Love, P E D; Leonard, D; Matthews, J; Ford, G and Fang, W (2024) Setting a course to validate and operationalize quality II in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(12): 06024002, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Quality II is a nascent paradigm (i.e., a distinct set of concepts) for reducing and containing errors and mitigating rework in construction. It has emerged from empirical observations of best practices implemented in two large-scale infrastructure assets delivered using alliancing - a relational delivery strategy - underpinned by: (1) a contractual joint venture agreement (CJV) that fosters a collaborative "no-blame"culture where all parties aim to deliver best-for-project outcomes; (2) sharing of risks and rewards; (3) delivering value for money; and (4) a program of continuous improvement. Questions, however, surround the generalizability of Quality II beyond the alliances from which best practices were identified. This paper introduces the concepts of Quality II and discusses the need to validate and operationalize its use more broadly within the practice of project procurement. The contributions of this paper are twofold: (1) a new way to contain (i.e., enhance the detection and minimize the adverse consequences) and reduce (i.e., limit the occurrence of) errors in construction is introduced - Quality II; and (2) it provides opportunities to initiate the cultural and organizational changes in practice needed to improve performance and productivity in construction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | continuous improvement; error; error management; learning; quality; rework |
| Index terms: | program, alliancing, construction quality, organizational change, best practice, productivity, paradigm, strategy, rework, error management, continuous improvement, joint venture, value-for-money, project procurement, project outcome |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, performance measurement, software systems, project completion, quality assurance, project delivery, management, education and knowledge transfer, operations management, evaluation, business |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Procurement, Quality Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Value Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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