Tang, S L; Aoieong, R T and Ahmed, S M (2004) The use of process cost model (PCM) for measuring quality costs of construction projects: Model testing. Construction Management and Economics, 22(3), pp. 263-275. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
A 'Process Cost Model (PCM)' approach has been proposed previously (Aoieong et al., 2002) for measuring the quality costs of construction projects. The PCM is proposed because the traditional models on PAF (prevention, appraisal and failure) quality costs have been found to be unsuitable for the construction industry, although they may be successful in the manufacturing industry. The focus of PCM, unlike PAF model, is no longer on capturing the total quality costs of an entire project but the quality costs of a particular process. It is simple and more feasible to be applied in construction projects and is in line with the 'process approach' and 'continual improvement' concepts of the latest (year 2000) version of the ISO 9000 quality management system, which is a step closer to Total Quality Management (Aoieong and Tang, 2002). The current paper describes two case studies using the PCM to capture quality costs on two construction projects. The case studies reveal that the PCM is feasible, practicable and easy to use. It is also possible to use the model to achieve 'continual improvement' by referencing the quality costs of a particular construction process. The Process Cost Model (PCM) is therefore a better model than the traditional PAF model for application in the construction industry for measuring quality costs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; costs; hong kong; paf; pcm; process cost model; processes; quality; TQM |
| Index terms: | construction industry, prevention, quality management system, Hong Kong, case study, appraisal, construction project, construction process, cost model, manufacturing industry, model testing, ISO, total quality management |
| Subjects: | building construction, industry analysis, factor and component analysis, financial risk, Geography, production management, standards development, evaluation methods, financial and cost management, project delivery, data collection methods, reliability engineering |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Cost Management, Quality Management, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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