Meier, J R and Russell, J S (2000) Model process for implementing maintainability. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(6), pp. 440-450. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Most companies lack a formal method to address maintainability during the project delivery process, yet maintenance can seriously affect project costs. To address the opportunities available to companies through the effective inclusion of maintainability concepts, the Construction Industry Institute formed the Maintainability Research Team. Using a combination of recent literature, a questionnaire survey, personal interviews, and case studies with industry professionals, the research team organized maintainability best practices into a model implementation process. Developed from the owner's perspective, the model process has two levels: corporate and project. Milestones, steps, and activities further define each level. The benefit of the model process is that it provides owners with a starting point for implementing maintainability. This paper outlines the proposed model process and describes the potential roles and benefits of maintainability on various types of projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | questionnaire, project cost, survey, interview, maintainability, implementation, project delivery, best practice, owner, Construction Industry Institute, case study |
| Subjects: | sociology, economics, maintenance engineering, contractual arrangements, project delivery, research organizations, data collection methods, business |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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