Keraminiyage, K P (2009) Achieving high process capability maturity in construction organisations. PhD thesis, University of Salford, UK.
Abstract
A move towards a process based view has been noted as the way forward to achieve the desired performance improvements in the construction industry. It has further been recognised that, it is important for the organisations to possess appropriate process capability maturity to embark on successful process improvement initiatives to achieve desired performance improvements. With the success of the software industry's Capability Maturity Model (CMM), other industries have attempted to map the principles of CMM as a basis for process improvement initiatives within their respective settings. Construction is not an exception; the same has been attempted within the construction industry through a research collaboration between academia and industry, under the name of SPICE (Structured Process Improvements in Construction Enterprises). Being a stepwise improvement strategy, the CMM consists of five maturity levels, where the first three levels have been identified as low maturity levels, while levels four and five have been named as high maturity levels. While the low maturity levels lay the foundation for organisations to attain continuous improvements successfully, the practices of the high maturity levels deploy the process improvements required to achieve substantial performance boosts. Despite the fact that achieving high maturity levels is of utmost importance to achieve continuous improvements, up till now, only the low maturity level practices of CMM have been mapped within the context of construction organisations, leaving its true potential unexplored as a construction process improvement initiative. In the light of the above, this research aimed at mapping the practices of CMM high maturity levels to construction organisations to achieve high process capability maturity within construction organisations. This research has adopted the grounded theory and case studies as the primary research methods. It used the hermeneutic spiral approach to operationalise the research. Accordingly, the empirical investigation of this research consisted of two phases. The first phase is a series of expert interviews followed by two case studies conducted during the second phase of the study. Data analysis in this research was based on the coding, content analysis and cognitive mapping techniques. To assist with the data analysis and presentation
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; content analysis; grounded theory; interview; performance improvement |
| Index terms: | content analysis, strategy, data analysis, interview, process improvement, capability maturity model, collaboration, mapping, construction process, grounded theory, continuous improvement, maturity level, case study, construction organization, construction industry, investigation, academia, cognitive mapping, performance improvement |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, organization, data collection methods, educational institutions, cognitive psychology, building construction, industry analysis, spatial and geospatial analysis, performance measurement, management, theoretical framing, evaluation |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Education, Site Management, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| 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