Seymour, D and Low, S P (1990) The quality debate. Construction Management and Economics, 8(1), pp. 13-29. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The paper argues that there are intrinsic difficulties in defining quality. This is particularly true of construction in view of the endemic uncertainty to which it is subject. However, an institutional framework comprising a balance between technical, occupational, contractual/legal and economic orders was developed making possible the equitable negotiation of quality. This balance has been disturbed and the current debate within the industry concerns the way a new balance can be achieved. Two major tendencies in the debate about what quality is and how it is to be achieved are identified. One argues the need for market forces to operate at all levels, for tighter specification and quantification of quality standards and for the development of formal control procedures. The other argues the intrinsic limits of specification, quantification and formalization of procedures and therefore the ineluctable need for occupational discretion to be exercised at the point of production.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | economic order; occupational order; professionalism; quality; quality assurance |
| Index terms: | occupational order, professionalism, negotiation, quality assurance, specification, quantification, quality standard, control procedure, economic order |
| Subjects: | quality assurance, measurement and scaling, sociology, conflict resolution, project delivery, professional development, contractual condition, economic and policy analysis |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Contract Administration, Research Practice, Quality Management, Project Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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