How a quantity surveyor can ease cost management at the design stage using a building product model

Matipa, W M; Kelliher, D and Keane, M (2008) How a quantity surveyor can ease cost management at the design stage using a building product model. Construction Innovation, 8(3), pp. 164-181. ISSN 1471-4175

Abstract

The role of the professional quantity surveyor is to provide information with regard to the initial and future costs so that sound financial factors — inter alia — are considered by the design team. However, it has always been very difficult to produce conceptual estimates because they require the ability not to count the bricks, windows, doors and fixtures but the ability to visualise these components. This problem stifles quantity surveyors' capability to meet the demand for “value for money” (VfM) throughout sustainable building development. The purpose of this paper is to describe results from a case study of deploying a building product model on a commercial project in Ireland, with a view to easing the cost management duties of the quantity surveyor. The paper comprises a case study of the Environmental Research Institute project and a questionnaire survey of quantity surveying business in Ireland. Quantity surveying still encounters serious data compatibility problems in integrated teams because most software available on the market run proprietary file formats. It is concluded that there is a huge business potential for quantity surveying to facilitate designing to a budget within integrated teams, and that software interoperability could have a negative impact on professional fee structures, which could trigger more robust appraisal strategies for building products if quantity surveying is to maintain a leading role in providing cost management services to the construction industry. Some case study data could not be made public. Quantity surveyors might be encouraged to be innovative when using computerised systems that could produce better cost models; hence meet the demand for VfM throughout sustainable building development. The paper provides valuable information to built environment stakeholders working in integrated teams so as to optimise whole life resources expendable on a constructed facility.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: budgetary control; construction industry; modelling; open systems; quantity surveying; sustainable design
Index terms: cost management, case study, quantity surveying, interoperability, Ireland, construction industry, modelling, estimate, financial factor, built environment, survey, strategy, design team, research institute, sustainable design, surveying, product model, duty, computerized system, value-for-money, appraisal, integrated team, questionnaire, cost model, design stage, window, sustainable building
Subjects: design process, sustainable construction, evaluation, Geography, accounting and finance, factor and component analysis, architectural elements, management, systems and processes, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, computing systems, contractual role, profession, research organizations, data collection methods, economic analysis, health monitoring assessment and metrics, analytical methods, financial and cost management, professional practice, modelling and simulation
Topics: Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Value Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context
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