Rounds, J L and Chi, N Y (1985) Total quality management for construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 111(2), pp. 117-128. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Traditional approaches to quality control in the construction industry are inadequate and should be replaced with the Total Quality Control concept implemented through the Quality Control (Q.C.) Circle as developed in Japan and currently in wide use throughout the manufacturing industry. The term “total quality control” is defined, and four total quality control principles are set forth on the basis of this definition. The evolution of quality control is traced from the nineteenth century to today to explain the decline in quality standards and to illustrate the need for a new approach. Unique characteristics of the construction industry are described as they relate to the Q.C. circle concept. Implementation of this concept will result in higher quality, lower costs, and increased productivity in the construction industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | Japan, manufacturing industry, total quality management, evolution, productivity, quality standard, construction industry, implementation, quality control |
| Subjects: | environmental science, contractual arrangements, evaluation methods, project delivery, management, Geography, industry analysis, quality assurance |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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