Group of Construction Management EACEF-45

THE NEED for STANDARD PRODUCTION INFORMATION

of INDONESIAN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Reini D. Wirahadikusumah
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung
E-mail : wirahadi@si.itb.ac.id

ABSTRACT: The Indonesian Construction Industry has played an important role in the national
economy. In 2005, the industry’s direct contribution to the gross national product was about 6%,
and employed 7-8% of the country’s labor force. However, the industry is mostly populated by a
large number of small and medium sized firms, and is considered highly fragmented. The
fragmentation has been acknowledged as one of the major causes of performance-related problems
facing the industry. Different types of construction information are exchanged between the various
parties for the purpose of communicating design, construction and contractual matters. In
Indonesia, individual firms have developed their own systems of classifying and disseminating
construction information to facilitate this process. Because there is no standardised system of
sharing of such information, the complete idea originated from the owner, pass through the
designers and the contractors, is partially lost in the process of constructing the desired facilities.
Effective communication of high quality production information between designers and
constructors is therefore essential for the satisfactory realisation of construction projects. Such
standards of production information for construction works have been widely used in the U.S., the
U.K. (and Europe); while neighbouring countries have started to adapt these standards as the
recommended national systems. In the era of globalization, Indonesian construction industry needs
to catch up in developing such standard in order to be competitive. A pilot study was performed to
look into the possibility of developing a standard information for construction works. Developing
a new standard unique for Indonesian purposes is not reasonable, since in the future it will only
become a barrier for playing in the global arena. Thus, a general review of international standards,
particularly the widely used classification system developed by the Construction Specification
Institute (the MasterFormat), was followed by discussions with architects and contractors. The
case study resulted in a classification format for schedule of work which was agreed by designers
and contractors. The proposed format was exercised on a medium-rise building. While a wider
national study is required, the study concluded that a standard classification system should be
developed based on industry players’ widespread familiarity, as well as regional/ international
compatibility. The MasterFormat has a good potential for adoption with some adjustments in the
structure and the terminology.

KEYWORDS: standard, classification, construction, information, buildings

1. INTRODUCTION
The construction industry in general is highly fragmented and dominated by small businesses. It
involves numerous parties from different professions. The temporary nature and uniqueness of
construction projects is reflected in one-off locations, one-off designs solutions and one-off project
teams, which led to a very fragmented communication platform. This fragmentation results in
significant negative impacts (i.e., low productivity; cost and time overruns; disputes and litigations)
which have been acknowledged as the major causes of performance-related problems facing the
industry (Tucker et al., 2001).
Since the 1990s, in the U.K. and U.S, there have been national movements toward increasing the
productivity of construction industry and more thoroughly as “Rethinking Construction.” The reports
emphasized the need to eliminate adversarial attitudes and practices, and to develop effective team
working. Both recognized the importance of good project information, and a major part of the large
cost savings projected are expected to arise from more effective use of IT in the preparation and use of
project information. The reports are concerned with promoting increased efficiency in the building
process and taken together they clearly identify inadequate project information as a major cause of
inefficiency.

E-102 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum
Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-45

Different types of construction information are exchanged between the various parties for the purpose
of communicating design, construction and contractual matters. The consequences of the
fragmentation problem include the fragmentation of design, fabrication and construction data, with
data generated at one location cannot readily re-used downstream. Poor communication of design
intent and rationale often leads to unwarranted design changes, inadequate design specifications,
unnecessary liability claims, and increases in project time and cost. The fragmentation problem is
worsened by the fact that individual companies have developed their own means of classifying and
disseminating construction information to facilitate this process. In Indonesia, there is no standardized
system of classifying and sharing of such information in the industry, much of the exchanged data may
be lost along the way
The classification systems for the purposes of the construction industry has been developed in Europe
and North America since the 1970s, while the Swedish system, SfB, has been in existence for more
than 50 years. The importance of a standard classification system is reaffirmed by a UK report
(Building EDC, 1987) which was based on detailed on-site studies of construction projects. This report
examined factors affecting the quality of building and revealed that the largest single cause of quality
problems was inadequate project information.
Indonesia’s neighboring country Singapore, has started their efforts in developing such system in the
late 1990s by forming the Construction Industry IT Standards Technical Committee (CITC). The
national committee prepare the industry for the IT age of the 21st century. The committee has
developed the Standard Code of Practice for Classification of Construction Cost Information, which is
to ensure that construction cost information is structured and stored in a way that is consistent and
reliable within and between the different disciplines so as to reduce any duplication of work. They
have also proposed to the industry a Code of Practice for the Classification of Construction Resources
Information, which presents a uniform system for classifying information relating to construction
products, materials, services and machinery. The codes should provide a standardized format to
facilitate procurement activities in the construction industry. As construction projects use a broad
range of products and services, there is even greater need for a classification standard to ensure a
consistent and structured way of information exchange and storage (Goh and Chu, 2002).
Research has shown that many problems on site are caused by poor or missing production information.
Effective communication of high quality production information between designers and constructors is
therefore essential for the satisfactory realization of construction projects. The evidence shows that
improvements in the quality of production information reduce the incidence of site quality problems
and lead to significant savings in the cost of construction work. In many countries, construction sector
can contribute a significant portion of the GNP, around 6-9%. In 2005, construction contributed 6.35%
of Indonesia’s GNP. It is evident, therefore, that improvements in the efficiency of the construction
process should result in significant benefits for the Indonesian economy.

2. STANDARD CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION

Production (construction) information is the information prepared by designers, which is passed to a
construction team to enable a project to be constructed.” It is the means of communication between
designers and contractors, either in separate organizations or in the same organization. It is
independent of who employs the designers and which procurement route or form of contract is used.
Production (construction) information is communicated through drawings, specifications, and bills of
quantity or schedules of work. This information must be complete, accurate and coordinated, so that it
will be effective because no matter how good the design is, it will not be satisfactorily realised on site
otherwise. Poor production information causes delays, additional costs and poor quality, which in turn
give rise to disputes over who is responsible for the problems. Consequently, good production
information is of vital importance to the success of any project.
There are three most commonly known classification systems: the MasterFormat and Uniformat used
in North America and the European CI/SfB coding system. These systems have also been in adopted
in many other countries around the world.

Universitas Pelita Harapan, INDONESIA - September 26-27th, 2007 E-103

Group of Construction Management EACEF-45

MasterFormat, a product of Construction Specification Institute (CSI) and Construction Specifications

Canada, is a hierarchical system of numbers and titles for organizing construction information. It is the
organizational standard for specifications, the written instructions for construction, and other
information for most commercial and institutional building projects in the U.S. and Canada. It
provides a standard information filing-and-retrieval system that can be used for organizing information
in project manuals and specifications, cost accounts, and cost data; and for filing product information
and other technical data. Functioning as the "Dewey Decimal System" for organizing construction
information, MasterFormat is divided into divisions, and each division is composed of sections.
Since its introduction in 1963, the MasterFormat has been widely accepted as an industry standard in
the United States and Canada. It has been adopted by the Associated General Contractors (AGC), The
American Institute of Architects (AIA), the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), and
others in the United States and Canada in the form of a document entitled “Uniform System for
Building Specifications.” It has also been officially adopted for all construction works by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Navy (NAVFAC), the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), and by numerous other public and private agencies. It has been used since
1986 by the McGraw-Hill Information Systems Co. as the basis for the Sweet’s Catalog Files of
construction products; and it has also been used since 1987 by the R. S. Means Company for coding
their construction-cost data publications. In addition, the MasterFormat has also been used for coding
product literature, such as the CSI Spec-data product-information sheets, for organizing specifications
and construction bids, as in the CSI Manu-Spec system, and in numerous commercial cost-estimating
and cost-accounting computer systems (Ioannou and Liu, 1993).
The earlier and still widely used version of MasterFormat includes 16 divisions. Among the recent
trends in construction industry is the demand for constructing building with high-tech services (e.g.,
hospitals, entertainment facilities, etc.). According to CSI, data in such construction project manuals
about voice, data, and video networks has often been deficient, misplaced, or left out because of the
limited capacity of MasterFormat's 1995 edition. Its formatting structure does not have enough
locations for specifications in a construction project manual to address the tremendous growth in the
volume and complexity of information about such fast-advancing systems. Specifications writers have
tried to make do by placing data in project manuals where they could, using their individual judgment
about locations, if they could be found at all. Many people have added non-standard slots for missing
information, without reference to the MasterFormat standard. To diminish these problems, the 2004
version has more divisions (i.e., 50) and sections to provide better specifications about modern
buildings' data, communications, and automation systems.
While MasterFormat has been considered most suitable for buildings in North America and many
other countries; for non-building projects (large and complex civil engineering projects), engineers
often have to develop a unique work breakdown structure, or other standard, for classification system
in preparing the drawings, specifications, and bill of quantity (Peurifoy and Oberlander, 2002). To
achieve further applicability within the construction industry, the 2004 edition of MasterFormat offers
a solution for this problem by adding divisions and sections for standardizing specifications for heavy
civil construction, such as dams and bridges, and process engineering construction projects, such as
power plants and refineries.
The “Uniformat,” issued by General Services Administration (GSA), uses a functional breakdown of a
building into subsystems. It includes 12 major divisions that are broken down into sublevels. Unlike
the MasterFormat, it is not material-oriented. In current design practices, the Uniformat is used
primarily for functional breakdown at the early planning and design stages. Information at the detail
design and construction phases is typically organized according to the MasterFormat.
The CI/SfB coding system is based on the SfB system used in Sweden since 1950 as a national method
for organizing official and centrally produced construction-industry specifications, price books, and
building-product data sheets. After many modifications, a new version of the SfB system, now called
the CI/SfB system, was introduced in 1969 and has since been adopted by many European countries,
including the United Kingdom and The Netherlands, and is being considered as a standard for all
countries in the European Economic Community. The CI/SfB coding system includes four main

E-104 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum
Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-45

tables: building environment, elements, construction forms and materials, and activities and
requirements. One characteristic of the CI/SfB system is that each table can be used either
independently or together with other tables. This characteristic makes the CI/SfB system more flexible
than other coding systems, since it allow it to cover technology information from generic to specific
forms (Ioannou and Liu, 1993).
In the U.K., the Construction Project Information Committee (CPIC) is responsible for providing best
practice guidance on the content, form and preparation of construction production information and
making sure this best practice is disseminated throughout the construction industry. The Committee is
formed from representatives of the major industry institutions - Royal Institute of British Architects,
Institution of Civil Engineers, Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, Royal Institution
of Chartered Surveyors and the Construction Confederation - which ensure that the guidance we
provide has a solid foundation within all branches of the industry. In 2003, the committee with the
support of the Department of Trade and Industry launched of a new code - Production information: a
code of procedure for the construction industry, which provides practical guidance on the preparation
of good production drawings, specifications and schedules of work by making optimum use of widely
adopted computer systems.
The use of any standardized classification of construction information (MasterFormat, CI/SfB,
Uniformat, or else) can cut construction costs because of more accurate specifications, which can
reduce costly changes or delays in projects due to incomplete, misplaced, or missing information.
According to CSI, it is estimated that an average 5 to 10 percent of savings in construction costs can
be realized when such systems are addressed fully in a building's specifications. The use of
standardized system should be started early in the design phase and coordinated between consultants.
Because in recent years, more and more buildings are designed with tremendous complexity as
technology-rich (voice, data, and video networks) facilities, this reality must be fully addressed during
the design phase of a construction project through the specifications and other construction
information. It will lead to more cost-efficient and smoother project delivery, as well as facilitate
future maintenance and accommodation of new technologies over the life of the project. The challenge
of providing standard construction information is increasing in building such facilities with the risks of
additional changes, delays, and costs (tearing down walls to install cabling and cable pathways and
then rebuilding the walls, paying for express delivery of large amounts of construction products such
as wire and cable to minimize schedule delays, paying crews overtime to install such systems to help
keep the overall project on schedule, etc.).

3. CASE STUDY
In the era of globalization, Indonesian construction industry needs to catch up in developing standard
classification in order to be competitive. Such standard should not be developed uniquely for
Indonesian purposes, since in the future it will only become a barrier for playing in the global arena.
The reasonable strategy is to perform a general review of international standards, decide on the
standard which has the best potential for adoption and develop adjustments to accommodate the
industry’s local characteristics.
The Ministry of Public Works, as one of the Indonesia’s construction industry largest clients, do not
provide a standard construction information for their projects. However, for building and road
projects, the Ministry tend to use particular formats; while the application of these formats are not
enforced, they are used on customary grounds. Indonesia’s other biggest players are involved in the
telecommunication, electrics, and oil and gas industry. These industries consist of a major portion of
multi-national companies. They have their own regulations, and the construction aspects within these
significant industries are beyond the scope of the Ministry of Public Works. The interdepartmental
relations among different ministries have traditionally been challenging, thus a national effort in
developing a standard for construction information will require solid national commitment.
A pilot study was performed as an exercise in looking into the possibility of developing standard
information for construction works. While it was not intended for the purpose of developing a national
standard, the study started with performing a general review of the most commonly known

Universitas Pelita Harapan, INDONESIA - September 26-27th, 2007 E-105

Group of Construction Management EACEF-45

international standards, particularly the widely used classification system developed by the
Construction Specification Institute, i.e. the MasterFormat. Limited discussions with architects and
contractors were conducted to obtain inputs to develop the proposed standard. Based on inputs from
designers and contractors, a standard schedule of work or BoQ was proposed and followed by using
this format in a case study of preparing the bill of quantity (BoQ) of a medium-rise building.
The study was carried out with the support of an established engineering design firm in Bandung. The
architects/ engineers in this company were familiar with the MasterFormat and were considering
adopting the format for most of their construction production information. Engineering firms have
been traditionally used their own system in preparing drawings, specifications, and BoQ. Even within
the same company, engineers often use different coding system to suit the client’s request.
The engineers have occasionally adopted the 16-division MasterFormat in their designs; however have
limited its use to the second-level sections (only the first two digits). For the more detailed sub
sections, they still use the concept of traditional “analisa harga satuan” or AHS (=unit price analysis)
which has been widely applied in Indonesian construction industry. The AHS system has been existed
since the Dutch era, and is basically a standard breakdown of cost components (material, labor,
equipment). For example, the AHS for concrete work K-175 per 1 m3 involves 6.8 bags of Portland
Cement, 0.8 m3 of gravel, 0.54 m3 of sand, 1.5 man-day of unskilled labor, 0.5 man-day of semi-
skilled labor, 0.05 man-day of mason, 0.01 man-day of superintendent, and 0.07 unit of miscellaneous
tools.
In this system, the unit volume per cost component (or the productivity rate) is accepted as the
industry’s standard for the lack of the availability of other standards; however, the numbers have been
considered not relevant anymore in today’s industry characteristics which involve modern
technologies. Besides the need for a standardized classification system, it is required that an industry-
wide study be conducted to provide productivity and cost references for the purposes of owners,
engineers, and contractors.
Pramudita and Bashirah (2006) worked with the company to exercise the use of a classification system
based on the 16-division MasterFormat with adjustments supported by contractors’ inputs. The
proposed system was then applied to prepare the BoQ of a 1900 square meters, 3 stories building,
functioning as an administrative facility of an airport complex. The study did not involve using the
proposed system in the development of the drawings and the specifications.
Two contractors which have been worked together with the design firm in many projects explain their
practice of using the BoQ system developed by designers only for bidding purposes. Before starting
the construction phase, contractors often prepare a different system for their own purpose which
breaks down a construction project into separate zones or buildings (i.e., Building A, B, etc.). The
first-level division in the MasterFormat (i.e., Division 01-General Requirements, Division 02-Site
Construction, Division 03-Concrete, Division 04-Masonry, Division 05-Metals, etc) is deemed more
suitable by the interviewed contractors as the second-level divison, after breaking down the project
into separate zones or buildings. This work break down is practiced because the contractors prefer
being able to summarize or aggregates the BoQ and cost for each zone or building. The MasterFormat-
based classification or coding system has been considered inadequate for project cost control purposes
by contractors.
Rather than preparing two different references of schedule of work, contractors prefer the following
format. The format for schedule of works which was preferred by contractors and also agreed by the
engineers in the study, is a Work Breakdown Structure organization of work group-level (e.g.,
Administrative Building A, Warehouse, etc.). Each group is subdivided into divisions of work
required to construct the group. The divisions are standardized into 9 divisions (as opposed to 16
divisions in the MasterFormat):
Division A Design Development
Division B Sitework
Division C Structural Work
Division D Architectural Work
Division E Mechanical Work

E-106 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum
Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-45

Division F Electrical Work

Division G Exterior Building Facilities
Division H Interior Fixtures
Division I Miscellaneous Work

Each division is further broken down into components of work required to construct each division:
A1 Contract Documents
A2 Insurance and Bonds
A3 Shop Drawings & As-Built Drawings
A4 Site Management
A5 Material Sampling and Tests
A6 Project Documentation

B1 Setting-out
B2 Temporary Facilities
B3 Mobilization and Demobilization
B4 Site Clearing and Removal
B5 Excavation, Cut, Backfill, and Disposal

C1 Above Ground Structural Work

C2 Under Ground Structural Work
C3 Roof Framing

D1 Concrete
D2 Metals
D3 Wood and Plastics
D4 Masonry
D5 Thermal and Moisture Protection
D6 Openings (Doors, Windows, Frames)
D7 Finishes

E1 Plumbing
E2 Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning
E3 Fire Suppression

F1 Electrical Power Distribution System

F2 Lighting System
F3 Communication System
F4 Lightning Protection

G1 Paving, Parking, Pedestrian

G2 Fences and Gates
G3 Planting/Landscaping (Plants, Grass, Soils)

I1 Equipment
I2 Special Construction
I3 Conveying Equipment

These subdivions (A1, A2,… etc.) can be further broken down as needed, but the coding system has
not been standardized. In assembling the cost for each item of work, the cost components include the
direct costs (i.e., material, labor, and equipment) and the indirect costs (overhead, contingency, profit).
The “Pajak Pertambahan Nilai” (PPN which is 10% of the total project cost), or the added-value tax
required to be paid to the government for all construction projects, is added later after the schedule of
work is finally summarized.

Universitas Pelita Harapan, INDONESIA - September 26-27th, 2007 E-107

Group of Construction Management EACEF-45

4. CONCLUSIONS
Learning from Singapore’s experience in developing their national standard for construction
information (Goh and Chu, 2002), the Indonesian standard should not be developed uniquely for local
purposes, since in the future it will only become a barrier for playing in the global arena. However, the
pilot study suggests that designers and contractors prefer to use a system suitable for their needs, but
lack of regional and international compatibility. The Indonesian construction industry should not
“reinvent the wheel” in developing a new standard, it will take too much efforts and at the end the
standard will probably cannot be useful in the global competition. Instead, the endeavors should start
with a review of international standards; then followed by a selecting a standard (based on local
practitioners familiarity, regional/international compatibility, etc.) for detailed evaluation and should
be a subject to considerable scrutiny and discussion among the industry members and academics; and
a localization of terminology.
While the advantages of adopting a national standard of construction information have been widely
acknowledged, it is well understood that the successful application of a national standard requires a
change of attitude and mindset among all stakeholders. Designers and contractors will have to
willingly make conversion of their database and other necessary operational and administrative
activities. There should also be an incentive for change.
The driver for change in one nation may be different from others. An attempt to build a nation-wide
participation, should be initiated by identifying the key factor as the force for such changes. In
Indonesia, the government has still been the biggest client which contributes about 50 percent in value
of construction project spending. Furthermore, the majority of Indonesian construction companies (the
small and medium sized firms which combine to around 90% of the registered companies) are
supplying these governmental/public-funded projects. The government can play a significant role with
supports from Lembaga Pengambangan Jasa Konstruksi, or LPJK (= Construction Industry
Development Board), Badan Standardisasi Nasional (National Standards Board), and the academic
community. The stakeholders have to make a conscious effort benefiting all. LPJK consists of four
elements of the industry: government, contractors, consultants/designers, and scholars. While it is
dominated with small and medium-sized firms, within this board it can be identified several leaders in
the industry who will be the pioneers and drivers for such change to be realized.

5. REFERENCES
Building Economic Development Council (Building EDC). (1987) “Achieving Quality on Building
Sites,” Report of the National Economic Development Office (NEDO), London, U.K.
Egan, J. (1998). “Rethinking Construction,” The Report of the Construction Task Force on the
Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, on Improving the Quality and Efficiency of U.K.
Construction. Department of the Environment, Transport and Regions.
Goh, B. H. and Chu, Y. L. (2002). “Developing National Standards for the Classification of
Construction Information in Singapore,” Proceedings of the Int. Council for Research and
Innovation in Building and Construction - CIB W78 Conference, 12-14 June 2002, Netherland.
Ioannou, P. G. and Liu, L. Y. (1993). “Advanced Construction Technology System – ACTS,”
ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, V.119/ 2, June 1993, p.288-306
Peurifoy, R. L. and Oberlender, G. D. (2002). Estimating Construction Costs, 5th Ed., McGraw-Hill.
Pramudita and Bashirah (2006). “Pengembangan Format Standar Penyusunan Estimasi Biaya
Konstruksi Bangunan Gedung oleh Perencana,” Final Project Report, School of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung.
Tucker, S.N., Mohamed, S., Johnston, D.R., McFallan, S.L. & Hampson, K.D. (2001) “Building and
Construction Industries supply Chain Project (Domestic)” Report for Department of
Industry, Science and Resources, http://www.industry.gov.au/assets/documents/itrinternet/BC-
SCMReport.pdf (July 27, 2004)

E-108 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum