Scott, L and Kanjanabootra, S (2019) The productivity, performance and quality paradox: An alternative perspective. In: Gorse, C and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 35th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2019, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
In seeking to increase Performance, Productivity and Quality it is important to look at the whole as well as the parts of a system and to understand how each interacts with the others. History suggests there are deep-seated problems holding construction back as it struggles to improve performance and quality along with raising productivity. Productivity, quality and flexibility are critical measures of performance for justifying the investment in manufacturing and production systems, including construction. Existing knowledge informs us that performance, productivity and quality are interconnected through conventional measures. For example, if productivity increases, performance most probably increases and vice versa. However, productivity is closely related to the use and availability of resources, with expertise considered as one of these valuable resources. Quality is also a good measure of performance and with an effective quality management system it will most likely increase performance. However, quality in construction is both difficult to define and achieve as buildings are often unique and not repetitive enough for construction firms to master their expertise as the goals of new projects keep changing. The contribution of expertise is an important aspects and this research paper aims to gain a better understanding of how the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) sector understands and conceptualises discipline knowledge and expertise as it relates to performance, productivity and quality. Previous research undertaken by the authors has shown construction expertise derives both systematically and often for some professionals in an ad hoc manner from various forms of knowledge, either or both from authoritative and non-authoritative knowledge sources. It offers a theoretical discussion which aims to create a dialog on how the AEC sector should look at non-traditional measuring methods, by investing in people both being a stock of knowledge and having expertise as a way to increase productivity which, as extant research shows, will have on-going positive effects on both quality and performance.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | performance, efficiency, quality, paradox and value |
| Index terms: | paradox, history, quality management system, construction firm, productivity, production system, efficiency, research paper |
| Subjects: | social theory and frameworks, architectural and construction history, project delivery, research dissemination and communication, organization, management, manufacturing engineering, performance management |
| Topics: | Information Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Quality Management |
| 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