You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Applied Sciences
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open Access

19 July 2024

Application of Selected Lean Manufacturing Tools to Improve Work Safety in the Construction Industry

,
,
and
1
Faculty of Material Engineering, Department of Production Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Krasińskiego 8, 40-019 Katowice, Poland
2
Institute of Materials and Quality Engineering, Faculty of Materials, Metallurgy and Recycling, Technical University of Kosice, Letna 1/9, 04200 Kosice, Slovakia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci.2024, 14(14), 6312;https://doi.org/10.3390/app14146312
This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Technological, Methodological, and Organizational Research Trends in the Construction Industry, Second Edition
Version Notes
Order Reprints

Abstract

Shaping safe and hygienic working conditions is the basic obligation of the employer. Employers are still looking for methods, tools, and solutions to improve work safety. The study reviews the literature on solutions aimed at improving occupational safety in construction. For this purpose, bibliometric analysis was used, consisting of the exploration and analysis of scientific studies in the field of occupational health and safety, including the possibility of using the LM tool to improve working conditions on construction sites. The study presents the possibility of implementing Lean Manufacturing (LM) tools in the construction industry. Their strengths and weaknesses were identified, and the benefits and possible barriers related to their effective implementation/use were identified. The result of the analyses was a summary of benefits for the construction industry (strengths and opportunities) as well as areas requiring improvement (weaknesses and hazards) regarding the LM tools used. Based on the conducted analyses, it was found that it is possible to use the tools of the LM concept to improve work safety and organize tasks performed on construction sites. The implementation of LM tools, such as 5S/6S, Poka-Yoke, and Standardization, enables risk reduction through a direct impact on the area being analyzed, in which occupational hazards have been identified. It is also noted that there is a need to simultaneously use LM tools (VM, Gemba-Walk, DHM) as solutions aimed at reducing risk.

1. Introduction

Shaping safe and hygienic working conditions is an important issue both in the design of workplaces and in the solutions implemented by employers (technical and organizational solutions). New methods and tools are increasingly sought to improve the organization of working conditions and work safety. Proper work organization, the use of methods and tools to improve the implementation of work on construction sites, and properly developed procedures can significantly improve safety because it is one of human needs, but also becomes a basic element of construction project management [1]. The issue of occupational health and safety is the subject of many scientific studies in which the authors draw attention to the essence of the problem relating to the occurrence of accidents [2], the use and implementation of preventive solutions [3], new technologies to improve working conditions and increase supervision over them [4,5,6]. The conducted research becomes important from a practical point of view due to the fact that construction workers are exposed to the risk of accidents more than workers in other industries, as well as the increased awareness of occupational hazards [7]. This is due to the nature of the business and the specificity of the activity and work carried out, as well as the sources of occupational hazards, depending on the place where construction work is performed. The occurrence of accidents in the construction industry is an important issue due to the number of people injured on a global scale; the average number of people injured in fatal accidents and as a result of other events causing injuries is three times higher than among employees performing all other activities [8], which results from the nature of the construction work performed [9].
Attention is also paid to the months, days and hours of recording accident events [9], thus indicating their possible repeatability. Factors that play an important role among workers involved in accidents on construction sites are professional experience, level of education, and knowledge of occupational health and safety [10]. Attention is also paid to the size of the investment and enterprise. In the case of small enterprises, there is a low level of occupational health and safety, lack or improper use of protective measures and failure to comply with the applicable markings [11]. In the case of large investments, attention is paid to greater investor supervision over subcontractors, subcontractors over subcontractors, where attention is paid to occupational health and safety training, audits, consultations and understanding the essence that all interested parties are responsible for accidents (client, consultant, contractor, and employee) [12]; therefore everyone should be involved in the subject matter and strive to eliminate accidents. Lack of involvement will generate costs for each party involved in the project.
In the case of registered accident events, it cannot be forgotten about health ailments resulting from the way work is performed (e.g., manual transport work), the place of work (e.g., variable weather conditions and high/low temperature), as well as the negative effects noticeable in the long run. That is why it is so important to engage in pro-safety activities, where contractors and owners should attach the highest importance to ensuring occupational safety [13]. Contractors and owners should engage in pro-safety activities without treating them as unnecessary costs. Therefore, attention is drawn to the need to understand the manifestations of cost and safety interactions [14]. In connection with the above, it is important to recognize the fact that accidents are costs incurred by construction companies, and investing in occupational health and safety becomes a priority in reducing them. Methods and tools to improve occupational safety are still being sought. In practice, work safety monitoring methods were used to ensure cooperation between the general contractor and the subcontractor, as well as the occupational health and safety services implementing the project [15].
In terms of monitoring safety at various stages of construction, it is possible to use unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) in the field of work to support safety management on construction sites [16]. The usage of drones also allows for reducing the risk of accidents when working at heights, thus improving safety [16,17,18].
A solution that allows continuous supervision of compliance by construction workers with applicable occupational health and safety regulations and rules, as well as their use of protective measures provided for by the organizer of the work, is the use of continuous monitoring. Visual video processing is actively used to automatically recognize workers and their behavior during construction works [19]. Constant supervision of working conditions also ensures the ability to implement safety measures at a specific place and time. The solutions used also allow for monitoring dangerous working conditions [16]. Therefore, appropriate protective prophylaxis can be implemented on time, aimed at reducing the risk of accidents—and thus improving occupational safety [20,21].
In the literature [22,23,24,25,26,27,28], attention is drawn to the possibility of using new technologies (Industry 4.0 technologies) to improve work safety in construction industry enterprises. The authors review the technologies used, such as 3D printing, augmented reality and wearable sensors, virtual reality, bionic exoskeleton, building information modeling (BIM), radio frequency identification (RFID), helmets with sensors and smart helmets, and the Internet of Things (IoT). New technologies allow for a broader view of security issues, but attention is also drawn to the need to take a critical look at the technologies used and to take into account barriers to their application. Their strengths are also identified in terms of activities enabling effective safety management in construction [25,26]. Attention is also drawn to the possibility of using biosensors to measure stress, which may improve occupational safety and health of employees, in addition to productivity, which cannot be preferred over occupational safety [28].
The scope of issues related to work safety on construction sites allows for the registration of traditional solutions aimed at reducing the number of registered accident events in the construction industry. First of all, the analyses are aimed at identifying accident factors (electrical hazards, level differences, moving parts of machines and devices, falling objects, etc.), as well as the use of protective prophylaxis to reduce the occurrence of accident events [29,30,31]. Occupational health and safety analyses (audits) are also carried out to assess compliance with occupational health and safety rules on construction sites [32], and directions for safety-related activities are established. An overview of selected solutions aimed at improving safety in the construction industry is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Selected solutions used to improve safety in the construction industry—literature review.
Lean Manufacturing (LM) solutions are also used in construction practice. This concept was developed in the 1990s based on the Toyota Production System (TPS), developed by T. Ohno and S. Shingo. This system includes a set of methods, tools, and practices implemented at Toyota Motor Company since 1948 [33,34]. Production in the LM system is called “lean” because, compared to mass production, it uses much fewer resources and in half the time [35]. Its main goal is to identify and eliminate activities that do not bring added value to the process, referred to as waste [36,37,38]. There are seven categories of waste such as overproduction, excessive inventory, overprocessing, waiting, unnecessary motion, unnecessary transportation, and defects [36,37,38,39]. Identifying and then eliminating or reducing these losses creates the potential for improvement through properly selected LM tools. The most frequently used LM solutions include 5S/6S, Visual Management, Standardization, VSM, Just in Time, Kanban, Kaizen, SMED, TPM, and Poka-Yoke [36,37,38,40]. Additionally, quality management tools are also used, such as the Ishikawa diagram, 5Why analysis, Pareto analysis, and PDCA. For many years, the LM concept has been considered the main approach in operations management, and its importance among practitioners is constantly increasing [41]. LM solutions are used in most manufacturing and service industries around the world [40,42] and bring many benefits, including eliminating errors, reducing inventories, reducing lead time, reducing costs, increasing productivity, and improving quality and occupational safety [34,36,40,43,44]. The construction industry can also achieve these benefits by using solutions taken from TPS.
Based on the model used in the automotive industry, L. Koskela [45] introduced the Lean Construction (LC) approach in 1992 to the construction industry, which involves designing a production system to minimize losses of materials, time, and costs, creating maximum value for the customer. The main goal of LC is to reduce or eliminate activities that do not add value to the project and optimize activities that do. When implementing LC, the importance of a culture of continuous improvement is also emphasized, which enables understanding and correct application of LM principles, which in turn translates into improved quality, efficiency, and work safety [46]. As the construction industry struggles with low productivity rates, inefficient work practices [47], and low levels of occupational safety [48], using LM solutions can reduce losses and improve flow processes, achieving maximum benefits. An overview of LM tools commonly used in the construction industry is presented in Table 2. They also include quality management tools that support solving problems occurring on construction sites.
Table 2. LM methods, tools, and techniques used in the construction industry—literature review.
In terms of improving occupational safety in the construction industry, 5S/6S, implemented in five or six steps, plays a significant role in the selection, systematics, cleaning, standardization, self-discipline, and safety. It is emphasized [48] that safe working conditions are of key importance in the uninterrupted workflow on the construction site because accidents are a source of losses, which is an obstacle to creating value for the customer. The literature [44,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59] indicates that the use of 5S/6S principles in construction allows you to organize and maintain an orderly, visual workplace, which reduces the number of accidents caused by crowding of the construction site and the general disorder there (e.g., trips, falls, slips). The solutions used within 5S/6S include [56,57]: removal of unnecessary materials and equipment from the construction site, separation and marking of zones for storing construction materials placing tools and equipment in designated areas, compliance with established standards, audits, and training. Attention is also drawn to the problem of lack of awareness of construction workers in the field of health and safety [48]; therefore, the implementation of 5S/6S can be an effective tool supporting the management of work safety on construction sites. An orderly construction site facilitates the detection of errors and the identification of damage to materials, tools, and equipment [57], which also pose a risk of an accident at work. 5S/6S is considered one of the first steps that an organization should take to implement LC [53].
Another solution for improving safety on construction sites is Visual Management (VM). Limited levels of visualization and lack of supervision are often the cause of accidents on construction sites [56]. VM involves presenting key information to all employees in a simple, clear and understandable way. Thanks to visual markings, the construction process becomes transparent, simple and safe for construction workers. Visual indicators streamline work and facilitate communication [53], show deviations from standards, and thus help employees identify irregularities during work [49,53]—which affects work safety. Various VM solutions can be used to improve health and safety on construction sites [48,49,53,55,56,57,58,59]: labels, color coding, safety signs, digital billboards, safety boards presenting health and safety instructions and equipment, safety control boards, signage for hazardous areas, use of physical barriers, marking of safe passageways for workers, light and sound signals (sirens), and monitoring cameras integrated with the signaling system to respond to hazards during construction works.
In the aspect of work safety in the construction industry, the importance of standardization is also emphasized. The use and compliance with standards (work and safety) allow to reduce or elimination problems occurring during construction work [48,54,55]. Standards that reflect best practices in the workplace can be used to change employee behavior to improve occupational safety [55].
The use of error-proof devices (Poka-Yoke) in construction is considered an effective way to avoid human errors in terms of work quality and work safety [47,48,52,53,54,55,57]. Mechanical or electronic systems are used to identify and prevent potential errors in construction works, and in the event of irregularities, the operation is automatically interrupted, or a problem/error warning is given (light and sound signals)—alarm siren switches should be available to all workers to ensure safety in emergencies [57]. Other examples of protection against errors leading to accidents are [53,57] devices protecting employees against excessive heating, noise, and other hazards (signaling and interrupting work), devices preventing employees from approaching or crossing risk zones (e.g., the possibility of objects falling from a height or a zone of concrete waiting to dry), the use of remotely controlled devices to facilitate work and reduce the likelihood of accidents caused by manual operation.
The literature [47,48,49,52,53,54,55,58,60] also draws attention to the use of Value Stream Mapping (VSM) in construction to record the course of the construction process by assessing its current state and paying attention to time creating value and time not creating value for the client at every stage of work. By graphically presenting subsequent stages of construction (visualization of the entire process and indicators), you can easily understand the flow of materials, information, and documentation and identify problems [47,53]. In this way, VSM supports the design of the construction process and provides opportunities for improvement, e.g., in terms of facilitating workflow (balancing workload, reducing process complexity, minimizing unnecessary movements of employees and materials) [49,53,60]. Since safe working conditions are crucial to achieving uninterrupted workflow [56], VSM can be used as a supporting tool for improving health and safety.
Gemba Walk (“go, see, ask why”) is also an essential practice, which allows supervisors to see and assess the current condition of the construction site in terms of any problems. Regular Gemba Walks help collect data regarding the root cause of the problem and its solution [47]; therefore, they can be an effective tool for identifying and eliminating occupational safety problems.
The literature [48,52,54,55,56,58,59,61] also draws attention to the use of Just in Time (JiT) and Kanban in the construction industry. JiT is a tool for managing and monitoring inventory, quality, cost control, and work plans. It ensures the efficiency of construction works by reducing the flow time in the process and the response time of suppliers to end users [48,52,54,55,58,59]. In terms of improving occupational health and safety, delivering materials at the right time and in the appropriate quantity for the stage of project work being carried out reduces the number of accidents at work caused by the formation of “congestions” at the construction site [56]. The Kanban technique is used to control the amount of materials used in construction processes and regulate their flow, which ensures a reliable workflow [48]. Attention is also drawn [61] to the use of Kanban cards as a tool for controlling work safety in construction. Using Kanban cards at each stage of the construction process provides key information regarding the type of task performed, materials used, and information on work safety (based on data on accidents, their causes, and methods of prevention). The mechanism of synchronization of Kanban-controlled production and safety control systems both enables reliable workflow and improves health and safety [61].
Another solution used in construction is Daily Huddle Meetings, during which tasks to be performed and current problems that may hinder the implementation of works are discussed. Moreover, these meetings facilitate communication within the team and involve employees in undertaken activities, especially in the field of problem-solving [47,48,49,58] and also in the field of detecting the causes of accidents at work [47]. Attention is also paid to the possibility of using tools in construction to analyze occurring problems, determine their root causes, and improve the process, including Pareto analysis [48,54], 5Why analysis [47,48,54,62], Ishikawa diagram [48], FMEA [48,62], PDCA [48,52,62], and Kaizen [48,49,54,58]. In terms of improving work safety in the construction industry, the importance of tools identifying root causes is particularly emphasized, which may result in higher efficiency and productivity while eliminating risky conditions [47].
The aim of the study is to present the possibilities of using Lean Manufacturing tools to improve occupational health and safety on construction sites. Due to the above, a list of exemplary hazards (Section 3.1) occurring on construction sites was prepared. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and hazards resulting from the implementation and use of Lean Manufacturing tools in the construction industry were identified (Section 3.2). In Section 3.3, a list of preventive actions aimed at reducing the risk associated with the hazards listed in Section 3.1 was made. However, in Section 3.4, a collective summary of positive and negative factors was made, as well as their repeatability in terms of the tools being the subject of the analysis.

2. Materials and Methods

The achievement of the assumed goal was possible thanks to the development of a four-stage methodology for my own work is shown in Figure 1. The first stage involved conducting a bibliometric analysis, which is a method of exploring scientific data, allowing for the analysis of specific fields and areas that are the subject of research [63,64,65]. The main goal of the analyses was to identify scientific studies that recorded the issues of work safety on construction sites [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32] and the impact of Lean Manufacturing tools on improving work safety [44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63]. For this purpose, the following databases were explored: Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and ResearchGate.
Figure 1. Stages of own work in the adaptation of LM tools in construction [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62].
In the first stage, the following keywords were analyzed: “Health and Safety in Construction”, “Lean Safety”, and “Lean Construction”, in the next stage, the area of analysis was narrowed down to “Lean Construction and Safety”, “Lean Manufacturing tools in the construction industry”. The analyses conducted included articles published between 1991 and 2024.
For the narrowed area relating to the words “Lean Construction and safety”, 262 publications were analyzed—the WOS database and 399 for the SCOPUS database. In the case of the keyword “Lean Manufacturing tools in the Construction Industry”, 69 publications were analyzed for the WoS database and 136 publications for SCOPUS. The initial analysis was made on the basis of the title of the study, abstract, and keywords. Ultimately, 50 publications were selected regarding the possibility of using LM tools in the construction industry, which were related in detail to the subject matter. Selected studies constituted the basis for preparing a literature review (Section 1) and developing the research part (Section 3). Based on the analysis of the number of studies, it is concluded that since 2005, there has been an increase in the number of studies devoted to this issue. The graphic number of publications for the SCOPUS and Web of Science databases published in the years 1991–2024 is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Number of publications for keywords between 1991 and 2024.
Based on the literature study, exemplary hazards registered in the construction industry were identified (Table 3). The identified hazards occurred in both small and large construction projects. In the next step, based on the literature analysis [44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62], the strengths and weaknesses resulting from the implementation/use of Lean Manufacturing tools were identified, as well as opportunities and threats—stage 2. The analysis was carried out for each LM tool that was used in the construction industry in terms of improving occupational health and safety (Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11).
Table 3. Hazards and LM tools are used to improve work safety on construction sites.
Table 4. Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of 5S/6S as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use.
Table 5. Analysis of VM’s strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use.
Table 6. Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of standardization as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use.
Table 7. Analysis of Poka-Yoke’s strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use.
Table 8. Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of VSM as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use.
Table 9. Analysis of Just in Time’s strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use.
Table 10. Analysis of Kaizen’s strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use.
Table 11. Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of Gemba Walk and Daily Huddle Meeting as well as opportunities and threats related to their implementation and use.
Stage 3—consisted of a list of solutions/actions aimed at mitigating the threats resulting from the implementation of LM tools (Table 12).
Table 12. Solutions to reduce the identified hazards provided in the LM.
Stage 4—consisted of a collective list of strengths and weaknesses, opportunities, and threats resulting from the implementation/use of LM tools. For this purpose, a summary of the most common factors (positive and negative) characterizing individual LM tools and their impact on improving occupational safety was made (Table 13).
Table 13. Common factors of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to the implementation and use of LM tools.

3. Results

3.1. Dangerous Situations, Hazards on Construction Sites and the Possibility of Using Selected LM Tools to Reduce Them

The type of work performed, the place where it is performed, and the machines, devices, and tools used become a source of dangerous situations and accidents at work. The authors of works [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28] drew attention to the need to use solutions whose operation translates into improved safety. The study presents examples of hazards occurring on construction sites. The identified ones (Table 3) include hazards related to physical factors (e.g., electric current, vibrations, moving elements, material ejection), chemical factors (greases, oils), and psychophysical factors (work-related loads). A key element in improving occupational safety is limiting the negative impact of identified hazards on construction sites. For this purpose, a list of possible tools of the Lean Manufacturing concept was made. For each of the identified dangerous situations and hazards, a tool/tools were selected, the implementation of which may translate into improved safety in the work process.
For the purposes of the study, 22 hazards were identified for illustrative purposes, for which the implementation of LM tools was proposed, i.e., 5S/6S, Visual Management, Standardization, Poka-Yoke, VSM, Just in Time, Gemba Walk, Daily Huddle Meetings, and Kaizen (column “a”).
The most frequently used solutions to reduce the identified hazards (columns “h”–“j”) were Daily Huddle Meetings, Kaizen, and Gemba Walk (22 applications each). Daily team meetings make it possible to draw attention to dangerous situations while performing tasks, solve safety-related problems and identify the causes of dangerous events/accidents at work. Similarly, Gemba Walk—thanks to constant supervision by supervisors of work carried out on the construction site, it is possible to identify and eliminate health and safety problems (unsafe behavior, unsafe working conditions). The implementation of Kaizen allows you to engage construction workers in health and safety improvement activities by submitting their own proposals for creating pro-safety activities. The presented solutions may translate into a reduction in risks (Table 3), but the key factors are the commitment and awareness of health and safety for all construction workers and their superiors. The effective use of these tools can become an element of shaping the safety culture on construction sites, where each employee influences various safety-related areas.
The key tools for improving work safety in the construction industry may be Visual Management and 5S/6S (columns “b”–“c”). The use of VM solutions allows the use of visual markings on the construction site to provide employees with important health and safety information, i.e., safety signs, acoustic signals, safety boards, and boards of protective measures used. In this respect, it is possible to reduce the probability of accidents at work related to 18 hazards summarized illustratively (Table 3). 5S/6S is a tool whose effective implementation allows for four illustrative hazards to be reduced. 5S/6S refers to the proper organization of the workplace by implementing activities aimed at creating an organized, orderly, and safe workplace on the construction site. Thanks to 5S/6S practices, it is possible to remove unnecessary materials and tools and store them in designated visually marked places.
Standardization (column “d”) is a tool that allows for reducing accidents at work on the construction site related to 13 hazards listed in Table 3. Performing tasks in accordance with adopted standards that pay attention to existing hazards (e.g., moving elements, electric current, hot surfaces) allows for the identification of dangerous situations and reacting to them. The standards (work, safety) developed and followed reflect the best practices in the workplace; therefore, they can be used to shape the safe behavior of employees on the construction site.
Poka-Yoke (column “e”) has been used to reduce accidents at work related to 6 illustrative hazards (Table 3). Mechanical and electronic systems used on construction sites (identifying and warning against danger or interrupting the operation of devices) prevent employees from making mistakes, which may result, for example, from distraction. Therefore, Poka-Yoke can be an effective tool for reducing the number of accidents at work (e.g., an employee entering a dangerous area).
The use of VSM in the construction industry (column “f”) makes it possible to reduce three illustrative hazards that cause accidents at work. Identification of areas where material inventories accumulate on the construction site (blocked passages), and incorrect internal transport allows for actions to be taken to improve the organization of work and redesign the production system in terms of improving working conditions. Supervisors can use VSM as a supporting tool to solve safety problems.
The use of JiT (column “g”) allows to reduce the occurrence of 3 illustratively summarized threats on construction sites. By monitoring material deliveries (at the right time and quantity), excessive inventories are prevented from accumulating at the construction site, creating dangerous “congestions” that prevent safe movement.
The hazards identified in Table 3 can be eliminated or reduced by using LM tools (“b”–“j”). The number of possible solutions for a given threat is specified in the “k” column. It was found that the largest number of LM tools (eight) can be used to eliminate or reduce disorder in the workplace. Then, six different LM tools can be used to eliminate/reduce threats related to blocked passages (stored materials), electricity, noise, mechanical vibrations of equipment, fire, internal transport, and objects falling from height. Five LM tools can be used to eliminate/reduce threats related to a surface at the same level where a fall is possible, sharp edges of work tools, moving machine elements, ejection of work tools, dust, smoke, lubricants, dynamic physical load (lifting and material handling), and hot materials/surfaces. Four LM tools can be used to eliminate or reduce threats related to differences in levels (moving up stairs, working on scaffolding or below the level), static physical load (long-term work in one position, performing similar movements for a long time) and load emotional (stress and deconcentration). The smallest number of LM tools (three) can be used to eliminate or reduce hazards related to incorrect lighting of the construction site and changing weather conditions.
Based on the analysis, it is concluded that it is possible to adapt selected tools of the LM concept in terms of improving the organization and safety of work on construction sites. The choice of tools depends on the individual problems of the construction company, and the selection criterion is the identified threats. In order to implement a solution that improves safety, it is necessary to conduct a detailed analysis, allowing the selection of LM tools that have the greatest impact on reducing the existing threats. When selecting LM tools, it is necessary to assess possible uncertainties and threats related to the effective implementation of selected LM tools (Section 3.2).

3.2. Identification of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of Implementing/Using LM Tools in the Construction Industry

For the purposes of this study, the possibility of using Lean Manufacturing tools to reduce the negative impact of hazards on the safety of construction workers was analyzed. Therefore, the strengths and weaknesses of LM tools, as well as the opportunities and threats resulting from their implementation and use, were analyzed (Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11). Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11 were prepared on the basis of the analysis of literature studies [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62] in the scope of security and the possibility of adapting LM tools in the scope of its improvement. The 5S/6S method was used for four potentially identified hazards—Table 3; however, it is believed that the steps used within it effectively improve the organization and safety of work on construction sites and may find practical application.
Based on the analyses, the strengths of the 5S/6S implementation were assessed, including proper organization of work and the workplace, reduction of waste resulting from the storage of materials, which may result in improved safety and a reduction in the number of registered accidents at work and near misses. Moreover, the application of the 5S/6S principles influences the development of occupational health and safety culture and awareness among the staff. The key element is the involvement of construction management in the implementation of the 5S/6S method. Lack of supervision, failure to follow established procedures, frequent turnover, lack of knowledge, errors in implementation, and lack of self-control and awareness will be among the weaknesses that need to be eliminated to improve safety on the construction site. Effective implementation of 5S/6S (opportunity) may influence the perception of the company by potential employees and other entities as a safe place to work. Particular attention should also be paid to the existing hazards related to achieving the intended goal of improving safety. Lack of knowledge of subcontractors’ employees, non-compliance with established procedures, as well as the need for additional supervision over the effectiveness of compliance with established procedures constitute a hazard to the effectiveness of maintaining 5S/6S and achieving the assumed goals, where the primary goal will be zero accidents. The analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of 5S/6S, as well as the opportunities and threats related to its implementation and use, is presented in Table 4.
An important tool in the field of occupational health and safety and the LM concept is Visual Management, which allows for the transmission of simple and understandable messages to people employed on construction sites (VM allowed for the reduction of 18 potentially identified hazards—Table 3). Proper marking of the construction site, all visual messages regarding hazards, and acoustic information are the strong points of VM, improving safety and working conditions. Moreover, the use of visual messages shapes the occupational health and safety culture and awareness among employees. Effective implementation of VM requires knowledge of the proper implementation of VM, supervision, compliance with applicable rules, awareness of health and safety, involvement of management and employees in compliance with applicable rules, and clear communication about the changes introduced, the failure of which will be a weakness of the proposed solution. The implemented visual management activities will result in improved safety on the construction site among potential employees and external entities. Threats that employers may face may include the need for frequent, additional supervision of subcontractors’ employees who are reluctant to follow established rules and do not comply with visual messages. The implementation of VM (opportunity) may translate into building employee awareness of implementing solutions aimed at improving work safety. Visual messages, information about threats and dangerous situations, and better communication significantly improve the organization of work on the construction site, which results in reduced accidents and a positive reception on the market. The analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of Visual Management, as well as the opportunities and threats related to its implementation and use, is presented in Table 5.
Standardization is an important element of the LM concept because it reflects best practices in the workplace and describes the safest and most effective methods of performing work at the required level of quality. Hence, standardization was used to reduce 13 illustrative hazards (Table 3). Carrying out construction works in accordance with the adopted standards (e.g., moving along designated paths, correct and safe use of equipment, materials and tools, and maintaining order) introduces a unified method of carrying out all tasks, allows maintaining order in the construction site, limiting unnecessary movement of workers in areas of increased risk and build awareness of occupational health and safety. The factors mentioned above affect work safety, which is the strength of standardization in this area. Lack of knowledge, incorrect implementation of standards, lack of supervision by superiors, non-compliance with the procedures introduced by employees, lack of awareness, lack of training, and communication regarding the changes introduced in the applicable standards will constitute weaknesses that affect occupational safety. The effect of standardization and compliance with the introduced rules will be an improvement in safety on the construction site among potential employees and other external entities (opportunities). Failure of subcontractors’ employees to comply with work and safety standards, as well as the need for frequent supervision of subcontractors’ employees related to compliance with standards, may pose a hazard to the effectiveness of standardization in construction work. An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of Standardization, as well as opportunities and threats related to its implementation and use in the construction industry, is presented in Table 6.
Poka-Yoke allows for the elimination of dangerous events on the construction site by introducing technical solutions that identify and warn against hazards or interrupt the operation of devices (P-Y allowed for the reduction of six potentially identified hazards—Table 3). Reducing the possibility of an employee making an error through properly designed Poka-Yoke solutions has a positive impact on the safety of the tasks performed, especially when the activities performed are repetitive and may cause, for example, distraction. To achieve the goal, i.e., eliminating the possibility of making an error leading to an accident, the implemented technical solutions should be properly designed and implemented. They should be explained to employees, and the way of working at the position (i.e., how it is used) should be standardized and supervised. Improper implementation of Poka-Yoke solutions, lack of supervision, and lack of awareness of the impact of these solutions on health and safety may increase the risk of an accident (weaknesses). Proper implementation of Poka-Yoke can create a positive perception of the company among potential employees and other entities due to the creation of safe working conditions and ensuring good organization of construction works aimed at reducing accidents (opportunities). Among the hazards affecting occupational safety, additional, frequent supervision of employees of subcontractors who do not comply with applicable rules was indicated. An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of Poka-Yoke solutions, as well as opportunities and threats related to implementation and use, is presented in Table 7.
VSM, by visualizing the flow of materials and information and identifying problems and losses in the construction process, can be an auxiliary tool in improving occupational health and safety (VSM allowed for the reduction of three potentially identified hazards—Table 3). Striving for a smooth workflow (based on the results of process mapping) is important for occupational safety. Based on the analysis, the strengths of the VSM application were assessed, which included the identification of activities that do not bring added value in the form of excessive traffic of construction workers, waiting, and excessive material supplies, which affect the possibility of dangerous situations (tripping, falls, and entering dangerous zones), identification of sources of pollution that worsen working conditions on the construction site (dust, smoke, and post-production waste). The result of using VSM (its strength) may also be the improvement of working conditions, thanks to the reduction of the complexity of the construction process and the equal division of tasks among employees (obtained thanks to process mapping). The key factors are the commitment and awareness of superiors regarding the use of VSM and its benefits (not only in terms of improving work organization but also health and safety). Lack of knowledge in mapping, improper use of VSM, high employee turnover, and lack of information flow in the process are weaknesses that need elimination to improve work safety. The effect of using VSM in the construction process will be a safety improvement perceived among potential employees and other external entities (opportunities). High dynamics in the supply of materials, lack of regular suppliers, and frequent changes in the work schedule may disorganize work and create dangerous conditions (e.g., in the form of excessive inventories, making it difficult to move safely on the construction site). These factors pose a hazard to the effectiveness of the use of VSM in terms of improving occupational health and safety. An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of VSM, as well as opportunities and threats related to its use in the construction industry, is presented in Table 8.
The use of Just in Time (JiT) in the construction industry aims to ensure the efficiency of work carried out by managing and monitoring material inventories, quality, and task plans (JiT allowed for the reduction of three potentially identified hazards—Table 3). Organizing supplies of materials at the right time and quantity for a given process stage facilitates work planning, which creates safer working conditions (due to the established delivery plan). It also reduces the possibility of accidents (falls, trips) caused by the formation of “congestions” on the construction site that make safe movement difficult (strengths). The weaknesses that make it difficult to achieve the goal of improving occupational health and safety are the lack of knowledge in the use of JiT, lack of awareness of the impact of JiT on safe working conditions, lack of compliance with the rules related to the flow of materials and work inconsistent with the schedule, which disorganizes the work and creates potentially dangerous situations (e.g., excessive accumulation of materials in various places on the construction site). The effective implementation/application of JiT in construction practice (opportunity) can improve work safety, thanks to proper coordination of deliveries and constant cooperation with suppliers, limiting the occurrence of “congestions” on the construction site and enabling the development of permanent, safe work methods. Additionally, the use of JiT may influence the positive perception of the company among potential employees and other entities due to the creation of safe conditions and ensuring good organization of construction works aimed at reducing accidents. One of the potential hazards in the use of JiT on the construction site is the lack of awareness of subcontractors’ employees, which requires additional supervision. Difficult control and failure to implement activities by the implemented JiT standards may negatively affect safety on the construction site. Attention should also be paid to possible lack of coordination in the supply of materials (disorganization of work and the possibility of occurrence of dangerous situations), resulting from delays that may be caused by bad weather conditions that make it impossible to meet the planned construction work schedule. An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the JiT tool as well as opportunities and threats related to its implementation and use in the construction industry, is presented in Table 9.
Kaizen as a tool for continuous improvement is the basis for shaping the awareness of construction industry employees in the field of occupational safety. Using employee creativity through the ability to propose improvements makes Kaizen one of the most universal tools for improving occupational health and safety and shaping a safety culture (which is why it was used in the field of 22 potentially identified hazards—Table 3). Construction workers encounter potentially dangerous situations in their daily work, and their knowledge and experience, in many cases, can lead to the implementation of a solution that reduces or eliminates the risk of an accident (strengths). A key factor in this respect is the involvement and awareness of employees in the field of occupational health and safety. The use of Kaizen in the activities of a construction company may influence its positive reception among potential employees and other entities due to the involvement of employees in creating safe working conditions (opportunities). Incorrect implementation of Kaizen, lack of knowledge in this area, high turnover of construction workers, lack of response to safety-related deviations, lack of support from superiors, lack of motivation, lack of employee involvement and awareness of health and safety will be the weaknesses of the introduction of Kaizen. A threat to the effectiveness of this solution may be the lack of response to hazards and the lack of potential proposals to solve problems on the part of subcontractors’ employees who do not identify with the company and are not involved in pro-safety activities. An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the Kaizen tool, as well as opportunities and threats related to its implementation and use, is presented in Table 10.
The implementation of Gemba Walk and Daily Huddle Meetings tools into everyday practice in the construction industry may translate into improved occupational safety. Both solutions were used in the scope of 22 potentially identified hazards (Table 3), which indicates their significant impact on the ability to reduce accidents on construction sites and shape the safety culture. Regular assessment of the current status of work performed by superiors (Gemba Walk) allows the identification of dangerous employee behavior and existing hazards, which is the basis for discussing problems with employees during Daily Huddle Meetings (strengths). Moreover, providing information at meetings related to possible hazards during construction work, identifying the causes of accidents together with employees, engaging them in pro-safety activities and influencing awareness of occupational health and safety. Lack of response by superiors to deviations from health and safety regulations, lack of supervision, lack of awareness in the field of health and safety, lack of commitment, lack of communication about occur-ring safety problems, lack of knowledge in solving problems or incorrect/irregular use of these tools are weaknesses, the elimination of which is crucial to improving work safety. Effective use of Gemba Walk and Daily Huddle Meetings may influence potential employees’ and other entities’ perception of the company as a safe workplace (opportunities). However, the lack of involvement of subcontractors’ employees in safety-related activities and additional supervision of their work in terms of compliance with occupational health and safety regulations may pose a threat to the effectiveness of these tools in reducing potentially accidental events. An analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of Gemba Walk and Daily Huddle Meetings, as well as opportunities and threats related to their implementation and use, is presented in Table 11.

3.3. Risk Reduction Activities within the LM Tools Used

Based on the analysis of the strengths of LM tools listed in Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11, it was concluded that they constitute good practices in the field of risk reduction. The summarized strengths therefore constitute proposals for preventive solutions aimed at reducing the risk of accidents on construction sites. The solutions listed in Table 12 can be classified as preventive measures falling within the scope of organizational and technical activities. Organizational activities will be related to the organization of work, the workplace, involvement in pro-safety activities, and shaping a safety culture on construction sites. However, technical solutions result, among others, from the use of solutions designed for barriers constituting a physical barrier between the employee and the source of the threat. A summary of actions to reduce the risk of accidents for the identified hazards (Table 3) is presented in Table 12.
The implementation of solutions that reduce the occurrence of hazards (preventive actions) translates into improved safety and, thus, the number of registered accident events. The main goal of construction industry companies should be zero accidents.

3.4. List of Common Factors (Positive/Negative) in the Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats for the Implemented and Used LM Tools

Section 3.2 identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the implementation/use of LM tools as well as the opportunities and threats for the construction industry resulting from their application. In practice, what most often stands out is the simultaneous use of selected tools to improve work safety on construction sites. Table 13 presents a summary of the factors, taking into account their repeatability (Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11). The identified factors were common to the tools in question. Identification of recurring factors that occur most often may be an important element in determining priorities for actions aimed at improving occupational safety. In the case of activities aimed at eliminating dangerous events, the repeatability of identified factors is recorded using the following tools: 5S/6S, VM, Standardization, Poka-Yoke, VSM, JiT, Gemba Walk, DHM, as they concern the safe organization of work and compliance with established procedures and management supervision over employees. The key element in shaping work safety on construction sites is the proper identification of threats and effective protective prevention; therefore, an important activity of the organizer of construction works and construction management is the early identification of dangerous behavior and quick response to this type of situation (5S/6S, VM, Poka-Yoke, VSM, Gemba Walk, DHM). The key element is shaping the occupational health and safety culture and promoting pro-safety activities. This type of attitude can be strengthened thanks to the implementation of 5S/6S, VM, Standardization, Kaizen, Gemba Walk, DHM, and at the same time, the communication itself (VM, Gemba Walk, DHM), which plays an important role in health and safety at construction sites.
The implementation of LM tools in construction industry enterprises provides opportunities to achieve the established health and safety goals and allows for positive reception among potential employees, collaborators, companies interested in cooperation, and subcontractors. A positive aspect may also be the result of the supervisory authorities’ inspection of working conditions, confirming that the adopted standards significantly influence the development of safe and hygienic working conditions. These chances are listed for each of the tools being the subject of this study (Table 13).
When implementing/using LM tools in construction, weaknesses are also recorded. The most frequently recorded weaknesses included a lack of knowledge regarding the implemented tool or its incorrect use, as well as a lack of awareness and involvement of employees (Table 13—weaknesses). Also significant in this respect were the lack of communication and supervision of work (six tools) and employees’ non-compliance with the introduced procedures (five tools). Therefore, the weaknesses listed should be key when implementing/using LM tools, and it is necessary to pay attention to them at an early stage, as they concern the company itself (internal factors).
A common, recurring element in terms of threats (negative factors) was the need for additional supervision, particularly of subcontractors’ employees. This issue was identified for seven tools (5S/6S, VM, Standardization, Poka-Yoke, JiT, Gemba Walk, DHM). Another threat in terms of effective implementation/use, which was registered for five tools, is the non-compliance of subcontractors’ employees with applicable procedures, as well as the lack of involvement in pro-safety activities (in the scope of three LM tools)—Table 13. The human factor plays an important role on the construction site, which is why special attention is paid to it, and actions should be taken to engage employees in health and safety activities.

4. Discussion

Shaping safe and hygienic working conditions on construction sites is the basic obligation of the organizer of these works. This issue is an important concern for both construction companies and workers. In the literature on OSH in construction [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32], attention is drawn to the need to implement appropriate protective prevention, as well as to look for methods to improve occupational safety or supervision of working conditions. The paper presents the possibility of applying LM tools to improve occupational safety. LM tools are widely used in various industries, including the construction industry. Studies [44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62] draw attention to the possibility of implementing LM tools in improving occupational safety, so the study summarized the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of implementing/applying LM tools in the construction industry (Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11). The adaptability was also linked to the risks, which are illustratively presented in Table 3.
A key element in the implementation of LM tools is the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8, Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11), on the basis of which it is possible to plan activities for the implementation of LM tools in construction. The juxtaposition of positive and negative factors (Table 12) allows management to take specific actions based on the specifics of the work in progress. A holistic analysis of the juxtaposed factors also makes it possible to assess the suitability of a given tool for the enterprise. In the case of the implementation of LM tools, it may be useful to apply them simultaneously in the construction practice due to the effectiveness of achieving the established goals, i.e., improvement of work safety and elimination of accidental events (zero accidents). The implementation of individual tools can also significantly affect the involvement of construction workers in pro-safety activities and the formation of a safety culture on construction sites.
The implementation and use of LM tools can be an important issue for a number of scientific studies, not only dedicated to the construction industry but also other industries where it will be possible to implement them to improve OSH, such as the mining industry, metallurgy, etc.

5. Conclusions

Based on the analysis, it is concluded that it is possible to use LM tools in the construction industry, taking into account the individual needs of the company. Information summarized illustratively regarding the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to the implementation and use of LM tools may be useful for the organizer of construction works in the selection of a given tool and the possible results to achieve.
The study highlights the strengths of LM tools in terms of their implementation and use, which concern the so-called “hard” aspects related to security, i.e., the identification of hazards and the elimination of hazards. An improvement in communication is also visible in this respect, which may translate into a reduction in the number of registered accident events. The identified strengths of the tools also constitute proposals for risk-mitigating activities within the scope of implemented protective prevention. With reference to the examples of hazards occurring on construction sites (Table 3), the repeatability of risk reduction tools is recorded, in particular for Kaizen (22 hazards), Daily Huddle Meetings (22 hazards), Gemba-Walk (22 hazards) and VM (18 hazards). The implementation and effective use of one tool can significantly improve safety in relation to a larger number of identified hazards. In particular, attention should be paid to tools whose implementation may have a significant impact on changing work organization (hard tools)—5S/6S (4 hazards), Poka-Yoke (6 hazards), the use of which may influence the limitation or elimination of existing hazards. When considering the implementation of individual tools, it is also important to note what hazards they can effectively reduce. What is particularly important is the fact that they allow for the reduction of hazards that may result in the death of construction workers.
The implementation of LM tools is an opportunity for activities aimed at improving occupational safety, as all entities organizing work on the construction site—management and employees—are involved. Effective health and safety management is only possible when these entities cooperate with each other. Therefore, an important element in assessing the effectiveness of implementing the solutions provided in the LM tools for identified hazards will be the risk assessment process. Based on the assessment, the team will determine whether the solutions used reduce the likelihood of accidents occurring. The implementation of LM tools will also require updating the risk assessment due to technical or organizational changes introduced at the construction site.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.M.; methodology, T.M.; software, T.M., J.F., S.P. and M.Š.; validation, T.M., J.F., S.P. and M.Š.; formal analysis, T.M., J.F., S.P. and M.Š.; investigation, T.M. and J.F.; resources, T.M., J.F. and S.P.; data curation, T.M., J.F. and S.P.; writing— T.M., J.F., S.P., M.Š., T.M. and J.F.; writing—review and editing, T.M.; visualization, T.M., J.F. and S.P.; supervision, T.M., J.F. and S.P.; project administration T.M., J.F., S.P. and M.Š.; funding acquisition, T.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The publication is supported by the Rector’s pro-quality grant. Silesian University of Technology, “11/010RGJ24/0052”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Soltanmohammadlou, N.; Sadeghi, S.; Hon, C.K.H.; Mokhtarpour-Khanghah, F. Computer vision for behaviour-based safety in construction: A review and future directions. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2020, 43, 100980. [Google Scholar]
  2. Helander, M.G. Safety hazards and motivation for safe work in the construction industry. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 1991, 8, 205–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Cheng, C.W.; Lin, C.C.; Leu, S.S. Use of association rules to explore cause–effect relationships in occupational accidents in the Taiwan construction industry. Saf. Sci. 2010, 48, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Nowobilski, T.; Sawicki, M.; Szóstak, M. Analiza rusztowań budowlanych z wykorzystaniem nowych technologii. Builder 2020, 276, 32–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Afzal, M.; Shafiq, M.T.; Jassmi, H.A. Improving construction safety with virtual-design construction technologies—A review. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2021, 26, 319–340. [Google Scholar]
  6. Zhang, M.; Cao, T.; Zhao, X. Applying Sensor-Based Technology to Improve Construction Safety Management. Sensors 2017, 17, 1841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Sousa, V.; Almeida, N.M.; Dias, L.A. Risk-based management of occupational safety and health in the construction industry—Part 1: Background knowledge. Saf. Sci. 2014, 66, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Goncalves Filho, A.P.; Waterson, P.; Jun, G.T. Improving accident analysis in construction—Development of a contributing factor classification framework and evaluation of its validity and reliability. Saf. Sci. 2021, 140, 105303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Shao, B.; Hu, Z.; Liu, Q.; Chen, S.; He, W. Fatal accident patterns of building construction activities in China. Saf. Sci. 2019, 111, 253–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ramdan, I.M.; Candra, K.P.; Arlita, D.; Tura, S. Association of demographic characteristics of construction workers and work environments to workplace accident in high building (hotel) construction. Indian J. Public Health Res. Dev. 2019, 10, 1251–1256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Cheng, C.W.; Leu, S.S.; Lin, C.C.; Fan, C. Characteristic analysis of occupational accidents at small construction enterprises. Saf. Sci. 2010, 48, 698–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Williams, O.S.; Hamid, R.A.; Misnan, M.S. Accident causal factors on the building construction sites: A review. Int. J. Built Environ. Sustain. 2018, 5, 78–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kanchana, S.; Sivaprakash, P.; Joseph, S. Studies on labour safety in construction sites. Hindawi Publ. Corp. Sci. World J. 2015, 2015, 590810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Oswald, D.; Ahiaga-Dagbui, D.D.; Sherratt, F.; Smith, S.D. An industry structured for unsafety? An exploration of the cost-safety conundrum in construction project delivery. Saf. Sci. 2020, 122, 104535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Stala, A.; Dąbrowski, A. Przykład wdrożenia i funkcjonowania systemu monitorowania bezpieczeństwa pracy na placu budowy. Bezp. Pr. 2006, 4, 28–31. [Google Scholar]
  16. Nowobilski, T.; Hoła, B. The use of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) in the process of occupational safety management in construction. Prz. Bud. 2023, 9–10, 126–130. [Google Scholar]
  17. Jeelani, I.; Gheisari, M. Safety challenges of UAV integration in construction: Conceptual analysis and future research roadmap. Saf. Sci. 2021, 144, 105473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Choi, H.-W.; Kim, H.-J.; Kim, S.-K.; Na, W.S. An Overview of Drone Applications in the Construction Industry. Drones 2023, 7, 515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Cheng, J.C.P.; Wong, P.K.-Y.; Luo, W.M.; Wang, M.; Leung, P.H. Vision-based monitoring of site safety compliance based on worker re-identification and personal protective classification. Autom. Constr. 2022, 139, 104312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Martinez, P.; Al-Hussein, M.; Ahmad, R. A scientometric analysis and critical review of computer vision applications for construction. Autom. Constr. 2019, 107, 102947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tay, J.; Shi, P.; He, Y.; Nath, T. Application of Computer Vision in the Construction Industry. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3487394 (accessed on 28 August 2019).
  22. Soares Junior, G.G.; Satyro, W.C.; Bonilla, S.H.; Contador, J.C.; Barbosa, A.P.; de Paula Monken, S.F.; Martens, M.L.; Fragomeni, M.A. Construction 4.0: Industry 4.0 enabling technologies applied to improve workplace safety in construction. Res. Soc. Dev. 2021, 10, e280101220280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Turner, C.J.; Oyekan, J.; Stergioulas, L.; Griffin, D. Utilizing Industry 4.0 on the Construction Site: Challenges and Opportunities. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021, 17, 746–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhang, S.; Teizer, J.; Lee, J.K.; Eastman, C.M.; Venugopal, M. Building information modeling (BIM) and safety: Automatic safety checking of construction models and schedules. Autom. Constr. 2013, 29, 183–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Guo, H.; Yu, Y.; Skitmore, M. Visualization technology-based construction safety management: A review. Autom. Constr. 2017, 73, 135–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Nnaji, C.; Gambatese, J.; Lee, H.W.; Zhang, F. Improving construction work zone safety using technology: A systematic review of applicable technologies. J. Traffic Transp. Eng. 2020, 7, 61–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Dobrucali, E.; Demirkesen, S.; Sadikoglu, E.; Zhang, C.; Damci, A. Investigating the impact of emerging technologies on construction safety performance. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2024, 31, 1322–1347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lee, T.Y.; Ahmad, F.; Sarijari, M.A. Current status and future research trends of construction labor productivity monitoring: A bibliometric review. Buildings 2023, 13, 1479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Chi, C.F.; Yang, C.C.; Chen, Z.L. In-depth accident analysis of electrical fatalities in the construction industry. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2009, 39, 635–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Winge, S.; Albrechtsen, E. Accident types and barrier failures in the construction industry. Saf. Sci. 2018, 105, 158–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Chi, C.F.; Chang, T.C.; Ting, H.I. Accident patterns and prevention measures for fatal occupational falls in the construction industry. Appl. Ergon. 2005, 36, 391–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bigelow, P.L.; Greenstein, S.L.; Keefe, T.J.; Gilkey, D.P. Development of an on-site, behavior-based safety audit for the residential construction industry. Work 1998, 11, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Holweg, M. The Genealogy of Lean Production. J. Oper. Manag. 2007, 25, 420–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Pavnaskar, S.J.; Gershenson, J.K.; Jambekar, A.B. Classification scheme for lean manufacturing tools. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2003, 41, 3075–3090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Womack, J.P.; Jones, D.T.; Roos, D. The Machine that Changed the World; HarperPerennial: New York, NY, USA, 1991; pp. 11–14. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kumar, N.; Hasan, S.S.; Srivastava, K.; Akhtar, R.; Yadav, R.K.; Choubey, V.K. Lean manufacturing techniques and its implementation: A review. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 64, 1188–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Melton, T. The benefits of Lean Manufacturing: What Lean Thinking has to offer the process industries. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2005, 83, 662–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Imai, M. Gemba Kaizen. Zdroworozsądkowe, Niskokosztowe Podejście do Zarządzania; MT Biznes: Warszawa, Poland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  39. Dixit, A.; Dave, V.; Pratap Singh, A. Lean Manufacturing: An Approach for Waste Elimination. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. Sci. 2015, 4, 532–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Palange, A.; Dhatrak, P. Lean manufacturing a vital tool to enhance productivity in manufacturing. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 46, 729–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kunyoria, J.O.; Aila, F.O. Lean Manufacturing Practices: A Structured Literature Review. World J. Innov. Res. 2022, 13, 9–22. [Google Scholar]
  42. Yuniarti Utami, E.; Rijal, S.; Iwang, B. Application of Lean Manufacturing Principles in Increasing Factory Productivity. West Sci. J. Econ. Entrep. 2023, 1, 264–270. [Google Scholar]
  43. Adzrie, M.; Elcy, K.; Joselyn, R.M.; Mohd-Lair, N.; Chai, F.O. Implementation Selected Tools of Lean Manufacturing. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1529, 042007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Anvari, A.; Zulkifli, N.; Yusuff, R.M. Evaluation of approaches to safety in lean manufacturing and safety management systems and clarification of the relationship between them. World Appl. Sci. J. 2011, 15, 19–26. [Google Scholar]
  45. Koskela, L. Application of the New Production Philosophy to Construction; Standford University: Standford, CA, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  46. Garcés, G.; Pena, C. A Review on Lean Construction for Construction Project Management. Rev. Ing. Constr. 2022, 37, 43–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Demirkesen, S. From Lean Manufacturing to Lean Construction: How Principles, Tools, and Techniques Evolved. In Lean Manufacturing; IntechOpen: Rijeka, Croatia, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ahmed, S.; Hossain, M.; Haq, I. Implementation of lean construction in the construction industry in Bangladesh: Awareness, benefits and challenges. Int. J. Build. Pathol. Adapt. 2021, 39, 368–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Amade, B.; Amaeshi, U.F.; Echeme, I.I.; Onwusonye, S.I.J.; Oguzie, J.O.C. Awareness, use and benefits of lean technologies on construction projects in Nigeria. Int. Sci. Res. J. 2021, 2, 310–322. [Google Scholar]
  50. Misiurek, K.; Misurek, B. Improvement of the safety and quality of a workplace in the area of the construction industry with the use of the 6S system. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2020, 26, 514–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Varshini, D. A Review of Organizational Adaptation of Lean Construction Techniques. J. Hous. Adv. Inter. Des. 2024, 7, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Aravindh, M.D.; Sriram, N.S.; Nakkeeran, G.; Jayakeerti, M.; Velan, C.; Krishnaraj, L. Synergistic effect of alliance contract and lean methodology on project performance measures in the construction industry: SEM analysis. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2023, 192, 122545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bajjou, M.S.; Chafi, A.; Ennadi, A.; El Hammoumi, M. The Practical Relationships between Lean Construction Tools and Sustainable Development: A literature review. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. Rev. 2017, 10, 170–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Shaqour, E.N. The impact of adopting lean construction in Egypt: Level of knowledge, application, and benefits. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2022, 13, 101551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Li, S.; Fang, Y.; Wu, X. A systematic review of lean construction in Mainland China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 257, 120581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Abu Aisheh, Y.I.; Tayeh, B.A.; Alaloul, W.S.; Almalki, A. Health and safety improvement in construction projects: A lean construction approach. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2022, 28, 1981–1993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Morshidi, Z.; Othman, M.K.F.; Bohari, A.A.M.; Rais, S.L.A. Awareness and Adoption of Lean Construction Tools to Enhance Safety in Construction Projects. Int. J. Serv. Manag. Sustain. 2022, 7, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Musa, M.M.; Saleh, I.M.; Ibrahim, Y.; Dandajeh, M.A. Assessment of Awareness and Barriers to the Application of Lean Construction Techniques in Kano State, Nigeria. J. Constr. Bus. Manag. 2023, 6, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Kulkarni, P.; Dubey, S.; Yadav, P.; Wankhede, S.; Gaikwad, P.; Vishwakarma, S. Study of Lean Technique in Construction. Int. J. Res. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2023, 11, 7146–7154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Gunduz, M.; Fahmi Naser, A. Cost Based Value Stream Mapping as a Sustainable Construction Tool for Underground Pipeline Construction Projects. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Jang, J.-W.; Kim, Y.-W. Using the kanban for construction production and safety control. In Proceedings of the IGLC 15, East Lansing, MI, USA, 18–20 July 2007; pp. 519–528. [Google Scholar]
  62. Aravindh, M.D.; Nakkeeran, G.; Krishnaraj, L. Identification of the Lean Tools Used in the Tamil Nadu Construction Industry. In Recent Advances in Civil Engineering. ICC IDEA 2023; Reddy, K.R., Ravichandran, P.T., Ayothiraman, R., Joseph, A., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering; Springer: Singapore, 2024; Volume 398, pp. 583–584. [Google Scholar]
  63. Donthu, N.; Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, D.; Pandey, N.; Lim, W.M. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 133, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Ellegaard, O.; Wallin, J.A. The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? Scientometrics 2015, 105, 1809–1831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Nobanee, H.; Al Hamadi, F.Y.; Abdulaziz, F.A.; Abukarsh, L.S.; Alqahtani, A.F.; AlSubaey, S.K.; Alqahtani, S.M.; Almansoori, H.A. A Bibliometric Analysis of Sustainability and Risk Management. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Optimal Configuration Research of Plant Landscapes under Combined Horizontal and Vertical Curves on Mountainous Roads
Previous
A Fault Diagnosis Method for a Missile Air Data System Based on Unscented Kalman Filter and Inception V3 Methods
Next