Osuizugbo, I C; Okolie, K C and Oshodi, O S (2024) Factors supporting the implementation of buildability assessment as a tool for buildability improvement. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 22(3), pp. 879-900. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: Improving buildability of building designs with the aid of buildability assessment is essential because of the effect of designs on construction. Despite the plethora of research into buildability reported over the years, a review of the literature shown a dearth of research into the factors supporting the implementation of buildability assessment. Because buildability assessment has been confirmed to be highly beneficial to construction business, this study aims to investigate the factors supporting the implementation of buildability assessment as a tool for buildability improvement using Nigeria as a representative case. Design/methodology/approach: Survey research method was adopted for the study. Questionnaires were administered to a purposively selected group of architects, engineers, builders and quantity surveyors involved in construction project delivery within client, consulting and contracting organisations in Nigeria. A total of 368 questionnaires were distributed among the sampled participants, out of which, a total of 219 representing 60% were sufficiently filled and returned. Data collected were analysed using inferential and descriptive statistics. Findings: The results revealed owner’s commitment, clients' awareness of the benefits of conducting buildability assessment on building design, unity amongst different professionals in the construction industry, designers consider buildability important, adequate coordination amongst different design disciplines, adequate channel for co-ordination and communication between designers and constructors at the design stage and adequate support from the government as the top most seven factors supporting buildability assessment implementation in construction sector of Nigeria. Secondly, the results from the research revealed that there is no statistically significant difference in factors supporting buildability assessment implementation in construction between clients and consulting and contracting construction organisations in Nigeria. Originality/value: The findings provide in-depth insight of the factors supporting the implementation of buildability assessment in construction that can help principal stakeholders in construction to facilitate development of strategies required in supporting the adoption and implementation of buildability assessment tool for buildability improvement.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildability; buildability assessment; implementation; Nigeria; supporting |
| Index terms: | Nigeria, designer, engineer, owner, building design, quantity surveying, construction organization, coordination, statistics, implementation, construction industry, architect, builder, survey, construction project delivery, strategy, commitment, buildability, contracting organization, construction sector, design stage, questionnaire, methodology |
| Subjects: | project controls, sociology, industry analysis, design efficiency, management, research methods, Geography, psychology, contractual arrangements, professional practice, architectural design, profession, data collection methods, organization, mathematical modelling, practitioner |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Organizational Design, Time Control, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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