Naveed, F and Khan, K I A (2022) Investigating the influence of information complexity on construction quality: A systems thinking approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(3), pp. 1427-1448. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: This paper investigates the causative relation between information complexity and construction quality. The objectives are to identify the challenges faced in the communication of information and data on construction projects and determine how these barriers influence quality performance of a project. Design/methodology/approach: Limitations in the literature on information seeking, coupled with the utilization of Theory of Motivated Information Management as a response led to the development of research problem statement. Through comprehensive review of literature published between the years 2005–2019, the paper first identified barriers of information communication in the industry and key performance indicators of construction quality, followed by content analyses to rank and screen out the least important variables. This paved the way for quantitative and qualitative analyses through 180 structured questionnaires and 11 expert opinion sessions that respectively led to the use of systems thinking approach to establish causality. Findings: The study finds ineffective communication, unclear details, changes in contract, information delays, unpleasant relationships between stakeholders and project complexity as the most critical factors causing information complexity in a construction project. These factors cause a reduction in quality performance of a project through increased rework and decreased implementation of total quality management. Practical implications: The study will assist project managers to diagnose quality-related issues in their projects, trace them back to the challenges and barriers of information communication and then make policy/strategic interventions to reduce such issues through improved information flow. Originality/value: Majority of the studies in this field of work have identified the effects of ineffective information flow on overall project performance, but very few have focused specifically on the quality of construction projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cld; communication; construction quality; information; information complexity; performance indicators; systems thinking; theory of motivated information management |
| Index terms: | project complexity, construction quality, complexity, construction project, methodology, qualitative analysis, questionnaire, content analysis, rework, information flow, performance indicator, total quality management, systems thinking, implementation, quality performance, project performance, critical factor, key performance indicator, project manager |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, organizational theory, production management, performance management, research methods, systems engineering, quality assurance, information systems, research design and methodology, risk assessment, profession, data collection methods, evaluation methods, project delivery, analytical methods, data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements, operations management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Digital Applications, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here