods provides strengths which recompense the weaknesses of each method, as well as provides
a complete image of the topic for better study and research (Creswell, 2003).
Further by studying different case-studies, the researcher will be able to develop a framework
for effectively integrating Lean Construction in a structured methods and recommendations in
order to promote Health and Safety on construction sites and achieve best results.
Interviews will be based on main questions as following:
 What are the health and safety benefits of LC?
 How LC was utilized to address causes of accidents?

 How LC was integrated through the construction phase of the projects?
 What are the barriers and limitations facing Lean implementation?
 What are LC drawbacks (if there’s any) on H&S?
 To what extent workers are compatible with the use of LC tools and techniques?
 Recommendation to improve LC practices?
 Are the companies aware of the health and safety significance?
 Whether they apply LC with Health and Safety as a primary concern or is it just a
consequence of the practices followed?
Through analyzing the results and findings of the aforementioned methodologies, the researcher
will be able to determine the potential effectiveness of LC on improving Health and Safety, and
identify the best applicable tools and techniques used in addressing the construction problems. In
addition, the findings will provide a holistic overview of how companies perceive Health and
Safety concerns and to what extent H&S is considered throughout the project execution. Further,
determine the relevance of LC tools in promoting H&S on sites, as well as identify the barriers
and limitations affecting the implementation of Lean Construction. and the possible
recommendation of the possible improvements for ensuring smooth integration of LC practices in
promoting health and safety.

5.0 Expected Findings
At the end of the study, it is expected that Lean Construction has a great potential of
positively impacting the Health and Safety on Construction sites, LC tools have synergies with
H&S standards and considerations, and that projects implementing LC practices are safer than
those using traditional practices. However, it is expected to find limitations and barriers of LC
implementation resulted from different reasons such as, inadequate supervisions to ensure work is
done in the assigned way or the workforce are not compatible with the innovative techniques.
In addition, it is also predicted that companies are not completely aware of the significance
of Health and safety issues, and thereby they intend to use lean for the purpose of increasing
productivity and reducing expenses rather than Health and Safety. Consequently, this paper will
contribute to promoting health and safety and emphasizing its significance on the social and
economic sustainability, by integrating Lean construction practices through the construction
phases of the projects.
6.0 Future Work Plan
The future work on the research is planned in the following Gantt chart, in an
attempt to effectively achieve the aim of the study in a scheduled time for better organized
results.
Figure 8 Gantt chart scheduling the planned future work for this research

7.0 Structure of the Research Chapters
7.1 Literature Chapter Map
Figure 9 demonstration of the structure of Literature Chapter

7.2 Methodology Chapter Map
Figure 10 illustrating the Research Methodology Map

7.2 Research Chapters Structure
Figure 11 Graph of the content included in each chapter

8.0 References
1. Anvari, Zulkifli and Yusuff (2011). Evaluation of Approaches to Safety in Lean and Safety
Management Systems and Clarification of the Relationship Between Them. World Applied
Sciences Journal, 15 (1):(19-26, 2011).
2. AL-Aomar (2011). A framework for assessing the cost effectiveness of lean tools.
3. Bajjou, Mohamed Saad & Chafi, Anas & En-Nadi, Abdelali. (2017). The Potential
Effectiveness of Lean Construction Tools in Promoting Safety on Construction Sites.
International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa. 33.
4. Allan, N. (2000). Managing Health & Safety in Building & Construction. Structural Safety, 22(3),
pp.291-292.
5. Brioso, Xavier & Humero, Antonio & Calderon-Hernandez, Claudia. (2018). Teaching
how to integrate Last Planner System and the Safety and Health Management System. 2.
12. 10.20868/abe.2018.1.3691.
6. Bashir, A M, Suresh, S, Proverbs, D and Gameson, R (2011) A critical, theoretical, review
of the impacts of lean construction tools in reducing accidents on construction sites In:
Egbu, C. and Lou, E.C.W. (Eds.) Procs 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September
2011, Bristol, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 249-258
7. Baxendale T. and Jones O. (2000) Construction Design and Management Safety
Regulations in Practice - Progress on Implementation. International Journal of Project
Management 18 pp. 33-40
8. Bezalel, O. and Issa, M. (2016). A literature review of sustainable health and safety in the
construction industry. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Manitoba.
9. Bertelsen, Sven & , Sven. (2003). Construction as a Complex System. Proceedings for the
11th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction.
10. Cary, U. 2013. Achieving Sustainability in Construction Safety Programs.Occupational
health and safety
11. Cooney, J. (2016). Health and Safety in the Construction Industry: A Review of
Procurement, Monitoring, Cost Effectiveness and Strategy. Master Degree. University of
Salford.

12. COSHH (2017). Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) - COSHH. [online]
Hse.gov.uk. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/ [Accessed 15 Dec. 2018].
13. S. Dinesh, R. Sethuraman & Shruthi Sivaprakasam, “The Review on Lean Construction an
Effective Approach in Construction Industry”, Special Issue, April, Page Number 119-123,
2017
14. Donaghy (2009). One Death is too many. Inquiry into the Underlying Causes of
Construction Fatal Accidents. [Accessed 1 Dec. 2018].
15. European Agency for safety and work –EASW (2013) Occupational Safety and Health
Issues Associated With sustainable Buildings
16. Edwards, S. (2015). A guide to the 5S Lean production method for occupational health and
safety. 67. 27-29.
17. FISCA (2006) An Analysis of the Significant Causes of Fatal and Major Injuries in
Construction in Scotland; factors Influencing Scottish Construction Accidents (FISCA),
Health and Safety Executive Research Report 443
18. Forman, Marianne. (2010). Lean construction and health and safety on site: Analysed in a
planning and empowerment perspective. Association of Researchers in Construction
Management, ARCOM 2010 - Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference.
19. Guo, B. H., Yiu, T. W. & Gonzalez, V. A. 2015. Identifying behaviour patterns of
construction safety using system archetypes. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 80, 125-141
20. Gambatese J. A., Behm M., Rajendran S. (2008) Design’s Role in Construction Accident
Causality and Prevention: Perspectives From an Expert Panel. Safety Science, 46, pp. 675–
691.
21. Ghosh and Young-Corbett (2009). Intersection between Lean Construction and Safety
Research: A Review of the Literature. Myers Lawson School of Construction. Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University.
22. Greg, B. 2012. Safety Goes Green Occupational Health and Safety [Accessed 15 Oct.
2018].
23. Haslam R. A., Hide, S.A., Gibb, A.G.F., Gyi, D.E., Pavitt T., Atkinson S., Duff, A.R.
(2005) Contributing Factors in Construction Accidents. Applied Ergonomics, 36, pp. 401–
415

24. HSE (2017). Health and Safety Executive, construction industry health and safety statistics
[online] Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/ [Accessed 23 Dec. 2018].
25. HSE (2015). Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. [online] Hse.gov.uk.
Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l153.htm [Accessed 8 Dec. 2018].
26. HSE (2015). Health and Safety Executive, construction industry health and safety statistics
[online] Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/ [Accessed 10 Nov. 2018].
27. Howard, J. 2011. Summary of the Making Green Jobs Safe Workshop. National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health.
28. Hanapi N.M., Kamal M.M.M., Ismail M.I. Identifying Root Causes and Mitigation
Measures of Construction Fall Accidents. Grading Bus. Manag. J. 2013;17:65–79
29. Howell, Gregory & Ballard, Glenn & Demirkesen Çakır, Sevilay. (2017). Why Lean
Projects Are Safer. 10.24928/2017/0116.
30. Katsakiori P., Sakellaropoulos G. and Manatakis E. (2009) Towards An Evaluation of
Accident Investigation Methods in Terms of their Alignment With Accident Causation
Models. Safety Science 47, pp.1007–1015
31. "Labour Force Survey". Office for National Statistics. UK construction industry statistics,
fatal and non-fatal injuries.
32. Larios, Sanz, Pellicer and Catalá (2012). Construction Health and Safety from Lean
Approach. Universitat Politècnica de València.
33. Marhani, Jaapara, Baria and Zawawib (2013). Sustainability through Lean Construction
Approach: A literature review. In: AMER International Conference on Quality of Life.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 101 ( 2013 ) 90 – 99.
34. McKay, J. (2010). The effect of construction on occupational health and safety. A Doctoral
Thesis. Loughborough University Institutional Repository.
35. Murray, M. (2003) Rethinking Construction: The Egan report (1998), in Mike Murray and
David Langford (eds) Construction Reports 1944-98, Blackwell, Oxford, 178-194
36. Mossman, Alan. (2013). Last Planner- 5 + 1 crucial & collaborative conversations for
predictable design & construction delivery (Apr 2013).
37. Oloke, D., Yu, H. and Heesom, D. (2007), “Developing Practitioner Skills in Construction
Health and Safety Management: An Integrated Teaching and Learning Approach”, Journal
for Education in Built Environment, Vol. 2 No 1, pp. 3-30.

38. OGC (2007). Risk and value management, Achieving Excellent in Construction
Procurement Guide.
39. A Pasale, R & J S Bagi, Prof. (2013). 5S Strategy: A workplace improvement lean tool.
Paripex - Indian Journal of research ISSN 2250 - 1991. 2. 151-153.
40. Rajendran, S. (2006). Sustainable Construction Safety and Health Rating System.
Civil and Environmental Engineering. Corvallis, OR, Oregon State University.
Doctorate
41. RIDDOR (2017). Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations
2013 - RIDDOR - HSE. [online] Hse.gov.uk. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/
[Accessed 8 Jan. 2019].
42. Reyes, J. P., San-José, J. T., Cuadrado, J. & Sancibrian, R. 2014. Health & Safety criteria
for determining the sustainable value of construction projects. Safety science, 62, 221-232
43. Suraji, A., Duff, R. and Peckitt S. J. (2001) Development of Causal Model of Construction
Accident Causation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 127(4), pp.
337-344
44. Sarhan and Fox (2012). Trend and Challenges to the Development of a Lean Culture among
UK construction Organizations. [Accessed: 25 Dec. 2018]
45. Singh, Jagtar & Vikas, Rastogi & Sharma, Richa. (2014). Implementation of 5S practices:
A review. Uncertain Supply Chain Management. 2. 155-162. 10.5267/j.uscm.2014.5.002.
46. Salem, Ossama & Asce, M & Solomon, J & Genaidy, Ash & Minkarah, I. (2006). Lean
Construction: From Theory to Implementation. Journal of Management in Engineering - J
MANAGE ENG. 22. 10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2006)22:4(168).
47. Saurin, T.A., Formoso, C.T. and Guimaraes, L.B.M. (2004) Safety and Production: An
Integrated Planning and Control Model. Construction Management and Economics, 22(2),
pp.159-169
48. Tyler M. and Lamont D. (2008) Construction Health and Safety. Institution of Civil
Engineers
49. Wood, Hannah & Gidado, Kassim. (2008). Project Complexity in Construction. COBRA
2008 - Construction and Building Research Conference of the Royal Institution of
Chartered Surveyors.

50. UMIST, Loughborough University (2003). Causal factors in construction accidents
Prepared by Loughborough University and UMIST for the Health and Safety Executive
2003

INTEGRATING LEAN CONSTRUCTION IN PROMOTING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON SITES

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to INTEGRATING LEAN CONSTRUCTION IN PROMOTING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON SITES

Similar to INTEGRATING LEAN CONSTRUCTION IN PROMOTING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON SITES (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

INTEGRATING LEAN CONSTRUCTION IN PROMOTING HEALTH AND SAFETY ON SITES