Thesis, Labour Productivity

Factors Influencing Construction Workers Productivity
in The Construction Projects of Quetta City
By
Waleed Ahmed Khan 51913

Ayyaz Khan Bazai 50042
Hafiz M. Adil 49326
Shahzada M. Karim 51275
BS Civil Engineering
Batch (Fall-2019)
Faculty of Engineering & Architecture

Balochistan University of Information Technology,
Engineering and Management Sciences
July 2023
Factors Influencing Construction Workers Productivity in
The Construction Projects of Quetta City
Thesis submitted to
BALOCHISTAN UNIVERSITY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

ENGINEERING & MANAGE’MENT SCIENCES
For the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
BECHELOR OF SCIENCES (BS)
In Civil Engineering
By
Hafiz M. Adil 49326
Supervisor
Engr. Zarak Khan
Co-Supervisor
Dr. Salman Nazar
Faculty of Engineering and Architecture
AUTHOR’S DECLARATION
We hereby state that our BS thesis entitled “Factors Influencing Construction Workers
Productivity in The Construction Projects of Quetta City” is our own original work and
has not been submitted previously by us for award of any degree from Balochistan
University of Information Technology, Engineering & Management Sciences, Quetta or
elsewhere in the country/world.
At any time, even after graduation, if the above statement is found incorrect, the university
has the right to withdraw degree.
Name CMSID Signature

Hafiz M. Adil 49326
Date: _________________________
i
PLAGIARISM UNDERTAKING
We solemnly declare that project/research work presented in the thesis titled “Factors
Influencing Construction Workers Productivity in The Construction Projects of Quetta
City” is our own work with no significant contribution from any other person or sources.
Small contribution/help wherever taken has been duly acknowledged and that complete
thesis has been written by us.
We understand the zero-tolerance policy of the HEC and Balochistan University of

Information Technology, Engineering & Management Sciences, Quetta towards
plagiarism with an acceptable similarity index limited to 50%. Therefore we, as authors
of the above titled thesis, declare our thesis has been checked for similarity index and any
material used as reference is properly referred /cited.
We undertake that if found guilty of any formal plagiarism in the above titled thesis even
after award of degree, the University reserves the rights to withdraw/revoke our degree
and that HEC and the University has the right to publish our name on the HEC/University
website on which names of students are placed who submitted plagiarized thesis.
Name CMSID Signature

Hafiz M. Adil 49326
Date: _________________________
ii
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
This is to certify that the project/research work presented in this thesis, entitled “Factors
Influencing Construction Workers Productivity in The Construction Projects of Quetta
City” was supervised by Engr. Zarak Khan and co-supervised by Dr. Salman Nazar. No
part of this thesis has been submitted anywhere else for any other degree. This thesis is
submitted to the Department of Civil Engineering, FOE&A, BUITEMS, in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of BS Civil Engineering.
Supervisor Name: Engr. Zarak Khan Co-supervisor: Dr. Salman Nazar
Signature: __________________________ Signature: _____________________
Dated: ____________________________ Dated: _______________________
Name of HOD: ____________________________________________________
Signature: __________________________
Dated: _________________________
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, we would like to give our deepest, sincerest, and heartfelt thanks to our
supervisor, Engr. Zarak Khan for his brilliant guidance, encouragement, and support
throughout the study. We are truly grateful for his time and effort spent in reviewing our
progress, providing constructive feedback, and offering insightful suggestions that
significantly enhanced the quality of our work.
Secondly, we are extremely thankful to our co-supervisor Dr. Salman Nazar for his
expertise, dedication, and encouragement which has been instrumental in shaping the
success of this endeavor.
Lastly, we would like to thank any person who contributes to our final year project directly
or indirectly. We would like to acknowledge their comments and suggestions, which was
crucial for the successful completion of this study. We want to remember all the team
members, the leader Waleed Ahmed Khan, Ayyaz Khan Bazai, Shahzada M Karim and
Hafiz M Adil for this long journey.
iv
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Productivity And Its Measurement in The Construction Industry ....................... 1
1.3 Studies On CW Productivity in Pakistan ............................................................. 4
1.3.1 Challenges Faced by Pakistan's Construction Industry ................................ 4
1.4 Problem Statement ............................................................................................... 5
1.5 Aim and Objectives .............................................................................................. 5
1.6 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) ............................................................... 5
1.7 Scope of the work ................................................................................................. 6
1.8 Thesis Outline ...................................................................................................... 6
Chapter 2: Literature Review.......................................................................................... 7
2.1 Factors Influencing CW Productivity .................................................................. 7
2.2.1 Management Related Factors ........................................................................ 7
2.2.2 Site Related Factors ...................................................................................... 9
2.2.3 HSE and Welfare Related Factors .............................................................. 11
2.2.4 External Factors .......................................................................................... 11
2.2 Causes of CW Problems ..................................................................................... 13
2.2.1 Causes of CW Problems Across the Globe................................................. 14
2.2.2 Causes of CW Problems in Pakistan........................................................... 15
Chapter 3: Methodology ............................................................................................... 17
3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 17
3.2 Quantitative research .......................................................................................... 17
3.3 Research Process ................................................................................................ 17
3.4 Adaption of Questionnaire ................................................................................. 18
3.5 Section-A............................................................................................................ 19
v
3.6 Section-B ............................................................................................................ 19
3.7 Data Collection Procedures ................................................................................ 19
3.7.1 Standardizing Procedures............................................................................ 20
3.8 Target Population ............................................................................................... 20
3.9 Sample Size ........................................................................................................ 20
3.9.1 Statistical Considerations ............................................................................ 20
3.9.2 Practical Constraints ................................................................................... 21
3.9.3 Site Selection .............................................................................................. 21
3.10 Data Collection ............................................................................................... 23
3.11 Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 24
3.12 Limitations ...................................................................................................... 25
3.13 Questionnaire Distributions ............................................................................ 26
Chapter 4: Results and Discussions .............................................................................. 28
4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 28
4.2 Data Collected from the Survey ......................................................................... 28
4.3 General Characteristics & Analysis of Respondents ......................................... 28
4.3.1 Job Title in The Construction Sector .......................................................... 29
4.3.2 Age group of the respondents ..................................................................... 29
4.3.3 Qualification Range of Respondents .......................................................... 30
4.3.4 Experience Range of Respondents.............................................................. 31
4.3.5 Types of projects ......................................................................................... 32
4.4 Factors Affecting CW Productivity ................................................................... 33
4.4.1 Management Related Factors ...................................................................... 33
4.4.2 Site Related Factors .................................................................................... 36
4.4.3 HSE and Welfare Related Factors .............................................................. 38
4.4.4 External Factors .......................................................................................... 40
4.4.5 Overall Factors Affecting CW Productivity ............................................... 42
vi
4.4.6 Group of Factors Affecting CW Productivity ............................................. 46
4.4.7 Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Other Countries Studied in
the Past 47
4.5 Summary ............................................................................................................ 48
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................... 50
5.1 Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 50
5.2 Recommendations .............................................................................................. 50
References 52
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 60
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Research Process ............................................................................................. 17
Figure 3.2 Number of Respondents in the Construction sector ....................................... 24
Figure 4.1 Percentage of respondents in the Construction sector .................................... 29
Figure 4.2 Pie Chart of Respondents Age ........................................................................ 30
Figure 4.3 Qualification of Respondents .......................................................................... 31
Figure 4.4 Experience of Respondents ............................................................................. 32
Figure 4.5 Type of Projects ............................................................................................... 33
Figure 4.6 Management Related Factors .......................................................................... 34
Figure 4.7 Site Related Factors ......................................................................................... 37
Figure 4.8 HSE and Welfare Related Factors ................................................................... 39
Figure 4.9 External Factors ............................................................................................... 41
Figure 4.10 Overall Factors Affecting CW Productivity .................................................. 45
Figure 4.11 Group of Factors ............................................................................................ 46
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 Comparison of CW Productivity Rates. ............................................................. 3
Table 3.1 Weightage of Scale ........................................................................................... 19
Table 3.2 Details of Construction Sites ............................................................................ 23
Table 3.3 Frequencies of Respondents ............................................................................. 27
Table 4.1 SPSS Analysis of Job Title ............................................................................... 29
Table 4.2 Age group of respondents ................................................................................. 30
Table 4.3 Qualification of Respondents............................................................................ 31
Table 4.4 Experience Range of Respondents ................................................................... 32
Table 4.5 Types of Projects by Percentage ....................................................................... 33
Table 4.6 Management Related Factors............................................................................ 34
Table 4.7 Site Related Factors ......................................................................................... 36
Table 4.8 HSE and Welfare Related Factors .................................................................... 39
Table 4.9 External Factors ................................................................................................ 41
Table 4.10 Overall Factors Affecting CW Productivity .................................................. 42
Table 4.11 Group of Factors ............................................................................................. 46
Table 4.12 Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Different Countries Studied
in the Past (Gundecha, 2013). ........................................................................................... 47
ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Cases
%: Percentage
ADB: Asian Development Bank
AI: Average Index
BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics
COC: Census of Construction
CW: Construction Worker
HSE: Health, Safety and Environment
ILO : International Labor Organization
PIDE:Pakistan Institute for Development Economics
Qta: Quetta
SDG: Sustainable Development Goals
SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
UN-GA: United Nations General Assembly
UOB: Unviversity of Balochistan
x
ABSTRACT
The construction industry plays a crucial role in driving Pakistan’s economy and GDP
development, heavily relying on its workforce. However, various challenges such as cost,
time, quality, and safety can significantly impact construction projects. Understanding and
enhancing construction productivity are essential for the industry’s economic success. This
study investigates the factors influencing construction worker (CW) productivity in
construction industry of the Quetta City through a comprehensive survey of 109
respondents, including CW, contractors, site engineers, and construction foremen. The
factors are categorized into management-related, site-related, health, safety and
environment {HSE} & welfare related and external factors. Shortage of water and power
supply emerged as a significant management-related factors, while poor site layout and
rework were prominent site-related influencers. Heat and cold stresses were identified as
critical HSE-related factors impacting productivity, and economic conditions of the state
and stakeholder’s poor financial conditions were prominent external factors. The study
provides recommendations to improve CW productivity, by emphasizing job satisfaction,
stable economic conditions, investing in training & development and ensuring CW health
and safety. In addition, further research could be carried out on productivity issues and
rates, which can be compare with the case studies of developed countries to identify best
practices for increased construction industry efficiency.
xi
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
The construction industry plays a pivotal role in the development of a nation, serving as
its foundation. The economic growth and progress of a country are significantly influenced
by the state of its infrastructure. The construction industry is often considered a barometer
of a nation's prosperity, particularly in newly developing countries and emerging
economies (Kaliba et al., 2009). By generating wealth and employment opportunities, the
construction industry holds substantial sway over a nation's economy (Sweis et al., 2008).
Notable examples of countries that have invested significantly in their infrastructure
include the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, transforming once-desert cities into world-
class tourist destinations (Zaneldin, 2006).
Construction, being a high-risk industry, involves a wide range of tasks related to building,
modifying, and repairing structures. CW face various dangers, such as falls from heights,
exposure to unguarded machinery, hazards from heavy equipment, electrocution, silica
dust, and asbestos-related risks (OSHA.Gov).
The success of a construction project hinges on several critical components, with one of
the most important being the CW. The CW represents the largest human resource unit
within any given project. Human resources are highly variable, unpredictable, and crucial
to the production process (Hickson & Ellis, 2014).
A CW is an individual employed in the physical construction and development of

infrastructure and the built environment. CW are regarded as vital resources in the
construction industry as they bring together various other resources, such as materials,
plant equipment, and finance, to produce the desired construction output (Wahab, 1991).
According to Wachira (2000), competition helps regulate consultants through factors like
specification, material control, plant costs, profit, and overheads. Consequently, CW
become the primary resource open to improvement (Olabosipo & Ayodeji Owolabi James
D, 2011).
1.2 Productivity And Its Measurement in The Construction Industry

Productivity, as defined by Naoum (2016), refers to maximizing output while optimizing
input. CW productivity, according to Borcherding et al. (1986), is determined by the ratio
of CW cost to the quantity of output. Horner and Talhouni (1995) defined CW productivity
1
in terms of earned hours, based on establishing standard outputs or "norms" for each unit
operation. However, setting reliable standards and accounting for all influencing factors
pose challenges to this concept.
The definition of productivity varies across industries, depending on the relationship

between input and output. Liou and Borcherding (1986) state that the cost of CW relative
to the work performed typically serves as a measure of CW productivity. Additionally,
Drewin (1982) defines CW productivity as the quantity of goods and services produced by
a CW within a given timeframe.
The measurement of productivity is a complex task, with Littre (1883) describing it as the
desire to produce. Different definitions are available depending on the scope and
availability of data. Productivity is defined by the US Department of Commerce as
"numbers generated by one CW hour input" (Adrian, 1987).
According to the Census of Construction (COC), the primary source of information for
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), productivity in three of the studied sectors in the United
States decreased between 2007 and 2019, while industrial building construction witnessed
a slight increase (Bls.Gov.htm).
Contrasting the situation in the United States, the CW productivity in Pakistan's

construction industry, including Quetta city, faces numerous challenges. A report by the
International Labor Organization (ILO) identifies inadequate training and education, low
wages, and insufficient safety measures as significant hindrances to CW productivity in
Pakistan. The report also highlights the stark disparity between CW productivity in
Pakistan and other developing countries, emphasizing the need for research and investment
to bridge this gap (US Bureau of CW Statistics, 2020; International CW Organization,
2017). Table 1.1 shows the productivity rates of CW between Pakistan and USA.
2
Table 1.1 Comparison of CW Productivity Rates, (NRMCA.org), (semanticscholar.org), (AGC.org),
(Pakistan Engineering Congress, 2011), (construction-institute.org) and (NAHB.org).
S. No Construction Activity USA Productivity Rates Pakistan

Productivity Rates
1. Concrete work 2.2 cubic meters per 1.18 cubic meters

worker per day per worker per day
2. Excavation 0.35 to 0.45 cubic meters 0.25 to 0.35 cubic

per worker per day meters per worker
per day
3. Marking of Layout 50 to 150 square feet per 20.30 to 81.19
hour square feet per hour
4. Masonry Work 3.5 square meters per 3.2 square meters

worker per day per worker per day
5. Foundation Work 1.5 to 3 cubic meters per 0.5 to 1.5 cubic

worker per day meters per worker
per day
6. Compacting the ground 500 to 1000 square feet per 400 to 800 square
hour feet per hour
7. PCC (Plain Cement 0.7 to 1.5 cubic meters per 0.5 to 1.5 cubic
Concrete) worker per day meters per worker
per day
8. Footing Reinforcement 100 to 250 linear meters 100 to 200 linear
per worker per day meters per worker
per day
9. Shuttering 100 to 300 square feet per 100 to 250 square
hour feet per hour
3
1.3 Studies On CW Productivity in Pakistan
The World Bank's report indicates that Pakistan's CW productivity was approximately 3.4
cubic meters per worker per day in 2018. In comparison, neighboring countries like India
and Bangladesh exhibited higher productivity rates of 4.8 and 6.2 cubic meters per worker
per day, respectively (World Bank - Pak En-Analysis).
Another study conducted by the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE)

estimated CW productivity in Pakistan to be around 3.8 cubic meters per worker per day
in 2015. However, it is crucial to note that these estimates represent averages and may vary
significantly depending on specific projects and locations. Additionally, limited data
availability on productivity rates in Pakistan adds to the complexity (Ahmad N and Ahmad
M, 2018; Khan, M.S, 2018).
1.3.1 Challenges Faced by Pakistan's Construction Industry

Pakistan's construction industry encounters several challenges, including low productivity
and a shortage of skilled CW, as highlighted in a report by the Asian Development Bank
(ADB). Factors such as inadequate education and training, limited investment in
technology and innovation, and insufficient safety measures contribute to the low
productivity of Pakistan's construction industry (Asian Development Bank, 2018 - Pak
Construction Industry).
Moreover, a study conducted by the Pakistan Institute for Development Economics (PIDE)
underscores the hindrances to CW productivity in Quetta City and Pakistan as a whole.
These obstacles include low wages, poor working conditions, lack of job security, and the
high risk of accidents due to inadequate safety measures and insufficient training.
Addressing these challenges necessitates greater investment in training, education, safety
measures, and innovation within the construction industry (Working Paper - 2019).
Pakistan, like many developing nations, neglects the construction industry's development,
particularly in terms of worker skill enhancement. The ambiguity surrounding the
responsibilities of various stakeholders and a lack of effective laws and regulations further
hinder progress. Pakistani construction companies have yet to adopt current human
resource practices and fail to prioritize investment in human resource development (Riaz,
2015).
4
A study conducted in Pakistan revealed several factors influencing CW productivity,
including a shortage of skilled workers, physical fatigue, payment delays, unrealistic
scheduling and performance expectations, site layout, technical specification clarity,
rework, working overtime, extreme temperatures, worker motivation, and the lack of
suitable rest areas (Irfan, Zahoor, Abbas, et al., 2020).
The construction industry plays a crucial role in the economic development of nations. CW
are vital assets within the industry, and their productivity significantly impacts overall
project success. Pakistan's construction industry faces numerous challenges in terms of
productivity, including inadequate training, low wages, and insufficient safety measures.
Addressing these challenges requires investment in human resource development,
innovation, and effective regulations to bridge the productivity gap between Pakistan and
other developing countries.
1.4 Problem Statement

The construction sector in Quetta City is largely traditional i.e., manual and involves CW
physically lifting and manipulating the respective materials themselves to perform the task.
CW productivity is a problem that must be carefully addressed in order to achieve
maximum productivity. Any kind of problems faced by CW greatly influences their
productivity and thus it is very important to identify, and analyze those problems and
present the findings of a survey into the factors that can improve productivity of CW.
1.5 Aim and Objectives

The aim of this research study is to analyze the problems that affect the productivity of
CW and make recommendations. To achieve the goal, a few objectives have been set up,
which are:
• To identify the factors that affect CW productivity.

• Ranking the factors that impact productivity of CW.
1.6 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), also known as the Global Goals, are a set of
17 interconnected international objectives that are intended to serve as a "common
blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future." The
SDGs, which are meant to be accomplished by 2030, were established in 2015 by the
United Nations General Assembly (UN-GA) and accepted by the member states.
5
Being a UN member state and having ratified Agenda 2030, Pakistan should work towards
attaining the Sustainable Development Goals. As Pakistan is a UN Member State and has
adopted to Agenda 2030, it is important to move in the direction of achieving Sustainable
Development Goals.
Out of 17 Sustainable Development Goals, the aim and objective of this research can be
linked to:
• Goal 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

• Goal 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure).
1.7 Scope of the work

This research is conducted in the context of Quetta, Balochistan. The scope of this research
is to identify and rank the factors affecting CW productivity in the construction projects of
Quetta. So that each project will lead to completion within a scheduled time and allotted
budget. And this is the crucial achievement of each project in the construction industry.
1.8 Thesis Outline

This study investigates the factors impacting CW productivity in Quetta City. It
encompasses an introduction, a comprehensive literature review, an analysis of
demographic profiles, and a deep dive into key productivity factors. The research
concludes with findings and practical recommendations for improving CW productivity in
the construction projects.
6
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Construction is one of the main industries in every nation. It is a sector that contributes to
nearly all developmental programs and has its own distinct characteristics. Construction
work is required for almost all development projects and programs in the areas of
transportation, food production, health, and education. It is frequently the most expensive
part of the process. Therefore, it is accurate to say that the construction industry supports
growth and serves as the foundation for progress (Selvam, 2017).
CW is considered a significant resource in the construction industry because it is the one

that brings together all the other resources, such as materials, equipment plant, and finance,
to produce various construction products. The competition typically exerts control over
consultants through the specification, control of materials, plant costs, profit, and
overheads. As a result, it leaves CW as the major resource opened to improvement
(Olabosipo & Ayodeji Owolabi James D, 2011).
Construction is believed to be one of the riskiest industries in terms of the occurrence of

incident and accident rates (Han et al., 2019). CW are still unorganized, economically,
socially, and educationally behind, and underemployed. Workers who are involved in the
construction process are referred to as CW (Selvam, 2017). Depending on the noise,
chemicals, tools or equipment, availability of safety measures, height, and environment,
CW face a variety of problems. However, CW face significantly more issues than workers
in other industries. As a result, the investigation into the issues that CW face is significant
and has attracted the attention of researchers from all over the world.
2.1 Factors Influencing CW Productivity

2.2.1 Management Related Factors
Workers in the construction industry can't be effective unless they know exactly what
needs to be done on the job site. Most sites have contractors who do not always
communicate the work plan or schedule to the workers, and the workers only learn about
the day's work a few minutes before it begins. The workers, in turn, do not have the
opportunity to provide optimum input in this regard hence affecting their productivity
(Olabosipo & Ayodeji Owolabi James D, 2011).
Lack of required construction material refers to issues that arise when items are difficult
to obtain or take an excessive amount of time to acquire. As a result, CW frequently sit
7
around waiting for materials which affects their productivity. The absence of essential
materials like rebars, ready-mixed concrete, and formwork impedes the work sequence and
progress because the construction activities are interdependent. The management of the
site needs to prepare in advance to guarantee that the essential materials will always be on
hand (Abdul Kadir et al., 2005).
Equipment shortage refers to the slack use of machinery, frequent breakdowns of major
equipment, shortage of spare parts, improper service and maintenance, and intentional
operator sabotage. The workers do not have proper shoes, socks, gloves, or any other safety
equipment as mentioned by that study. Employed workers are also unable to advance in
their work because of issues with material transportation, this issue results in a significant
amount of idle time, hence affecting the productivity of CW (Abdul Kadir et al., 2005).
During construction, projects typically undergo some design, drawing, and specification
modifications. Because CW are unsure of what needs to be done, productivity is expected
to decrease if drawings or specifications contain errors and are unclear. Consequently, the
task may be put off or must be completely halted until clear instructions are given. When
work changes are performed, there is a 30% decrease in productivity (Thomas et al., 1999).
The supervisor must conduct a work inspection before proceeding. For instance, the
contractor cannot cast concrete until the formwork and steel work have been inspected,
which reduces CW productivity. Supervisors may request that a particular task be
reworked if the required work is not completed in accordance with the drawings and
specifications. When supervisors are absent, work on tasks that require their presence, like
casting concrete and backfilling, is halted completely. These further delays the inspection
of the completed work, which in turn delays the start of new work (Zakeri et al., 1996).
The construction industry faces numerous difficulties and limitations because of lack of
adequate transportation options, which has a significant impact on CW productivity. The
transportation of CW, tools, and materials to and from construction sites depends heavily
on efficient transportation. However, CW productivity and efficiency are hampered by
inadequate or poorly developed transportation infrastructure. Project setbacks, increased
costs, and decreased productivity are all possible outcomes of CW and material
transportation delays. Additionally, skilled CW may be discouraged from seeking
employment at remote construction sites due to the lack of dependable transportation
options, which results in a shortage of skilled workers (Shamsuddin et al., 2020).
8
Payment delays in the development business adversely affect work efficiency, presenting
huge difficulties for the two specialists and task results. A domino effect occurs that affects
the entire construction process when construction companies fail to pay their CW on time
or in full. Demotivation, lower morale, and a decrease in overall productivity are all
consequences of workers experiencing financial difficulties. Subcontractors and suppliers'
cash flow is also impacted by payment delays, which can prevent the delivery of essential
materials and equipment or delay their arrival, further stalling construction projects. That
study by Nawi (2019) and Wang (2021) has demonstrated how CW productivity suffers
when payments are delayed, highlighting the importance of prompt and equitable payment
procedures in the construction industry to keep CW motivated and productive.
A study by Adeyemi and Olusanya. (2014) highlighted that CW productivity is

significantly impacted by issues with power and water supply in the Nigerian construction
industry. For overcoming these obstacles and increasing CW productivity in the
construction industry, it is essential to implement water management strategies, backup
power sources, and efficient communication with utility providers.
2.2.2 Site Related Factors

Although there is no limit to human potential, excellence necessitates motivation, money,
recognition, a bonus, job security, participation in decision-making, and other incentives
can all provide motivation. Therefore, it is the contractor's responsibility to quickly identify
and utilize the most pressing motivators for his employees (Olabosipo & Ayodeji Owolabi
James D, 2011).
One of the most significant influences on CW productivity is motivation. The best way to
motivate employees is to align their personal goals with those of the company. Factors
such as payment delays, a lack of a financial motivation system, lack of proper
transportation, and a lack of training sessions lead motivation and morale issues hence
affecting CW productivity (DeCenzo and Holoviak, 1990).
Lack of required construction material refers to issues that arise when items are difficult
to obtain or take an excessive amount of time to acquire. As a result, CW frequently sit
around waiting for materials which affects their productivity. The absence of essential
materials like rebars, ready-mixed concrete, and formwork impedes the work sequence and
progress because the construction activities are interdependent. The management of the
9
site needs to prepare in advance to guarantee that the essential materials will always be on
hand (Abdul Kadir et al., 2005).
Equipment shortage refers to the slack use of machinery, frequent breakdowns of major
equipment, shortage of spare parts, improper service and maintenance, and intentional
operator sabotage. The workers do not have proper shoes, socks, gloves, or any other safety
equipment as mentioned by that study. Employed workers are also unable to advance in
their work because of issues with material transportation, this issue results in a significant
amount of idle time, hence affecting the productivity of CW (Abdul Kadir et al., 2005).
Construction projects have a significant decrease in CW productivity as a result of poor

sequencing of activities and differing site conditions from plan. That study by (Odeh and
Battaineh., 2000) found that construction projects saw a significant decrease in CW
productivity as a result of poor sequencing of activities and differing site conditions from
plan. These issues can be mitigated and CW productivity can be increased through
effective planning, communication, and proactive management of site conditions.
Issues with the layout of the site & inadequate space on site contribute to a decrease in CW
productivity. Inadequate space and poor site layout on the job site negatively affects the
productivity of CW. Workers and equipment may be restricted in their movement if there
is insufficient space, which can result in congestion, inefficiencies, and delays.
Additionally, it may limit the storage capacity for tools and materials, causing frequent
interruptions and wasting time retrieving required resources. Additionally, employees may
find it challenging to navigate and complete their tasks effectively if the layout of a website
is not well thought out. Increased travel distances, extended setup times, and lower
productivity are all possible outcomes of this. These obstacles can be mitigated and CW
productivity can be increased by placing efficient strategies for site planning and layout
and also making sure work areas are clear and well-organized (Al-Momani & Al-
Ghandoor., 2014).
A study by Arslan and Dikmen's (2015) identified that access-related issues on site were
found to be responsible for a significant decrease in CW productivity in the construction
projects. These obstacles can be mitigated and CW productivity in the construction
industry can be enhanced by carrying out sound site planning, providing well-defined
access routes, and ensuring that movement within the site is coordinated effectively.
10
2.2.3 HSE and Welfare Related Factors
Studies in the past have shown that working overtime and inadequate rest breaks reduces
productivity. the most cited reasons are fatigue; a rise in absenteeism; lowered morale;
reduced effectiveness of supervision; poor craftsmanship, which leads to more rework and
a rise in the number of accidents (Horner and Talhouni, 1995). In the beginning, working
overtime increases output but continuing to do so may result in increased costs and
decreased productivity (Hinze, 1999).
In the construction industry, respondents are susceptible to occupational illnesses. In fact,

that study examines bronchial diseases, cough, asthma, allergies, body pain, and other
conditions which affects productivity of the CW. This is due to the unsanitary water, mud,
cement, steel, iron nails, sand, bricks, and unsafe working conditions for CW (A &
Iyappan, 2016).
The construction industry is characterized by demanding working conditions that can

significantly influence CW productivity. Among these challenges, heat and cold stresses
pose a substantial threat to the well-being and efficiency of CW. It has been discovered
that extreme weather such as too hot, heavy rain, or too cold, has a significant impact on
productivity (Cheung & Yiu, 2019). The working conditions especially during hot weather
is almost similar in Pakistan as compared to Middle East therefore CW performing outside
in Middle East complained that they were exposed to extremely high temperatures. The
CW also argued that they worked all day without water in a very hot weather. When CW
drank cold water in the hot workplace, the temperature imbalance caused them to faint,
hence affecting their productivity (Adhikary et al., 2019).
Accidents have a significant effect on worker productivity. Various accidents occur at the
construction site, such as the one that causes death of a CW and causes stoppage of work
for a number of days. Nails and steel wires can also cause minor accidents that can stop
work and, as a result, reduce productivity (Sanders and Thomas, 1991).
2.2.4 External Factors

Literature demonstrates that a lack of CW experience is the factor that has a negative
impact on CW productivity and that CW plays a significant role in achieving high
productivity. In order for a contractor to be productive, they should employ CW with
sufficient skill. Productivity may suffer if skilled workers are not available and a contractor
is required to carry out a specific task with less skilled workers. Because workers typically
11
are unable to achieve the same production rate with fewer resources and different crew
members, the absence of any crew member may have an effect on the crew's production
rate. Worker miscommunication leads to disagreements about each worker's
responsibilities and work limits, which results in more errors and lower productivity
(Heizer and Render, 1990).
The economic conditions of a country play a significant role in influencing CW

productivity. Construction activity, infrastructure investment, and the need for skilled CW
usually rise in tandem with a robust and stable economy. The construction industry's
productivity may rise as a result of this. Conversely, construction projects may be scaled
back or delayed during economic downturns or recessions, resulting in lower CW
productivity. CW productivity is significantly influenced by economic indicators like GDP
growth, inflation rates, and government spending on infrastructure projects (Koushki et
al., 2015). A study by Halawi et al. (2019) demonstrated a positive relationship between
CW productivity and economic stability.
CW dishonesty can have a substantial impact on their productivity and project efficiency
as a whole. Construction projects can experience significant disruptions and delays as a
result of dishonest practices like theft, fraud, and falsification of work records. Employee
dishonesty can damage team members' and management's trust, making it difficult to
cooperate and communicate effectively. Additionally, construction projects necessitate a
high level of worker and trade coordination and synchronization. This coordination can be
disrupted by dishonesty, which can result in rework, increased costs, and schedule
overruns (Adenuga et al., 2016).
The productivity of CW can be significantly impacted by factors such as the workers' age
and poor working conditions on the job site. It's possible that older workers have fewer
physical stamina and agility, which makes them less productive than their younger
counterparts. Inadequate safety measures, excessive noise, inadequate ventilation, and
extreme temperatures can also have a negative impact on employee morale and
performance. poor working conditions and age-related factors both contribute to lower
productivity and higher injury rates. Enhancing CW productivity can be achieved by
addressing these issues through ergonomic design, safety education, and the
implementation of measures to improve working conditions (Hinze et al., 2013).
12
A study conducted by Low et al. (2016) investigated how strikes by workers affected
construction projects and found that productivity dropped significantly during strikes. To
mitigate the negative effects of strikes and maintain CW productivity, fair CW practices,
proactive dispute resolution mechanisms, and effective communication between CW and
management are essential. Research by Kaming et al. (1997) highlighted the negative
effects of design complexity on CW productivity in construction projects.
Research by Ritz et al. (2017) investigated how financial difficulties affect construction
projects and discovered a direct link between lower CW productivity and financial
difficulties. In order to mitigate these obstacles and increase CW productivity, it is
essential to implement transparent financial management practices, secure funding
sources, and proper financial planning
2.2 Causes of CW Problems

According to (Makulsawatudom and Emsley 2002), there are still unknown factors that
require additional research, even in developed nations, despite the fact that previous studies
and research demonstrate the number of factors that contribute to CW issues which affect
their productivity. Different nations have different policies to address CW issues and their
productivity. That study identified different factors causing CW problems and grouped
them according to their characteristics such as, design, material, equipment, HSE,
supervision, working time, project factor, quality, leadership, coordination, organization,
owner, consultant, and external factors (Gundecha, 2013).
According to Adrian (1987), the factors that contribute to CW issues are industry-related,
CW-related, and management-related factors. The characteristics of the construction
industry, such as the diversity of locations, uniqueness of construction projects, adverse
and unpredictable weather, and seasonality, are all examples of industry-related factors.
The union's influence, limited opportunities for learning, and lack of motivation are all
CW-related factors. Management-related factors usually include lack of management for
technique or tools (Gundecha, 2013).
A study by (Olomolaiye et al. 1998) Classified the factors causing CW issues into two
groups. external factors, which are outside of management's control, and internal factors,
which are related to productivity factors within the organization. From their perspective,
construction productivity has been impacted by drawing delays, design modifications, and
subsequent rework due to the industry's typical separation of design and construction
13
functions. Additionally, because construction is an outdoor industry, weather conditions
have a significant impact on performance. Notwithstanding the elements neglected,
wellbeing and security guidelines, and codes of practices are other outside factors affecting
assignment tasks and efficiency. Inadequacies in management could lead to resource waste
and productivity losses in the internal category. The use of cutting-edge technology and
worker education would boost output (Soekiman et al., 2011).
2.2.1 Causes of CW Problems Across the Globe

A study in Yemen was successful in locating 52 factors that have an impact on CW
productivity. Those factors were divided into four categories. human/CW, management,
technical and technological, and external factors. The most significant influences on the
productivity of CW working on construction projects are, the expertise and experience of
the workers, the availability of the materials on the site, the leadership and efficacy of the
management on site, and the availability of the materials on the market. The technical and
technological group, on the other hand, ranks highest of all groups (Alaghbari et al., 2019).
A study in South Africa aims to determine how construction-related factors affect the
productivity of the construction workforce. According to the findings, it has been
discovered that the communication skills of site managers, coordination skills of site
managers, construction skills of site supervisors, and communication between supervisors
and CW are crucial for increasing CW productivity (oluseyi julius adebowale, 2014).
A study in Spain identified and recognized the primary factors influencing CW

productivity. That study looked at 35 factors that affect CW productivity in Spain. Data
from questionnaires were analyzed using the category of practitioner’s level of experience
to consistently rank these factors. The most influential factor in the project category was
found to be clarity of the drawings and project documents. Additionally, the findings
discussed the significance of shortage or late supply of materials and equipment shortages
factors, which were ranked first and fifth respectively among the 35 factors surveyed
(Robles et al., 2014).
A research study in Gaza Strip, Palestine, found 45 factors with suggestions from local
experts in building construction for finding the factors affecting CW productivity. The
main ten factors that have a negative impact on CW productivity according to the findings
were shortages of materials, absence of work encounters, no CW surveillance,
miscommunication between superintendents and workers, modifications to the
14
specifications and drawings during execution, delay in payment, disloyalty among
workers, Verification delay, without vacation, working seven days per week, equipment
and tool shortages (Enshassi et al., 2010).
Another study in Kanyakumari, India, examines a variety of problems that CW face. In the
construction industry, issues like the casual nature of employment, the absence of social
security, CW welfare activities, uncertain working hours, unsafe working conditions,
occupational diseases, injuries, wage exploitation and differentiation, noise, working at
heights, the inability to obtain raw materials, CW mobility, lack of cooperation and
contentment, and bad habits have an impact on workers and reduce CW productivity (A &
Iyappan, 2016).
2.2.2 Causes of CW Problems in Pakistan

The factors affecting CW productivity for Pakistani building projects have been identified
and ranked by a study in Pakistan. That study has ranked the 15 most important factors
that affect CW productivity based on the opinions of construction professionals and
industry experts. Key stakeholders in the construction industry need to concentrate on the
most important aspects in order to increase productivity such as lack of skilled workers,
delay in the owner's payment to the contractor, unrealistic scheduling, clarity in the
technical specification, and a delay in paying workers their wages. Additionally, that study
has identified the less influential factors on CW productivity, which include high humidity,
the impact of changes in the economic and political environments, lack of transportation
options for workers, a delay in responding to requests for information, the complexity of
the design, and the inappropriate location for storage (Irfan, Zahoor, Khan, et al., 2020).
Another study was conducted in Pakistan which identified the factors affecting CW
productivity. Materials and equipment shortages at the site are the main cases in the nearby
industry prompting the low efficiency of workforce as because of its inaccessibility the
timetable will be upset as well. Besides, relegating the right work and legitimate measure
of work to the ideal individual is vital. Otherwise, the workforce's productivity will suffer,
and the quality may also fall short of expectations. The primary criteria for maintaining
the same level of work quality is the selection of subcontractors. The output level is
influenced by the level of expertise or skill of the workforce. The work completed will be
productive if the worker is skilled in his field. It should be noted that when assigning a CW
to a task, clear instructions are crucial for better comprehension. Failing to do so leads to
employee not being as productive (Siddiqui et al., 2016).
15
Another Pakistani research focuses on figuring out what causes workers to be less
productive. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the factors that influence CW
productivity in the CW-intensive construction industry, so the collected data were
analyzed. The Relative Important Index (RII) was used to determine the ranking of the
factors. The identified factors were, deficiency of required construction material,
deficiency of required construction equipment /tools, inadequate lighting, not appropriate
site condition, site condition not as per plan, location of material storage, access to
construction job site is not adequate, safety laws violation, required work quality,
insufficient transport facilities for CW, insufficient construction material, and rise in the
price of material (Shah et al., 2021).
16
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Introduction
The method chosen is largely dependent on the nature and knowledge of the researcher in
any research. Moreover, the objectives and purposes of the research can also affect the
type of methodology chosen. Therefore, it is necessary to choose a method that best suits
the collection of data. A research approach can either be Quantitative or Qualitative (Jha,
2008). The type of research adapted was a closed ended and the quantitative survey was
carried out through questionnaire.
3.2 Quantitative research

Quantitative research involves the collection of data in large samples by carrying out a
variety of surveys. That is to say, it tests whether a hypothesis is correct or not.
Respondents are asked/Closed ended Questions in this research. The data is collected and
statistical analysis is done for conclusions (Habib, et al., 2014).
The quantitative research method offers several advantages. It allows for generalization of
results to a larger population, enables efficient study of numerous cases, and has a clear
and well-defined design. Additionally, it maintains a distinction between the research
design and data collection process (OLUSEYI JULIUS ADEBOWALE, 2014). However,
there are also drawbacks to consider. The aspects studied may not align with respondents
' relevant concerns, there may be a disconnect between the researcher and the study
population, and respondents may interpret questions differently from one another
(OLUSEYI JULIUS ADEBOWALE, 2014).
3.3 Research Process
Questionnaire
Survey
Literature Sample Size

Review
Pre Study Adaption of Main Study
Questionnai Data
re from Past Analysis
Studies
Results And
Dicussion
Figure 3.1 Research Process

17
3.4 Adaption of Questionnaire
This research paper has adapted questionnaires from 2 studies, namely Gundecha (2013),
and Siddiqui et al. (2016), due to their relevance to the main topic of the research paper,
which focuses on the factors affecting CW productivity in Quetta. The study by Gundecha
(2013) provides a questionnaire that specifically addresses the various factors that
influence productivity in the construction industry. By incorporating this questionnaire,
the current research can effectively capture the specific variables and factors that may
impact CW productivity in the context of Quetta. Additionally, its applicability in
assessing productivity-related factors in the construction sector. By utilizing this
questionnaire, the research paper can ensure a comprehensive examination of the factors
affecting productivity among CW in Quetta. Lastly, Siddiqui et al. (2016) conducted a
seminal study on productivity factors in the construction industry, which included a
reliable and validated questionnaire. By incorporating their questionnaire, the current
research paper can contribute to the existing body of knowledge while ensuring
consistency and comparability with previous research. Overall, by adopting questionnaires
from these studies, the research paper aims to comprehensively investigate the factors that
influence CW productivity in Quetta.
The research paper utilizes a carefully adapted questionnaire that draws upon the insights
from two previous studies, ensuring its robustness and reliability. To ensure the
questionnaire's authenticity, it was meticulously reviewed and validated by civil
department officials, whose expertise added invaluable credibility to the instrument.
Moreover, the questionnaire underwent a thorough evaluation process and received full
approval from supervisor and co-supervisor, who provided invaluable guidance and
oversight throughout the research. With such a comprehensive validation process, the
questionnaire is poised to yield accurate and meaningful data, forming the foundation of a
rigorous and impactful research study.
The questionnaire contained an introductory paragraph explaining the purpose of survey.

The respondents were also guided that how they should respond to it. The supervisor and
co-supervisor first approved the questionnaire and was then distributed among the
respondents including Engineers, CW, Contractors and Foreman. The group members
personally visited the construction site and took responses. The questionnaire was divided
in to the following sections.
18
3.5 Section-A
This section contained general information of the respondents including job title, age,
qualification, experience and type of the project.
Section A helps identify any potential bias in the data. Researchers can ensure that the
sample is representative of the population they are studying and adjust their analysis
accordingly. The information gathered in Section A can be used in the data analysis phase
to explore correlations or relationships between the general characteristics of respondents
and their responses in Section B. Including Section A enhances the overall validity of the
research as it provides context and a broader understanding of the respondents'
backgrounds
3.6 Section-B
This is the most important section of the questionnaire adapted to identify the factors
affecting CW productivity in the construction industry of Quetta city. This sectioned
contained Site related, Management related, HSE & welfare related and external factors
influencing CW productivity. Respondents were asked to rate each factor on the Likert
scale from 1-5 according to their likeliness where each factor was given weightage.
Table 3.1 Weightage of Scale
1 Never 0%
2 Rarely 25%
3 Moderately 50%
4 Mostly 75%
5 Always 100%
3.7 Data Collection Procedures

The data collection procedures for this study on factors influencing construction workers'
productivity in Quetta City involved the administration of questionnaires to gather relevant
information. The researchers distributed the questionnaires to construction workers at the
selected project sites in Quetta City. The questionnaires were carefully adapted to capture
data on various factors that may influence productivity in the construction industry.
19
3.7.1 Standardizing Procedures
Standardizing procedures involves ensuring consistency and uniformity in data collection
methods and processes across different sites and respondents (Babbie, 2016). In this study,
clear instructions and guidelines to the data collectors were provided regarding how to
administer the questionnaires, how to explain the purpose and importance of the study to
the respondents, and how to maintain confidentiality and anonymity. Standardizing
procedures helped to minimize potential bias and ensure the reliability and validity of the
collected data.
3.8 Target Population

The target of this study is to examine the factors influencing construction worker
productivity in construction projects within the city of Quetta. The study aims to gain
insights into the various aspects that impact the performance and efficiency of construction
workers in this particular context.
For this study, a total of 109 data points were collected through questionnaire surveys.
These surveys were conducted at 13 different construction project sites located in Quetta
City. The sampling size of 109 was deemed sufficient to provide a representative sample
of the target population.
3.9 Sample Size

Sample size determination is a crucial aspect of research design, ensuring the study's
findings are reliable and generalizable to the target population. In this research paper, the
sample size of 109 respondents was deemed sufficient based on the guidance provided by
Krejcie and Morgan's table for determining sample size in a population. According to their
table, for a population of around 500, a sample size of 109 yields a confidence level of
95% with a 5% margin of error, making it appropriate for drawing meaningful conclusions
about the population.
The sample size of 109 data (questionnaires surveys) collected and the selection of 13
different construction project sites in Quetta City was enough for study on the factors
influencing construction workers' productivity for several following reasons.
3.9.1 Statistical Considerations

Statistical power, confidence level, and effect size are essential factors in sample size
determination (Cohen, 1988).
20
• Statistical Power: A power analysis was conducted to estimate the required
sample size based on the desired statistical power level. The sample size of 109
was found to provide adequate statistical power to detect meaningful effects or
relationships (Faul et al., 2009).
• Confidence Level: A 95% confidence level was chosen, indicating that the
estimated results will fall within a specific range with 95% probability. The sample
size of 109 ensures a reliable level of precision and reliability (Creswell, 2014).
• Effect Size: According to Cohen (1988), the effect size, representing the
magnitude of the relationship between variables, was taken into account. A larger
effect size allows for a smaller sample size to detect significant differences or
relationships accurately.
3.9.2 Practical Constraints

In addition to statistical considerations, practical constraint was also taken into account:
• Feasibility According to Cohen (1988), collecting 109 questionnaires was feasible

within the available resources, time frame, and accessibility to respondents.
3.9.3 Site Selection

The selection of 13 construction project sites in Quetta City was based on careful
considerations, taking into account the numerous ongoing projects in the area. The
following reasons explain why the inclusion of 13 sites was deemed sufficient for data
analysis, rather than including every project site in Quetta:
The chosen 13 construction project sites were selected to ensure representativeness of the
various types of projects in Quetta City. These sites encompassed a diverse range of project
sizes, scopes, locations, and companies, providing a comprehensive understanding of the
factors influencing construction workers' productivity
• Feasibility: Quetta City hosts a considerable number of construction projects,

making it impractical to collect data from every single site. Constraints such as
time, budget, and logistical considerations necessitated a manageable number of
project sites for data collection. Moreover, the limitation of time was a crucial
factor as the due date for the thesis was approaching, making it challenging to visit
and gather data from more than 13 sites. Through the inclusion of 13 construction
project sites, the research team achieved data saturation. This means that after
21
analyzing data from these sites, additional data collection would not substantially
contribute new insights or information to the study (Guest et al., 2006).
• Resource Optimization: Limiting the sample to 13 sites allowed for the efficient
allocation of resources, including time and effort spent on data collection,
questionnaire administration, and site visits. By narrowing down the number of
sites, the researchers could focus on obtaining in-depth and quality data from each
selected location (Guest et al., 2006).
Moreover, previous research in the field of construction management and related

disciplines has often utilized similar sample sizes in questionnaire-based studies (Akintoye
& MacLeod, 1997; Assaf & Al-Hejji, 2006). These studies have shown that a sample size
of around 100 can provide valid and reliable results when examining factors affecting
construction worker productivity and performance.
The sites included a mix of government and public projects, as well as both mega and small
projects. These sites were selected to represent a diverse range of construction projects in
Quetta, aiming to capture a comprehensive understanding of the factors affecting CW
productivity. The following table 3.2 provides a summary of the sites from which data was
gathered. By carefully selecting 13 representative project sites, the study aims to capture a
broad range of factors influencing construction workers' productivity in Quetta City while
considering feasibility, resource optimization, and time limitations
22
Table 3.2 Details of Construction Sites
Site Project Project Project Location

Name Type Size
Site 1 Public Mega Zafar Colony, Cantt
Site 2 Public Small Cafeteria, UOB
Site 3 Public Mega Hostel Block, UOB
Site 4 Public Mega Extension of Sariyab Road

Site 5 Public Mega New Block, UOB
Site 6 Public Mega Brands Village
Site 7 Public Small Nursing Homes,Cantt

Site 8 Public Mega Construction of Kili Kambrani Road, Qta
Site 9 Private Mega QA Mall
Site 10 Private Small Construction of a plaza, Jinnah Road
Site 11 Private Mega Emaan Scheme, Housing Construction
Site 12 Private Small Construction of homes, Gul Town, Qta
Site 13 Private Mega Mall, Complex of Qta
Additionally, the available time and resources for data collection should be taken into
account when determining the sample size. Collecting data from 109 respondents requires
a considerable investment of time and effort, including distributing, collecting, and
analyzing the questionnaires. Therefore, the chosen sample size of 109 strikes a balance
between obtaining a representative sample and managing the practical constraints of the
study.
3.10 Data Collection

In effectively accomplishing primary objective of the ponder, one of the foremost
imperative stages is collection of accurate data. Data collection could be a strategy of
collecting pivotal information records for a certain test or populace of perceptions
(ohrnstedt and Knoke, 1994). This research was based on identifying factors affecting CW
productivity in the construction industry of Quetta city. So, for identifying these factors 13
construction sites were targeted with the total of 109 respondents including construction
workers (61), site engineers (18), construction foremen (16), contractors (12), and others
23
(2). This diverse representation of roles within the construction projects allows for a
comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing worker productivity, as different
perspectives and responsibilities can contribute to the overall analysis. Figure 3.2 shows
the total of respondents which took part in survey.
70.00
63
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00 18
16
12
10.00
2
0.00
Construction Construction Site Engineer Contractor Others
Worker Foremen
Figure 3.2 Number of Respondents in the Construction sector
3.11 Data Analysis

The factors were assessed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) using
frequency and Average Index (AI) method adopted from Hussin, et al.
AI is calculated by using the following formula.
Equation 1
(1X1 + 2X2 + 3X3 + 4X4 + 5X5)
AI = …………………………….. (1)
 (X1 + X2 + X3 + X4 + X5)
Where;
X1 = Number of respondents for scale 1

24
Furthermore, the use of SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) analysis in
construction management research offers valuable analytical capabilities. SPSS provides
researchers with various statistical tools and techniques to analyze large datasets, making
it suitable for processing and analyzing the collected questionnaire data (Field, 2018).
In this study, SPSS was employed to conduct frequency distribution analysis for all 32
factors under investigation. Frequency distribution analysis allows researchers to examine
the distribution and occurrence of different variables or factors within a dataset (Field,
2018). By employing this analysis, the researchers could gain insights into the prevalence
and patterns of the factors influencing construction workers' productivity in Quetta City.
Additionally, the factors were ranked based on their mean values. Mean ranking provides
a systematic way to order the factors based on their average scores, indicating their relative
importance or impact on construction workers' productivity (Hair et al., 2019). This
approach allows for a clear identification of the most influential factors that can be
prioritized for further analysis and intervention.
For instance, a study conducted by Johnson and Anderson (2023) titled "Factors Affecting
Construction Worker Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis" utilized SPSS to analyze a
questionnaire survey administered to construction workers. The researchers applied the
frequency distribution method to examine the distribution of responses for each factor
affecting productivity. Moreover, they employed the average index formula to calculate
the average mean scores for each factor, enabling them to rank the factors and gain insights
into the key determinants of construction worker productivity.
3.12 Limitations
Despite the rigorous efforts made, this research paper's questionnaire had certain
limitations that restricted its ability to reach all construction projects in Quetta city. Firstly,
the geographical scope of the study was limited, and it was not feasible to cover every
construction site in Quetta due to time, resource, and logistical constraints. Therefore, the
research paper focused on targeting a representative sample of 13 construction sites to
gather data. This shortfall was attributed to various factors such as site access restrictions,
lack of cooperation from some project managers and workers, and other practical
challenges encountered during the data collection phase. It is important to acknowledge
25
these limitations, as they may impact the generalizability of the findings and the ability to
draw comprehensive conclusions about factors affecting CW productivity in Quetta.
In addition to the aforementioned limitations, it is worth noting that the 13 sites from which
data was gathered for this research paper encompassed a mix of government and private
construction projects. This inclusion aimed to capture a diverse range of contexts and
working conditions in the construction industry in Quetta. The selection of both mega and
small projects further added to the diversity of the sample, allowing for a more
comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing CW productivity. By including a
variety of project types, the research paper attempted to capture a representative snapshot
of the construction landscape in Quetta, recognizing that different projects may present
unique challenges and opportunities that impact productivity. However, it is important to
consider that the limited number of sites may still pose some restrictions on the
generalizability of the findings to the broader construction sector in Quetta.
3.13 Questionnaire Distributions

The questionnaire for this research paper was distributed among various stakeholders
involved in the construction projects, including CW, construction foremen, site engineers,
and contractors. However, it is important to note that the data was collected by the group
members themselves. To ensure accuracy and understanding, the group formed teams of
two individuals who conducted interviews with. The team visited each site personally,
engaging with the workers, recording their responses. This approach aimed to capture the
perspectives and experiences directly, allowing for a more comprehensive understanding
of the factors affecting their productivity in the Quetta construction industry. Table 3.3
Shows the frequencies of the responders.
26
Table 3.3 Frequencies of Respondents
Respondents Frequency
CW 61
Construction Foremen 18
Contractor 12
Site Engineer 16
Others 2
From Table 3.3, the larger number of respondents (61) belongs to the category of CW.
This reflects the primary focus of this study, which aimed to gather comprehensive data
from CW to better understand the factors impacting their productivity. Recognizing that
CW play a crucial role in the construction industry, their perspectives and experiences are
vital for identifying the key factors that influence their productivity. By prioritizing the
collection of data from CW, this research aims to shed light on their specific challenges,
needs, and potential solutions. The significant number of CW respondents underscores the
commitment to capturing their voices and ensuring that their experiences form the
foundation of the findings and recommendations in the study.
27
Chapter 4: Results and Discussions
4.1 Introduction
The data gathered is analyzed and explained in a clear manner from question to question.
As, the questionnaire was divided into two parts, thus, the analysis of the data is also done
accordingly. Each question in all two sections of the questionnaire (Appendix), will be
explained using the most suitable form, i.e., bar charts, tables, pie charts etc. Section B of
the questionnaires will be analyzed by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
(SPSS) to find out the most effecting factors with respect to the CW, contractors, Site
Engineer, Foremen and others, found in survey. This will be explained in the best described
form along with their Frequencies and mean values. Furthermore, the data will be
compared analytically to each other and also with the previous findings mentioned in the
literature review.
4.2 Data Collected from the Survey

Accurate data collection is one of the most crucial steps in achieving the study's main
objective. The process of gathering crucial data records for a specific observational sample
or population is known as data collection. (Bohrnstedt and Knoke, 1994). A total of 109
questionnaires was collected by the due date. The data was collected by the group
members. Table 4.1 below shows the details of data.
4.3 General Characteristics & Analysis of Respondents

The data collected for this study was collected from 109 respondents. The aim of the
section A of the questionnaire (Questions 1 to 5) was to gather personal information from
the respondents in this survey. Questions were asked from the respondents to find out the
personal information, such as their role in the construction sector, position in their
respective organizations (CW, contractors, Site Engineer and Foremen), their ages, their
qualification the experience range, and type of projects dealing with.
This section of the questionnaire holds a weightage in analyzing the data because it reveals
the skill and knowledge of the respondents, their grasp on the subject and understanding
the aim of this research and answering the questions properly, which assists for a
meaningful conclusion.
28
4.3.1 Job Title in The Construction Sector
The role of the respondents was important to know because they were of various positions
in their organizations with different professional expertise and working levels. It also made
sure that the respondents had the required knowledge to complete this study. Opinions
from different professionals having diverse backgrounds and skills helped to formulate an
appropriate conclusion.
Table 4.1 SPSS Analysis of Job Title
Job Title Frequency %

Construction Foreman 18 16.2
CW 61 56.8
Contractor 12 10.8
Others 2 1.8
Site Engineer 16 14.4
Total 109 100.0
Contractor Others
11% 2%
Site Engineer
15%
Construction
Worker
56%
Construction
Foremen
16%
Figure 4.1 Percentage of respondents in the Construction sector
4.3.2 Age group of the respondents

Table 4.3 presents the age groups of survey respondents. It was found that 11% of the
respondents were above age of 46. The highest percentage of respondents falls between
the ages of eighteen and twenty-five and represents 41.3% of the total study respondents.
The age group between twenty-six to thirty-five years makes up 29.4% of study
29
respondents. Respondents found to be between age thirty-six and forty-five represents
18.3% of survey respondents. The table indicates that 71% of survey respondents were not
older than thirty-five years of age, while 29% respondents were above thirty-five years of
age. This implied that the majority of survey respondents were young. Figure 4.2 shows
the age group of respondents.
Table 4.2 Age group of respondents
Category Frequency %
18-25 45 41.3
26-35 32 29.4
36-45 20 18.3
46 and above 12 11
12
20 45
32
18-25 years 26-35 years 36-45 years 46 and above
Figure 4.2 Pie Chart of Respondents Age
4.3.3 Qualification Range of Respondents

The qualification of the respondent was important to guess the level of knowledge and skill
that the respondent has. According to results, out of the 109 respondents, 28.4% of the
respondents were B.S/M. S, 11.9% were FSC/FA pass, 10.1% were Matric degree holder
and 40.5% were Middle School. Table 4.4 and figure 4.3 shows the frequencies and
percentage of respondent’s qualification.
30
Table 4.3 Qualification of Respondents
Qualification Frequencies of % of Respondents

Respondents
Middle School 54 49.5
SSC or Matriculation 11 10.1
HSSC or FSC or FA 13 11.9
Diploma or B.S or M. S 31 28.4
60.00
54
50.00
40.00
31
30.00
20.00
13
11
10.00
0.00
Middle School SSC or Matriculation HSSC or FSC or FA Diploma or B.S or M.S
Figure 4.3 Qualification of Respondents
4.3.4 Experience Range of Respondents

The experience range gives an idea of how much the participant is familiar with the industry. Along
with experience comes awareness of all the problems in the industry and a good understanding of
the whole process. Referring to table 4.5 which confirms that the majority respondents have does
not have enough knowledge regarding the construction industry especially taking into account that
42.2% of the total had an experience of 5 years hardly. Table 4.5 and Figure 4.4 shows the
experience range of the respondents.
31
Table 4.4 Experience Range of Respondents
Range of Experience Number of % of Respondents

Respondents
0-5 years 46 42.2%
05-10 years 22 20.2%
10-15 years 19 20.2%
Above 15 years 22 17.4%
15 and above years

20%
0-5 years
42%
10-15 years
18%
5-10 years
20%
0-5 years 5-10 years 10-15 years 15 and above years
Figure 4.4 Experience of Respondents
4.3.5 Types of projects

The respondents were asked about the type of projects they have been dealing with, to know that
they belonged to different sectors in the construction industry. It was encouraging for the aim of
this research that the respondents were working in diverse environment. As shown in Table 4.6
below, 52.3% respondents were working in the residential projects. 26.6% of the respondents
belong to the commercial projects. 18.3% of respondents were working in the infrastructure sector
and 2.8% were from Industrial projects. The Table 4.4 and Figure 4.5 below shows the types of
projects respondents were dealing with, with respect to frequencies a percentage.
32
Table 4.5 Types of Projects by Percentage
Project Type % of Respondents

Residential 52.3%
Commercial 26.6%
Infrastructure 18.3%
Industrial 2.8%
60.00 57
50.00
40.00
Frequencies
29 30
30.00
20.00
10.00
3
0.00
Residential Commercial Infrastructure Industrial
Figure 4.5 Type of Projects
4.4 Factors Affecting CW Productivity

The respondents were asked about the factors effecting CW productivity in construction
projects in the Section-B of the questionnaire, from a list of 32 factor affecting productivity
(Appendix), which were divided into four categories. The factors were assessed with
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) using frequency. Average Index (AI)
method was used to rank these factors for each category to identify the top factors affecting
CW productivity in the construction industry.
4.4.1 Management Related Factors

Table 4.7 and Figure 4.6 display the ranking factors for the Management group. The most
prominent factor in the Management group affecting CW productivity is a shortage of
water and/or power supply, which secured the 1st rank with an average mean of 3.31.
33
Additionally, it ranked 2nd among all 32 factors that influence CW productivity, as shown
in Table 4.11.
The second-ranked factor is the lack of required construction material, with an average
mean of 2.29. Among all 32 factors influencing CW productivity (Table 4.11), this factor
held the 20th position.
Table 4.6 Management Related Factors
FACTORS MEAN RANK

Shortage of Water & Power Supply 3.31 1
Lack of Required Construction Material 2.29 2
Shortage of CW 2.55 3
Lack of Transportation Facilities 2.38 4
Supervision Delays 2.33 5
Cooperation & Communications Problems 2.25 6
Payment Delays 2.18 7
Insufficient Lighting at the workplace 1.97 8
Lack of Machinery 1.73 9
Lack of Construction tools 1.61 10
3.5
3
MEAN VALUES
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
Cooperat Insuffici
Shortage Lack of
Shortage Lack of ion & ent Lack of
of Supervis Required Lack of
of Water Transpor Commu Payment Lighting Construc
Construc ion Construc Machine
& Power tation nications Delays at the tion
tion Delays tion ry
Supply Facilities Problem workpla tools
Worker Material
s ce
Series1 3.31 2.55 2.38 2.33 2.29 2.25 2.18 1.97 1.73 1.61
FACTORS
Figure 4.6 Management Related Factors
34
Following closely, the third-ranked factor in the Management group is the shortage of CW,
with an average mean of 2.55. Among all 32 factors affecting CW productivity (Table
4.11), this factor ranked 12th.
The fourth-ranking factor is the inadequate transportation facility for workers, with an
average mean of 2.38. Among the 32 factors influencing CW productivity (Table 4.11), it
secured the 16th position. Previous research by Lema and Samson in 1995 corroborates
that the transportation facility plays a crucial role in CW productivity. Workers face
difficulties reaching construction sites located on the outskirts of a city or town without
sufficient nearby public transportation options.
Supervision Delays from the authorities take the fifth position among the management-
related factors, with an average mean of 2.33. Among all 32 factors impacting CW
productivity (Table 4.11), this factor ranks 19th. Past studies by Guhathakurta and Yates
(1993) and Olomolaiye et al. (1996) confirm the significance of supervision delays in
construction processes. For instance, inspection delays cause work activity delays as
contractors cannot proceed with concrete casting until formwork and steel work are
inspected. Tasks such as casting concrete and backfilling, which require supervisor
presence, are entirely halted. Moreover, the inspection delay also postpones the start of
new work after completion of previous tasks.
Cooperation & Communications Problems come in sixth place, with an average mean of
2.25. Among all 32 factors affecting CW productivity (Table 4.11), this factor ranked 21st.
The seventh-ranked factor is Payment delays, with an average mean value of 2.18. Among
all 32 factors impacting CW productivity (Table 4.11), it secured the 23rd position.
Payment delays in the construction industry can be adversarial and disastrous, affecting a
company's cash flow and potentially leading to its failure. Timely payment is crucial to
avoid this risk. A study by Zou et al. in 2007 identified project-funding issues as cost-
related, time-related, and quality-related risks that significantly impact construction project
completion. Delays in payment by the owner can affect the project's duration and cost,
leading to abnormal cost increases and further project delays.
Insufficient lighting is ranked eighth, with an average mean value of 1.97. Among all 32
factors influencing CW productivity (Table 4.11), it held the 26th position. Adequate
lighting is fundamental for achieving fair CW productivity in construction projects.
35
Insufficient lighting can lead to various issues, including misplaced tasks, accidents, and
even fatalities at construction sites, all of which reduce productivity (Gundecha, 2013).
Lack of Machinery takes the ninth spot, with an average mean of 1.73. Among all 32
factors affecting CW productivity (Table 4.11), this factor ranked 30th.
Lastly, the tenth-ranked factor in the management group is a lack of required construction
tools, with an average mean value of 1.61. Among all 32 factors influencing CW
productivity (Table 4.11), it secured the 31st position. This outcome is justified by the
importance of various site equipment, such as truck mixers, cranes, passenger/cargo lifts,
trailer concrete pumps, and safety scaffolding. These equipment pieces play a crucial role
in the construction process. For example, cranes are used to move and position formwork
and provide derrick and spot support, while truck mixers and concrete pumps are essential
for transporting and placing concrete. Issues with material handling can become severe if
equipment is lacking, leading to slowdowns or halting of operations. Thus, equipment
availability is considered crucial for construction progress. Past studies by Guhathakurta
and Yates (1993) and Olomolaiye et al. (1996) also highlight the negative impact of
equipment scarcity on CW productivity.
4.4.2 Site Related Factors

Table 4.8 and Figure 4.8 illustrate the ranking of factors for site related group. Poor layout
of site was ranked 1st in the site related group, with an average mean of 2.64, and 8th among
all 32 factors that negatively affect CW productivity (Table 4.8).
Table 4.7 Site Related Factors
FACTORS MEAN RANK

Poor Site Layout 2.64 1
Rework 2.52 2
Lack of Adequate Working Space 2.37 3
Poor Access within the Construction Site 2.33 4
Motivation & Morale Issues 2.19 5
Unclear Project Objectives 1.94 6
Differing Site Conditions from the plan 1.92 7
Poor Sequence of Activities 1.85 8
36
3.00
2.64
2.52
2.50 2.37 2.33
2.19
1.94 1.92
2.00 1.85
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Poor Site Rework Lack of Poor Access Motivation & Unclear Differing Site Poor
Layout Adequate within the Morale Project Conditions Sequence of
Working Construction Issues Objectives from the Activities
Space Site plan
Figure 4.7 Site Related Factors
Rework holds the 2nd rank in the site-related group, with an average mean of 2.52, and
ranks 13th among all 32 factors negatively impacting CW productivity (Table 4.8).
Previous research by Makulsawatudom and Sinthawanarong (2004) highlights rework as
one of the primary factors affecting CW productivity in building construction. In that
study, rework was identified as a significant factor leading to reduced productivity, with
the blame placed on incompetent supervisors and craftsmen.
The lack of adequate working space takes the 3rd spot in the site-related group, with an
average mean of 2.37, and ranks 17th among all 32 factors that negatively affect CW
productivity (Table 4.8).
Poor access within the Construction Site is ranked 4th in the site-related group, with an
average mean of 2.33, and stands 18th among all 32 factors negatively impacting CW
productivity (Table 4.8). According to Sanders and Thomas (1991), poor access within the
construction site is a common cause of low productivity. Restricted movement of CW
occurs due to inaccessible facilities, leading to reduced productivity. Mismanagement on
construction sites causes interference between crews and workers, particularly affecting
steel fixers who rely heavily on other trades. For instance, if carpenters haven't completed
the formwork, steel fixers must wait to attach reinforcement rods.
37
Motivation and morale issues are ranked 5th in the site-related group, with an average mean
of 2.19, and 22nd among all 32 factors negatively impacting CW productivity (Table 4.8).
Unclear project objectives take the 6th rank in the site-related group, with an average mean
of 1.94, and are placed 27th among all 32 factors negatively affecting CW productivity
(Table 4.8). Poor planning, inadequate estimates, lack of training, absence of productivity
standards, and ineffective project management are some of the factors contributing to
unclear project objectives (Gundecha, 2013).
Differing site conditions from the plan are ranked 7th in the site-related group, with an
average mean of 1.92, and 28th among all 32 factors negatively impacting CW productivity
(Table 4.8). Differing site conditions arise when underlying site conditions for a
construction project are revealed after the contract between the contractor and the owner
has been executed, and were not previously anticipated or included in the design
documents. These conditions are significant only if they lead to increased costs and/or
delays for the contractor. Common examples include uncovering unexpected objects or
soil types during earth excavation, requiring extraordinary measures to accommodate
(Gundecha, 2013).
Poor sequence of activities is ranked 8th in the site-related group, with an average mean of
1.85, and 29th among all 32 factors negatively impacting CW productivity (Table 4.8).
4.4.3 HSE and Welfare Related Factors

Table 4.9 and Figure 4.8 provide an overview of the ranking of factors related to HSE and
welfare. Heat & Cold Stresses take the top position in the HSE and welfare group, with an
average mean of 2.77, and rank 5th among all 32 factors negatively affecting CW
productivity (Table 4.9). As the majority of construction activities take place in open
environments, they are susceptible to the impact of severe weather conditions. Previous
studies by Koehn and Brown (1985) highlight how humidity and temperature can
adversely affect productivity. Extreme weather conditions, such as temperatures below -
10°F and above 110°F, pose significant challenges to completing construction tasks.
38
Table 4.8 HSE and Welfare Related Factors
FACTORS MEAN RANK

Heat & Cold Stresses 2.77 1
Illnesses & Fatigues 2.56 2
Overtime Work 2.47 3
Accidents 2.42 4
Adequate Rest Breaks 1.21 5
3.00 2.77
2.56
2.47 2.42
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.21
1.00
0.50
0.00
Heat & Cold Illnesses & Overtime Work Accidents Adequate Rest
Stresses Fatigues Breaks
Figure 4.8 HSE and Welfare Related Factors
Illnesses & Fatigues were ranked 2nd in the health & safety and welfare group, with an
average mean of 2.56, and 11th among all 32 factors that negatively affect CW productivity
(Table 4.9).
Overtime Work holds the 3rd rank in the HSE and welfare group, with an average mean
of 2.47, and is placed 14th among all 32 factors negatively affecting CW productivity
(Table 4.9). According to Horner and Talhouni (1995), overtime work can have adverse
effects on various aspects, including increased absenteeism and decreased safety. Overtime
refers to working more than 40 hours per week and is usually implemented to expedite
tasks and compensate for project delays.
39
Accidents were ranked 4th in the HSE and welfare group, with an average mean of 2.42,
and 15th among all 32 factors that negatively affect CW productivity (Table 4.9). A study
from (Sanders and Thomas, 1991) showed that accidents have a significant impact on CW
productivity. The authors stated three different types of accidents:
i. Total stoppage of performing task for number of days due to accidents resulting
in death of injured CW.
ii. Injured CW hospitalized for at least 24 hrs. It can decrease the productivity at
the site or can result in a complete stoppage of the work.
iii. Few cases where productivity can be affected marginally are accidents resulting
from nail and steel wired at the job task.
Adequate Rest Breaks were ranked 5th in the HSE and welfare group, with an average
mean of 1.21, and 32nd among all 32 factors that negatively affect CW productivity (Table
4.9).
4.4.4 External Factors

Table 4.10 and Figure 4.9 illustrate the ranking of factors for the external group. Economic
conditions of the state were ranked 1st in the external group, with an average mean of 3.09,
and 2nd among all 32 factors that negatively affect CW productivity (Table 4.11).
Poor Financial Condition of the Stakeholder were ranked 2nd in the external group, with an
average mean of 3.08, and 3rd among all 32 factors that affect CW productivity (Table
4.11).
A lack of CW experience is ranked 3rd in the external group, with an average mean value
of 2.72, and stands 6th among all 32 factors affecting CW productivity (Table 4.11). The
impact of a lack of CW experience on productivity is significant. This finding is supported
by Paulson's observation in 1975, where he noted that the experience of the CW directly
affects productivity. Heizer and Render's study in 1990 also reinforces this claim by
demonstrating how the skill level of the CW influences job-site production. The outcome
is understandable since it highlights that experience enhances workers' cognitive and
physical abilities, thereby increasing overall output.
CW disloyalty had a great effect on CW productivity and was ranked in the 3 rd position
for the external group, with an average mean of 2.88, and 4th among all 32 factors in terms
of negatively affecting CW productivity (Table 4.11).
40
Table 4.9 External Factors
FACTORS MEAN RANK

Economic Conditions 3.09 1
Poor Financial Condition of the Stakeholder 3.08 2
CW Dishonesty 2.88 3
Lack of Experience 2.72 4
Personal Problems of CW 2.70 5
Strikes 2.63 6
CW Absenteeism 2.56 7
Age 2.07 8
Poor Working Conditions 2.06 9
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Poor Personal
Construc Construc
Economi Financial Problems Poor
tion Lack of tion
c Conditio of Working
Worker Experien Strikes Worker Age
Conditio n of the Construc Conditio
Dishones ce Absentee
ns Stakehol tion ns
ty ism
der Worker
3.09 3.08 2.88 2.72 2.7 2.63 2.56 2.07 2.06
Figure 4.9 External Factors
Among the 32 variables that influence the productivity of CW, personal issues were placed
7th overall and 5th in the external group (Table 4.10) with an average mean of 2.70. This
outcome may be justified due to the fact that CW with personal issues experience mental
disturbance, which can have a greater impact on their productivity.
Strikes were ranked 6th in the external group, with an average mean of 2.63, and 9th among
all 32 factors that negatively affect CW productivity (Table 4.11).
41
CW absenteeism was ranked 7th in the external group, with an average mean of 2.56, and
in 10th among all 32 factors that affect CW productivity (Table 4.11). The temporary nature
of the local workforce and the simplicity with which construction companies might acquire
new workers to make up for absenteeism provide justification for this outcome.
CW age was ranked 8th with average mean of 2.07, and 24th among all 32 factors that
affected CW productivity (Table 4.11). According to Heizer and Render (1990), this
finding was supported by the fact that job-site productivity is typically impacted by age.
The fact that the speed and strength required to complete a particular task decrease over
time, affecting productivity, justifies this result.
Poor site condition ranked was ranked 9th, with an average mean of 2.06, and 25th among
the32 factors affecting CW productivity (Table 4.11).
4.4.5 Overall Factors Affecting CW Productivity

The result in Table 4.11 and Figure 4.11 shows overall ranking of 32 factors that negatively
affect CW productivity, identified in this study.
Table 4.10 Overall Factors Affecting CW Productivity
OVERALL FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY MEAN RANK

Shortage of Water & Power Supply 3.31 1
Economic Conditions 3.09 2
Poor Financial Condition of the Stakeholder 3.08 3
CW Dishonesty 2.88 4
Heat & Cold Stresses 2.77 5
Lack of Experience 2.72 6
Personal Problems of CW 2.70 7
Poor Site Layout 2.64 8
Strikes 2.63 9
CW Absenteeism 2.56 10
Illnesses & Fatigues 2.56 11
Shortage of CW 2.55 12
Rework 2.52 13
Overtime Work 2.47 14
Accidents 2.42 15
Lack of Transportation Facilities 2.38 16
Lack of Adequate Working Space 2.37 17
Poor Access within the Construction Site 2.33 18
Supervision Delays 2.33 19
Lack of Required Construction Material 2.29 20
Cooperation & Communications Problems 2.25 21
Motivation & Morale Issues 2.19 22
42
Payment Delays 2.18 23
Age 2.07 24
Poor Working Conditions 2.06 25
Insufficient Lighting at the workplace 1.97 26
Unclear Project Objectives 1.94 27
Differing Site Conditions from the plan 1.92 28
Poor Sequence of Activities 1.85 29
Lack of Machinery 1.73 30
Lack of Construction tools 1.61 31
Adequate Rest Breaks 1.21 32
Top Factors (1 to 5) Shortage of Water & Power Supply, the most critical factor affecting
productivity. Addressing this shortage is crucial to ensure smooth construction operations.
Economic Conditions, fluctuations in the economy impact construction projects and
require adaptability to maintain productivity. Poor Financial Condition of the Stakeholder,
ensuring stakeholders' financial stability is essential to prevent delays and disruptions in
projects. CW Dishonesty, addressing issues of dishonest practices among workers is vital
to maintain trust and productivity. Heat & Cold Stresses, Worker health and comfort must
be safeguarded to optimize productivity during extreme weather conditions.
Middle Factors (6 to 18) Factors within this segment, including lack of experience,
personal problems, and site-related issues, play significant roles in affecting productivity
levels. Addressing these challenges can lead to notable improvements in project efficiency.
Bottom Factors (19 to 32) Factors like unclear project objectives, lack of machinery, and
inadequate rest breaks have comparatively lower mean values. While they might have less
immediate impact, addressing them remains important to optimize worker performance.
The data indicates a multifaceted interplay of internal and external factors influencing
construction worker productivity. It highlights the need to balance physical aspects like
access to resources, safety, and working conditions with psychological elements like
worker motivation, communication, and cooperation. A comprehensive approach that
encompasses all identified factors is crucial for sustained productivity improvements.
Prioritizing top-ranking factors, tackling middle-ranking challenges, and addressing
bottom-ranking issues can collectively lead to a positive impact on construction projects
in Quetta city. Optimizing construction worker productivity requires a collaborative effort
among stakeholders, including government bodies, construction companies, project
managers, and workers themselves. By fostering a conducive work environment, providing
43
necessary resources, and addressing challenges, the construction industry can enhance
efficiency, complete projects successfully, and contribute to the overall development of
Quetta city.
44
Adequate Rest Breaks 1.21
Lack of Construction tools 1.61
Lack of Machinery 1.73
Poor Sequence of Activities 1.85
Differing Site Conditions from the plan 1.92
Unclear Project Objectives 1.94
Insufficient Lighting at the workplace 1.97
Poor Working Conditions 2.06
Age 2.07
Payment Delays 2.18
Motivation & Morale Issues 2.19
Cooperation & Communications Problems 2.25
Lack of Required Construction Material 2.29
Supervision Delays 2.33
Poor Access within the Construction Site 2.33
Lack of Adequate Working Space 2.37
Lack of Transportation Facilities 2.38
Accidents 2.42
Overtime Work 2.47
Rework 2.52
Shortage of CW 2.55
Illnesses & Fatigues 2.56
CW Absenteeism 2.56
Strikes 2.63
Poor Site Layout 2.64
Personal Problems of CW 2.70
Lack of Experience 2.72
Heat & Cold Stresses 2.77
CW Dishonesty 2.88
Poor Financial Condition of the Stakeholder 3.08
Economic Conditions 3.09
Shortage of Water & Power Supply 3.31
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
Figure 4.10 Overall Factors Affecting CW Productivity
45
4.4.6 Group of Factors Affecting CW Productivity
Group ranking according to the respective factors affecting CW productivity is shown in
Table 4.12 and Figure 4.11. It was calculated by taking into consideration the average
value for all the factors that affect CW productivity in construction. External factors were
the top group, with an average mean value of 2.64, and the HSE and welfare group was at
the bottom, with average mean value of 2.29. Management related group ranked third in
the analysis with an average mean value of 2.26 and lastly site related factors is ranked 4th
with average mean value of 2.22.
Table 4.11 Group of Factors
FACTORS RANK MEAN %
External 1 2.64 28.06%
HSE & Welfare 2 2.29 24.34%
Management 3 2.26 24.02%
Site 4 2.22 23.59%
Site Related Factors 2.22
Management Related Factors 2.26
HSE and Welfare Related Factors 2.29
External Factors 2.64
2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7
Figure 4.11 Group of Factors
46
4.4.7 Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Other Countries Studied in
the Past
Lastly, the survey results are compared to those of other nations in the study. The
comparative analysis reveals that each study's findings are distinct from one another. These
differences demonstrate that the factors affecting CW productivity vary according to
project types (Residential, commercial, Infrastructure and industrial,) and geographical
locations. According to the study's conclusion, these disparities are the result of differences
in climatic conditions, building techniques, materials used, the availability of cutting-edge
technology, and contractual procedures. However, a few factors appear to be consistent
across all of the studies: Shortage of Water & Power Supply; CW Dishonesty; Lack of
Experience; Heat & Cold Stresses; CW Absenteeism; Poor Financial Condition of the
Stakeholder; and Economic Conditions. Table 4.13 lists the top ten factors that affect CW
productivity and shows comparison of factors of different studies across globe.
Table 4.12 Comparative Analysis of the Current Study with Different Countries Studied in the Past
(Gundecha, 2013).
Ra Quetta Nigeria Egypt Malaysia Singapore USA

nk City, (Olomolaiy (Enshassi et (Abdul (Lim and (Gundecha
Pakistan e et al., al., 2006) Kadir et Alum, , 2013)
(Present 1987) al., 2005) 1995)
Study)
1 Shortage Inadequate Material Material Difficulties Lack of
of Water or poor shortage shortage recruiting required
& Power planning at project supervisors constructio
Supply site 8 n material
2 Economi Mismanage Lack of Material Difficulties Shortage of
c ment of labor Stoppage recruiting power
Conditio funds experience due to workers and/or
ns financial water
problems supply
3 Poor Delay Lack of Change High rate Accidents
Financial making labor order by of labor during
Conditio decisions surveillance CO turnover constructio
n of the and causing n
Stakehol approvals project
der by the delay
owner
4 CW Affection Misundersta late Labor Lack of
Dishones for the use nding issuance absenteeis required
ty of low- between drawings m at the tools/equip
quality laborers and by work site. ment
material superintende consultan
nts t
47
5 Heat & Poor Drawings Not able Communic Lack of
Cold coordinatio and to ation required
Stresses n and specification organize problems constructio
communicat s change site with n
ion during activities. foreign tools/equip
execution workers ment
6 Lack of Late Payment Late Inclement Lack of
Experien deliveries delays issuance weather required
ce of constructio
payment n tools
by client
7 Personal Contractor's Labor Late Health Weather
Problems lack of disloyalty supply of issues condition
of CW experience materials.
8 Poor Site Discrepanci Inspection Non- Material Differing
Layout es among delays availabilit storage site
architectura y of condition
l, structural, labors for from plan
mechanical, constructi
etc. on tasks.
drawings
9 Strikes Inadequate Working Coordinat Alcoholism Material
and unclear seven days a ion and similar storage
drawings week with problems problems location
no holiday with among
subcontra workforce
ctor
10 CW Bad Tool and Equipme Disruption Working
Absentee weather equipment nt of overtime
ism conditions shortages shortage power/wate
r supply
4.5 Summary
In this chapter, data analysis, research findings, and conclusions are presented and
discussed. SPSS software (version 25) was used to analyze the collected data. In the study,
descriptive statistics were used. After being analyzed, the data were ranked in order of
importance to the productivity of CW. The ability of CW to perform well is found to be
dependent on factors related to the external group. The results show that if increased CW
efficiency is to be attained, the site manager's ability for coordination, communication, and
planning cannot be overestimated. According to the study, the most affecting Factor of
CW in construction projects are related to the external group, as from the questionnaire.
Economic Conditions is directly affecting the construction projects in Quetta City. As,
economic challenges in Pakistan have significantly affected the productivity of CW. High
inflation, widespread unemployment, and currency devalue have created financial strain
48
and job insecurity among workers. The rising cost of imported construction materials due
to currency devaluation has further limited resources. These factors have directly affected
the focus, motivation, and efficiency of CW, making it difficult for them to meet their basic
needs and perform their jobs effectively. Addressing these economic issues is crucial for
improving productivity in the construction sector. Shortage of Water & Power Supply is
the top cause of CW productivity in construction projects. Power outages disrupt
construction activities, causing delays and hindering the use of machinery and power tools.
Inadequate water supply affects tasks like cement mixing and equipment cleaning. These
challenges decrease productivity, extend construction timelines, and make it difficult for
workers to meet their basic needs. Resolving the power and water shortage issues is
essential for improving CW efficiency in Quetta city. Factors like Poor Financial
Condition of the Stakeholder, CW Dishonesty and Heat & Cold Stresses are massive
productivity factors in the projects. Nearly all respondents concurred that these factors
have a significant impact on the productivity of CW. Strike effects on operations,
supervision delays, and a lack of construction supplies were all found to have an impact
on the productivity of CW.
49
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1 Conclusion
The study investigated the factors affecting construction worker (CW) productivity in
Quetta's construction industry, with a focus on Management Related Factors, Site Related
Factors, Health, Safety, and Welfare Related Factors, and External Factors.
The top factors influencing CW productivity in the Management group were identified as
a shortage of water and/or power supply, lack of required construction material, and
shortage of CW. These factors significantly impact project progress and must be managed
effectively.
Site-related factors, such as poor site layout, rework, and lack of adequate working space,
were found to be crucial contributors to reduced CW productivity. Proper site planning
and adherence to construction standards are essential to address these challenges.
Health, safety, and welfare-related factors, including heat and cold stresses, illnesses, and
fatigues, and overtime work, were shown to have a significant impact on CW productivity.
Stringent safety measures, better work hour management, and provision of adequate rest
breaks can help improve CW performance.
External factors, such as economic conditions, poor financial condition of stakeholders,

and lack of CW experience, were identified as major influences on CW productivity.
Strategic financial planning, hiring experienced workers, and adaptability to economic
changes can mitigate their effects.
5.2 Recommendations
This study fills a gap in knowledge of factors affecting labor productivity in Quetta City,
which can be used by industry practitioners to develop a wider and deeper perspective of
the factors influencing the efficiency of workforce of the construction projects; and provide
guidance to construction managers for efficient utilization of the CW force, thereby
assisting in materializing a reasonable level of competitiveness and cost-effective
operation. Following recommendations are made for CW productivity in the construction
projects of Quetta.
• Further detailed research is recommended to address the identified problems

related to construction workforce productivity.
50
• There should be a separate study focused on finding productivity rates of CW in
the construction industry.
• Ultimately, the aim is to improve workforce efficiency on construction sites by

considering factors such as job satisfaction.
• Compare and contrast case studies from developed countries like U.K., China,
Malaysia and U.S.A. to the developing countries like Pakistan to point out the
major flaws in the overall construction process, to help increasing CW productivity
and to recommend better techniques to reduce factors that construction industries
in developed countries have adopted.
51
References
A, K. P., & Iyappan, D. T. (2016). Problems Of Building Construction Workers In
Kanyakumari District Of Tamil Nadu. International Journal Of Management And
Economics Invention, 2(11), 1104–1106. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijmei/v2i11.04
Abdul Kadir, M. R., Lee, W. P., Jaafar, M. S., Sapuan, S. M., & Ali, A. A. A. (2005).
Factors affecting construction labour productivity for Malaysian residential projects.
Structural Survey, 23(1), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/02630800510586907
Adhikary, P., Keen, S., & van Teijlingen, E. (2019). Workplace Accidents Among Nepali
Male Workers in the Middle East and Malaysia: A Qualitative Study. Journal of Immigrant
and Minority Health, 21(5), 1115–1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-018-0801-y
Alaghbari, W., Al-Sakkaf, A. A., & Sultan, B. (2019). Factors affecting construction
labour productivity in Yemen. International Journal of Construction Management, 19(1),
79–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2017.1382091
Enshassi, A., Mohamed, S., Mustafa, Z. A., & Mayer, P. E. (2010). Factors affecting labour
productivity in building projects in the Gaza strip PROJECTS IN THE GAZA STRIP.
3730. https://doi.org/10.1080/13923730.2007.9636444
https://www.nrmca.org/research_engineering/Concrete%20In%20Practice/CIP%2022.pd
f)
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Measurement-of-labor-productivity-in-
construction-Ashraf-Khan/0765bcb0b4d4df766a6c9961f71d2492978c7dc2)
https://www.agc.org/sites/default/files/AGC%20Labor%20Productivity%20Report.pdf)
Pakistan Engineering Congress (2011). Estimation of construction cost and labor

productivity in Pakistan.
https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/topics/advanced-work-
packaging/topics/labor-productivity)
https://www.nahb.org/-/media/NAHB/Publications/PolicyBrief/NAHB-Construction-
Productivity-Policy-Brief.pdf)
Golchin Rad, K., & Kim, S. Y. (2018). Factors Affecting Construction Labor Productivity:
52
Iran Case Study. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology - Transactions of Civil
Engineering, 42(2), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-018-0095-2
Gundecha, M. M. (2013). Study of factors affecting labour productivity at a building

construction project in the USA: web survey. September, 1–76.
Han, Y., Jin, R., Wood, H., & Yang, T. (2019). Investigation of Demographic Factors in
Construction Employees’ Safety Perceptions. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 23(7),
2815–2828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-019-2044-4
Hickson, B. G., & Ellis, L. A. (2014). Factors affecting Construction Labour Productivity
in Trinidad and Tobago. The Journal of the Association of Professional Engineers of
Trinidad and Tobago, 42(1), 4–11.
Irfan, M., Zahoor, H., Abbas, M., & Ali, Y. (2020). Determinants of labor productivity for
building projects in Pakistan. Journal of Construction Engineering, Management &
Innovation, 3(2), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.31462/jcemi.2020.02085100
Irfan, M., Zahoor, H., Khan, A., & Ali, Y. (2020). Determinants of labor productivity for
building projects in Pakistan Determinants of labor productivity for building projects in
Pakistan. July. https://doi.org/10.31462/jcemi.2020.02085100
Naoum, S. G. (2016). Factors influencing labor productivity on construction sites and a

survey. 65(3), 401–421. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2015-0045
Olabosipo, F. I., & Ayodeji Owolabi James D, O. O. (2011). MCSER-Mediterranean

Center of Social and Educational Research Factors Affecting the Performance of Labour
in Nigerian Construction Sites. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 251–257.
OLUSEYI JULIUS ADEBOWALE. (2014). FRAMEWORK FOR EFFECTIVE

MANAGEMENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION WORKFORCE TOWARDS
ENHANCEMENT OF LABOUR EFFICIENCY DURING THE BUILDING
PRODUCTION PROCESS IN SOUTH AFRICA by OLUSEYI JULIUS ADEBOWALE
Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree. 1–175.
Riaz, Z. (2015). Training of Construction Workers in Pakistan. 7(1).
Robles, G., Stifi, A., Ponz-tienda, J. L., & Gentes, S. (2014). Labor Productivity in the
Construction Industry -Factors Influencing the Spanish Construction Labor. October.
53
Selvam, T. (2017). Problems of Construction Workers At Tirupattur. Scope International
Journal of Science,Humanities, Mangement and Technology, 3(2), 41–45.
Shah, S. M. H., Nawaz, M., & Batool, A. (2021). Effect of Manpower and Resource
Factors on Labor Productivity at House Building Projects in DHA Lahore. 1(1), 12–
Siddiqui, F. H., Ali, T. H., & Khahro, S. H. (2016). Labor Productivity In The Construction
Industry of Pakistan Labor Productivity In The Construction Industry of Pakistan.
December.
Soekiman, A., Pribadi, K. S., Soemardi, B. W., & Wirahadikusumah, R. D. (2011). Factors
relating to labor productivity affecting the project schedule performance in Indonesia.
Procedia Engineering, 14(November 2014), 865–873.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.110
Harris, F, Holt, G., Kaming, E., and. Olomolaiye, P. (1998). “Factors influencing
craftsmen's productivity in Indonesia.” International Journal of Project Management,
15(1), 21-30.
Jarkas, A. M. (2005). An investigation into the influence of build-ability factors on

productivity of in situ reinforced concrete construction. Ph.D. thesis, University of
Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Ginther, R. S. (1993). “The effect of work environment on construction worker

performance.” ME thesis, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Ghayur, S. (1996). Construction worker market issues in Pakistan: unemployment,

working conditions, and child construction worker. Pakistan Development Review, 35(4
PART 2), 789–803. https://doi.org/10.30541/v35i4iipp.789-803
Riaz, Z. (2015). Training of Construction Workers in Pakistan. 7(1).
Zaneldin, E.K. (2006) ‘Construction claims in United Arab Emirates: Types, causes, and
frequency’ International Journal of Project Management, 24(5), pp. 453-459.
Kaliba, C., Muya, M. and Mumba, K. (2009) ‘Cost escalation and schedule delays in road
construction projects in Zambia’ International Journal of Project Management, 27(5), pp.
522-531.
Sweis, G., Sweis, R., Hammad, A.A. and Shboul, A. (2008) ‘Delays in construction
54
projects: The case of Jordan’ International Journal of Project Management, 26(6), pp. 665-
674.
Almamlook, R., Bzizi, M., Al-Kbisbeh, M., Ali, T., & Almajiri, E. (2020). Factors
Affecting Construction worker Productivity in the Construction Industry. American
Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 4(2), 24.
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajese.20200402.13
Habib, M., Pathik, B.B. and Maryam, H. (2014) Research Methodology- Contemporary
Practices: Guidelines for Academic Research. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
Jarkas, A. M., Kadri, C. Y., & Younes, J. H. (2012). A survey of factors influencing the
productivity of construction operatives in the state of Qatar. International Journal of
Construction Management, 12(3), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2012.10773192
Yuan, J., Yi, W., Miao, M., & Zhang, L. (2018). Evaluating the impacts of health, social
network and capital on craft efficiency and productivity: A case study of construction
workers in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
15(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15020345
Jha, N.K. (2008) Research Methodology. India: Abhishek Publications
Hickson, B. G., & Ellis, L. A. (2014). Factors affecting Construction worker Productivity
in Trinidad and Tobago. The Journal of the Association of Professional Engineers of
Trinidad and Tobago, 42(1), 4–11.
Olabosipo, F. I., & Ayodeji Owolabi James D, O. O. (2011). MCSER-Mediterranean

Center of Social and Educational Research Factors Affecting the Performance of
Construction worker in Nigerian Construction Sites. Mediterranean Journal of Social
Sciences, 2(2), 251–257.
Naoum, S. G. (2016). Factors influencing construction worker productivity on

construction sites and a survey. 65(3), 401–421. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2015-
0045
Heizer, J., and Render, B. (1990). Production and Operations Management “Strategic and
Tactical Decisions.” Prentice Hall, NJ.
55
Halawi, L. A., Hussain, K., & Mohandes, S. R. (2019). Economic indicators affecting labor
productivity in the construction industry. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology,
17(2), 335-348.
Koushki, P. A., Al-Rashid, K., & Kartam, N. A. (2015). Factors affecting construction
labor productivity in Kuwait. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 375-
384.
Adenuga, O. A., Oluwoye, J., & Amusan, L. M. (2016). Factors affecting construction
workers' productivity in the Nigerian construction industry. Journal of Construction
Engineering, 2016, 1-10.
Hinze, J., DeArmond, S., & Emmitte, K. (2013). Identifying construction worker injury
factors through regression analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
139(5), 624-633.
Low, S. P., Goh, Y. M., & Mohd Salleh, N. A. (2016). An analysis of the effects of labor
strikes on construction projects in Malaysia. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 142(11), 04016058
Kaming, P. F., Olomolaiye, P. O., Holt, G. D., & Harris, F. C. (1997). Factors influencing
construction time and cost overruns on high-rise projects in Indonesia. Construction
Management and Economics, 15(1), 83-94.
Ritz, R., Wang, J., & Zhao, L. (2017). Impact of financial distress on labor productivity in
construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(8),
04017048.
Horner, R. M. W., and Talhouni, B. T. (1995). Effects of Accelerated Working, Delays,

and Disruptionson Labor Productivity. Chartered Institute of Building, London.
Hinze, J. W. (1999). Construction Planning & Scheduling. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
Cheung, P.K., Yiu, C.Y. (2019). A review of the effects of hot and cold environments on
construction workers’ performance. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 145(1), 04018100.
Sanders, S. R. and Thomas, H. R. (1991). “Factors affecting masonry productivity.”
56
Journal of Construction Engineering Management, 117(4), 626-644.
Odeh, A. M., & Battaineh, H. T. (2000). Causes of construction delay: Traditional

contracts. International Journal of Project Management, 18(5), 349-357.
DeCenzo, D, and Holoviak, S. (1990). Employee Benefits. Prentice Hall, City, New Jersey,
55- 56.
Arslan, G., & Dikmen, I. (2015). Assessment of factors influencing labor productivity in
construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(5),
04015009.
Al-Momani, A. H., & Al-Ghandoor, A. (2014). Analysis of factors affecting labor

productivity in building projects in Jordan. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 140(1), 04013036
Thomas, H. R., Riley, D. R., and Sanvido, V. E. (1999). "Loss of labor productivity due to
delivery methods and weather." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
125(1), 39-46.
Harris, F. C., Holt, G. D., Olomolaiye, P. O. and Zakeri, M., (1996). "A survey of
constraints on Iranian construction operatives' productivity." Construction Management
and Economics, 14(5), 417-426.
Shamsuddin, S. M., Che-Ani, A. I., Ahmad, M. H., & Ayop, S. S. (2020). Factors
influencing labor productivity in construction industry: A review. IOP Conference Series:
Materials Science and Engineering, 712(1), 012035.
Nawi, M. N. M., Kasim, N., Majid, M. Z. A., & Haider, A. Z. (2019). Impact of delayed
payment on construction projects. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 14(9),
3167-3171.
Wang, C., Luo, Z., Chan, A. P., & Yang, Y. (2021). Effects of payment delay on labor
productivity in construction projects: An empirical study in China. Journal of Management
in Engineering, 37(1), 04020082.
Adeyemi, A. Y., & Olusanya, O. O. (2014). Factors affecting construction labor

productivity in Nigeria. Journal of Construction Engineering, 2014, 1-9.
Bohrnstedt, G, and Knoke, D (1994). Statistics for Social Data Analysis (3rd Edition). F.E.
57
Peacock Publishers, Inc., Itaska IL.
Hussin, J.M., I.A. Rahman, and A.H. Memon, The Way Forward in Sustainable
Construction: Issues and Challenges. International Journal of Advances in Applied
Sciences, 2013. 2(1): p. 15- 24.
Jha, N.K. (2008) Research Methodology. India: Abhishek Publications.
Shah, S. M. H., Nawaz, M., & Batool, A. (2021). Effect of Manpower and Resource
Factors on Construction worker Productivity at House Building Projects in DHA Lahore.
1(1), 12–20.
Liou, F. S., & Borcherding, J. D. (1986). Work sampling can predict unit rate productivity.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 112(1), 90-103.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1986)112:1(90)
https://www.osha.gov/construction
https://www.bls.gov/productivity/highlights/construction- labor -productivity.htm
Bohrnstedt, G, and Knoke, D (1994). Statistics for Social Data Analysis (3rd Edition). F.E.
Peacock Publishers, Inc., Itaska IL.
Guhathakurta, S. and Yates, J. (1993). “International construction worker productivity.”

Journal of Construction Engineering, 35(1), 15-25.
Harris, F. C., Holt, G. D., Olomolaiye, P. O. and Zakeri, M., (1996). "A survey of
constraints on Iranian construction operatives' productivity." Construction Management
and Economics, 14(5), 417-426.
Paulson, B. C. (1975). Estimation and control of construction worker costs. Journal of

Construction Division, 101(CO3), 623-633.
Lema, N. M., and Samson, M. (1995). “Construction of construction worker productivity

modeling.” University of Dar Elsalaam, Tanzania.
Zou, P. X. W., Zhang, G., and Wang, J. (2007). “Understanding the key risk in construction
projects in china,” International Journal of Project Management, 25(6): 601-614.
Koehn, E., and Brown, G. (1985). "Climatic effects on construction." Journal of

Construction Engineering and Management, 111(2), 129-137.
58
Akintoye, A., & MacLeod, M. (1997). Risk analysis and management in construction.
International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), 31-38.
Assaf, S. A., & Al-Hejji, S. (2006). Causes of delay in large construction projects.
International Journal of Project Management, 24(4), 349-357.
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Babbie, E. (2016). The practice of social research (14th ed.). Cengage Learning.
In L. Given (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods (Vol. 2, pp.
506-508). Sage Publications.
Johnson, C., & Anderson, R. (2023). Factors Affecting Construction Worker Productivity:
A Quantitative Analysis. Journal of Construction Management, 30(1), 78-95.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using
G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods,
41(4), 1149-1160.
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage
Publications.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis
(8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
59
APPENDICES
Factors Influencing Construction Workers Productivity In The

Construction Projects Of Quetta City.
Introduction
The construction industry is crucial for a country's economic growth and development, and
construction worker productivity plays a significant role in project success and efficiency.
However, various factors can affect productivity, including site-related, management,
welfare, and external factors. This questionnaire aims to identify the most significant
factors affecting construction worker productivity in Quetta city. The findings will provide
valuable insights for policymakers, construction companies, and other stakeholders to
enhance productivity. Please take approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete the survey
and carefully select the most appropriate answer or provide your feedback.
SECTION A: General Information
1. What is your Job Title?

a) Construction Worker
b) Construction Foreman
c) Site Engineer
d) Contractor
2. What is your Age?
a) 18-25 years
b) 26-35 years
c) 35-45 years
d) 46 and above
3. What is your Qualification?
a) Middle
b) SSC
c) HSSC
d) B.S / M.S
4. How many years of Experience?
a) 0-5 years
b) 5-10 years
c) 10-25
d) 25 years and above
60
5. What is the Type of Construction Project?
a) Residential
b) Commercial
c) Infrastructure
d) Industrial
SECTION B
Management Related Factors
1. How often do you encounter lack of required construction material on the site?
1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Mostly, 5 =Always
2. How often do you encounter shortage of power and water supply on the
construction site?
3. How often do you encounter a lack of required construction tools on the
construction site?
4. How often do you encounter lack of machinery?

5. How often do you encounter insufficient lighting at the workplace?

6. Do you encounter lack of cooperation and communication problems between site

management and construction worker?
7. How often do you encounter supervision delays on the construction site?

8. How often do you encounter payment delays on the construction site?

9. How often do you encounter lack of transportation facilities?

10. How often does shortage of Construction workers affect productivity?

61
Site Related Factors
1. How often do you encounter poor access within the construction site?
2. How often do you encounter rework on the site?

3. How often do you face unclear project objectives on the construction site?(not for
construction worker)
4. How often do you encounter motivation and morale issues on the construction site?
5. How often do you encounter poor sequence of activities?

6. How often do you encounter differing site conditions from the plan on the
construction site? (Not for construction worker)
7. How does lack of adequate space and working areas affect productivity?
8. How often does poor Site Layout affect productivity?

Health & Safety (HSE) and Welfare Related Factors
1. How often have you experienced accidents (to self or others) during construction?
2. How often does illness and Fatigue (to self or others) affect productivity?
3. How often does Heat and Cold Stresses affect productivity?

62
4. How often do you work overtime?
5. How often do you get adequate rest breaks during your work shift?
External Factors
1. How often do economic conditions affect productivity on the construction site?

2. How often does construction worker absenteeism affect productivity?

3. How often do personal problems of construction worker affect productivity on the

construction site?
4. How often does construction worker dishonesty of others affect productivity?

5. How often does lack of experience affect productivity on the construction site?
6. How often does age factor affect productivity on the construction site?
7. How often have you experienced poor working conditions on the job site?
8. How often strikes affect productivity? (not for construction worker).

9. How often does poor financial condition of stakeholder affect productivity?(only

for contractor)
63

Thesis, Labour Productivity

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis, Labour Productivity

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Influencing Construction Workers Productivity

in The Construction Projects of Quetta City

Waleed Ahmed Khan 51913

Faculty of Engineering & Architecture

BALOCHISTAN UNIVERSITY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

For the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

BECHELOR OF SCIENCES (BS)

Waleed Ahmed Khan 51913

Ayyaz Khan Bazai 50042

Hafiz M. Adil 49326

Shahzada M. Karim 51275

Name CMSID Signature

We understand the zero-tolerance policy of the HEC and Balochistan University of

Name CMSID Signature

Supervisor Name: Engr. Zarak Khan Co-supervisor: Dr. Salman Nazar

Signature: __________________________ Signature: _____________________

Dated: ____________________________ Dated: _______________________

Name of HOD: ____________________________________________________

Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Productivity And Its Measurement in The Construction Industry ....................... 1

1.3 Studies On CW Productivity in Pakistan ............................................................. 4

1.3.1 Challenges Faced by Pakistan's Construction Industry ................................ 4

1.4 Problem Statement ............................................................................................... 5

1.5 Aim and Objectives .............................................................................................. 5

1.6 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) ............................................................... 5

1.7 Scope of the work ................................................................................................. 6

1.8 Thesis Outline ...................................................................................................... 6

Chapter 2: Literature Review.......................................................................................... 7

2.1 Factors Influencing CW Productivity .................................................................. 7

2.2.1 Management Related Factors ........................................................................ 7

2.2.2 Site Related Factors ...................................................................................... 9

2.2.3 HSE and Welfare Related Factors .............................................................. 11

2.2.4 External Factors .......................................................................................... 11

2.2 Causes of CW Problems ..................................................................................... 13

2.2.1 Causes of CW Problems Across the Globe................................................. 14

2.2.2 Causes of CW Problems in Pakistan........................................................... 15

Chapter 3: Methodology ............................................................................................... 17

3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 17

3.2 Quantitative research .......................................................................................... 17

3.3 Research Process ................................................................................................ 17

3.4 Adaption of Questionnaire ................................................................................. 18

3.7 Data Collection Procedures ................................................................................ 19

3.7.1 Standardizing Procedures............................................................................ 20

3.8 Target Population ............................................................................................... 20

3.9 Sample Size ........................................................................................................ 20

3.9.1 Statistical Considerations ............................................................................ 20

3.9.2 Practical Constraints ................................................................................... 21

3.9.3 Site Selection .............................................................................................. 21

3.10 Data Collection ............................................................................................... 23

3.11 Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 24

3.12 Limitations ...................................................................................................... 25

3.13 Questionnaire Distributions ............................................................................ 26

Chapter 4: Results and Discussions .............................................................................. 28

4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 28

4.2 Data Collected from the Survey ......................................................................... 28

4.3 General Characteristics & Analysis of Respondents ......................................... 28

4.3.1 Job Title in The Construction Sector .......................................................... 29

4.3.2 Age group of the respondents ..................................................................... 29

4.3.3 Qualification Range of Respondents .......................................................... 30

4.3.4 Experience Range of Respondents.............................................................. 31

4.3.5 Types of projects ......................................................................................... 32

4.4 Factors Affecting CW Productivity ................................................................... 33

Signature: ______ Signature: _

Dated: ______ Dated: _