Building inspection in multi-dwelling housing and the perception of building quality

Jonsson, A Z and Muyingo, H (2019) Building inspection in multi-dwelling housing and the perception of building quality. Construction Economics and Building, 19(2), pp. 144-159. ISSN 2204-9029

Abstract

Principal-agency problems due to hidden incentives might be amplified, for example, under circumstances when unjustified trust in an inspector is associated with higher perception of building quality. This paper sets out to determine whether a significant difference exists in the owner’s perception of the building quality based on the perception of the inspector and the inspection process within multi-dwelling housing. A principal-agent theoretical perspective and the question of trust is applied on data from a survey sent to 1563 housing cooperatives in Sweden and analysed using a one-sided ANOVA as well as Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc Dunn’s test. The major finding is that differences in perception associated with the company size of the developer, the timing of the inspection as well as the complexity of the process for the owners affects reported defect. The main implication is that efforts to address shortcomings related to the gap between the developer and the owner, in the context of building quality and perceived severity of defects, need to be customised to different owner groups. A better understanding of the inspection process by the owner improves active participation, which leads to efficient quality improvement. Society benefits from improved comprehension and utilisation of the results.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: quality; building inspection; principal-agent; residential buildings; trust
Index terms: agent, agency, complexity, housing, owner, quality improvement, survey, Sweden, inspection, residential building, society
Subjects: project delivery, data collection methods, construction type, practitioner, sociology, communities and social development, quality assurance, systems engineering, Geography
Topics: Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Quality Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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