International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

Systems and relationships for construction quality

Peter Barrett
Article information:
To cite this document:
Peter Barrett, (2000),"Systems and relationships for construction quality", International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 17 Iss 4/5 pp. 377 - 392
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656710010298409
Downloaded on: 02 February 2016, At: 17:18 (PT)
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 31 other documents.

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1679 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Low Sui Pheng, Tan Boon Kee, Allen Ang Aik Leng, (1999),"Effectiveness of ISO 9000 in raising
construction quality standards: some empirical evidence using CONQUAS scores", Structural Survey, Vol.
17 Iss 2 pp. 89-108 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02630809910273776
Sui Pheng Low, Henson K. C. Yeo, (1998),"A construction quality costs quantifying system for the building
industry", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 Iss 3 pp. 329-349 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719810198926
James Sommerville, Hamish W. Robertson, (2000),"A scorecard approach to benchmarking for total quality
construction", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 Iss 4/5 pp. 453-466
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656710010298526

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:121184 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The research register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers/quality.asp http://www.emerald-library.com

Systems and relationships for Construction

quality
construction quality
Peter Barrett
University of Salford, Salford, UK 377
Keywords Quality, Construction industry, Supply, Improvement, Project management
Abstract Argues, with evidence from a number of related studies, that in order to effectively
manage quality in the construction project environment, firms need two things. First, externally
orientated, flexible, quality improvement systems are required. Second, firms need a targeted
approach to investing in key stable relationships in the supply network of which they are a part.
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

Introduction
The definition of quality can be a complex matter. In construction, Baden-
Hellard (1991) has proposed function, aesthetics, cost and time as the main
dimensions. Through a project involving academic partners from Denmark,
Estonia, Lithuania and the UK (CONQUEST, 1995), a concerted effort was
made to understand the fundamentals of what construction quality is
concerned with, and to produce a common template so that the two ECE
countries could be assisted in making the transition from command to market
economies, drawing from the experience of the EU countries. The exercise was
very revealing because the ECE countries had scrapped their highly
prescriptive Russian framework but, at that time, not really replaced it with
anything else. In fact, Lithuania had a rule that any mix of regulations from
any EU countries could be used. This level of turbulence meant that nothing
could be taken for granted, which was very stimulating.
As a result, Baden-Hellard's (1991) four quality dimensions were extended
through extensive discussions to include environmental and health and safety
issues, together with the broader issue of location. This extension of the
performance criteria was linked to the notion of a range of stakeholders having
various interests in each. Simplistically, it could, for example, be said that
``society'' is concerned with the environmental dimension, whereas workers and
users have a special interest in the safety factors. As a result, an interacting
mesh of mechanisms exist to address these different interests in these various
The author would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the input of many friends and
colleagues who appear as co-authors of several of the papers referenced. In particular, Martin
Sexton has worked closely on many of the research projects drawn from. The work has
generally involved collaboration with industry and thanks are due for this willing (for them)
and stimulating (at least for me) involvement that has been crucial to the relevance of the
findings. Funding for various projects drawn from has been provided by the UK Engineering
and Physical Sciences Research Council and the Department of the Environment, Transport and
the Regions, and this continued support has been crucial to building a clearer picture. I must International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management,
thank the editor and referees for stimulating comments that improved the paper, but, as ever, Vol. 17 No. 4/5, 2000, pp. 377-392.
responsibility for any errors or omissions remains mine. # MCB University Press, 0265-671X
 IJQRM aspects of performance. In some instances, say for cost, market mechanisms
17,4/5 may suffice; for others, regulation may be needed.
In this paper, then, quality is taken to be a many-faceted thing, conditioned
by many contextual factors and achieved through many mechanisms. It is not
simply a specialist subset of general management. If seen in this partial way, it
is inevitable that only partial achievements will be possible. Having said that,
378 in construction, as in any industry, it is crucial that client satisfaction is
achieved if an organisation is to succeed, or indeed survive. Thus, a key
stakeholder is the client, namely the organisation or individual who makes the
decision to purchase services from the construction industry.
However, a recent study on the briefing process (Barrett and Stanley, 1999)
has cast light on this key relationship. The project methodology was based on a
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

grounded theory approach (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and Corbin,
1990), using 16 case study construction projects, carefully selected to provide
diversity (Yin, 1989), with data elicited through multiple recorded and
transcribed interviews of a range of between two and four project participants.
The data were then analysed using soft data analysis software, namely Sage's
well known NUD.ist (non-numerical, unstructured data, indexing, searching,
theorising) program. A clear finding, amongst many, was that those in
construction have a strong tendency to blame clients for problems because
``they [clients] don't understand construction''. This is suicidal in business
terms, and can be seen to explain much of the widely-held dissatisfaction with
construction. Our proposed definition of briefing sums up the sort of positive
aspiration that is needed to underpin action to achieve client satisfaction,
namely:
Briefing is the process running throughout the construction project, by which means the
client's requirements are progressively captured and translated into effect (Barrett and
Stanley, 1999).

So, quality in construction can be thought of as the satisfaction of a whole

range of performance criteria owned by an interacting host of stakeholders and
mediated by a range of mechanisms running from regulation to market forces.
Client satisfaction is the ultimate measure of construction quality, but it is clear
from the briefing research described above that this will only be achieved if
construction companies adopt a strong external orientation in order to address
the full range of quality dimensions that impact on the client. Then there is a
good prospect that the client will get satisfied users, satisfied statutory
authorities, etc. as well as meeting their own direct ends.
This is quite an ambitious target in the complex, dynamic context of the
construction project, but it can be argued that meeting expectations is not
enough. To really succeed, expectations must be exceeded (GroÈnroos, 1984) and
the client ``delighted''. In this context, two postgraduate research projects have
cast some light on the relative importance of various service dimensions.
Hoxley (1993) carried out a random postal survey of building surveying
practices and their clients. A response rate of around 55 per cent was achieved
 resulting in 126 responses from clients and 169 from the practices. There was a Construction
strong correlation in the order of importance between the factors as assigned quality
by clients and surveyors surveyed. A high level of responsiveness emerged as a
key factor to achieve client satisfaction.
This has been reinforced and extended by a study of exemplary practices
carried out by Faulkner (1996). He studied two projects for each of two
construction consultancies, each selected by three experienced clients as being 379
their best advisors. Thus, three clients and 12 projects were studied and
tracked, with data collected through interviews, and triangulation with other
documentary evidence. From this mass of evidence it was found that the
practices were judged by the clients in various ways, but with a common core
of two factors: value for money (not cheapest) and good team working with
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

other construction participants and with the client. The clients expected the
industry to deliver a unified service, not to pass any problem around. The
practices:
. . . [did not] simply respond to client expectations . . . the real motivation was for them to
achieve ``best in class'' status ± to the extent of asking ``rude questions'', a determination to
solve problems and develop a meaningful relationship with their clients . . . [but] despite their
being regarded as exemplary . . . they each acknowledged the potential for further
improvement, and demonstrated a determination to aim for increasingly higher levels of
service to their clients (Faulkner, 1996, p. 231).

This evidence suggests that even responsiveness is not enough to achieve

excellence. Generative relationships (Senge, 1990) between clients and
construction companies and between the companies themselves are needed
where new possibilities are created through the interaction between the parties.
In addition this needs to be within a climate where improvement is
continuously sought.
This introductory section has set the scene for the rest of the paper by
drawing together a number of studies of construction. It is suggested that
construction quality is a broad concept involving the satisfaction of many
interacting stakeholders and that delighting customers demands externally
orientated construction companies working in concert with a strong
improvement emphasis. The following sections of this paper will consider,
within the above context, current activities and future prospects, first taking
the company perspective and second looking at the same questions from the
perspective of the project. Both views are needed, as the industry comprises, at
any point in time, a mesh of many companies working on any one project and
any one company working on many projects.

Company-based quality systems

QA certification
Within the UK, there has been a presumption that to address quality a
company goes for third-party certification against ISO BS EN 9000 (formerly
BS 5750). The theoretical strengths and weaknesses of this approach have been
debated extensively and it is not intended to repeat these arguments here;
 IJQRM however, fieldwork evidence in relation to construction professionals (included
17,4/5 in Barrett and Grover, 1998) is drawn upon to illustrate a few main points. The
surveys used were part of a major study completed in 1994, but subsequently
included and updated through a series of workshops run by the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors together with some new surveys that
confirmed the earlier findings. The fieldwork adopted multiple perspectives
380 and methods to establish an objective view of QA in construction. The various
parts of the methodology are shown in Figure 1. The randomly-selected postal
surveys provided a triangulated view and generated 146 (48 per cent response
rate) from certified firms; 152 (49 per cent) from non-certified firms and 51 (29
per cent) from clients. The view developed from the above data was then linked
to a carefully controlled, iterative Delphi study (e.g. Linstone and Turoff, 1976)
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

using eight experts, one of whom dropped out, chosen to populate a matrix
representing a UK perspective from a broad range of disciplines including
architects, academics, consultants, clients, and surveyors. The entire exercise
was carried out blind, that is none of the experts knew who the others were.
Figures 2 and 3 illustrate two points. First, for those companies that have
achieved certification, the actual impact on the quality of the service from the
clients' viewpoint has been only slightly positive and does not correlate in any
way to the importance of the factors, drawn from Hoxley's (1993) work. Second,
this must be seen in the context that less than half the professional firms in the
industry are ever likely to become certified. The projections in Figure 3 were
produced by a Delphi panel in 1994, but informed opinion is now that the view,
then, for the next five years was, in the event, an over-estimate.
The argument is simply that QA certification is by no means the whole
answer and for many firms it is not attractive at all. This has been reflected in
CLIENT’S VIEW
(postal questionnaire) STRATEGY
PROPOSALS

FORWARD LOOK
(Delphi Study)

QA for the
Construction
Professions

CURRENT POSITION

QA - CERTIFIED NON - CERTIFIED

FIRM’S VIEW FIRM’S VIEW
(postal questionnaire) (postal questionnaire)

LITERATURE SYNTHESIS /
ACADEMIC DEBATE
Figure 1.
Study methodology SCOPING STUDY
(multiple casestudies)
 vastly 7.0 Construction
Impact
BETTER
much 6.0 quality
of Q.A. on 9
factors a bit 5.0 6 4 1 7
2 3 8
10
5
11
NONE 4.0 12

a bit 3.0 381

much 2.0
WORSE
vastly 1.0
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
agree strongly agree very
strongly
Importance of factors to clients agree
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

Key
1 Accessibilty of personnel 7 Professionalism demonstrated
2 Appearance of staff 8 Speed of response to client’s needs
3 Client’s technical input 9 Standard of presentation
4 Frequency of communications 10 Technical correctness of service Figure 2.
5 Interest and enthusiasm of professional 11 Understanding of client’s organisation Clients' view-impact of
certification
6 Politeness of support personnel 12 Understanding of client’s problems

60
Percentage QA Certified QA System TQM
of firms (not certified)
50 51

40
39
36
30

24 25 24
20
20
15
Figure 3.
10
10 Delphi panel's view on
0 take-up
Now 5 Years 10 Years Now 5 Years 10 Years Now 5 Years 10 Years

the findings of a national level review of quality in construction (QLG, 1995).

This involved six prominent industry figures, representing all sides of the
industry, meeting regularly over a year and a half to develop a strategic view.
They concluded, among other things, that quality improvement must be the
emphasis for construction. This resonates with a commissioned strategic
review of quality in the surveying profession (Barrett and Grover, 1998) that
came to a similar conclusion via a synthesis of various studies, additional
fieldwork, industry workshops and a structured strategic analysis that took
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats and forced paired
comparisons to stimulate a raft of possible strategies that were then distilled to
a few major thrusts. For this professional grouping, the synergy between the
notion of professionalism and continuous improvement was important and this
 IJQRM study also reinforced the broadening of the quality conception to include issues,
17,4/5 such as safety responsibility and positive stewardship of the environment,
which resonate with the broad view of quality given in the introductory
section. The need for an emphasis on professionals working together to do
better on a broad front, rather than being driven by overt focused management
practices, is evident in Minzberg's (1998) recent paper on managing
382 professionals.

Supple systems
An approach to quality improvement that has been developed particularly in
relation to construction professionals is termed ``supple systems'' (Barrett,
1994). The genesis of this approach was the development of strategic proposals
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

in the 1994 study shown in Figure 1. The approach advocates the key features
set out in Figure 4, which reflected the findings of the fieldwork, but also linked
to the quality literature and literature concerning the management of
professional and service industry firms. These ideas have subsequently been
tested and extended in the context of higher education as described in Barrett
and Sexton (1997). This involved an action research project in which the
concepts were tested in a real world situation with an independent researcher
observing and recording progress and impact. During this study the notion of
stakeholder was introduced in place of client and the importance of a strategic
dimension was recognised by the addition of an extra dimension termed
``nested objectives''. The idea of the supple systems approach is to either
complement ISO 9000 systems for those firms that have followed this route, or
to provide an alternative for those firms that do not find this ``normal'' approach
helpful. The supple systems approach is determinedly outward-looking (client/
stakeholder orientated), it aims to actively manage the contribution of formal
systems alongside other actions, such as leadership, (minimalistic/holistic), it
allows diversity, concentrating more on outcomes than detailed processes, but
within a strong audit framework (loose-jointed), and it encourages incremental
improvement (evolutionary) that capitalizes on the positive aspects of the firm's
culture (symbiotic with social systems), which in professional firms can
contribute a lot of self-control. Lastly, the approach stresses that the systems
must be aligned with and contribute to the company's strategy (objective-
nested) and in this area a link is currently being developed to ``holographic''
organisational design (e.g. Morgan, 1993), which is described as ``trying to
develop approaches to organisation where the whole is built into all the parts''
(Morgan, 1993, p. 176), in order to ``create systems that are able to learn from
their own experience, and to modify their structure and design to reflect what
they have learned'' (Morgan and Ramirez, 1983, p. 4).
The practical experience of supple systems assessed through action research
in the educational context confirmed its general utility to provide a stimulating
professional context, allowing autonomy with responsibility. It also revealed
many problems and created a lot of data itself that at times could be hard to
handle. As a consequence the work on prioritising effort in relation to strategic
 Construction
Symbol Feature Description quality
Objective-nested The systems are aligned to, and positively support,
appropriate strategic organisational objectives. Systems
should not be developed within an operational/technical
vacuum. 383

Client / Stakeholder The systems are tested against stakeholder, and especially
orientated client requirements, by actively seeking feedback through
both hard and soft data.
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

Minimalist / Holistic “As much as you must, as little as you may”, that is, not
having systems for their own sake, but rather targeting high
risk / gain areas. Better to have made some progress on
all important fronts than to have patchy provision.

Loose-jointed The systems operate at an audit level: clarifying objectives,

checking performance and integrating efforts. At an
operational level different styles and approaches can be
accommodated, especially when they have proved
themselves over time.

Evolutionary Allow incremental and continuing progress to be made from

whatever base.

Symbiotic with social Build on the norms and culture of the organisation, for
systems instance allowing self-control or group pressure to operate
where appropriate.
Figure 4.
Key features of supple
systems

objectives was pursued, with some success. The approach is a long term
endeavour that continues. It works on the capability of the organisation to seek
and support continuous improvement.
 IJQRM The supple systems approach endeavours to take into account the nature of
17,4/5 professional firms and the fact that they are peopled with highly qualified
individuals, who operate within norms provided by their discipline as well as
within the particular context of the host firm they work for (Sibson, 1971). It is
no accident that at the same time this approach provides a strong basis for
flexible external engagement with other members of the supply chain. This is
384 important in the project context, which is the focus of the following section.

Project-based quality systems

Project quality plans
Construction is a project-based industry. Temporary teams are constantly
being created. Tight QM systems that only make sense internally can cause
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

real problems if they are not compatible with the systems of supply chain
partners. A range of possible theoretical outcomes is shown in Figure 5. At
present most projects rely on standard contracts to provide project quality
management. These are not really designed as quality management tools, but
can be effective if the companies involved willingly collaborate. There is a
move towards the use of an explicit project quality plan. This theoretically
links the relevant parts of all of the supply chain participants' own quality
systems together around the needs of the project, as shown in Figure 6 (Sjoholt,
1995). This calls for a high level of formalisation and assumes an underlying
compatibility if the various players are not going to have to constantly create
new systems for each project.

The nature of construction supply chains

For major projects the investment in comprehensive project quality plans
would seem justified, however, a recent study (Barrett and Aouad, 1998) of a
sample of three major projects, known to have been successful, raised some

QUALITY MANAGEMENT
SYSTEMS FOR FIRMS
SYSTEMS FOR PROJECT
QUALITY MANAGEMENT

firms willingly
collaborate

Figure 5. if
Integrating organisation contract
systems
and project systems rigorously
administered mesh
 Project Quality Plan Construction
quality
Customer’s Quality System

Designer’s Quality System

385
Contractor’s Quality System

Sub-contractor’s Quality System

Figure 6.
Company systems: the
Supplier’s Quality System project quality plan
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

interesting questions. The research used Harland's (1996) model of supply

chain relationships (see Figure 7), which provides a gaps model stressing the
softer aspects, namely the perceptions on the part of customers and suppliers of
requirements and performance. The study took as a starting point any one
participant in the given project who then gave other contacts upstream and
downstream through a ``snowballing'' technique. Each ``player'' was asked
questions through telephone interviews, using a standard interview format,
which took between 20 minutes and one hour, concerning the communications
that took place and the respondent's perceptions of the clarity of the
requirements they were charged with meeting and their degree of success in
this context. Harland's approach links well to the service industry quality
literature (e.g. Parasuraman et al., 1985) and the TQM customer-supplier-chains
notion, and it takes a richer view than the usual technical logistics perspective,
which prevails in construction research on supply chains (O'Brien, 1997). By
asking those involved at each end of any given link about their perceptions

Supplier’s Customer’s
perception of perception of
requirements Mismatch 1 requirements
Mismatch 3
Mismatch 4

SUPPLIER CUSTOMER

Supplier’s Mismatch 2 Customer’s

perception of perception of Figure 7.
performance performance Harland's mismatch tool
 IJQRM gaps could be identified and related to performance. It became clear that, in
17,4/5 fact, supply networks typified construction. The relationships were much more
complicated than purely linear ``relay-race'' connections. This was particularly
so for specialist design. Figure 8 provides an illustration of part of a supply
network studied.
Trawling through the interview records it became evident that the
386
relationships in these successful projects were consistently typified by a high
level of interaction: daily meetings, constant communications (or ``fax and
build'', ``no time for letters'', ``informally short-circuited'', ``all decisions in
meetings'') and the use of radio links. This reinforces the importance of
responsive or, better still, generative working. Several of the relationships were
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

not new ± participants were working with partners they had experience of from
previous projects. This clearly led to a lower level of misunderstandings.
Quotations such as ``good relationship'', ``team players'' and ``worked closely
and successfully together'' are common. This is underpinned by a high level of
commitment (e.g. ``Never let down . . . even at 3 o'clock in the morning!''). These
factors, that were crucial to the success of the projects, did not depend on
formal systems, in fact there is the distinct impression that the communications
and relationships described replaced the formal checking systems which could
not cope with the complexity and turbulence of the project demands. The idea
of responses being appropriate to the demands faced is not new (Burns and
Stalker, 1961; Lawrence and Lorsch, 1967) and links to the need for requisite
variety in the organisation (e.g. Beer, 1985). The point being made is that, in the
dynamic, project environment, although a framework is needed, at a more
detailed level it seems likely that multiple informal communications within the
context of strong relationships are the key to success.

Specialist sub- R5
P5
contractor 1 R4
P5

Package
R5
P5
Contractor
R5 R4
Specialist sub- P5 P5
R3
contractor 2 R3
P5
P3 Construction
R5
R3
P5
manager P5
R3
Specialist sub- R4 P5
P5
contractor 3 R4
P5
Client
R5
Figure 8. P5
An example supply Designer R4
P4
chain analysis
 Managing the supply network Construction
In a sense, what is emerging is that, in order to achieve high quality outcomes, quality
managing relationships is a crucial skill in a project-based industry where
temporary coalitions are constantly forming and breaking up. This argues for
an investment by those in the industry, but how best to maximise that
investment in terms of productive relationships given finite resources? This
links back to the strategic dimension of supple systems. Just as the quality 387
systems of a company should support to best effect the company strategy, so
too should the company's relationships provide optimum support to its role,
position and aspirations in the industry.
Many players in the industry are currently thinking about developing
strategic alliances and framework agreements. Of course some major clients,
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

such as BAA and Boots, have made a lot of progress, but for many more
normal players it is still struggling to get past the initial idea. It is difficult to
identify key relationships without a model or vocabulary to do so. A recent
project, entitled ``Integrating to innovate'' (i2i), addressed this question focused
on innovation in construction across the supply chain (Barrett and Sexton,
1998). The project methodology placed great importance on the creation of an
industry-based project team that had members from right across the supply
network, including: a materials manufacturers, a builders supplier, a specialist
sub-contractor, a contractor, a client and a facilities manager. A series of
meetings were held over a year in which discussions were held and then a
workbook created made up of a summary of the ideas generated plus questions.
Responses to this were then analysed and provided the starting point for the
next meeting. In addition visits were conducted to the partners' sites and mini-
projects pursued with them and this provided much additional data and
material for the workshops. The cycle of meetings allowed a good level of trust
and familiarity to grow up between the partners so that a lot of tacit knowledge
flowed around a concerted effort to identify major common issues and themes.
Interestingly, the project quickly confirmed that the scope for any company
to innovate is severely limited if it tries to act on its own. So much depends on
the other partners with whom it works. This translates very clearly for quality.
A company can only achieve a little on its own. To radically address quality it
needs to work with its supply network partners. With the close involvement of
the industry collaborators, the project produced after a number of iterations a
model that provides five levels of possible interaction. This is given in Figure 9
and ranges from a simple one-way exchange within a project at Level 1 up to a
joint business-based approach to innovation at Level 5 within which tacit as
well as explicit knowledge is regularly exchanged. Table I was also developed
with the partners to illustrate in more detail what the levels mean in practice.
This model and vocabulary then link to a decision process, again jointly
developed, that firms can go through to identify and prioritise their supply
chain relationships as shown in Figure 10. The end result is intended to be a
focused investment in building a portfolio of key relationships that will help the
company deliver high quality services and achieve its long-term goals. In a
 IJQRM
17,4/5 Level of innovation
Level 5: through the
Innovation network supply chain

Level 4:
388 Innovation chain

Level 3:
Knowledge collaboration

Level 2:
Knowledge exchange
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

Figure 9.
Levels of supply Level 1:
network interaction Information transfer

fragmented, project-based industry this is probably one of the most productive

actions a firms can take to achieve quality ± and innovation ± in its services. If
a construction project is seen in change management terms, it could be said
that companies taking the above approach are trying to stabilise their ``guiding
coalition'' (Kotter, 1996).
Interestingly, this ability to manage supply chain relationships is considered
so important and distinctive in the construction context, that it is being linked
into a project that is taking the capability maturity (SEI, 1994) approach to
organisational system assessment and development drawing from the
computer software industry into construction. The CMM model defines system
maturity levels ranging from chaotic, through repeatable, defined, managed, to
optimising. The approach argues for creating platforms at each level before
attempting more sophisticated activities. This thinking has some relevance for
supply network relations, as the shared platform defined by the lowest
performer will be a strong determinant of the level at which shared action can
take place. However, in the context of shared quality improvement efforts, the
platform may well be defined by the level of the relationship management and
innovation capabilities in the companies.

Summary and conclusion

This paper is based on a synthesis of a number of studies all of which are quite
substantial in their own right, however, the objective is to try to reveal a bigger
picture linked and grounded back into the data of these empirical studies. Some
of the data is statistical, but much of it is soft data analysed using qualitative
methods. Guba and Lincoln (1989) suggest the following criteria for assessing
the ``authenticity'' of qualitative research: resonance, rhetoric, empowerment
and applicability. These are briefly applied to the content of this paper before
the findings are summarised and conclusions drawn.
 Level 1: Discrete, one-way flow of information from one partner of the supply Construction
Information chain to another. The sender of the information does not actively seek quality
transfer feedback from the receiver on the information provided
Information transfer tends to be located at a project level and focuses on
``information administration''. For example, a materials order from a
component manufacturer to a supplier
Level 2: Recognises the role of people as a transfer medium in the supply chain. 389
Knowledge There is a two-way flow of information and ideas between different
exchange members of the supply chain. Each informs the other, thus better
understanding is facilitated
Knowledge exchange tends to be located at a project level and focuses on
``knowledge sharing and understanding'' (not knowledge generation or
application). For example, a briefing meeting between an architect and a
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

client, where the client informs the architect of its building requirements
and the architect informs the client of the services it can provide
Level 3: Ideas are developed collaboratively through the supply chain. There is
Knowledge less certainty at the outset of ``what'' will be developed. People from
collaboration various parts of the supply chain work together to solve a problem or
develop an opportunity. New ideas and insights are gained as a result of
the interaction
Knowledge collaboration tends to be located at a project level and focuses
on knowledge generation and application. For example, a ``one-off''
partnering arrangement, where all partners from the supply chain work
closely together from the outset to generate an optimal design and
production solution
Level 4: Partners of a given supply chain adopt a more systematic and systemic
Innovation approach. Business objectives and business systems are aligned; priorities
chain are continually reviewed in light of the progress of the effectiveness of the
supply chain and developments in the market place. The supply chain is
a learning system
Innovation chains tend to be located at a firm level and focuses on
integrating and developing a given supply chain partners' knowledge
bases to improve performance across projects and over time. For example,
the development of a long-term partnering arrangement where partners
work as a ``virtual'' organisation to maximise business opportunities and
collaborative learning and innovation
Level 5: The network generates dynamic innovation. Different supply chain
Innovation partners are needed as an innovation moves into business development.
network Several supply chains intertwine, each with a different focus and purpose,
though with many common partners to form a network. Networks ebb
and flow. ``Knowledge flow'' becomes the source of collaborative
advantage
Innovation networks tend to be located at a firm level and focuses on
integrating and developing a number of supple chains partners'
knowledge-bases to improve performance across projects and over time,
and to enhance the attractiveness of the industrial sector overall. For
example, long-term collaborative research and development agreements,
where a broad raft of supply chain partners (even competitors) engage at Table I.
different times and to varying degrees, in efforts to develop mutually Innovation levels and
beneficial technologies, processes and so forth associated activities
 IJQRM High strategic
17,4/5 •Objectives importance /
complementary compatibility -
Level 5:
•Culture match Innovation network

•Information exchange Strategic importance /

390 •Resource distribution
compatibility of
supply chain partner
Continuum

•Level of trust
Low strategic
importance /
•Shared measurement
compatibility -
system
Level 1:
Information transfer
Figure 10.
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

Evaluating supply Could we work Should we work How do we work

network partners
together? together? together?

``Resonance'' is the extent to which the research process reflects the underlying
paradigm. The topic is highly subjective and involves many participants
interacting through complex relationships. The combination of studies
followed by synthesis is resonant with these characteristics. ``Rhetoric'' is
concerned with the strength of the argument presented. By linking multiple
views to synthesise the major issues a strong and relatively simple case has
been presented for making improvements in construction project quality. This
links to ``empowerment'', that is enabling readers to take action. There is a clear
agenda, but it remains to be seen if these findings, illustrated as they are, will
lead to concerted action in a combative industry. The explicit consideration of
the context for implementation should help together with the high
``applicability'' of the findings, achieved through keeping visible the basis of the
proposals. It seems from industry feedback over several years on various
discrete aspects of the proposals that everyone can find something in the
material that confronts them and is meaningful in their everyday lives. Indeed
the industry collaborative nature of the research that is being drawn upon
ensures this.
In summary then, clearly a certain level of formal systems are necessary, but
there is plenty of evidence that they are not sufficient to achieve high quality,
especially in the turbulent, complex world of construction, where temporary
organisational forms are the main mode of project delivery.
In order to achieve continuous improvement and effective joint working
firms need dynamic quality systems that are externally orientated and flexible.
Supple systems has been described as an approach that meets these criteria
and also harnesses the professionalism available.
Taking a broader view than the single company, supply network issues
have been considered. Models, designed originally for joint innovation activity,
have been described and seem to fit well the need to create some stability in the
companies relationships so that joint quality improvement can be sought
 across the supply network. The thrust is to get firms to target their efforts into Construction
building key relationships. These can then provide a measure of stability out of quality
which long-term, incremental improvement can be achieved. Supple systems
can be seen as a way of developing these types of relationships for those parts
of the supply network that exists within companies. Thus, the approaches
being advocated are highly complementary.
A combination of sound formal systems and strong relationships is essential 391
to achieve high quality in the project environment of construction, both within
companies and across the supply network. There will be great variability in the
industry, but in many firms strong steady-state orientated formal systems need
to be matched by dynamic, less formal relationships or they may well diminish
overall project effectiveness. Conversely, many networks are a morass of
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

personal connections that are too fragile and should be buttressed by the
creation of a portfolio of more formal key alliances. If the right balance can be
achieved and actively managed, it is my belief that a powerful force for positive
change can be created.

References
Baden-Hellard, R. (1991), ``Total quality management in construction management'', in Barrett, P.
and Males, R. (Eds), Practice Management: New Directions for the Construction
Professional, E&FN Spon, London.
Barrett, P.S. (1994), ``Supple systems for quality management'', RICS Research Paper Series,
RICS, London.
Barrett, P.S. and Aouad, G. (1998), Final Report: Hybrid Concrete Structures for the UK Market,
Workpackages 3 and 5, PiT Project CI39/3/372, Reinforced Concrete Council, Reading.
Barrett, P.S. and Grover, R. (1998), Quality Assurance and the Surveying Professional, 3 Vols,
RICS, London.
Barrett, P.S. and Sexton, M. (1997), ``Improving quality in a research-orientated university
department using supple systems'', Final report to the Higher Education Quality Council,
University of Salford, Salford.
Barrett, P.S. and Sexton, M. (1998), Integrating to Innovate, Construction Industry Council,
London.
Barrett, P.S. and Stanley, C. (1999), Better Construction Briefing, Blackwell Science, Oxford.
Beer (1985), Diagnosing the System for Organizations, Wiley, Oxford.
Burns, T. and Stalker, G.M. (1961), The Management of Innovation, Tavistock Publications,
London.
CONQUEST (1995), ``Achieving quality management in construction'', Final report for EC
PHARE ACE project, December.
Faulkner, A.J. (1996), ``Achieving exemplary quality in the UK construction professions'',
unpublished PhD thesis, University of Salford, Salford.
Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory, Aldine, Chicago, IL.
GroÈnroos, C. (1984), Strategic Management and Marketing in the Service Sector, Chartwell-Bratt,
Bromley.
Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. (1989), Fourth Generation Evaluator, Sage, Newbury Park, CA (quoted
in Symon, G. and Cassell, C. Qualitative Methods and Analysis in Organisational Research:
A Practical Guide, Sage Publications, London, 1998, p. 7).
 IJQRM Harland, C.M. (1996), ``Supply chain management: relationships, chains and networks'', British
Journal of Management, Vol 7, Special Issue, S63-S80.
17,4/5 Hoxley, M. (1993), ``Obtaining and retaining clients: a study of service quality and the UK
building surveying practices'', unpublished MPhil thesis, University of Salford, Salford.
Kotter, J.P. (1996), Leading Change, HBS Press, Boston, MA.
Lawrence, P.R. and Lorsch, L.W. (1967), Organisation and Environment: Managing
392 Differentiation and Integration, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.
Linstone, H.A. and Turoff, M. (Eds) (1976), The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications,
Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Minzberg, H. (1998), ``Covert leadership: notes on managing professionals'', HBR, November/
December, pp. 141-7.
Morgan, G. (1993), Imaginization: The Art of Creative Management, Sage, London.
Morgan, G. and Ramirez, R. (1983), ``Action learning: a holographic metaphor for guiding social
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

change'', Human Relations, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 1-28.

O'Brien, W.J. (1997), ``Construction supply-chains: case study, integrated cost and performance
analysis'', in AlarcoÂn, L. (Ed.), Lean Construction, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 187-222.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L. (1985), ``A conceptual model of service quality and
its implications for future research'', Journal of Marketing, No. 49, Fall, pp. 41-50.
QLG (1995), Constructing Quality: A Strategy for Quality in Construction, Department of the
Environment, London.
Senge, P.M. (1990), The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization,
Doubleday, New York, NY.
SEI (1994), The Capability Maturity Model, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Sibson, R.E. (1971), Managing Professional Services Enterprises: The Neglected Frontier, Pitman,
New York, NY.
Sjoholt, O. (1995), From Quality Assurance to Improvement Management, Project Report 189,
Norwegian Building Research Institute, Oslo.
Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures
and Techniques, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Yin, R. (1989), Case Study Research ± Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Newbury Park,
CA.
 This article has been cited by:

1. Lukumon O. Oyedele, Babatunde E. Jaiyeoba, Kabir O. Kadiri, Samuel O. Folagbade, Iyabo K. Tijani,
Rafiu O. Salami. 2015. Critical factors affecting construction quality in Nigeria: evidence from industry
professionals. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development 6, 103-113.
[CrossRef]
2. Ahmad Rashed, Mohammad OthmanImplementing quality management in construction projects 1-5.
[CrossRef]
3. Abdulhamid Shebob, Raj Shah, Amit Mhalas. 2013. A Review of Customer Satisfaction Factors in Libyan
Housing Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Project Management 3, 26-34. [CrossRef]
4. Sami Kärnä, Juha-Matti Junnonen, Ari-Pekka Manninen, Päivi Julin. 2013. Exploring project participants'
satisfaction in the infrastructure projects. Engineering Project Organization Journal 3, 186-197. [CrossRef]
5. Calvin C. W. Keung, Li-yin Shen. 2013. Measuring the Networking Performance for Contractors in
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)

Practicing Construction Management. Journal of Management in Engineering 29, 400-406. [CrossRef]

6. Liisa Lehtiranta, Sami Kärnä, Juha-Matti Junnonen, Päivi Julin. 2012. The role of multi-firm satisfaction
in construction project success. Construction Management and Economics 30, 463-475. [CrossRef]
7. Mao Yihua, Xu Tuo. 2011. Research of 4M1E's effect on engineering quality based on structural equation
model. Systems Engineering Procedia 1, 213-220. [CrossRef]
8. E Khojeh, M K M Nor, N AghakhaniUsing ICT to improve customer satisfaction in small and medium
sized construction companies: A study among malaysian construction SMEs 480-486. [CrossRef]
9. Joseph Mpeera Ntayi, Gerrit Rooks, Sarah Eyaa, Cheng Qian. 2010. Perceived Project Value, Opportunistic
Behavior, Interorganizational Cooperation, and Contractor Performance. Journal of African Business 11,
124-141. [CrossRef]
10. Denis Leonard. 2010. Quality management practices in the US homebuilding industry. The TQM Journal
22:1, 101-110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
11. Hasan Haroglu, Jacqueline Glass, Tony Thorpe. 2009. A study of professional perspectives on structural
frame selection. Construction Management and Economics 27, 1209-1217. [CrossRef]
12. Sami Kärnä, Juha‐Matti Junnonen, Veli‐Matti Sorvala. 2009. Modelling structure of customer satisfaction
with construction. Journal of Facilities Management 7:2, 111-127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. Roshani Palliyaguru, Dilanthi Amaratunga. 2008. Managing disaster risks through quality infrastructure
and vice versa. Structural Survey 26:5, 426-434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
14. James Sommerville, Julie McCosh. 2006. Defects in new homes: an analysis of data on 1,696 new UK
houses. Structural Survey 24:1, 6-21. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Syed M. Ahmed, Raymond T. Aoieong, S.L. Tang, Daisy X.M. Zheng. 2005. A comparison of quality
management systems in the construction industries of Hong Kong and the USA. International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management 22:2, 149-161. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Peter Samuelsson, Per-Eric Gräns. 2004. Approach for Assessment and Review in a Large Construction
Company: Case of Skanska Sweden. Journal of Management in Engineering 20, 2-7. [CrossRef]
17. J. S. Goulding, M. Alshawi. 2002. Generic and specific IT training: a process protocol model for
construction. Construction Management and Economics 20, 493-505. [CrossRef]
 18. Robby Soetanto, David G. Proverbs, Gary D. Holt. 2001. Achieving quality construction projects based
on harmonious working relationships ‐ Clients’ and architects’ perceptions of contractor performance.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 18:5, 528-548. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by University of Pittsburgh At 17:18 02 February 2016 (PT)