Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 32299
The Appraisal of Construction Sites Productivity: In Kendall’s Concordance

Authors: Abdulkadir Abu Lawal


For the dearth of reliable cardinal numerical data, the linked phenomena in productivity indices such as operational costs and company turnovers, etc. could not be investigated. This would not give us insight to the root of productivity problems at unique sites. So, ordinal ranking by professionals who were most directly involved with construction sites was applied for Kendall’s concordance. Responses gathered from independent architects, builders/engineers, and quantity surveyors were herein analyzed. They were responses based on factors that affect sites productivity, and these factors were categorized as head office factors, resource management effectiveness factors, motivational factors, and training/skill development factors. It was found that productivity is low and has to be improved in order to facilitate Nigerian efforts in bridging its infrastructure deficit. The significance of this work is underlined with the Kendall’s coefficient of concordance of 0.78, while remedial measures must be emphasized to stimulate better productivity. Further detailed study can be undertaken by using Fuzzy logic analysis on wider Delphi survey.

Keywords: Factors, Kendall’s coefficient of concordance, magnitude of agreement, percentage magnitude of dichotomy, ranking variables.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 858


[1] ILO, International Labour Organization, Practical Hand Book, 1987.
[2] J. Prokopenko ‘Production Management Hand Book, 1987, pp. 312.
[3] A. A. Okwa, ‘Improving Productivity in the Nigerian Construction Industry, a Management Approach, MSc. Thesis 1981, Department of Building, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
[4] G. Winch, ‘Bench Marking on Site Productivity in France and the UK, a Caliber Approach. Construction Management and Economics, 19: 577-590 (2001).
[5] B. Carr, ‘Bench Marking On-site Productivity in France and the UK, Calibre Approach. Construction Management and Economics, 19: 577-590, (2001).
[6] E.R. Levitt, ‘Defining and Measuring Productivity in Construction. Proceeding of the Spring Conference of the American Society of Engineers, (4), 1982.
[7] R. W. Fense, ‘An Analysis of the Meaning of Productivity, Productivity Measurement Review (9), 1985
[8] M. Kendall, “The Problem of M Rankings”, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 10(3); 275-287, (1939).