Cirelli Jr., L R (2017) Impact of design fees and duration of design process on construction quality: Implications for quality management. PhD thesis, Baker College (Michigan), USA.
Abstract
The American construction industry is a trillion-dollar business. Errors that occur during the building process result in billions of dollars in lost revenue and time. The focus of this study was the project design phase, which occurs at the beginning of the construction process. The researcher investigated the fees paid to design professionals and the time allotted for the design process. The purpose was to better understand the relationship between time, fees, and the errors produced by the design professionals, which can lead to construction cost overruns and rework. The design process was also explored, using questionnaires and interviews, to understand if quality management techniques were being used and if quality management could be applied to improve the design process. The theoretical underpinnings for this mixed method study stemmed from the works of Deming, Senge, and the Six Sigma concept of y = f (x). The quantitative study sample (N = 515) was drawn from the New York State public construction agencies engaged in vertical construction. Interviewees (N = 7) were a subset of the quantitative sample. Two quantitative and three qualitative research questions guided the study. The research findings were compared with other studies that show a correlation between the independent variables of design fee and design duration and the dependent variable of errors and omissions (as a measure of quality on construction projects). The results indicated that there was no relationship between design fee and errors and omissions. The results did reveal a weak correlation between the time allotted to design professionals and errors and omissions. The qualitative analysis revealed firms’ adherence to traditional design procedures and a reliance on staff for effective communication and process execution. Firm leaders have been forced to develop techniques to mitigate the reduced fees and design duration in an industry that is slow to adopt change. The potential exists for introducing quality management into the design process as a path toward improvement.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Vinton, J |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cost overrun; duration; construction cost; construction project; building process; communication; quality management; professional; qualitative analysis; interview; qualitative research |
| Index terms: | project design, mixed method, independent variable, cost overrun, construction cost, public construction, duration, construction industry, quality management, six sigma, interview, design process, rework, overrun, New York, revenue, construction process, qualitative research, construction project, qualitative analysis, questionnaire, agency, building process, dependent variable, construction quality |
| Subjects: | production management, Geography, quality assurance, building construction, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, operations management, performance measurement, industry analysis, statistical analysis, project controls, sociology, design methods, data collection methods, research design and methodology, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Design Practice, Time Control, Site Management, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles, 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