DETERMINING KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
WITH BALANCED SCORECARD APPROACH FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECT WAREHOUSE EFFICIENCY
Durio Etgar1, Dermawan Wibisono2
Institut Teknologi
Bandung
durioetgar@gmail.com, dwibisono@sbm-itb.ac.id
Abstract
Recent
Covid-19 pandemic had negative impacts on various formal industries in
Indonesia. This adverse condition also affected PT Waskita
Karya (Persero) Tbk,
reflected from the slump in company’s business revenue. Waskita
was forced to readjust their strategies to overcome the situation and one of
them is efficiency. However, Efficiency in construction project warehouse is
currently unmanageable because there is no proper Performance Management System
for measuring the achievement. Developing and tracking Key Performance
Indicators (KPI) with Balanced Scorecard (BSC) approach had been seen as the
solution as it is covering four important perspectives of performance namely
financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. The expert
consensus analysis had been conducted with Fuzzy Delphi Method the results of
all Balanced Scorecard perspectives (Financial, Customer, Internal Process, and
Learning and Growth) are deemed applicable for Waskita’s
construction warehouse based on the result of expert consensus with the
financial perspective became the top priority. Furthermore, 21 out of 28 Key
Performance Indicators had been agreed as the performance measurement for Waskita’s construction warehouse, with the proportion of 5
financial indicators, 4 customer indicators, 6 internal process indicators, and
6 learning and growth indicators. Those indicators had been translated from
strategic objectives that could lead to efficiency. Order fulfillment rate
became the most important indicator to track. Performance scoring system has
been determined to categorize the performance indicators’ achievement of Waskita’s construction warehouse by the range of high,
medium, and low with specific targets for each indicator.
Keyword: performance indicators, balanced scorecard, construction, warehouse,
fuzzy delphi.
Introduction
PT Waskita Karya (Persero) Tbk is one of the biggest state-owned companies that has
great contributions in Indonesia’s infrastructure development. Throughout 2020
during pandemic situation, Waskita recorded Rp 7,38
trillion net loss and 48,73% drop on their operating revenues. Responding to
this situation, Waskita crafted several strategies to
ensure business continuity during the pandemic namely: Maximize cash inflow
from project payment and land acquisition credit, Tollroad
divestation, OPEX efficiencies, and credit relaxation
proposal. OPEX efficiencies is considered possible to be managed by project for
now as the smallest business unit in Waskita.
Moreover, efficiencies are the most relevant, potentially permanent, and
long-term strategy to reach the corporate vision. Construction project in Waskita is the smallest unit with several business
processes inside namely: construction operation, financial management,
administration and contract management, human capital management, and logistic.
Warehouse management is one of logistic element. It covers about 30% of project
finance and hold a significant role in determining project’s success. So far,
project performance indicators are still using financial one, and these types
of measures tend to reflect the past performance (Lag Indicators) of an
organization rather than predicting future performance (Lead Indicators). This
research conducted by implementing BSC approach to design an integrated system
of key performance indicators (KPI) both Lag and Lead Indicators that are
important for achieving efficiency in project warehouse.
Receiving,
putting away, storing, picking, and shipping are the main warehouse activities (Frazelle,
2016). Receiving activities include
assigning vehicles to docks and planning and carrying out unloading activities (Gu,
Goetschalckx, & McGinnis, 2007). Put away refers to the act of
storing a purchased commodity or material in the warehouse. This activity also
involves handling materials and checking the product's positioning and material
location (Frazelle,
2016). Storage is the transfer of goods
from the area of unloading to the location intended (Johnson,
Scholes, & Whittington, 2008). Order preparation is called order
picking. This is thought to be the primary and labor-intensive function of
warehouses. Packing after picking up the orders, assigning vehicles to ports
where the orders are, and loading trucks are all aspects of shipping (Gu et
al., 2007).
A
warehouse performance measurement is a method to measure activity performance,
program or service which is provided by a warehouse. Performance measurement
system as the sets of metrics used to quantify both the efficiency and
effectiveness of action (Neely,
Gregory, & Platts, 1995). Performance measurement can be
divided in 4 categories: input, output, efficiency, and effectiveness (Ammons,
1995).
In general, efficiency and effectiveness are the most widely utilized as
a measure of performance (Ammons,
1995) ; (Kusrini
& Masruroh, 2014). This is inline
with Waskita’s strategy which is operational
expenditure efficiency.
Construction projects are the
spearheads of contractor companies. Their business’ goals and targets pretty
much depending on how the construction projects are performing. The most
definite terms of successful projects are on-time delivery and on budget. If You Can't Measure It, You Can't Manage It. Peter
(Drucker, 1974) famously said “Work implies not only that somebody
is supposed to do the job, but also accountability, a deadline and, finally,
the measurement of results —that is, feedback from results on the work and on
the planning process itself,”. That’s why we need a whole view of our business,
set the plan, keeping track on the progresses and problems, and always have an
eye on indicators of success.
This is where the performance
management take part. Performance management makes it possible for managers to
identify and solve issues accurately, communicate better and keep the progress
on schedule. Moreover, it could be a benchmarking tools to compare how we coupe
with another companies. While every
construction works need goods, material, equipment, consumables, and so on, a
warehouse must be classified as a primary element. So far, it is usually
considered only as a “storage”, without putting the business process inside
into account. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) is there, but as it is only
for reporting purpose, the problems inside a warehouse are often overlooked.
Thus, a suitable performance management tools are needed to give a more
holistic indicators on how the warehouse perform towards the targets.
The research proved that the
development of Balanced Scorecard can be started from smaller unit instead of
cascading from the top. Therefore, BSC could be developed for another business
units in Waskita. Moreover, the
Balanced Scorecard could possibly be implemented for another Indonesian SoE
construction companies because they are merely in the same scale.
The Fuzzy Delphi Method involves two main processes:
Triangular Fuzzy Numbers and Fuzzy Evaluation Processes. To interpret the data
from this method, there are three conditions that must be considered to determine
whether a KPI should be accepted or rejected based on expert agreement. The
first two conditions are related to Triangular Fuzzy Numbers, while the third
condition pertains to the Fuzzy Evaluation Process. The Fuzzy Delphi method
involves converting a Likert scale chosen by experts into a fuzzy scale using a
system of binary numbering and evaluating the resulting values on a scale from
0 to 1. The conversion process will be done by using FDM Template v2.01 that
created by (Jamil
& Noh, 2020). Fuzzy Score Value is represented by
three values: m1, m2, and m3. m1 represents the minimum value, m2 represents
the most reasonable value, and m3 represents the maximum value. These values
can be depicted graphically in the form of a triangle, with the mean value
plotted against the triangular value.
Figure 1
Fuzzy Scale Agreement Level Diagram (Bojadziev
& Bojadziev, 2007).
Therefore,
Fuzzy Delphi method is used to identify, evaluate, and validate elements based
on expert agreement, as determined by three conditions:
(1). Threshold value (d)
d ≤ 0.2
A KPI
is accepted by a group of experts if the threshold value (d) is less than or
equal to 0.2 (d ≤ 0.2). This threshold value is used to determine whether
an element should be accepted or rejected based on expert agreement. If the
threshold value (d) is greater than 0.2, the element is rejected. The threshold
value (d) is calculated using a specific formula (1), which involves using the
vertex method to determine the distance between the average value of two fuzzy
numbers (m and n). These fuzzy numbers are represented by three values (m1, m2,
and m3), and the distance between them is calculated using below formula (1).
This approach is consistent with the findings of (Chen,
2000), (Cheng
& Lin, 2002), and (Jamil
& Noh, 2020).
(1)
(2). Expert Consensus
Percentage ≥ 75%
Elements
are only accepted if at least 75% of experts agree on their validity, according
to the research of (Chu
& Hwang, 2008), (Murry
Jr & Hammons, 1995), and (Jamil
& Noh, 2020). Elements with a lower level of
expert consensus are not accepted.
(3). Fuzzy Score Values
(A)
The
defuzzification process in the Fuzzy Delphi technique involves determining the
relative importance or ranking of each item or variable being analyzed. This
process is carried out as part of the data analysis process in the technique
and can be calculated using the formula below:
(2)
The
final step in the process is to calculate the alpha-cut value, which is the
median value between "0" and "1", where α-cut =
(0+1)/2 = 0.5. If the value of A is less than the alpha-cut value, the item
will be rejected because it indicates that the experts do not agree on its
acceptance. However, if the value of A is greater than the alpha-cut value, the
item will be accepted because it demonstrates a consensus among the experts to
accept it, according to (Jamil
& Noh, 2020). The data is then organized to
determine the fuzzy values, average fuzzy values, threshold values, consensus
percentages, defuzzification values, and item rankings. Table below summarize
the steps towards the implementation of Fuzzy Delphi Method.
Table 1 Fuzzy
Delphi Method Implementation Steps (Rejab,
Azmi, & Chuprat, 2019).
Step |
Detail |
1 |
Criteria
to determined experts involved in the study: ·
Expert in the field
(more than 5 years experience) ·
10-15 experts (Adle&Ziglio, 1996) |
2 |
Convert
all linguistic variables into a triangular fuzzy number |
3 |
All
data is scheduled to obtain the average value (m2, m2, m3) |
4 |
Determine
the distance between the 2 numbers fuzzy to determine the value of threshold,
d d
≤ 0,2, meaning that all the experts reach consensus. |
5 |
Determine
the consensus of the Group. ·
Value of the percent
agreement of experts that must be equal to or more than 75% |
6 |
Define
Aggregate Fuzzy Evaluation by adding all fuzzy numbers. |
7 |
Data
analysis using the average of fuzzy numbers or average response (Defuzzification
Process |
The
results will be validated by interviewing key stakeholders in research is a
common and effective method. According to (Creswell
& Clark, 2017), "key informants or
stakeholders are individuals who have knowledge or experience related to the
research problem and can provide valuable information to help validate the data
collected". By conducting interviews with Project Manager as designated
user, researchers can verify the accuracy and reliability of their data, as
well as gain a deeper understanding of the research problem from different
perspectives.
Results and Dicsussion
This section will explain the
steps and considerations taken in concluding the hypothesis of suitable Balance
Scorecard for warehouse construction in Waskita. The concept of Balance
Scorecard was introduced which will be the guidance throughout the Performance
Management System crafting process. Corporate situation analysis will be the
reference of vision and strategic planning. Strategic objectives will be
formulated using SWOT and TWOS analysis and later will be translated into Key
Performance Indicators.
Balanced Scorecard (BSC),
founded by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton, is a performance management
tool that helps organizations to align business activities to the organization's
vision and strategy, and to monitor performance against strategic goals (Kaplan & Norton, 1996). According to (Wibisono, 2013), Balance Scorecard (BSC) translates corporate’s
mission and strategy into a set of performance indicators that is useful for
strategic measurement and management system.
Figure 2 BSC
Components (Wibisono, 2013)
The balanced scorecard has
four perspectives: financial, customer, internal business process, and learning
and growth. The financial perspective measures financial performance and looks
at financial goals such as profitability, return on investment, and shareholder
value. The customer perspective measures the organization's performance from
the perspective of its customers. This includes measures such as customer
satisfaction, customer retention, and customer loyalty. The internal business
process perspective measures the organization's performance in terms of its
internal processes, including measures such as efficiency, quality, and
innovation. The learning and growth perspective measures the organization's
performance in terms of its ability to learn and grow. This includes measures
such as employee training, employee retention, and organizational culture (Kaplan, Robert, Kaplan, & Norton, 2001).
BSC provides a useful
framework to convert the overall strategy into specific actions and objectives
that can be carried out by the organization, ensure that all employees and
departments within the organization understand and are aligned with the
strategy, use specific metrics and targets to clearly communicate the progress
and success of the strategy to all stakeholders, and involve all relevant
parties in the process of creating a balanced scorecard, promoting
collaboration and agreement on the strategic goals. It is also can be applied
to newly promoted strategies or adjustments that have been made by the company.
Figure 3 Balanced Scorecard Pyramid (Wibisono, 2013)
From the Balanced Scorecard
Pyramid Figure, the first step for forming a Balanced Scorecard is to define
the vision of the corporate/organization based on current situation. After
that, the general strategy to reach that goals also should be defined. Those
strategies will be the reference for defining the objectives to realize the
vision on four different perspectives: Financial, Customer, Internal Processes,
and Employee Learning and Growth. Those objectives should be SMART (Specific,
Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound); hence the objectives would
be translated into quantitative performance measures/indicators that would
represent the achievement level of the objectives. It is important to first establish
the organization's overall vision and mission, as these provide the guiding
principles for the balanced scorecard strategy. The initiatives should be
chosen carefully and designed to address multiple objectives in a coordinated
manner. The objectives, measures, and targets can then be determined, either
for the entire strategy or for each perspective individually. The process of
setting the vision and mission is typically top-down, while the measures,
targets, and initiatives may involve more input from lower levels of the
organization. The goal is to achieve full buy-in from all stakeholders for the
overall strategy (Wibisono, 2013).
(Wibisono, 2013) stated three important principles for BSC performance measures namely:
1.
Make
Measurement Simple
It is important to ensure that the measurements
used in the balanced scorecard are easy for everyone to understand, collect,
and access. The measurements should be collected on a regular basis, such as
hourly, daily, or weekly, and should be visible to all stakeholders, such as by
posting them on a wall. The measurements should also be informative, requiring
no additional interpretation. This will help to make the measurement process
simple and effective.
2.
Make
Measurement Relevant
It is important to ensure that the measurements
used in the balanced scorecard are relevant to the organization's overall
strategy and to the expectations of its customers. The measurements should
encourage actions that will help the organization to achieve its strategic
goals and should be closely linked to the needs and expectations of the
customers. This will help to ensure that the measurement process is focused on
areas that are most important to the organization and its stakeholders.
3.
Measures
Output
In the balanced scorecard, it is important to
measure the output of both activities and business processes. Output measures
can include quantity, cost, time, and quality. These measures can be good
predictors of future performance and can help to identify areas for
improvement. By focusing on output measures, organizations can better
understand the efficiency and effectiveness of their activities and processes
and can take action to improve them.
Figure 4 Balanced Scorecard Planning and Implementation Workflow (Wibisono, 2013)
Figure above is the detailed Balanced Scorecard
Planning and Implementation Workflow. Senior Management commitment should be
secured as a good-to-go signal. On the early stages, strategy, business unit to
be measured, BSC perspectives priority, and BSC stakeholders need to be
identified. Critical success factors should be defined afterwards as the
reference for relevant performance indicators. Eliminating redundant indicators
is a significant step (hence it is being highlighted) and it is recommended to
have no more that 16 – 20 measures/indicators to capture “Strategic Success” (Wibisono, 2013). This research will be
concluded with the indicator’s validation through interview with key
stakeholders. Further steps will be reserved for future research.
In order to gain consensus and set the priorities
towards the proposed BSC framework, expert agreement has been gathered through
questionnaire and analyzed using Fuzzy Delphi Method. The level of agreements
was defined by 2 iterations: the BSC perspective and followed by the key
performance indicators. Due to scattered location of the experts, the data
gathering process has been conducted via online questionnaire with 7 Likert
scale for each item.
10
experts had been carefully selected to gain the consensus of BSC framework with
the proportion of 3 Project Managers, 2 Site Administration Manager (SAM), 3
Site Procurement, Logistic, and Equipment Managers (SPLEM), and 2 Site
Procurement, Logistic, and Equipment Officers (SPLEO).
Table 2 Expert Demographic Table
Experts |
|||
Code |
Alias |
|
Title |
1 |
MRHS |
SPLEO |
|
2 |
MS |
PM |
|
3 |
HHS |
SAM |
|
4 |
Y |
SAM |
|
5 |
PA |
SPLEM |
|
6 |
BBB |
SPLEM |
|
7 |
MG |
SPLEO |
|
8 |
AR |
PM |
|
9 |
WSD |
PM |
|
10 |
HP |
SPLEM |
Those
experts already met the criteria that has been set with minimum of bachelor’s
degree holders and have more than 5 years of experience in construction
business.
KPI should be agreed based on Specific, measurable,
achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) criteria with the explanation as
below:
Table 3 Agreements’Criteria
Criteria |
Context |
Specific |
Clear, detailed, and unambiguous. |
Measurable |
Can be measured by Waskita’s
existing tools (SAP and PW). |
Achievable |
Possible to achieve. |
Relevant |
Suitable with Waskita
construction warehouse’s characteristic and relevant to the efficiency goal. |
Time-bound |
Can be measured during certain period of time. |
The
level of agreement will be expressed from the scale of 1 until 7. The Fuzzy
Delphi analysis examined the construct to meet the three specified conditions
as below:
Table 4 Expert Consensus Condition
Value |
Condition |
Threshold
value (d) |
≤
0,2 |
Percentage
of expert consensus |
>
75% |
Fuzzy
Score |
≥ 0,5 (α-cut value) |
Those conditions will be examined in sequence. Once
there is one unfulfilled condition, the questionnaires should be revised until
the conditions are met. The percentage of consensus conditions are applied both
for total percentage and each item percentage. Total percentage will determine
the validity of the construct while each item that didn’t meet the percentage
of consensus will be rejected.
Finding
All
Balanced Scorecard perspectives (Financial, Customer, Internal Process, and
Learning and Growth) are deemed applicable for Waskita’s
construction warehouse and inline with the efficiency strategy according to the
result of expert consensus. This fact was the proof that BSC approach is
generic enough to be implemented in various industries. Financial perspective
got the top priority followed by internal process, customer, and lastly the
learning and growth perspective. It shows that financial indicators, mostly lag
indicators, are still the primary measurements of success in a profit-oriented
industries. Internal process perspective came second as it contains the
operation activities inside the warehouse. Customer perspective (in this case
the warehouse’s client is Construction supervisor) was considered as the third
most important and learning and growth perspective of human resources involved
in the warehouse came last.
Table 5 BSC Four Perspective Consensus Summary
21
Key Performance Indicators had been agreed as the performance measurement for Waskita’s construction warehouse, with the proportion of 5
financial indicators, 4 customer indicators, 6 internal process indicators, and
6 learning and growth indicators. Those indicators had been translated from
strategic objectives that could lead to efficiency. Order fulfillment rate
became the most important indicator to track because it will determine the
continuity of construction work and make sure that the project is proceeding
according to plan. Contradict from the result of BSC’s perspective result, indicator
from Internal Process Perspective became the top priority instead of Financial
Perspective, while the top financial indicator sits at 10th priority (Human
resource cost). That fact showed that the awareness of tracking lead indicators
instead of lag indicators in Waskita has increased.
The % of employees with QHSE training is the second most priority, expressing
that the quality of the work, healthy member and working environment, safety
operation, and sustainable environment became the fundamental culture of Waskita. The third most important indicator is inventory
accuracy, which is tracking the conformity of physical inventory data and web
database data. It would determine the logistics plan mostly for procurement
purposes.
Table 6 KPI Consensus Result Summary
Performance
scoring system has been determined to categorize the performance indicators’
achievement of Waskita’s construction warehouse by
the range of high, medium, and low with specific targets for each indicator.
The radar chart is used for dashboard visualization purpose. By tracking and
taking the right initiatives based on the achievement, the designated
efficiency can be reached.
Table 7 Balance Scorecard with Agreed Targets
Figure 5 Simulation of BSC Target Range Radar Chart
Implementation Plan & Justification
In the current state, the BSC is still missing
Weight and Initiative elements to make it fully applicable. Moreover, the
documents, parameters, and data gathering method required to construct the
target score should be defined. Those targets need to be revised periodically
in case those are easily reachable (leave no room for improvement) or
otherwise, impossible to reach.
Initiative is the required action to reach, to
maintain, or to improve beyond the target. There’s no standardization for this.
Initiative should be crafted conditionally according to current performance
situation.
Furthermore, BSC could be utilized as benchmarking
tools to compare warehouse performance among Waskita’s
projects. To do so, weight of each indicator should be defined. Indicators
priority that had been produced through Fuzzy Delphi output could be a helpful
reference to determine those weights.
Table 8 Balance Scorecard Implementation Plan
Total of two months more are needed to fully
implement the warehouse BSC. The first two weeks will be the remaining
development phase which will be filled with workshops to determine target,
indicators weight, and data collection method. After completing the BSC
components, Implementation Phase can be kickstarted with dissemination through
all stakeholders so they can get the essence of BSC implementation, fully aware
of and then can utilize it optimally. The following step is training for merely
four days to make sure that each user understands their role on BSC
implementation such as data gathering process and scoring process. Pilot
testing will be conducted for a month and later will be evaluated. If there is
nothing wrong and the pilot result is up to expectations, then the warehouse
BSC can be fully implemented.
To justify the warehouse BSC, an online interview
had been conducted with Andrianto Rachmat,
one of Waskita Project Manager with 12 years
experience on the company. Beside justification, Andrianto
also gave some perspective about the relevancy and applicability of the BSC.
For him, the warehouse Balanced Scorecard (BSC) could be extremely helpful in
reaching Waskita's efficiency goal, as it provides a
comprehensive and well-rounded view of the warehouse's performance. It is also
nice to have that the KPIs are not only on the operational aspect but also
covering financial, customer, and human resources perspective. This kind
helicopter view is good for managerial level so he can monitor every aspect on
one sweep. He also stated that the strategic objectives are spot on and well-aligned
to reach the efficiency goal. Furthermore, He believed that the contribution of
warehouse efficiency could have significant effect for the company as whole.
Andrianto was really
satisfied with the composition of KPIs for warehouse that had been agreed by
the expert as it covers all the important aspects of warehouse management. The
fact that several KPIs did not get agreement from the expert could be an
indication that the expert is providing valuable input and suggestions for
improvement. These expert’ selection and composition were accountable enough
because their background is matched with the four perspectives of BSC. Moreover, the KPIs are applicable and easy to
understand although he would need more effort for dissemination and training
for unskilled labour to execute the BSC.
Andrianto gave
another view that the BSC would be useful not only for tracking the progress
and improvement but also for communication tools. It would be easier for him to
manage the warehouse with quantified measurement instead of subjective
thoughts. The radar chart would also be helpful to identify current weakness
and strong point of warehouse performance.
As a Project Manager, Andrianto
would happily implement this BSC to his project. However, He suggested that the
BSC development phase should be carried on to create a powerful benchmarking
tools for all project warehouses in Waskita. Beside
that, it would be great for the BSC to be integrated into insentive system to
raise the personnel morale.
Conclusion
All Balanced Scorecard
perspectives (Financial, Customer, Internal Process, and Learning and Growth)
are deemed applicable for Waskita’s construction warehouse and inline with the
efficiency strategy according to the result of expert consensus. This fact was
the proof that BSC approach is generic enough to be implemented in various
industries. Financial perspective got the top priority followed by internal
process, customer, and lastly the learning and growth perspective. Furthermore,
21 Key Performance Indicators had been agreed as the performance measurement
for Waskita’s construction warehouse, with the proportion of 5 financial
indicators, 4 customer indicators, 6 internal process indicators, and 6
learning and growth indicators. Those indicators had been translated from
strategic objectives that could lead to efficiency. Order fulfillment rate
became the most important indicator to track because it will determine the
continuity of construction work and make sure that the project is proceeding
according to plan. Performance scoring system has been determined to categorize
the performance indicators’ achievement of Waskita’s construction warehouse by
the range of high, medium, and low with specific targets for each indicator.
The radar chart is used for dashboard visualization purpose. By tracking and
taking the right initiatives based on the achievement, the designated
efficiency can be reached. It is recommended that development phase of
determining indicator weight and initiatives should be continued to complement
the existing research. By doing so, implementation of warehouse Balanced
Scorecard could be a powerful benchmarking tools for all warehouses in Waskita.
To ensure achieveability, it's important to regularly review and update the
target to ensure they remain aligned with the company's strategy. BSC also can
later be integrated into insentive system to raise the personnel morale. The
incentive system could provide rewards for employees who exceed the targets. Performance scoring system has been determined to
categorize the performance indicators’ achievement of Waskita’s construction
warehouse by the range of high, medium, and low with specific targets for each
indicator. The radar chart is used for dashboard visualization purpose. By
tracking and taking the right initiatives based on the achievement, the
designated efficiency can be reached.
REFERENCES
APA (2020). Questionnaire.
In APA dictionary of statistics and research methods. Retrieved from
https://dictionary.apa.org/questionnaire
Bajec, P., Tuljak-Suban,
D., Bajor, I. (2020). A warehouse social and Environmental Performance Metrics
Framework. Promet – Traffic & Transportation,
https://doi.org/10.7307/ptt.v32i4.3390
Bernabei, M., Colabianchi,
S., Falegnami, A., & Tronci, M. (2022). Yet Another Warehouse KPIs
Collection (YAWKC). Retrieved January 23, 2023, from
https://publish.obsidian.md/yawkc
Creswell, J. W., &
Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dharma, W. S. (2022,
November 13). Waskita's Strategies and Potential Project Level Contribution to
Coupe with the Pandemic Slump. Online Personal Interview.
Fatima, I., & Wibisono,
D. (2017). Main performance indicators for a construction company in Indonesia.
Asia Pacific Journal of Advanced Business and Social Studies, 3(2).
https://doi.org/10.25275/apjabssv3i2bus8
Demin, V., Akulov, A.,
Karelina, E., Marusin, A., & Evtyukov, S. (2021). Determination of
performance criteria for organizing the operation of terminal and warehouse
complexes. Transportation Research Procedia, 57.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2021.09.033
Jamil, Mohd Ridhuan Mohd, & Noh,
Nurulrabihah Mat. (2020). Kepelbagaian Metodologi dalam Penyelidikan Reka
Bentuk dan Pembangunan. Qaisar Prestige Resources.
Jamil, M. R. M., Siraj, S.,
Hussin, Z., Noh, N. M., & Sapar, A. A. (2019). Pengenalan Asas Kaedah Fuzzy
Delphi dalam Penyelidikan Reka Bentuk dan Pembangunan. Bangi, Selangor: Minda
Intelek Agency
Rachmat, A. (2023).
Justification and Validation of Balanced Scorecard for Construction Project
Warehouse. Personal interview.
Rejab, Mazidah Mat, Azmi, Nurulhuda
Firdaus Mohd, & Chuprat, Suriayati. (2019). Fuzzy Delphi Method for
evaluating HyTEE model (hybrid software change management tool with test effort
estimation). International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and
Applications, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.14569/ijacsa.2019.0100465