Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770

Creative Construction Conference 2017, CCC 2017, 19-22 June 2017, Primosten, Croatia

Roles of communication on performance of the construction sector

AbdulLateef Olanrewaju*, Seong Yeow Tan, Lee Foo Kwan
Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Jalan Universiti, Bandar Baratm 31900, Kampar, Perak DR, Malaysia

Abstract

The poor performance of the Malaysian construction sector has its root in poor communication. That makes it essential to
investigate the communication issues within construction organisations in Malaysia. This study analyses factors leading to poor
communication on the construction sites and provides strategies to address the associated challenges. Based on a cross-sectional
survey questionnaire involving 80 site workers, the results show that the major causes of poor communication are: the absence of
a shared language between superiors and workers, workplace stress, superiors, and colleagues’ attitude towards site workers,
misinterpreting of instructions, and poor communication skills among workers. Communication problems on-site can be
minimised by taking into account noise reduction measures, honesty among workers and supervisors, reduction in on-site
bullying, and encouragement of communication and creativity among workers. The findings are useful for construction
companies, developers, construction and project managers, and other towards increasing productivity and profits.
©©2017
2017TheTheAuthors. Published
Authors. by Elsevier
Published Ltd. This
by Elsevier Ltd.is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Creative
of the Creative Construction
Construction Conference
Conference 2017 2017.

Keywords: Productivity, construction sites, information managemengt, conflcits, Malaysia

1. Introduction

The construction sector is an economic investment, and its relationship with economic development is well
posited. Many studies [1, 2] discussed the contributions of the construction sector towards the economic
development of nations. The construction sector plans, constructs, alters, repairs, and demolishes buildings, and
engages in engineering works and other structures. It has been argued that for a country to have meaningful and
sustained development, it requires that the country pay critical attention to its construction sector. The construction
business is a complex enterprise with several stakeholders whose interaction requires information to be analysed and
transmitted. Because of this, communication is a strategic consideration. For instance, most construction disputes are
due to breach or inadequate communication among the team members. To illustrate, poor communication of design

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +605 468 8888; fax: +605 466 7407.
E-mail address: abdullateef.olanrewaju@ymail.com

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Creative Construction Conference 2017
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.005
764 AbdulLateef Olanrewaju et al. / Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770

information often leads to design problems. This will lead to delays and poor quality. Productivity on the site
depends on effective communication among the workers. Communication is defined as a process involving the
exchange of information, news, knowledge, and instructions between two or more people [3]. Communication is
effective if the receiver understands the information as intended by the sender. At every stage of the construction
lifecycle, information (in the form of drawings, specifications, notes, letters, memos, models, catalogues, instruction
manuals, and pictures) needs to be stored, retrieved, and communicated. However, the Malaysian construction sector
is experiencing high cases of delays, overruns, poor quality, health and safety issues, pollution, and issues of
sustainability as a result of ineffective communication practices. Because of this, this research investigates the causes
and solutions to communication problems on the construction sites.

2. Research background and theoretical framework

The Malaysian construction sector is active and features prominently in terms of policy formulation and
implementation. It represents about 3% of the GDP. The construction sector is the fourth biggest employer of labour
after agriculture, manufacturing and services sectors. In terms of value, the construction sector contributed RM
126,838 million in 2016 [4]. This is more than 100% compared to its contribution of RM 58, 320 in 2008. It
employed approximately 1,015.9 million (or 8%) of the total employed workforce in 2009 [5]. The construction
sector is dominated by the private sector with the contribution of more than 60%. About 85% [of 22,140] of the
establishments/organisations have a turnover of less than RM5 million annually with a gross output of RM16.2
billion in 2010. What these figures indicate is that the sector is dominated by subcontractors/specialists. However,
while the performance of the Malaysian construction sector is robust, it is plagued with several problems such as
health and safety issues, delays, low-profit margin, poor quality work, cost overruns, shortage of skilled workers,
disputes, lack of investment in research and development, and poor maintenance practices. For instance, an analysis
of 359 projects indicates that only 46.8% of the public sector and 37.2% private sector projects were completed
within budget [6]. Elsewhere, it was found that only 20.5% public sector projects and 33.35% of private sector
projects were completed within the estimated time.
On the Time Performance Index, the construction sector had an index of 1.41, meaning that projects exceeded
their scheduled time by 41% of the original time. Another research looking at 244 projects found delays of 26% for
irrigation and drainage projects, 37% of road projects, and 4% for sewage projects [7]. Memon et al. [8] also
investigated 30 delayed projects of various sizes owned by the government across Malaysia and discovered that
projects could be delayed for up to 119% of their scheduled time with an average of delay 24%. While this may not
be high as compared to the performance of construction projects in countries like Nigeria [9], Saudi Arabia [10], and
Hong Kong [11] it remains a major problem. Table 1 contains a summary of the major causes of poor performance
in the Malaysian construction sector. However, there is no consensus in the research literature on factors leading to
the poor performance of the construction sector. Similarly, there is no consensus on how the factors contained in the
table are linked to communication. Nevertheless, many of the causes are associated with communication issues due
to errors, omission or information. For instance, findings suggest that defects in the UK construction sector, many of
which result from the inefficient use and communication of information, cost at least £20 billion to correct every
year [12]. Also, for every US$1 billion spent in the USA construction sector, US$135 million is lost; and for every
US$135 million lost, US$75 million (or 56%) is due to ineffective communication [13]. The PMI also found that
construction businesses that emphasise communication perform five times better compared to those that did not
prioritise effective communication. Businesses that communicate effectively complete more than 80% of their
construction projects within budget, on time, in high quality, and achieve other client value systems [13]. In the
construction business, the immediate consequences of lack of communication include rework, non-uniformity, and
misapplication of resources. Other fallouts are on-site bullying, unethical behaviour, worker frustration, loss of
productivity, health issues, anger, poor employee morale, discrimination, insecurity, on-site violence, suppression of
innovation and creativity, and resultant poor image of the organisation. Therefore, effective communication is
fundamental to project success. Effective communication facilitates proper planning and scheduling of the
construction works and adequate information guides the clients towards appropriate financial planning, and ensures
effective availability of material and labour when required.
 AbdulLateef Olanrewaju et al. / Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770 765

Table 1. Summary of previous studies on the poor performance of the Malaysian construction industry
Author Scope and problem Causes
contractor’s improper planning, poor site management, inadequate contractor experience,
Sambasivan and Soon, inadequate client’s finance and payments for completed work, problems with
Delay
[14] subcontractors, shortage of material, labor supply, equipment availability and failure, lack
of communication between parties, and mistakes during the construction stage.
design and documentation issues, financial resource management, project management and
Abdul Rahman, et.al., Cost and time
contract administration, contractors site management, information and communication
[15] overruns
technology
Othman, et.al., [7] Delay Project locations, type of projects, class of projects, tendering methods, types of clients.
Risk and cost
Musa, [16] Change of design, failure to construct as design, site condition, ineffective communication,
overruns
cash flow and financial difficulties faced by contractors, contractor's poor site management,
Cost, delay and inadequate contractor experience, shortage of site workers, ineffective planning and
Memon, et. al., [8]
quality scheduling by contractors, escalation of material prices, lack of communication among
parties
Labour shortages, contractors’ financial difficulties, construction mistakes and ineffective
Ali, et. al., [17] Delay
works, coordination problems, materials shortages and poor site management
Non Payment and Attitude, delay in claim approval, conflict among parties and poor understanding of
Munnanim, et al., [18]
late payment professional service contract
Janipha, and Ismail, materials, supplier relationship, communication, quality culture and attitude, competitive
Quality
[19] bidding
Ye and Abdul client’s poor, financial, management, insufficient financial, resources, conflict and poor
Payment
Rahman, [20] communication among parties involved
Tan and Abdul- inadequate management support, unwillingness of project staff to accept the quality system,
Quality
Rahman, [21] paper works, ineffective communication, inadequate information
material shortage, non-payment (financial problem) to suppliers causing the stoppage of
Abdul Kadir, et al., material delivery to site, change order by consultants causing project delay, late issuance of
Productivity
[22] construction drawing by consultants, lack of coordination among the various stakeholders,
rework due to construction error
Hashim. [23] Safety planning and control, commitment of workers, site management

Well-communicated information on project locations, type of projects, class of projects, and type of clients pre-
empts overruns on both cost and time, would help to improve the project performance in terms cost, time, quality,
sustainability, and comfort. Poor communications legitimate, problematise, and exacerbate change order, reworks,
variations, and claims. Similarly, relationships among the parties to construction contracts can be improved with
effective communication. Poor communication also affects ordering and payment with material suppliers. Tan and
Abdul Rahman [21] cited the difficulties in the understanding quality system and proper handling of paperwork as a
major factor leading to decline in quality of work.

3. Outline of the research design

This research is based on a cross-sectional survey questionnaire. The respondents were selected based on
convenient sampling. Convenient sampling is applicable if the appropriate response/feedbacks can only be
administered to available respondents [24]. A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed to the construction
‘workers’ on five different sites based on hand delivery. 26 factors that caused poor communication on sites and 19
‘methods’ capable of minimising communications problem identified through literature and experience were
included on the survey form. The factors and methods were measured on Likert Scale. The extent of measurement is
determined by the Average Relative Index (ARI).
766 AbdulLateef Olanrewaju et al. / Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770

4. Data analysis, results, and discussion

4.1. Respondents’ Profiles

Out of 300 survey forms administered, only 80 usable surveys were collected and analysed for this research
project. About 60% of the respondents were educated to a level lower than a BSc with only 35% of the respondents
having a BSc. Some 32% obtained a diploma. 60% of the respondents were either site operatives or site supervisors.
While about 15% were either site managers or site engineers, the remainder held other positions on sites including
the foreman, and clerk of works. Close to 50% of the respondents reported having worked in the construction sector
for more than five years, though only about 2% had more than 20 years’ experience. Nearly 20% have between 10
and 20 years working experience. More than 50% of the respondents were working in residential construction the
other worked on mixed construction, civil engineering and commercial building construction. 87% of the
respondents were locals. The respondents’ profiles were interpreted to mean that they are capable of providing valid
information on Malaysian construction sites.

5. Analysing the communication factors

The strength of the data was measured by reliability and validity tests. The validity scores range from 0.504 (for
the difference in moral values between superiors and workers) to 0.817 (for communication in different locations).
Reliability scores range from 0.913 (for workers’ lack of motivation to improve language skills) to 0.921 (for
communication in different locations). The results indicate that about 20% of the respondents marked that the
factors may not lead to communication problems, the rest thought otherwise (Table 2). 45% considered that the
factors put together would often lead to communication problems; more than 34% said these would very often or
extremely often lead to communication problems on-site. Furthermore, the average cumulative index is 0.6316
meaning that when taken together, all the factors would explain about 63% of all perceived communication
problems. Table 2 contains the statistical distributions of the communication factors. As may be seen, none of the
factors contributes less than 50%. These findings have similarities with research conducted in South Africa [25],
Dutch [26], Hong Kong [11], UK [27] and Australia [28]. However, due to space constraints, only the first five are
briefly discussed next. The highest-rated (69%) cause of communication problems is reported as stress experienced
by workers. This is not surprising. Based on large study conducted in the UK, work-related stress is a serious
concern in the construction sector as about 90% of respondents found their jobs to be stressful [29]. The UK, study
finds that the cause of stress in the construction sector includes having too much work to do in a short time,
travelling, being responsible for the safety of others at work, working long hours and having a dangerous job. A
CIOB surveyed revealed that 68.2% of the respondents claimed to have suffered from stress, anxiety or depression,
and 154 had taken medical advice [27]. Research on heat stress on construction workers in India shows stress related
problems are on the increase [30]. Incidences of stress in the construction industry are also documented in Hong
Kong [31].
While stress implies different things to different people, here it is considered as the experience of (external)
forces that are overbearing or unpleasant in a situation that someone is subjected to [31]. Stress leads to distraction,
unorganised thoughts, frustration, anger, and lack of concentration. About 50% of workplace stress is caused by
excessive workload, long working hours, travel time and the lack of resting time. If workers are tired and
overworked, it could become difficult for them to receive, interpret, and pass on information correctly to the proper
parties. However, 50.5% of respondents of the CIOB survey indicated that taking time off helps them to cope with
occupational stress [27]. Workers’ attitude was found to be another major source of poor communication. Attitude
plays an important role in human relations. Often the site operatives’ morale could be affected if treated indifferently
by their supervisors, and this would consequently lead to selective listening. Attitudes of construction workers were
shown to be a major factor affecting health and safety of construction workers in Singapore [32]. The study revealed
that it relates to communication issues on the sites. Specifically, it suggested that safety procedures also need to be
thorough and clearly communicated to workers. In Sri Lanka, the attitudes of construction workers were found to be
 AbdulLateef Olanrewaju et al. / Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770 767

a major issue on construction waste management [33]. Consistent with the literature, a study in Australia, suggested
that to improve safety issues of construction workers, the communication style is critical [34].

Table 2 Sources of communication problems on sites

Source SD Index
Working stress 0.759 0.693
Superiors and workers’ attitude and behavior 0.809 0.675
Workers misinterpret superior’s instructions 0.818 0.667
Workers are unable to express themselves due to poor communication skills 0.890 0.664
Local superiors and foreign workers have different communication style such as hand gesture and choice of words 0.912 0.655
Superiors and workers have different view on moral values 0.856 0.654
Workers are uncertain of the work instructions but afraid to ask 0.912 0.650
Superiors and workers’ anger or temper issue 0.849 0.650
Workers are not willing to communicate due to poor communication skills 1.00 0.639
Worker’s lack of motivation to improve working skills 0.992 0.637
Workers have fear of authority, keeping workers to speak up even if the work instruction given was wrong 0.824 0.637
Workers’ lack of motivation to improve language skill 0.977 0.636
Misunderstanding of body language between superiors and workers 0.848 0.634
The noise produces on site causing difficulty to hear each other clearly 0.743 0.628
Selective listening e.g. workers only listen to what they want to hear or only listen to their preferred superiors 0.923 0.623
Workers’ lack of commitment to their job such as quitting job without notice and absent without explanation 0.969 0.623
Superiors and workers have different judgment on priorities 0.895 0.623
Superiors and workers have different time management such as punctuality 0.803 0.623
Workers are unable to think creatively, unable to solve minor problems without superior’s instructions 0.872 0.616
Lack of trust between superiors and workers 0.875 0.616
Lack of honesty between superiors and workers 0.953 0.616
Communicate in different locations 0.908 0.610
Lack of shared language between superiors and workers 0.834 0.610
Workers are not willing to communicate to people who are at higher rank or from different countries 1.00 0.608
Superiors lack of leadership 0.906 0.584
Site bullies 0.996 0.551

The study also found that misinterpretation of instructions is a major cause of poor communication on the sites.
This finding is similar to findings elsewhere. For instance, communication in the Dutch construction is exacerbated
by poor interpretations of clients’ requirements [26]. Misinterpretation of instructions could result from a number of
factors, including communication technique, nature of work, language, and experience of both the supervisors as
well as the site operatives. For instance, if an operative is not familiar with a particular sign or symbol used by the
supervisor, an activity would be performed incorrectly. Similarly, the operatives’ inability to express themselves due
to poor communication skills would pose a problem on sites. 80% of the workers in the construction sector in
Malaysia are operatives; and about 80% of the operatives are foreign workers from Indonesia, the Philippines,
Pakistan, Myanmar, and Bangladesh. This creates a language barrier not only between operatives and supervisors
but also among the operatives. Further, most operatives have learnt about construction activities on-site, not through
formal education. It is, therefore, not surprising that the next sources of poor communication are communication
styles, gestures, and choice of words. This can be mostly attributed to the widespread presence of foreign labour in
the construction sector. This finding is consistent with construction communication studies in Australia [34], and
768 AbdulLateef Olanrewaju et al. / Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770

South Africa [25]. It is also consistent with a study on the importance of nonverbal communication [35]. Non-verbal
aspects of communication such as facial expression, eye contact, smiles or frowns, and body language are important
to establishing meaning in non-spoken venues [36]. Although Gunhan et al. [37] argued for the roles of nonverbal
communication style in the US construction sector, Zulch [25] found that electronic communication is the most
effective and nonverbal communication style is the least in the South African construction industry. While
nonverbal communication style has some potential, issues of culture might pose difficulties for its effective
implementation. Curiously, culture is one of the most important barriers to effective communication.

6. Perceived measures to improve communication on construction sites

The validity score ranges from 0.520 (employer provided communication workshops to develop the relationship
between supervisors and workers) to 0.800 (presence of a feedback mechanism). The reliability scores range from
0.872 (employer provided communication workshops to develop the relationship between supervisors and workers)
to 0.884. CIDB had provided language lessons before workers were permitted to work on construction sites). These
results indicate that the ‘solutions’ are capable of minimising poor communication problems on the sites. Table 3
contains the detail on the measurements of the proposed ‘solution’ to communication in the construction industry.

Table 3 Perceived ‘Solution’ to poor communication problems on sites

Solution SD Index
Avoid communication in a noisy environment 0.892 0.747
Promote honesty among superiors and workers 0.880 0.747
Increase awareness on site bullying, the bullies should be punished. 0.931 0.747
Superiors should promote open communication 0.799 0.745
Superiors to promote creative thinking to solve problems on site 0.848 0.734
Employer provide communication workshop to develop relationship between superiors and workers 0.839 0.734

Employer provides language lessons 0.944 0.743

Superior encouragement to boost workers’ confidence on communication 0.780 0.743
Promote trust among superiors and workers 1.000 0.741
Superiors should be trained for leadership 1.010 0.740
Superiors are to make effort to understand their workers’ communication styles to avoid misunderstanding. 0.884 0.737
Employer provides communication workshop to develop positive attributes 0.907 0.714
CIDB provides language lessons before workers are permitted to work on construction sites 1.078 0.709
Provide counselling to understand and try to solve workers’ problems 0.911 0.692
Provide feedback system 1.132 0.691
Employer provides communication workshop to develop understanding of cultural differences between local and foreign
1.004 0.686
workers
Employer provides communication workshop to develop awareness of communication problem on construction site 0.904 0.668
Employer rewards or compliments workers as the motivation to attend language lessons 0.813 0.655
Only employ those who speak and understand English or Bahasa Malayu 1.290 0.605

About 90% of the respondents granted that communication problem can be solved with all the solutions. The
average cumulative index of the methods is 0.71 or 71%. Most of the findings are consistent with what are available
in the literature and practices. The first method that the respondents considered appropriate to reduce
communication problems is avoiding communication in noisy environments (75%). Although this finding is
contrary to our undisclosed hypothesis, the findings are consistent with the literature. For instance, based on the
CIOB’s survey in the UK, more than half of the respondents confirmed that noise on-site is a potential cause of
 AbdulLateef Olanrewaju et al. / Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770 769

stress among workers [27]. The impact of stress on communication and productivity has been discussed earlier.
Noise also leads to headaches or eyestrain among the construction workers [29]. Hoezen et al.’s [26] research in the
Dutch construction sector highlighted the roles of noise in the communication. Construction sites by the nature of its
operations and activities, the plant and equipment use, the number of workers, and vehicular movement are prone to
noise pollutions. Noise from factories, neighbourhood and vehicular movement outsides the sites would also
problematise the communication problems on sites especially those in urban areas.
The respondents also apprised that the employer could reduce communication problems through promoting
honesty among workers, especially those involved in on-site activities. This factor was weighed as equally important
(weighting of 75%) to increase awareness about on-site bullying and reducing noise. Honesty between supervisors
and operatives did not manifest as one of the principle organisational factors affecting communication on
construction sites. However, the relationship between operatives and ‘superior’ features as an important organisation
factors that influence stress in the workplace [32]. Honesty and trust would enhance relationships on construction
sites because interactions are intensive. Site bullying is on the rise on the construction sites. Thus, it comes as no
surprise that it is cited as a means to improve sites' communication. In fact, extensive research conducted in the UK
shows that bullying and harassment behaviours in an indicative [38]. Unfortunately, construction workers for fear
choose to contain the humiliations, victimisations, threat and intimidations on sites rather than talk about it.
However, this concern is spectacular among the immigrant construction workers in the Gulf States. The diverse and
status of nationalities of the site operatives are not major factors accounting for reporting bullying incidences in
Malaysia. Findings in Australia show that workplace bullying has increased significantly. In 2000 alone, about 1.5
million workers were victimised with estimated costs to businesses of between $6 billion and $36 billion [28]. The
situation is not much different in other places including the US [39]. Site bullying is also caused by or exacerbated
due to poor communication. According to one operative, in our survey ‘if a site manager gives instructions and the
operative did not follow it, this can generate site bullying’.

7. Conclusion

This research offers insight into the problems leading to poor the performance of the construction sectors.
Communication is a major challenge leading to poor on-site productivity and decreased project performance around
the world. This research examined communication problems on construction sites in Malaysia. From the results of a
survey administered to workers on construction sites, this study identified and briefly explained the major causes of
poor communication and ways to address the challenge. It emphasised that unless communication issues are
addressed, the construction sector is likely to perform poorly. It has provided fresh theoretical insights into the
causes of poor communication on construction sites. This study is a preliminary attempt to determine suggestions to
improve communication. However, while the findings of this study are applicable to construction sites in Malaysia
and elsewhere, research that covers more diverse sites and locations is required to confirm the results presented here.

References

[1] G. Ofori,) Frameworks for analyzing international construction, Construction Management and Economics, (200321 (4): 379-391.
[2] L. S. Gruneberg, Construction economics: an introduction, New York, NY: Palgrave, 1997.
[3] Radosavljevic, M and Bennett, J. Construction management strategies: a theory of construction management. West Sussex: John Wiley &
Sons Limited, 2012.
[4] Department of Statistics malaysia (2016) Q u a r t e r l y C o n s t r u c t i o n S t a t i s t i c s, Fourth Quarter 2016. ISSN 2232-173X.
[5] Department of Statistics malaysia (2015), Malaysia Economic Statistics Time Series, ISSN 0127-9181
[6] Z, Shehu, I. R, Endut , A. Akintoye and G.D. Holt, Cost overrun in the Malaysian construction industry projects: A deeper insight.
International Journal of Project Management, (2014). 32(8): 1471–1480.
[7] A A., Othman, V. J., Torrance, and M. Hamid, (2006), factors influencing the construction time performance of public buildings in Malaysia.
In Procc. of Management in Construction Researchers Association Malaysia (MiCRA), International Islamic University Malaysia, 20th – 21st
June 2006 ISBN- 983-3142-02-8.
[8] Memon, H. A., AbdulRahman, I Abdulllah, R .M ,Abdul Aziz, A. A. Time overrun in construction project from the perspective of project
management consultant, Journal of Surveying, Construction & Property. (2011), Vol. 1 Issue 1 Issn 1985-7527pp54- 66.
[9] A. A Olanrewaju, and P. J. Anahve, Delay Factors in the Nigerian Construction Industry, In Proceeding of COBRA, 2013. New Delhi,
September, 10 – 12.
770 AbdulLateef Olanrewaju et al. / Procedia Engineering 196 (2017) 763 – 770

[10] A. S. Assaf, and S. Al-Hejji, (2006), Causes of delay in large construction projects, International Journal of Project Management,
24 (2006) pp349–357.
[11] A, W. K., Ng, and A. D. F Price,. (2010), Causes Leading to Poor site Coordination in Building Projects. International Journal of
Organization, Technology and Management in Construction 2(2) pp.167-172.
[12]BSI (British Standards Institute, 2003), Poor Communication Costing UK Construction Industry, http://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/about-
bsi/media-centre/press-releases/2003/9/Poor- Communication-Costing-UK-Construction-Industry/ [assessed on 15 January 2014].
[13] PMI (Project Management Institute, 2013), The high cost of low performance: The essential roles of communications. PMI.
[14] Sambasivan, and W. Y. Soon, (2007), Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction industry, International Journal of Project
Management, 25 (2007) 517–526.
[15] I., Abdul Rahman, H. A., Memon, S., Nagapan, I. A. B. Q. Latif, and A. A Abdul Azis, Time and Cost Performance of Construction
Projects in Southern and Central Regions of Peninsular Malaysia, IEEE Colloquium on Humanities, Science & Engineering Research
(CHUSER 2012), December 3-4, 2012, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia, 52 – 57.
[16] M Musa,Preliminary findings of the construction risk factors affecting the cost overruns of public projects in Malaysia In Proceedings of
Management in Construction Research Conference (MiCRA) Shah Alam: 28th – 29th August 2007 ppB-27-1 – B-27-8.
[17] S. A., Ali, A., Smith, M. Pitt, and H. C. Choon, (2010), Contractors' Perception of Factors Contributing to Project Delay: Case Studies of
Commercial Projects in Klang Valley, Malaysia. Journal of Design and Built Environment, Vol. 7, pp 43-57.
[18] C. E. M., Munaaaim, S. M., Mohd Danuri, H., Abdul Rahman, and M. Hanid, Late and non-payment issues in the Malaysian construction
industry – a consultant’s perspective. In Proc. of Quantity Surveying National Convention, Universiti Sains Malaysia, (2006), ISBN: 983-
41749-2-6 pp-18-26.
[19] I. A. N. Janipha, and F. Ismail, Conceptualisation of Quality Issues in Malaysian Construction Environment, Association of Malaysian
Environment-Behavior Researchers, AMER (ABRA malaysia), Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (2013),101 pp53 – 61.
[20] Ye, M. K. and Abdul Rahman, H. Risk of Late Payment in the Malaysian Construction Industry, International Journal of Social,
Management, Economics and Business Engineering (2010), Vol:4 No:5 pp73 – 81.
[21] Tan, C. K., & Abdul-Rahman, H. (2011), Study of Quality Management in Construction Projects, Chinese Business Review, ISSN 1537-
1506, Vol. 10, No. 7, pp542-552.
[22] M.R Abdul Kadir,. W.P., Lee, M.S., Jaafar, S.M. Sapuan, and A.A.A. Ali, (2005), Factors affecting construction labour productivity for
Malaysian residential projects, Structural Survey, Vol. 23 No. 1pp. 42-54.
[23] E. A. Hashim, (2007), New dimension of safety in construction refurbishment projects, pp B-4-1- B-4-8. In Proc. of Management in
Construction Research Conference (MiCRA) Shah Alam: 28th – 29th August 2007.
[24] U. Sekaran, and R. Bougie, Research methods for business: a skill building approach. Fifth Edition. UK: John Wiley and Sons, Limited,
(2010).
[25] B.G. Zulch, Communication: The foundation of project management. Procedia Technology 16 (2014), 1000 – 1009
[26] M.E.L., Hoezen, I.M.M.J. Reymen, and G.P.M.R. Dewulf, (2006),The problem of communication in construction. In Proceedings of the
CIB W06 Adaptables Conference, Eindhoven, The Netherlands,
[27] CIOB (Chartered Institute of Building, 2006) Occupational Stress in the Construction Industry Survey 2006.
[28] Master Builders Australia (2012) Submission to House Standing Committee on Education and Employment Inquiry into Workplace
Bullying. http://www.masterbuilders.com.au/.
[29] J., Beswick, K., Rogers, E., Corbett, S. Binch, and K. Jackson, An analysis of the prevalence and distribution of stress in the construction
industry, Health and Safety Executive, RR518 Research Report, Derbyshire,(2007).
[30] P, Dutta, A. Rajiva, D. Andhare, G.S., Azhar, A. Tiwari, P. Sheffield, Ahmedabad Heat and Climate Study Group. Perceived heat stress
and health effects on construction workers. Indian Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 19 (3)pp151-8.
[31 M.Y., Leung, Q., Liang and J.(Yu, 2016), Development of a mindfulness–stress–performance model for construction workers, Construction
Management and Economics, pp1-9.
[32] E. T. A., Lin, and K. P. H Wen,. (2005) Singapore’s Contractors’ Attitudes towards Safety Culture. Journal of Construction Research, Vol.
6, No. 1 (2005) 157–178.
[33] U., Kulatunga, D., Amaratunga, R. Haigh, and R. Rameezdeen, Attitudes and perceptions of construction workforce on construction waste in
Sri Lanka, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, (2006),Vol. 17 Iss 1 pp. 57 – 72.
[34] Bahn, S. T., & Barratt-Pugh, L. G. (2013). Improving safety culture: The impact of the construction induction training on the construction
industry in Western Australia. In Work, employment and employment relations in an uneven patchwork world: Proceedings of the 27th
AIRAANZ Conference (pp. 11-25). Fremantle, Australia: Association of Industrial Relations Academics of Australia and New Zealand.
[35] G. H., Graham, J., Unruh, & P. Jennings, The impact of nonverbal communication in organizations: A survey of perceptions. Journal of
Business Communication, (1991). 28, 45–62.
[36 ] L.C., Dzurec, and G.Bromley, "Speaking of workplace bullying." Journal of Professional Nursing (2012). No. 28:247-254.
[37] S., Gunhan, G. Senol, and S. Z. Dogan, Non-Verbal Cues: Improving Communication In Construction Projects . “Non-verbal Cues:
Improving Communication in Construction Projects.” Proceedings of the 119th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, San Antonio, TX,
2012. (ISBN: 978-0-87823-241-3).
[38] J.C., Illing, M., Carter, N.J., Thompson, P.E.S., Crampton, G.M., Morrow, J.H., Howse, A. Cooke, and B.C. Burford, Evidence synthesis on
the occurrence, causes, consequences, prevention and management of bullying and harassing behaviours to inform decision making in the
NHS. Project Report. HMSO, London(2013).
[39] G, Namie, R. U.S. Namie (2009) Workplace bullying: Some basic considerations and consultation interventions. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research. pp61:202-219.