Le, A T H; Domingo, N; Rasheed, E and Park, K (2022) Maturity model of building maintenance management for New Zealand's state schools. Building Research & Information, 50(4), pp. 438-451. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
In New Zealand (NZ), state school properties are owned by the Ministry of Education and operated by school managers with the assistance of external consultants. This study aims to explore relationships of key stakeholders to propose a set of improvement actions for building maintenance management (BMM) in NZ’s state schools. The research employed a sequential mixed-methods approach encompassing interviews with school managers at the exploratory stage and questionnaire surveys completed by school managers and the Ministry staff to identify the maturity level of BMM. The interviews' findings were used to map roles and responsibilities of people involved in BMM and develop the measurement model used in this study. Based on data from the questionnaire, relationships among key stakeholders in BMM were examined using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). The research hypotheses of correlation among the stakeholders were tested and validated. The questionnaire results were also analysed to identify the maturity level of stakeholders' responsibilities in BMM. Suggestions were made for improving BMM for NZ’s state schools focusing on training programmes, reporting system, performance evaluation, and lesson sharing. The results could assist stakeholders to review their current BMM and identify the areas in need of improvement.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building maintenance; maturity model; New Zealand; PLS-SEM; school buildings |
| Index terms: | maturity level, New Zealand, maturity model, performance evaluation, partial least square, questionnaire, school building, survey, programme, structural equation modelling, building maintenance, manager, interview |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, project controls, Geography, evaluation, performance measurement, practitioner, data collection methods, construction type |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Time Control, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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