Hadidi, L A (2016) Using quality function deployment to conduct assessment for engineering designs' contractors. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 12(3), pp. 205-230. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Construction is considered a highly competitive industry where excellence in providing services is highly appreciated by customers and is a key factor for success. Hence, many construction companies are keen to implement quality assurance programs especially in highly related customer service providers such as engineering design. In this paper quality function deployment (QFD) is used to assess and improve the quality of design services. In QFD the quality matrix is used to assess the correlation between customer and technical requirements (TRs). The method then proceeds to find weights of different TRs, based on their correlation with customers' requirements, enabling the evaluators to rank them based on their customers' importance. This research also provides an assessment for contracting designers based on customers' evaluation. A case study is presented for a large-scale public company in Saudi Arabia. The QFD matrix identified 20 customers' requirements and 13 groups of TRs (184 detailed requirements). The results identified the high-ranked TRs (most influential items). In addition, the paper also ranked design contractors based on their customers' satisfaction level. This can be used as a ranking mechanism for the selection of design firms.Construction is considered a highly competitive industry where excellence in providing services is highly appreciated by customers and is a key factor for success. Hence, many construction companies are keen to implement quality assurance programs especially in highly related customer service providers such as engineering design. In this paper quality function deployment (QFD) is used to assess and improve the quality of design services. In QFD the quality matrix is used to assess the correlation between customer and technical requirements (TRs). The method then proceeds to find weights of different TRs, based on their correlation with customers' requirements, enabling the evaluators to rank them based on their customers' importance. This research also provides an assessment for contracting designers based on customers' evaluation. A case study is presented for a large-scale public company in Saudi Arabia. The QFD matrix identified 20 customers' requirements and 13 groups of TRs (184 detailed requirements). The results identified the high-ranked TRs (most influential items). In addition, the paper also ranked design contractors based on their customers' satisfaction level. This can be used as a ranking mechanism for the selection of design firms.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Saudi Arabia; quality function deployment; design management; case study; case studies; design; engineering; contractors; quality |
| Index terms: | satisfaction, design firm, Saudi Arabia, case study, customer service, construction company, designer, quality assurance program, engineering design, design management, design contractor, quality function deployment |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, profession, organization, project delivery, service delivery, Geography, design process, quality assurance |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Design Practice |
| 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