Osuizugbo, I C (2025) Measures for improving the buildability of building designs in construction industry. Construction Innovation, 25(2), pp. 490-509. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: Despite many studies on buildability from different perspectives and methods, the problems associated with buildability have not ceased from confronting the construction industry. This paper aims to determine the critical measures for improving the buildability of building designs in the construction industry. Design/methodology/approach: A questionnaire was developed to address the aim of the study. Data were collected through the administration of questionnaires to purposively selected group of quantity surveyors, builders, engineers and architects. A total of 368 questionnaires were administered and a response rate of 60% (219 questionnaires were returned) was achieved. Data elicited were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Findings: The results revealed that "the benefits of improved buildability should be made known to designers", "more technical literature for improving buildability should be provided to designers" and "more education and training on buildability should be given to designers" are the top most important three measures for improving the buildability of building designs in the construction industry. Originality/value: This study highlights the measures for improving buildability of building designs which are considered significant by construction professionals. An understanding of these measures is essential for reducing buildability problems as well as for improving and embedding buildability as a practice in the construction industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildability; building design; improvement; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | architect, construction professional, education and training, statistics, construction industry, building design, quantity surveying, designer, engineer, questionnaire, methodology, buildability, builder, survey |
| Subjects: | professional development, industry analysis, mathematical modelling, data collection methods, profession, research methods, design efficiency, professional education, practitioner, architectural design |
| Topics: | Education, Information Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Design Practice |
| 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