ABSTRACT

This study explored the causes, effects, and solutions to material delivery
delays, with the ultimate goal of increasing construction productivity. The study,
which used a qualitative method and distributed the survey questionnaires ran
from March 24 to March 27, included 30 respondents, 15 engineers, and 15
foremen from NCR. The respondents categorically agreed that the factors causing
delayed material delivery (2.81), the consequences of delayed material delivery
in construction sites (2.94), and the solutions to delayed material delivery (3.31)
were significant. The study discovered no significant differences in how foremen
and engineers evaluated solutions to delayed material delivery on construction
sites. Future researchers are encouraged to explore how future technology can
handle material distribution issues. This could involve investigating the potential of
Building Information Modeling (BIM) for logistics optimization.

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Successful building projects require timely material delivery. However,
delays remain a recurrent issue In the Philippines. This research investigates the
factors that affect the delayed material delivery in construction sites perceived
by the foremen and engineers of NCR.
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
The Philippines faces unique obstacles due to its geographical location,
infrastructure limitations, and domestic supply chain complexities. The recent
construction boom has further strained resources, leading to potential delays. This
study focuses on the Philippine context to identify targeted solutions that address
these specific challenges. While some delays are inevitable, proactive planning
and communication can significantly reduce their frequency and impact. Key
strategies include thorough preparation and realistic scheduling, partnering with
reliable and transparent suppliers, fostering open communication, and
implementing robust crisis plans. By prioritizing preventative measures, project
managers can position themselves to more effectively navigate unavoidable
delays when they occur. (THX Ltd., 2023)
Delayed material delivery is a persistent thorn in the side of construction
projects in the Philippines, derailing meticulously planned schedules and creating
a cascading effect of delays in subsequent phases, potentially impacting the
entire project timeline. This disruption can have significant ramifications, not only
extending the project's completion date but also straining its budget and
potentially damaging the reputation of those involved. As evidenced by the
ongoing "Great Supply Disruption" highlighted by Robinson (2024), building
material shortages and supply chain issues continue to plague the industry well
into 2022, pushing back project timelines and raising construction costs.
Recognizing the intricacies of this challenge within the Philippine context is crucial
to pave the way for further investigation and the potential for smoother project
execution.
Delving into the specific factors that cause material delivery delays in the
1
Philippines, It dissects the root causes behind these delays, explores their
cascading effects on various stakeholders, and ultimately proposes practical
solutions to streamline project execution and elevate industry efficiency. By
offering a clear understanding of this prevalent challenge, the study equips
industry professionals with the knowledge and tools necessary to ensure smoother
project lifecycles and a more robust construction sector. Notably, Mohammed A.
(2019) emphasizes the importance of managing
material delivery as a key contractor risk event. Effective management strategies
include early supplier engagement and proactive communication, ensuring
smoother project execution and mitigating the negative impacts of delays on
both timelines and budgets.
This research on factors that affect the delayed material delivery in
construction sites perceived by the foremen and engineers of NCR has the
potential to significantly improve project efficiency and contribute to a more
robust construction sector in the country.

RELATED READING
The construction industry is strongly dependent on subcontractors and material
suppliers. Costs for purchasing materials and services represent 75% of the
turnover for Sweden’s three largest construction companies (Dubois & Gadde,
2000), and purchases of material correspond to at least 40% of the contract sum
in a construction project (Boverket, 2005). Although material suppliers have a
great impact on costs, quality, and time in construction projects, there are few
studies investigating how suppliers' performance affects these parameters.
Hadikusumu et al. (2005) state that material delivery deviations, such as delayed
deliveries, incorrect quantity, and quality defects, are common in the
construction industry, but measurement of material delivery deviations is a
neglected area in construction, both by contractors and by construction
management researchers.

Other industries, such as the automotive industry, have daily inspections

and measurements of incoming goods and suppliers’ performance (Bengtsson &
Gustad, 2008). These manufacturing companies believe that their success to a
great extent is dependent on suppliers’
performances. Hence, by supporting suppliers to improve their processes, the
manufacturing companies believe they will cut costs as well.

Effects on delivery performance after implementation of supplier

development activities, such as continuous feedback on delivery performance
to suppliers and formal evaluations of suppliers, have been studied by Krause
(1997). Krause (1997) investigated the impact and benefits of supplier
development in various types of organizations in the US and revealed that the
suppliers’ performance increased after supplier development activities had been
implemented. Organizations with a supplier development focus experienced
fewer quality deviations, increased on-time deliveries, decreased quantity
2
deviations, and reduced cycle times.

Supplier development studies in construction are rare; however, supplier-

contractor relations in the Swedish construction industry have recently been
studied by Frödell (2009). Frödell found that many constraints have to be
overcome before efficient supplier-contractor relations can be developed,
implemented, and maintained. Many of the constraints are related to the
contractor’s organizational structure and behavior. Individual ways of working
and project focus instead of focusing on the organization’s best when making
decisions are addressed as organizational constraints in
Frödell’s paper. Another identified constraint is the contractor’s long- term/short-
term perspective and Frödell (2009) questions the contractor’s willingness to
develop long-term relationships with suppliers when measurements and
incentives systems encourage reduction of prices each year. Frödell states that
the organization’s measures and incentive systems rather drive the organization
to a short-term perspective regarding supplier relations.

Moreover, the Swedish construction industry has during the last decade
been highly criticized, by both government and construction researchers, for
being inefficient, and associated with low quality and high costs (Josephson &
Saukkoriipi, 2005; Byggkommissionen, 2002). The criticisms towards the industry in
combination with the increasing competition on the market have made Swedish
construction companies realize that productivity improvements and decreased
costs are needed. Focus on purchases has been one of the strategies to cut costs
and many of the major construction companies have today a centralized
purchase department (Gunnerbeck & Hassel, 2004). A centralized purchasing
department allows purchasing greater order quantities and the companies can
thereby cut costs when signing framework agreements with material suppliers.
Another consequence of a centralized purchasing organization is that
supplier
relationships are moved from the construction site to the central department. Van
Weele (2005) argues that purchases affect all business areas in a company and
it is therefore important that all business areas can influence the purchases, so the
outcome becomes optimal for the whole company. To reach the best effects of
a centralized purchasing organization the company needs a way of working that
supports feedback between the construction site, the purchasing department,
and the suppliers (Gadde & Håkansson, 1998). To know if the outcome is optimal,
suppliers’ performance has to be measured. As the old axiom says, “You cannot
improve what you do not measure”.
REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES
Foreign Related Studies
The construction industry is one of the biggest dollar-generating segments of the economy in
many countries in the world. It varies from houses to highways, schools, hospitals, plants, and
many other constructions. It pushes many other related industries, such as concrete, lumber,
3
steel, paint, furniture, mining, paving, and shipping among other industries. However, the
construction industry is complicated and associated with high risks, and many factors
influence the output of construction projects. Enshassi et al. (2003) stated that “the increasing
complexity of infrastructure projects and the environment within which they are constructed
place greater demand on construction managers to deliver projects on time, within the
planned budget and with high quality.” One of the main problems in construction projects is
time overrun. It may be expressed as a “percent difference between the actual completion
time and the estimated completion time, agreed by and between the client and the
contractor during the signing of the contract” (Mahamid, 2017). Ameh et al. (2010) indicated
that the history of the construction industry is full of projects that were completed with critical
delay. For instance, Omoregie and Radford (2006) found that the 12 average time overrun in
Nigerian construction projects is 100%. Assaf and AlHejji (2006) concluded that 70% of Saudi
Arabian construction projects were completed with critical time overruns. In UAE, Faridi and
El‐Sayegh (2006) revealed that 50% of construction projects were completed with schedule
delays. Mahamid et al. (2012) found that about 100% of highway construction projects in
Palestine were completed with time overruns. Mahamid et al. (2012) concluded that time
overrun has negative effects on construction projects in terms of cost increase, conflicts,
disputes, quality problems, and mistrust between parties. Productivity is simply defined as a
ratio between an output value and an input value used to produce the output. It has its
proven importance as a critical factor for project success. Mahamid (2018) linked labor
productivity with a cost overrun; he concluded a strong relationship between them. Mahamid
(2020) found a high correlation between labor productivity and rework in building projects.
Thus labor productivity plays a critical role in the financial success of a project (Liu and Ballard,
2008). However, some previous studies found that construction productivity variations are one
of the most daunting problems faced by the construction industry, especially those in
developing countries and it is one of the main factors affecting cost and time overrun
(Mahamid et al., 2013; Liu and Ballard, 2008). Literature review 13 indicates that very few
studies have investigated the relationship between labor productivity and time overrun in
building projects. This study addresses the problems of labor productivity and time overrun in
Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, it investigates the relationship between construction productivity
and delays in construction projects. This paper aims at identifying factors affecting labor
productivity in construction projects, identifying factors affecting delay, and establishing the
relationship between delay and labor productivity.
Local Related Studies
The construction industry significantly contributes to the growth of the Philippine gross
domestic product (GDP). As per the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), the Philippines' gross
domestic product (GDP) increased by 11.8% in the second quarter of 2021. Construction had
the highest quarterly growth rate of 25.7%, followed by manufacturing at 22.3%. Other industry
sectors that experienced growth included electricity, stream, water, waste management
(9.8%), mining, and quarrying (0.8%). Similarly, the construction industry contributed 69.6% of
the country's total capital investments or gross capital formation (GCF). Construction
accounts for 16.6% of GDP in terms of expenditure. Despite 14 the pandemic, the construction
industry came in second with 1.7% points as one of the top contributors to GDP growth in Q2
2021, trailing only manufacturing (3.9%) and wholesale and retail trade (1.0%). Construction
delays could be defined as time overruns either beyond the completion date specified in a
4
contract or beyond the date agreed upon by the parties for project delivery. It is a project
running behind schedule and is a common issue in construction projects. In some cases,
delays result in higher overhead costs for the contractor due to more extended work periods,
higher material costs due to inflation, and labor costs increase. On-time project completion
is a sign of efficiency, but the construction process is rife with variables and unpredictable
factors rooted in many different areas. These sources include but are not limited to the parties'
performance, the availability of resources, the environment, the involvement of other parties,
and contractual arrangements. Nevertheless, it is unusual for a project to be finished in the
allotted quantity of time. Despite economic growth, construction is experiencing project
delays and unexpected costs. A project is delayed when it fails to meet its deadlines or
milestones. Several factors, including poor planning, communication, and a lack of resources,
can cause delays. Project delays impact both the 15 timeline and the quality of your project.
Unforeseen roadblocks can lead to costly changes in scope or resources, affecting the final
product or deliverable. As a result, being proactive in dealing with project delays and
managing stakeholder expectations is critical. A few projects in Cebu City are experiencing
delays; one is the Cebu City Medical Center Phase 2 project in the public sector. In its report
from 2021, the Commission on Audit outlines several inferences regarding the finances and
financial transactions of the Cebu City Government, including the delays in the P299 million
project. According to COA's audit report, delays in decision-making, the use of unreasonable
time extensions, and problems with calculating contract time have denied the constituents
of the much-needed facility, particularly during this period of the health crisis. Project delays
are common in the construction industry and significantly impact their success. Construction
delays are the result of numerous factors. This study aims to identify and analyze construction
project delay factors using the relative importance method. The pandemic is causing
previously unheard-of construction project delays, disruptions, and uncertainty. Travel
restrictions, social exclusion, and quarantines delay project completion and drive up costs by
disrupting supply chains, contractor 16 workforces, and government personnel's availability
for project inspections. This article highlights steps developers and owners dealing with
projects impacted by COVID-19 should take to mitigate the project impacts and offers
advice to them. Furthermore, the impact of COVID-19 on construction projects varies across
all regions and countries. Almost all construction must stop, per the directive of the Office of
the President and the Department of Health.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
According to Bueno (2022). In construction projects, time is crucial to
meeting customer expectations, delivering services, and avoiding additional
expenditures, contract breaches, and replacements or turnovers. Delays in
construction projects can have a wide range of consequences, depending on
the sector. Contractors in the Philippine construction industry must pay liquidated
damages and indemnification following the Uniform General Conditions of
Contract for Private Construction, often known as CIAP Document 102.
Presidential Decrees Nos. 1594 and 1870 can have an impact on government
projects since they allow the government to take over administration or award the
project to another competent contractor. Presidential Decree No. 1594
empowers the government to take over a project if the contractor abandons
contract work, delays prosecution work, is insolvent, distributes assets to creditors,
5
assigns work without government approval, or violates contract terms. (Bueno,
2022).

According to Larrson & Darvik (2010). The most common reason for material
delivery deviations was communication failure and poor communication
between construction sites, the purchasing department, and suppliers was
observed. Furthermore, delivery deviations in one of the projects caused
additional costs corresponding to 10.1% of the invoiced sum for the measured
material but the figure is probably higher since ‘hidden’ costs were not
considered. The study also shows that delivery deviations are seldom reported,
there are no economic consequences for suppliers when not performing
according to the contract, information from suppliers about delivery changes is
often poor, and total costs when procuring suppliers are seldom considered.
Delivery deviations have for a long time been accepted by contractors, but the
result of this study should address a changed attitude towards suppliers’
performance. Conclusively, companies who start focusing on delivery deviations
can gain many benefits, in terms of increased performance and decreased costs.
(Larrson & Darvik 2010)

According to Rahman et al. (2017). Shortage and delay in materials supply

are argued to be some of the most important factors that lead to delays in
construction project delivery globally. However, the relevant underlying reasons
vary from country to country. (Rahman et al. 2017)

This research delves into the theoretical underpinnings of material delivery

delays within construction projects. It identifies and analyzes a range of variables
that contribute to these delays, along with their subsequent effects on
construction site productivity. Through this examination, the research seeks to
establish a more holistic understanding of the impact that delayed material
deliveries have on overall project efficie

6
RESEARCH PARADIGM

Figure 1. Research Paradigm

7
 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
This conceptual framework outlines the research project to be conducted
by the authors. It aims to provide valuable insights for future researchers and the
public.
Figure 1 presents the research paradigm. The study begins with the
researchers' objective of identifying the factors that affect the delayed material
delivery in NCR construction sites. To achieve this, data will be collected from
engineers and foremen working on these sites.
The second phase involves administering a survey questionnaire to identify
these factors. This process will gather information through survey questions and
potentially incorporate respondent testimonies.
The research ultimately aims to determine the factors causing delayed
material deliveries, their effects, and potential strategies to prevent them.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

This research aims to understand the causes, effects, and potential solutions
for the factors that affect the delayed material delivery in construction sites
perceived by the foremen and engineers in NCR. Moreover, this sought to answer
the following questions:
1. Profile of the Respondents
a. Age;
b. Gender; and
c. Position in Construction Site
2. What are the factors that cause delayed material delivery in
construction sites?
3. What are the factors affected by the delayed material delivery in
construction sites?
4. What are the ways to avoid delayed material delivery in
construction sites?
5. Is there a significant difference in the evaluation of engineers and
foremen on the factors that affect the delayed material delivery in
construction sites?
6. How may findings be utilized?

HYPOTHESES
Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in the evaluation of
engineers and foremen on the factors affecting delayed material delivery in
construction sites.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This investigation seeks to identify the root causes of material delivery delays
and their subsequent impact on construction projects. The findings of this study are
anticipated to be of significant value for the following:
Students. This research will equip them with the knowledge to understand the
factors impacting construction sites. By gaining this awareness, they can become
8
more productive and informed young citizens.
Engineers or Future Engineers. This research's insights could equip engineers or
future engineers with valuable knowledge for handling material delivery delays on
construction sites. By mastering these strategies, they'll be better positioned to
achieve success throughout their careers.
Future Researchers. This research offers valuable data for future studies. It can be
used as a reference point to both explore new avenues of investigation and
validate existing findings related to construction site
material delays. Additionally, the study serves as a comprehensive resource,
providing researchers with essential background information on this topic.
For Foremen. This research equips them with actionable strategies to improve
on-site material management and keep projects on schedule.
SCOPE AND DELIMITATION

The research’s main objective is to analyze the factors that affect the
delayed material delivery in construction sites perceived by the foremen and
engineers in NCR.
The researchers used factors as the independent variable and delayed
material as the dependent variable, the study is limited only to NCR. The
researchers selected 30 individuals of different roles in construction such as 15
engineers and 15 foremen.
To quickly assess the factors affecting the delayed material delivery in
construction sites perceived by the foremen and engineers, the researchers
conducted their work from a construction site in National Capital Region.
The researchers use only certain research methods, probability sampling
such as surveys to gather data and not others.
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Engineer - This term refers to a person who designs, builds, or maintains engines,
machines, or public works.
Foreman - This term refers to a worker, especially a man, who supervises and
directs other workers.
Construction Site - This term refers to an area or piece of land where construction work
is taking place.
Delays - This term refers to time-related setbacks or interruptions that affect
progress.
Delivery - This term refers to the action of delivering letters, packages, or ordered
goods.
Disruption - This term refers to unforeseen or unplanned events that
interrupt the regular flow of activities.
Indemnification - This term refers to compensation for harm or loss.
Material - This term refers to a matter from which a thing is or can be made.
Shortage - This term refers to a state or situation in which something needed cannot
be obtained in sufficient amounts.

9
 CHAPTER 2
METHODOLOGY
This chapter outlines the methodological approach employed in this study.
It details the research design chosen, along with the rationale behind this
selection. Further, it describes the participant selection process, including the
target population and sampling techniques used. Additionally, the chapter
elaborates on the data collection instrument and the implemented procedures.
Finally, the methods utilized for data analysis are discussed.
RESEARCH DESIGN
The research design serves as the blueprint for this research. It outlines the
overall strategy to explore the factors that affect the delayed material delivery in
construction sites perceived by the foremen and engineers of NCR. This
framework will guide the study towards effectively answering the central research
question.
To achieve this, the research employed a two-pronged approach. First, a literature
review and survey questionnaires helped identify relevant variables for
evaluation. This stage also informed the research's conceptual framework and
research objectives. Second, quanitative data was gathered through surveys
administered to respondents.
RESPONDENTS OF THE STUDY

The questionnaire was administered to a balanced sample of 30

respondents in NCR’s construction sites. This included face-to-face surveys and
online surveys distributed through Google Forms. The Interpretation of Data utilized
diverse analytical methods to extract meaningful insights. To ensure a
representative sample, the questionnaires were purposefully divided, with 15
distributed to foremen and 15 to engineers.
DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE
The researchers employed survey questionnaires to gather data on the
factors that affect the delayed material delivery in construction sites perceived
by the foremen and engineers. To achieve this, they secured consent from each
project manager to survey their staff. Following approvals, the researchers directly
administered the questionnaires or distributed them electronically via Google
Forms during convenient times for the respondents. The respondents were
allocated a minimum of 10 minutes to complete the questionnaires, ensuring they
had ample time to thoughtfully consider their responses. To further encourage
thoroughness and honest participation, the researchers emphasized that all data
would be anonymized and protected.
Upon completion of the questionnaires, the researchers meticulously
compiled and analyzed the resulting data. This comprehensive data set served
as the foundation for subsequent analysis and interpretation.

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
The researchers prepared the research instrument, which includes survey
questionnaires and participant surveys for gathering qualitative data. They were
10
composed of two parts - profile of the respondents, and disruptions in material
delivery: causes, effects, and strategies. The Likert four-point scale was used in the
questionnaire: (1 - Strongly Disagree, 2 - Disagree, 3 - Agree, 4 - Strongly Agree)
Likert - Scale
Degree of the Agreement of Respondents
Scale Interpretation Range Verbal

4 3.51-4.00 Strongly Agree

3 2.51-3.50 Agree

2 1.51-2.50 Disagree

1 1.00-1.50 Strongly Disagree

These instruments are designed to collect specific information from

participants in standardized foundations and develop research objectives.
Second, qualitative data was gathered using survey questionnaires and
participant surveys.
STATISTICAL TREATMENT DATA
The data collected was categorized, counted, and organized into tables,
following specific statistical methods.
Frequency and Percentage
The respondents were categorized based on attributes like age, gender,
and position in the construction industry using frequency and percentage. To
identify the ratio of participants who responded in a certain manner in various
sections of the survey, the researchers employed a specific formula
Formula:

Where:
P= Percentage
F= Frequency
N= Numeral of respondents Weighted
Mean
The researchers used the Weighted Mean to calculate the average
responses from various options in the second and third sections of the
questionnaire. This was done to analyze the data and gauge the level of
agreement among the respondents.
11
Formula:

Where:

= Weighted Mean
= the sum of all products of f and x, f being the frequency of
each weight and x as the weight of each operation. n=
total number of respondents
Ranking
In the study, the researchers used a ranking method to compare the
significance of the items evaluated. This method was used after the first part of the
questionnaire.
Pearson r Correlation
The Pearson r Correlation was to identify any significant connection between the
solutions proposed by engineers and foreman, and the elements contributing
to the factors that affect the delayed material delivery in construction sites. This
statistical method is commonly used to assess relationships between closely
related variables. Both variables must be normally distributed for the Pearson r
Correlation to be computed. Specific formula variables are used to calculate
the Pearson r Correlation.

Where:
r= Pearson r Correlation Coefficient n=
number of values in each data

= sum of the products of paired scores

= sum of y scores
= sum squared x scores
Interpretation for Pearson r Correlation
If the value is 0.05, the hypothesis is rejected; otherwise, the
hypothesis is accepted as it indicates there is a significant difference.

12
 CHAPTER 3
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents a comprehensive analysis of all data and respondent
responses. It then discusses the research findings in alignment with the study's
research questions.
TABLE 1.1 PARTICIPANTS’ PROFILES ACCORDING TO THEIR AGE
Age Group Frequency Percentage (%)

23-30 16 53.34

31-40 4 13.33

41-50 4 13.33

51-60 6 20

TOTAL: 30 100

Table 1.1 displays the respondents' age distribution in terms of frequency and
percentage. Most respondents were between 23 and 30 years old, with a frequency
of sixteen (16) and a percentage of 53.34%. The remaining respondents were
between the ages of 31 and 40, with a frequency of four (4) and a percentage of
13.33%. Four (4) respondents had a percentage of 13.33% and were between the
ages of 41 and 50, and six
(6) had a percentage of 20% and were between 50 and 60.
TABLE 1.2 PARTICIPANTS’ PROFILES ACCORDING TO THEIR
GENDER

Gender Frequency Percentage (%)

Male 27 90

Female 3 10

TOTAL: 30 100

Table 1.2 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of respondents by

gender. Twenty-seven males (90%) comprised the majority of the sample, while three
females made up the remaining 10%.
TABLE 1.3 PARTICIPANTS’ PROFILES ACCORDING TO THEIR
POSITION IN THE CONSTRUCTION SITE

Position Frequency Percentage (%)

Foreman 15 50

13
 Engineer 15 50

TOTAL: 30 100

The frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents by their position are
shown in Table 1.3. Fifteen (15) Foremen comprised the majority of the sample (50%),
while fifteen (15) Engineers made up the remaining 50%. In total, we have thirty
respondents, accounting for 100%.
TABLE 2.1 FACTORS THAT CAUSE DELAYED MATERIAL DELIVERY IN CONSTRUCTION SITES
SD D A SA
Factors that
cause delayed Weighted Verbal Ranking
material 1 2 3 4 Mean Interpretation
delivery in
construction
sites Frequency

Suppliers often
run out of 1 8 12 9 2.97 AGREE 2.33
materials

Traffic jams and 0 7 18 5 2.93 AGREE 5

port delays

Ordering
materials too 3 5 15 7 2.87 AGREE 6.33
late

Last-minute
project changes 2 7 11 10 2.97 AGREE 2.33

Transporting
materials
between 2 5 15 8 2.97 AGREE 2.33
islands takes
longer than
expected

Rainy season 3 9 13 5 2.67 AGREE 6.33

14
 Getting
government 2 10 14 4 2.67 AGREE 6.33
permits takes
too long

Holidays or 2 16 9 3 2.43 DISAGREE 10

festivals

Poor
communication
between the 3 12 8 7 2.63 AGREE 9
contractor and
supplier

Damaged
materials during 0 8 14 8 3.00 AGREE 1
delivery require
replacements

OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN: 2.81 AGREE

Table 2.1 lists the factors that cause delayed material delivery on construction sites.
The factors: suppliers often running out of materials, traffic jams and port delays,
ordering materials too late, last-minute project changes, transporting materials
between islands taking longer than expected, rainy season, getting government
permits takes too long, holidays or festivals, poor communication between the
contractor and supplier, and damaged materials during delivery that require
replacements were linked to responses from respondents who agreed with the
weighted means of (3.00), (2.97), (2.93), (2.87), (2.67), (2.63), and (2.43). According to
the weighted average, damaged materials during delivery require replacements is
the leading factor that causes delayed material delivery in construction sites,
while holidays or festivals are the least likely factor to cause delayed material
delivery in construction.
Lastly, the factors that cause delayed material delivery at construction sites
yielded an overall weighted mean of 2.81, with a verbal interpretation of agree.
TABLE 2.2 CONSEQUENCES OR EFFECTS OF THE DELAYED MATERIAL DELIVERY IN
CONSTRUCTION SITES

SD D A SA
Consequences
or effects of Weighted Verbal Ranking
delayed 1 2 2 4 Mean Interpretation
material
15
 delivery in
construction Frequency
sites

Cost Overruns 1 6 19 4 2.87 AGREE 7

Construction
Schedule Delays 1 4 12 13 3.23 AGREE 1

Labor
Inefficiency 1 5 20 4 2.9 AGREE 6

Disrupted
Subcontractor 1 2 18 9 3.17 AGREE 2.5
Schedules

Quality Defects 1 14 10 5 2.63 AGREE 9

Project Strain 1 6 12 11 3.10 AGREE 4

Safety Risks 7 9 7 7 2.47 DISAGREE 10

Contractor’s
Reputational 2 7 15 6 2.83 AGREE 8
Damage

Client
Dissatisfaction 1 2 18 9 3.17 AGREE 2.5

Equipment Idle
Time and 2 5 12 11 3.07 AGREE 5
Increased
Rental Fees

OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN: 2.94 AGREE

Table 2.2 lists the consequences or effects of delayed material delivery in construction
sites. The consequences or effects: Cost Overruns, Construction Schedule Delays,

16
Labor Inefficiency, Disrupted Subcontractor Schedules, Quality Defects, Project
Strain, Safety Risks, Contractor Reputational Damage, Client Dissatisfaction,
Equipment Idle Time, and Increased Rental Fees were linked to responses from
respondents who agreed with the weighted means of (3.23), (3.17), (3.10), (3.07), (2.9),
(2.87), (2.83), (2.63), and (2.47). According to the weighted average, Construction
Schedule Delays are the leading consequences or effects of delayed material
delivery in construction sites, while Safety Risks are the least likely consequences or
effects to cause delayed material delivery in construction.
Lastly, the consequences or effects of delayed material delivery at
construction sites yielded an overall weighted mean of 2.94, with a verbal
interpretation of agree.
TABLE 2.3 SOLUTIONS TO THE DELAYED MATERIAL DELIVERY IN CONSTRUCTION SITES

SD D A SA
Solutions to the
delayed Weighted Verbal Ranking
material 1 2 2 4 Mean Interpretation
delivery in
construction
sites Frequency

Implementing
supplier
development
activities such
as continuous 0 1 18 11 3.33 AGREE 5
feedback on
delivery
performance
and formal
evaluations of
suppliers.

Provide
suppliers with
realistic
deadlines for

17
survey materials,
allowing
sufficient time 1 0 16 13 3.37 AGREE 3.5
for production,
packaging, and
delivery,
avoiding overly
tight deadlines
that may
increase delays.

Optimizing
logistics
processes, such
as transportation
and
warehousing, to 1 2 12 15 3.37 AGREE 3.5
ensure timely
and efficient
materials
delivery to
construction
sites.

Implement a
system to
monitor material
delivery
progress,
including
supplier
updates, 1 0 12 17 3.5 AGREE 1
shipment
tracking to
identify
potential delays

18
 early and take
proactive
measures.

Diversify the
supplier base to
reduce reliance
on a single
source and 0 2 19 9 3.23 AGREE 7.5
increase options
in case of
material
shortages.

Plan material
deliveries and
construction
activities
around known 1 4 14 11 3.17 AGREE 10
holidays and
festivals to
avoid
disruptions.

Implement
stricter lead
time
requirements
for material
orders based 1 2 16 11 3.23 AGREE 7.5
on historical
data and
potential
delays.

Implementing risk
management
techniques to
identify, assess,

19
 and mitigate 9
risks associated 1 1 19 9 3.20 AGREE
with delayed
material delivery,
such as
alternative
sourcing options
or buffer stock.

Conducting
thorough
project planning
to anticipate
material
requirements
and potential 1 1 13 15 3.40 AGREE 2
delays, allowing
for proactive
measures to be
taken to
mitigate risks.

Establish clear
communication
channels with
suppliers,
including 1 1 17 11 3.27 AGREE 6
dedicated
contact points
and regular
progress
updates.

OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN: 3.31 AGREE

Table 2.3 lists the solutions to the delayed material delivery at construction
sites. The solutions: Implementing supplier development

20
activities such as continuous feedback on delivery performance and formal evaluations of
suppliers, Providing suppliers with realistic deadlines for survey materials, allowing sufficient
time for production, packaging, and delivery, avoiding overly tight deadlines that may
increase delays, Optimizing logistics processes, such as transportation and warehousing, to
ensure timely and efficient materials delivery to construction sites, Implement a system to
monitor material delivery progress, including supplier updates to identify potential delays early
and take proactive measures, Diversify the supplier base to reduce reliance on a single source
and increase options in case of material shortages, Plan material deliveries and construction
activities around known holidays and festivals to avoid disruptions, Implement stricter lead
time requirements for material orders based on historical data and potential delays,
Implementing risk management techniques to identify, assess, and mitigate risks associated
with delayed material delivery, such as alternative sourcing options or buffer stock,
Conducting thorough project planning to anticipate material requirements and potential
delays, allowing for proactive measures to be taken to mitigate risks, and establish clear
communication channels with suppliers, including dedicated contact points and regular
progress updates were linked to responses from respondents who agreed with the weighted
means of (3.5), (3.4), (3.37), (3.33), (3.27), (3.23), (3.2), and (3.17). According to the
weighted average, implementing a system to monitor material delivery progress, including
supplier updates to identify potential delays early and take proactive measures is the leading
solution to delayed material delivery in construction sites, while planning material deliveries
and construction activities around known holidays and festivals to avoid disruptions is the least
likely solution to delayed material delivery in construction.
Lastly, the solutions to the delayed material delivery in construction sites
yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.31, with a verbal interpretation of agree.
TABLE 2.4 SOLUTIONS TO THE DELAYED MATERIAL DELIVERY IN CONSTRUCTION SITES
ACCORDING TO FOREMEN

SD D A SA
Solutions to the

delayed 1 2 2 4
material Weighted Verbal Ranking
delivery in Mean Interpretation
construction Frequency
sites

21
 Implementing
supplier
development
activities such
as continuous 0 1 10 4 3.20 AGREE 1.33
feedback on
delivery
performance
and formal
evaluations of
suppliers.

Provide
suppliers with
realistic
deadlines for
survey materials,
allowing
sufficient time 1 0 11 3 3.07 AGREE 5
for production,
packaging, and
delivery, and
avoiding overly
tight deadlines
that may
increase delays.

Optimizing
logistics
processes,
such as

22
 transportation
and
warehousing, to 1 0 9 5 3.20 AGREE 1.33
ensure timely
and efficient
materials
delivery to
construction
sites.

Implement a
system to
monitor material
delivery
progress,
including
supplier update 1 0 7 7 2.87 AGREE 9.5
to identify
potential delays
early and take
proactive
measures.

Diversify the
supplier base to
reduce reliance
on a single
source and 0 1 11 3 3.13 AGREE 4
increase options
in case of
material
shortages.

Plan material
deliveries and
construction
activities
around known 1 4 6 4 2.87 AGREE 9.5
holidays and

23
 festivals to
avoid
disruptions.

Implement
stricter lead
time
requirements
for material
orders based 1 1 10 3 3.00 AGREE 6.5
on historical
data and
potential
delays.

Implementing risk
management
techniques to
identify, assess,
and mitigate
risks associated
with delayed 1 1 11 2 2.93 AGREE 8
material delivery,
such as
alternative
sourcing options
or buffer stock.

Conducting
thorough
project planning
to anticipate
material
requirements
and potential 1 1 7 6 3.20 AGREE 1.33
delays, allowing
for proactive
measures to be

24
 taken to
mitigate risks.

Establish clear
communication
channels with
suppliers,
including
dedicated 1 1 10 3 3.00 AGREE 6.5
contact points
and regular
progress
updates.

OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN: 3.05 AGREE

Table 2.4 lists the solutions to the delayed material delivery at construction sites
according to foremen. The solutions: Implementing supplier development activities
such as continuous feedback on delivery performance and formal evaluations of
suppliers, providing suppliers with realistic deadlines for survey materials, allowing
sufficient time for production, packaging, and delivery, avoiding overly tight
deadlines that may increase delays, optimizing logistics processes, such as
transportation and warehousing, to ensure timely and efficient materials delivery to
construction sites, Implement a system to monitor material delivery progress,
including supplier updates to identify potential delays early and take proactive
measures, diversify the supplier base to reduce reliance on a single source and
increase options in case of material shortages, plan material deliveries and
construction activities around known holidays and festivals to avoid disruptions,
implement stricter lead time requirements for material orders based on historical
data and potential delays, implementing risk management techniques to identify,
assess, and mitigate risks associated with delayed material delivery, such as
alternative sourcing options or buffer stock, conducting thorough project planning
to anticipate material requirements and potential delays, allowing for proactive
measures to be taken to mitigate risks, and establish clear communication channels
with suppliers, including dedicated contact points and regular progress updates
were linked to responses from respondents who agreed with the weighted means of
(3.2), (3.13), (3.07), (3), (2.93), and (2.87). According to the weighted average,
implementing supplier development activities such as continuous feedback on
delivery performance and formal evaluations of suppliers, optimizing logistics
processes, such as transportation and warehousing, to ensure timely and efficient
materials delivery to construction sites, and conducting thorough project planning to
anticipate material requirements and potential delays, allowing for proactive
measures to be taken to mitigate risks is the leading solution to delayed material
25
delivery in construction sites according to engineers, while implementing a system to
monitor material delivery progress, including supplier updates to identify potential
delays early and take proactive measures and planning material deliveries and
construction activities around known holidays and festivals to avoid disruptions are
the least likely solutions to delayed material delivery in construction according to
foremen.
Lastly, the solutions to the delayed material delivery in construction sites
according to foremen yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.05, with a verbal
interpretation of the agreement.
TABLE 2.5 SOLUTIONS TO THE DELAYED MATERIAL DELIVERY IN CONSTRUCTION SITES
ACCORDING TO ENGINEERS

SD D A SA
Solutions to the
delayed Weighted Verbal Ranking
material 1 2 2 4 Mean Interpretation
delivery in
construction
sites Frequency

Implementing
supplier
development
activities such
as continuous
feedback on 0 0 7 8 3.00 AGREE 10
delivery

performance
and formal
evaluations of
suppliers.

26
 Provide
suppliers with
realistic
deadlines for
survey
materials,
allowing
sufficient time 0 0 5 10 3.67 STRONGLY 1.5
for production, AGREE
packaging,
and delivery,
and avoiding
overly tight
deadlines that
may increase
delays.
Optimizing
logistics
processes,
such as
transportation
and
warehousing, 0 2 3 10 3.53 STRONGLY 4.5
to ensure AGREE
timely and
efficient
materials
delivery to
construction
sites.
Implement a
system to
monitor
material

27
 delivery
progress,
including
supplier
updates to
identify 0 0 5 10 3.67 STRONGLY 1.5
potential AGREE
delays early
and take
proactive
measures.
performance
and formal
evaluations of
suppliers.

Provide
suppliers with
realistic
deadlines for
survey
materials,
allowing
sufficient time 0 0 5 10 3.67 STRONGLY 1.5
for production, AGREE
packaging,
and delivery,
and avoiding
overly tight
deadlines that
may increase
delays.
Optimizing
logistics
processes,
such as
transportation
and
warehousing, 0 2 3 10 3.53 STRONGLY 4.5
to ensure AGREE
timely and
efficient
materials
delivery to
construction
28
 sites.

Implement a
system to
monitor
material

delivery
progress,
including
supplier
updates to
identify 0 0 5 10 3.67 STRONGLY 1.5
potential AGREE
delays early
and take
proactive
measures.
Diversify the
supplier base
to reduce
reliance on a
single source 0 1 8 6 3.33 AGREE 9
and increase
options in case
of material
shortages.
Plan material
deliveries and
construction
activities
around known 0 0 8 7 3.47 AGREE 6.33
holidays and
festivals to
avoid
disruptions.
Implement
stricter lead
time
requirements
for material 0 1 6 8 3.47 AGREE 6.33
orders based
29
 on historical
data and
potential

delays.

Implementing
risk
management
techniques to
identify, assess,
and mitigate
risks 0 0 8 7 3.47 AGREE 6.33
associated
with delayed
material
delivery, such
as alternative
sourcing
options or
buffer stock.
Conducting
thorough
project
planning to
anticipate
material
requirements 0 0 6 9 3.60 STRONGLY 3
and potential AGREE
delays,
allowing for
proactive
measures to
be taken to
mitigate risks.
Establish clear
communicatio
n channels
with suppliers,
including 0 0 7 8 3.53 STRONGLY 4.5
dedicated AGREE
30
 contact points
and regular
progress
updates.

OVERALL WEIGHTED MEAN: 3.47 AGREE

Table 2.5 lists the solutions to the delayed material delivery at construction sites
according to engineers. The solutions: Implementing supplier development activities
such as continuous feedback on delivery performance and formal evaluations of
suppliers, providing suppliers with realistic deadlines for survey materials, allowing
sufficient time for production, packaging, and delivery, avoiding overly tight
deadlines that may increase delays, optimizing logistics processes, such as
transportation and warehousing, to ensure timely and efficient materials delivery to
construction sites, Implement a system to monitor material delivery progress,
including supplier updates to identify potential delays early and take proactive
measures, diversify the supplier base to reduce reliance on a single source and
increase options in case of material shortages, plan material deliveries and
construction activities around known holidays and festivals to avoid disruptions,
implement stricter lead time requirements for material orders based on historical
data and potential delays, implementing risk management techniques to identify,
assess, and mitigate risks associated with delayed material delivery, such as
alternative sourcing options or buffer stock, conducting thorough project planning
to anticipate material requirements and potential delays, allowing for proactive
measures to be taken to mitigate risks, and establish clear communication channels
with suppliers, including dedicated contact points and regular progress updates
were linked to responses from respondents who agreed with the weighted means of
(3.67), (3.6), (3.53), (3.47), (3.33) and (3). According to the weighted average,
provide suppliers with realistic deadlines for survey materials, allowing sufficient time
for production, packaging, and delivery, and avoiding overly tight deadlines that
may increase delays, and implement a system to monitor material delivery progress,
including supplier updates to identify potential delays early and take proactive
measures are the leading solution to delayed material delivery in construction sites
according to engineers while implementing supplier development activities such as
continuous feedback on delivery performance and formal evaluations of suppliers is
the least likely solution to delayed material delivery in construction according to
engineers.
Lastly, the solutions to the delayed material delivery in construction sites
according to engineers yielded an overall weighted mean of 3.47, with a verbal
interpretation of the agreement.
According to the weighted average, Construction Schedule Delays are the
leading consequences or effects of delayed material delivery in
construction sites, while Safety Risks are the least likely consequences or effects to
cause delayed material delivery in construction.
Lastly, the consequences or effects of delayed material delivery at construction
31
sites yielded an overall weighted mean of 2.94, with a verbal interpretation of
agree.
TABLE 3 SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FOREMEN AND ENGINEERS’ SOLUTIONS
TO THE FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE DELAYED MATERIAL DELIVERY IN CONSTRUCTION
SITES

Pearson Decision Remarks

Coefficient

FOREMEN AND
ENGINEERS’
SOLUTIONS TO THE
FACTOR THAT Accept No significant
AFFECT THE -0.37 H0 difference
DELAYED MATERIAL
DELIVERY IN
CONSTRUCTION
SITES

Note: if the p-value is less than the level of significance which is 0.05, reject
the null hypothesis, otherwise accept. Pearson coefficent values:
±0.77 - ±0.99 Very Strong; ±0.51 - ±0.75 Strong; ±0.26 - ±0.50 Moderate;

±0.11 - ±0.25 Weak; ±0.01 - ±0.10 Very Weak.

Therefore, table 3 shows that the Pearson coefficient is Moderate due to the
significant relationship in the evaluation of foremen and engineers.
CHAPTER 4

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A review of results indicated factors causing delayed material delivery in
construction sites, their consequences, and proposed viable solutions. The
research was conducted with a sample of 30 respondents, predominantly male
(90%), aged between 23 and 60. The respondents were evenly split between
fifteen (15) foremen and fifteen (15) engineers. Factors contributing to delayed
material delivery, including suppliers running out of materials, traffic jams, port
delays, late material ordering, last-minute project changes, inter-island
transportation delays, rainy season, lengthy government permit processes,
holidays or festivals, poor communication between the contractor and supplier,
and damaged materials requiring replacements. The most significant factor was
damaged materials during delivery, whereas holidays or festivals were the least
32
impactful. The overall weighted mean was 2.81, indicating agreement with these
factors proposed various solutions, including supplier development activities,
realistic deadlines for suppliers, logistics process optimization, a system to monitor
material delivery progress, supplier base diversification, planning around
holidays and festivals, stricter lead time requirements, risk management
techniques, thorough project planning, and clear communication channels with
suppliers. The most effective solution was implementing a system to monitor
material delivery progress while planning around holidays and festivals was
considered the least effective. The overall weighted mean was 3.31, indicating
agreement with these solutions. From the foremen's perspective, the leading
solutions included supplier development activities, logistics process optimization,
and thorough project planning. The least effective solutions were monitoring
material delivery progress and planning around holidays. The overall weighted
mean was 3.05, indicating agreement. Engineers considered providing realistic
deadlines to suppliers and monitoring material delivery progress as the most
effective solutions, with supplier development activities being the least effective.
The overall weighted mean was 3.47, indicating agreement. The Pearson
coefficient showed a moderate relationship in the evaluations of foremen and
engineers, indicating varying perspectives on the solutions to delayed material
delivery in construction sites.
CONCLUSION

In conclusion, delay analysis is multidimensional and critical for successful

construction projects. Delays are an unavoidable and common scenario in
construction caused by a variety of factors encountered throughout the
construction process, agreed by experts with construction expertise, such as
engineers and foremen still solvable and can be practiced to improve, which is
why it is included in the construction phase. To support this conclusion, numerous
studies have been conducted to manage, comprehend, identify additional
factors, and address this issue. Engineers and foremen were chosen as
respondents because they are best suited to discuss and define the causes,
consequences, and solutions to construction delays. From the findings gathered,
it is evident that this delay has a direct influence on project deadlines, budgets,
and overall efficiency. The delay in completing construction material surveys on-
site is a severe bottleneck that demands immediate attention and mitigation
solutions. Addressing this issue requires better stakeholder cooperation, improved
communication channels, and proactive initiatives to streamline material
procurement processes. Addressing these problems allows foremen and civil
engineers to effectively negotiate project complexities, maintain quality
standards, and assure successful project delivery.
RECOMMENDATION

Since implementing a system to monitor material delivery progress,

including supplier updatesis a leading solution for both engineers and foremen, a
construction site is recommended to prioritize a real-time material delivery
33
monitoring system. This system utilizes unique tracking identifiers and supplier
communication portals to transform construction site material management. By
integrating shipment tracking, proactive alerts for potential delays, and
communication tools, this system empowers construction teams to identify issues
early, collaborate with suppliers, and implement solutions like expedited shipping
or adjusted work sequencing. Ultimately, this approach keeps projects on
schedule and minimizes disruption caused by delayed deliveries.
Since engineers play a critical role in material deliveries on construction sites, it's
also recommended to provide suppliers with realistic deadlines for survey
materials. This allows sufficient time for production, packaging, and delivery,
avoiding overly tight deadlines that can create a domino effect of delays. By
factoring in buffer periods for unforeseen circumstances, engineers can ensure a
smoother material delivery process. This, in turn, minimizes disruptions to the
construction schedule, keeps workers productive, and ultimately, contributes to
a more cost-effective project.

Future researchers are encouraged to expand upon this study's foundation

by increasing the participant pool beyond 30 individuals. This will enhance the
generalizability of the findings to the broader construction industry in NCR.

Future researchers are also encouraged to incorporate the perspectives of

material suppliers within their respondent pool. By including the supplier viewpoint,
researchers can gain a more holistic perspective on the issue and identify potential
areas for improvement within the entire supply chain.

Future researchers are encouraged to move beyond recommendations

and test the effectiveness of proposed solutions in real- world construction
settings. This could involve collaborating with construction companies to pilot test
interventions like supplier development programs or real-time delivery monitoring
systems.
Future researchers are recommended to delve deeper into the root causes of
common delays. Understanding the underlying factors, such as inadequate
packaging leading to material damage or holiday periods disrupting specific
supply chain segments, will be critical.

Moreso, future researchers are also recommended to explore how

emerging technologies can address material delivery challenges. This could
involve investigating the potential of Building Information Modeling (BIM) for
logistics optimization. BIM allows for the creation of a virtual model of a
construction project, which could be used to simulate material flows, identify
potential bottlenecks, and optimize delivery routes.

34
35