Gilly, B A; Touran, A and Asai, T (1987) Quality control circles in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 113(3), pp. 427-439. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Total quality control (TQC) programs have been responsible for improved labor motivation, production, and product quality in Japan. Quality control circles, as part of a TQC program, are a rather new participative management technique that merits study and analysis. A brief history of quality circles (QC) is given and QC program implementation is described briefly. The differences between manufacturing industries, where the circles have been originally implemented, and the construction industry are discussed. QC applications in Japanese construction companies are reviewed, and the cultural and organizational differences between the Japanese and United States construction industries are addressed. A number of guidelines are recommended for the implementation of quality circles in a United States construction company. It is believed that if used correctly and efficiently, QC programs can work in the construction industry and can improve productivity, motivation, and quality.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | motivation, Japan, construction company, manufacturing industry, United States, quality circle, history, participative management, program, product quality, productivity, implementation, quality control, construction industry |
| Subjects: | psychology, contractual arrangements, architectural and construction history, project delivery, organization, industry analysis, quality assurance, management, performance measurement, software systems, Geography |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Quality Management |
| 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