Olatunde, N A; Awodele, I A; Adebayo, B O and Makanjuola, S S (2025) Assessment of factors inhibiting engagement of quantity surveyors on private residential building projects in Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 30(2), pp. 318-334. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
Purpose: The study examined the factors inhibiting the engagement of Quantity Surveyors (QS) on private residential building projects in Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria with a view to enhance the performance of such projects. Design/methodology/approach: The study used a qualitative research approach with the use of interview protocol for data collection. A Convenient sampling method was used to select 20 on-going residential building construction projects for the study in the Government Reserved Area, Ado Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria. The client and the architect of the selected projects were the population of research for interview. For data analysis, 28 successful interviews were used, while frequency, percentile and content analysis were the method of data analysis used. Findings: The result indicated that the most important factor inhibiting the engagement of QSs on private residential building projects is lack of awareness of the benefit inherent in engagement of QS on residential projects. Other important factors are; the perception that engagement of QS will increase the construction cost, absence of legislation that mandate engagement of QS, usurpation of Quantity Surveyor’s roles by other professionals and the perception that engagement of QS is essential only in big projects. Practical implications: It was recommended that every state chapter of the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (NIQS) should start a series of awareness campaign program within their State to enlighten the populace on the services that a professional QS can offer them with emphasis on the benefits of engaging QS on the small scale projects such as residential building projects. More recommendation has it that as a matter of policy and requirement for building approval criteria, deliverables from QS should be made compulsory. This measure will help every potential residential building client to see QS as an important professional that must be engaged before their project can be successfully delivered. Originality/value: The study attempted to investigate the factors inhibiting the engagement of QS on private residential building construction projects. This was motivated by the perceived prevalent of non-engagement of QS in the study area with the attendant poor project performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building projects; engagement; private residential; quantity surveyor |
| Index terms: | architect, sampling, small scale, project performance, Nigeria, construction cost, quantity surveying, residential building, residential project, methodology, qualitative research, population, construction project, program, content analysis, data analysis, legislation, mandate, approval, interview |
| Subjects: | legal systems, construction type, contractual role, demography, Geography, production management, research methods, economic development, financial and cost management, data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, profession, data collection methods, political science, project management theory and practice, software systems |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Governance, Cost Management, Research Practice, Contract Administration, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Geographical Context, Project Management, Legal Issues |
| 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