The development of a project process evaluation (PPE) framework that aims to measure the effectiveness of implementing a new design and construction project process

Lee, A (2002) The development of a project process evaluation (PPE) framework that aims to measure the effectiveness of implementing a new design and construction project process. PhD thesis, University of Salford, UK.

Abstract

{Embargoed until 31 July 2022) Increased globalised competition and the need to meet continuously changing customer requirements has forced the UK construction industry to consider its practice. The industry has been repeatedly criticised for its inefficiency, fragmentation, profitability, and lack of co-ordination and communication by many governmental and institutional reports (Phillips, 1950; Emmerson, 1962; Banwell, 1964; Gyles, 1992; Latham, 1994; Egan, 1998). Latham and Egan cited that process improvement and learning from the manufacturing industry could aid the prevailing situation. Following such recommendations, a number of construction clients started developing their own design and construction process, including BAA (British Airports Authority), BAe (British Aerospace) and London Underground, as a way to improve the prevailing situation. An appraisal of these industrial approaches highlighted a common structure that contributed to the development of the Generic Design and Construction Process Protocol (GDCPP). This research project, led by the University of Salford, proved to be the impetus for a flurry of other construction companies to remodel their processes. However, the success of a construction project is not always directly attributed to the performance of the new project process, and vice versa. Framed in these terms, how can the effectiveness of implementing a new design and construction project process be measured in recompense to this growing trend of process improvement? Construction performance measurement today is myopic. For too long, construction organisations have focused on short-termism. If they are to remain competitive, they need to embrace broader issues other than the traditional time cost and quality metrics of construction performance (Love & Holt, 2000). They must also consider the performance of the project process itself (Neely et al, 2000) as to determine the true barriers to success, be that the process itself or implementation factors. However, there is at present a lack of understanding on how the measurement of project processes should be approached. This is attributable in part to the absence of publicly available information, and in part to the inherent difficulty of measuring a complex and creative process. This thesis describes the development of the project process evaluation (PPE) framework that aims to address this research gap. Literature reviews and a scoping survey questionnaire were used in this research investigation for the discovery and building of the PPE framework. The framework consists of five steps, which guides the user from the identification of performance indicators governing the selection of the new project process, through into a knowledge-learning domain in order to improve upon future projects. A case study research strategy was then used to test and validate the model, which employed various research methods to collect both qualitative and quantitative data for the study; the Process Protocol was deployed on the case studies in order to certify the framework. The resulting PPE framework provides an original, prototypical solution to assessing the effectiveness of implementing a new design and construction project process.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Uncontrolled Keywords: aerospace; competition; co-ordination; fragmentation; measurement; construction project; communication; learning; manufacturing; research methods; London; UK; case study; airport; client
Index terms: construction organization, Latham, case study, construction performance, construction client, London, investigation, effectiveness, profitability, design and construction, implementation, construction industry, performance indicator, process improvement, strategy, manufacturing industry, literature review, fragmentation, survey, construction company, construction project, competition, questionnaire, appraisal
Subjects: economic analysis, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, performance assessment, organization, business, data collection methods, practitioner, industry policy reports, market analysis, industry analysis, performance management, factor and component analysis, management, Geography, production management
Topics: Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Governance, Site Management, Organizational Design, Project Management, Geographical Context, Procurement, Quality Management
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