Kim, H S (1998) Evaluation of quality during early design: A prerequisite to defining value for money for the client. In: Hughes, W (ed.) Proceedings of 14th Annual ARCOM Conference, 9-11 September 1998, Reading, UK.
Abstract
Value can be defined as quality in relation to cost. The relationship between these two dimensions, in the context of a building's design, has to be properly understood if building owners/clients are to be confident of achieving value for money in the outcome. The work as reported here describes part of a research study that aims to develop a cost-quality modelling technique for early design evaluation. Findings suggest that quality is amenable to a systematic treatment of measurement. Measurement of conformance, as opposed to measurement of non-conformance, is proposed as an approach to evaluating the quality of design options during the early design. The paper argues that the measurement of quality should be clearly understood in that it does not necessarily mean gauging 'quantity' of quality. Alternatively, the paper suggests that evaluation of quality during the early design requires the measurement of the extent to which a design satisfies the characteristics of the project, that the client requires.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | evaluation of quality; measurement of conformance; quality; value for money |
| Index terms: | owner, modelling, option, dimension, client value, design evaluation, value-for-money |
| Subjects: | health monitoring assessment and metrics, analytical methods, design assessment, decision analysis, evaluation, sociology, client relations |
| Topics: | Value Management, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Design Practice, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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