Razak, D S A; Mills, G and Roberts, A (2018) How do infrastructure owners build capabilities to reduce operational failure? In: Gorse, C and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 34th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2018, Queen’s University, Belfast, UK.
Abstract
Limited studies focused on understanding the causes of operational quality failure. Clients recognised some project failed with assets not performing during operations that question the distribution of capabilities to better perform. This study consists of 4 preliminary reviews on the operational issues and 19 in-depth interviews with highly knowledgeable experts sample who involved with operational delivery of the asset. Empirical data were gathered using the card sorting and semi-structured interview in identifying and measuring quality cost failure in five projects within single client organisation case-study. The preliminary findings indicate limited maturity in understanding and capturing quality cost failure thus influence the capabilities in addressing operational failure. By identifying and measuring quality cost failure, owners are learning through project–operations failures to capture integrated capabilities in reducing failures. The findings suggest capabilities were better distributes through integrated hybrid arrangements that share the dynamic of advances project in promoting organisational learning. It provides agreements between parties to better identify and measure cost of quality to achieve project benefits.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | operational failure; operational capabilities; coq; quality cost failure |
| Index terms: | agreements, client organization, owner, organizational learning, interview |
| Subjects: | contract formation, data collection methods, client relations, sociology, professional development |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Information Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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