Integrating Quality Systems In Construction Projects
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Integrating Quality Systems In Construction Projects as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 3,617
- Pages: 6
International Journal of Project Management Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 317±322, 1999 # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 0263-7863/99 $20.00 + 0.00
PII: S0263-7863(98)00048-9
Integrating quality systems in construction projects: the Chilean case Alfredo Serpell
Department of Construction Engineering and Management, Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, Casilla 306, Correo 22, Santiago, Chile
A summary of the principal characteristics, problems, limitations and bene®ts of the integration of quality systems based on the ISO 9000 in Chilean construction projects, is presented. These implementation processes were carried out by dierent construction companies with no previous experience on quality systems or ISO 9000, at the requirement of one owner. The particular and general characteristics of the processes and the lessons learned are analysed according to the appraisal of the dierent participants. Special focus is given to the impact that quality systems had on the relationship between the owner and its contractors. Finally, some recommendations are proposed for a successful integration of quality systems in construction projects, as well as for future implementations in countries with limited experience on this regard. # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved Keywords: quality systems, ISO 9000, construction projects, owners' requirements, construction procurement
Introduction During the last decade, the activities of quality assurance in most of Chilean construction companies have been limited only to meet the technical speci®cations of ®nal products, with a strong dependency on the owner's inspection.1 However, this approach is changing rapidly and several owners are now transferring the responsibility for quality assurance to contractors. This situation has impelled construction companies to make eorts to implement quality systems in their projects. It is important to note that in Chile, most of the construction projects are contracted using the traditional approach and that other approaches like the design-construction or turn-key contracts are seldom used. Quality assurance and quality management are topics that have received high level of attention during the last decade in many countries and industrial sectors. As stated by Hirao,2 company-wide quality management has become a serious concern for businesses all over the world. However, in the construction industry the application of quality management concepts and tools has been more dicult due to its reactive nature and the complexities of the construction process. As reported by Baden Hellard3, in a study of experiences in 12 countries, the construction industry has lagged behind other industrial sectors in these countries. This has also been the case in Chile and most of the Latin American countries.4, 5
Research was carried out to understand the problems, limitations and bene®ts expected from the integration of quality systems (QS) in an environment with limited knowledge and experience in this topic, and how the relationship between an owner and its contractors can be aected by this situation. An additional focus of this study was to observe how it possibly aects the procurement of construction services. In the cases studied, QS was a procurement obligation and the longer term issue here is whether it should always be one or whether QS becomes `second nature'. To achieve the previous objectives, three construction companies which were running ®ve construction projects between November 1993 and April 1994 were observed and interviews applied to projects' personnel. The contractors were contractually required by the owner to apply quality systems based on ISO 9000 series during the execution of mining projects. The description of the projects observed in the study is shown in Table 1, along with the time at which the observation on site was carried out. The interviews were carried out through all the levels of personnel involved in the QS implementation processes. A total of 33 persons were interviewed, as shown in Table 2. Figure 1 shows the relationship between the dierent participants involved in the QS implementation processes. Regarding the projects included in the study, the following aspects are interesting to note for clari®cation purposes: 317
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell Table 1 Description of projects studied (adapted from Crovetto6) Project
Type
A B C D E
Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil
Completion term (months)
Contractor's Previous QS Experience
Date of study* (months)
12 7 6 6 11
NO NO NO NO YES
2.5 2 2 1.5 10
works and steel structures works, piping and steel structures works, piping and steel structures works, piping and steel structures works, piping and steel structures
*Time from the beginning of the project Table 2 Description of interviewed personnel (adapted from Crovetto6) Project
Top company management
Site Professionals
QA/QC Oce
Crew Foremen
Site Administratives
Owner's Representatives
A B C D E Totals
2 0 0 1 0 3
2 1 2 1 1 7
3 2 2 0 1 8
2 1 2 1 1 7
2 0 0 0 0 2
2 1 1 1 1 6
Figure 1 Relationship between projects' participants
. Two of the three companies involved did not have previous experience in the application of quality systems in their projects, neither did they possess any knowledge of the ISO 9000 series.
Figure 2 Description of the phases of the implementation process
318
. The time between the adjudication of contracts and the beginning of projects was 45 days and this was used for the preparation and development phases of the QS for each project. . The two contractor companies without experience in QS, required the services of a consulting company which had acted as the owner's inspection in a previous contract. . The control of the quality system was exercised by the owner itself through quality auditors at the site that were trained during a previous contract. The structure of the implementation processes was similar for all the projects and it included three sequential phases: preparation, development and implementation, as described in Figure 2. Each phase was
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell
considered concluded when speci®c planned objectives were reached. Then it was possible to continue with the development of the next phase.
Characteristics of the implementation process The QS implementation introduced changes in dierent aspects of the organisations involved in the process. Interviews served to analyse the impact of this changes and to identify ideas for improving future implementations. In the next sections of this paper, the main issues observed are discussed. Characteristics associated with the organisational structure of the work Concerning their organisational structure on site, contractors had to incorporate a Quality Assurance and Control Oce (QA/QC), which was directly under the control of Project Management. Contractors' site organisations were quite similar, but dierences were found in their support towards the QA/QC oce which depended on the magnitude of the project and on each contractor's commitment to the QS. The principal novelty for the owner's organisation, was the inclusion of site quality auditors in charge of assuring the eectiveness of the contractors' quality systems. Due to the lack of experience of contractors and indeed of their own, they had to be very ¯exible and appeal to the good faith of contractors to achieve this purpose. Characteristics related to incentives In order to motivate and achieve the workers' commitment to the system, the contractors took some of the following actions: . Key implementation processes personnel received monetary and non-monetary incentives. . There was a permanent presence of management on site to show commitment to the quality system. . Supervisors were consulted about operating procedures and they participated in the elaboration of procedures associated with their jobs. . Objectives pursued through the implementation of QS were communicated in a clear and precise way to site personnel. . Personnel were convinced that training on QS would provide them with better quali®cations for future jobs. The main incentive given by the owner to contractors, was the promise to incorporate them into a `short list' for future projects. In spite of this incentive, contractors were not very convinced of the bene®ts of QS and the system was only seen as an owner's contractual requirement. As a direct consequence of this, none of the construction companies was able to maintain the application of the system beyond the time speci®ed by the contract. Characteristics related to training The contractors took several actions to confront the training needs of personnel, as follows:
. An intensive all-level training program at work was developed, with the objective of reducing the lack of knowledge and experience in the use of the concepts and techniques that sustain the application of a QS. . A permanent evaluation of the learning and progress of participants was performed, and a periodical evaluation of the training program was carried out. . Knowledge matrixes were developed, in which each member of the organisation was associated to the needed quality knowledge and abilities. It is also important to underline that the results obtained by one contractor that extended the training programs to direct labour levels were not better than those which only trained down to foremen level. This situation was basically due to the lack of workers' interest, to the work pressure produced by the short construction time allowed, and to the lack of appropriate incentives.
Barriers or limitations At the beginning of the QS implementation processes, both cultural and operational barriers were observed, some of which could not be surpassed and notably aected the success of the processes. The most important faced by the contractors were as follows: . Lack of knowledge of the concepts and tools of QS systems. . De®cient communication of objectives to personnel. . Unlinked implementation processes between the main oce and the site. . Improper organisation of the company, not adequate for the implementation process. . Lack of real commitment, leadership and interest of the company's top management. . Problems with the de®nition of the QS project scope due to inexperience in the topic. . Lack of interest and commitment of site personnel. Furthermore, particular barriers faced by project managers at the construction sites were as follows: . Lack of knowledge about the company's quality manual and procedures. . Short project completion times. . Lack of participation in the elaboration of operational and administrative procedures. . Insucient knowledge of project documents, a fact that produced an inadequate handling of changes and supplies as well as late detection of design quality problems. . Bad attitudes in front of the system's application. . Lack of knowledge and expertise in the construction market, in order to involve designers, suppliers and subcontractors in the process. . Natural rejection of the system due to the extra eorts that its implementation implied. . Lack of quali®ed personnel on quality and quality systems in the construction market at all levels. The owner's sta also faced several important barriers which are mentioned below: . Rejection of the QS by owner personnel. . Insucient management of changes and supplies that aected the owner/contractor relationship. 319
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell Table 3 Problems mentioned by contractors' personnel (adapted from Crovetto6) Projects C
Problems
A
B
Lack of knowledge and expertise of site personnel Lack of performance parameters to evaluate the implementation process Rejection to the system by site personnel Diculties associated with system documents Rotation of site personnel (foremen and workers) Diculties in the design and implementation of the ®les required by the system Objectives con¯icts between production area and the QS Diculties in management and consolidation of the QA/QC oce at work Lack of presence and motivation in site of companies' top management Mistakes and diculties in the training program Diculties in the integration of professionals to the implementation process No prior knowledge about the system Negative reaction and bad initial attitude Diculties associated with training and communication of the system at the site Lack of relationship between the new system and bene®ts that workers could receive
q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q
q q q q q q q q q q q q q q
q q q q q
D
E
q q q q
q q q q
q
q q q
q
q q q q q
q q q
q q q
. Once the system was put under way and accepted, it increased the order and the speed in the projects progress. . Trust between the hierarchic levels on site increased considerably. . A re-evaluation of workers' responsibility, image, and ethics by professionals was achieved. . The disappearance of the classic antagonistic point of view about work inspection for workers and foremen was encouraged.
. Improper training of the contract administration team. . Insucient control of the main parameters of project management: quality, time and cost. . Divergence of objectives inside the owner's team. . Weaknesses in the creation of owner/contractor teams.
Particular problems of the implementation processes
Bene®ts perceived by the owner's sta from the implementation of QS's are mentioned below:
The principal problems as identi®ed by contractors' personnel are shown in detail in Table 3. The answers have been individualised by each project. According to the owner's personnel, the following problems were associated with the contractors' performance:
. The relationship owner/contractor shifted to an issue of mutual trust. . The combination of the QS with the organisational structure of the owner reduced the `work dead times', due to better decision making on site. . Re-work was reduced due to the fact that the personnel became conscious of a greater responsibility on the quality of their assigned tasks. . The management of changes and/or modi®cations was improved. . The completion of tasks was documented and registered in detail, reducing the possibility of subjective interpretations.
. Diculty for generating commitment of site personnel to the system. . Contractors demonstrated severe diculties in the management of system documentation and in the maintenance of the system ®les. . Lack of initiative of contractors to begin with the implementation process, that ampli®ed the impact of the short construction completion time.
Success factors
Bene®ts of the system
The processes were also supported by success factors or positive aspects found in the cultural characteristics of the members of the construction companies, which should be taking into account for future QS implemen-
The most relevant bene®ts as perceived by contractors' professionals are shown in Table 4. Foremen also added the following bene®ts:
Table 4 Bene®ts mentioned by contractors' professionals (adapted from Crovetto6) Bene®ts
A
B
Relationship with the owner improved ostensibly System provided order, control and planning to site works System favoured quick treatment of doubts and/or work modi®cations System increased the participation and communication at site System improved team working of personnel Implementation processes allowed to spread companies and projects objectives Implementation processes improved the leadership conditions of people in charge of workers
q q
q
320
q q q
Projects C q q q q
q
D
E
q
q q
q q q
q
q
q
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell
tation processes. Among the most important factors mentioned are the following: . Local companies showed high levels of personal involvement in their human relationships. Their relationships with owners, suppliers, and personnel were based on seriousness and honesty. . There were adequate levels of self-examination between the professional and management levels. . Many workers felt very identi®ed with their companies, a fact that was used for motivation purposes.
Recommendations The analysis of the research results provided several recommendations for future improvement of QS implementation processes. These are discussed in the next sections of this paper. Regarding the contractors' organisation of the work . To assure that company and project organisational structures are ®tted to the proposed projects objectives. . To adequately structure and support the QA/QC oce at the site, according to the tasks that it must ful®l. . To reduce the hierarchies and delegate decision making at site level, in order to achieve a greater ¯exibility and decrease `work dead times'. . To provide the necessary training and abilities to QA/QC oces members. . To establish means for improving communication among dierent levels. . To assure the use of a clear and common language to avoid distortion of QS concepts and terminology, specially at the lower organisational levels.
For owners . To introduce the contractors at early stages of the project in order that they can better understand owner's requirements. . To consider the possibility of `partnering' with projects participants.
Regarding incentives Contractors can use the following recommendations: . To develop statistical tools to measure the achieved results and communicate them in order to increase the commitment to, and trust in the system. . To stipulate adequate incentive plans for critical implementation personnel. Owners can also play an important role: . To establish actions for increasing QS knowledge and expertise in the construction market, by requiring their use within their procurement processes.
. To promote by incentive, ISO certi®cation of suppliers and service companies, as well as the involvement of designers and subcontractors.
Related to training Contractors developed several training activities: . To increase the quality of persons in charge of the training program. . To continue with training at all levels, given the fact that the fundamental limitations for the implementation processes were the lack of knowledge and expertise of site engineers and personnel on the topic. . Construction companies should keep applying quality systems in their projects even if it is not a contractual requirement, to learn and acquire expertise on it. . To use quality circles as a better and quicker way to acquire knowledge, expertise and search of solutions. Owners should foresee realistic periods between contract adjudication and the beginning of the construction project, to allow proper planning and implementation of the QS by contractors, and in this way, to avoid the contractor's dilemma of attending to the system or to the production.
Conclusions The introduction of the modern concepts of quality systems is not an easy task in environments where the lack of knowledge and experience create particular limitations or barriers to implementation processes. This exploratory study allowed us to know the limitations and the most important characteristics which were present in dierent QS implementation processes. Also some bene®ts produced by a QS were identi®ed. Furthermore, an eort was made to transform the information obtained into useful recommendations. These recommendations are directed to prevent foreign and local companies which want to implement a QS basing it on external experience, without taking into account the particular characteristics of the local construction market. It is stressed, ®nally, the need of creating a `domino eect' in the market towards quality systems, in order to convince construction companies about the advantages of its application and in this way to induce their use by their own initiative and not as an owner's contractual requirement. Also, this initiative should be extended to suppliers, designers, subcontractors and other organisations in the construction industry. Regarding construction procurement, the main conclusion is that quality systems can provide a suitable mechanism to improve the relationships between an owner and its contractors. The main advantages oered by this approach are as follows: . It establishes a common goal for all parties involved. . It performance depends on the creation of a team spirit between the contractor and the owner, and it favours partnering. 321
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell
. It creates communication channels between owner and contractors, as required by the QS. . It requires a formal and rigorous handling of documentation and the creation of records that help to solve problems. . Because of its nature, a QS requires the attendance to problems and con¯icts in the short-term. However all these advantages can also be sources of problems if the QS is not well applied and if there is a high level of distrust between the parties. This fact makes it necessary to teach contractors and owners to work under this scheme.
Sjoholt, editor. Quality Management in Building and Construction. Norwegian Building Research Institute, 1994; 41±48. 4. De Solminihac, H., Serpell, A. and Figari, C., Quality in the Chilean construction industry: a general diagnosis (in Spanish). BoletõÂn de InformacioÂn TecnoloÂgica BIT, 1996, 3(6), 27±30. 5. Covelo Silva M. A. A Modernizacao do Macrocomplexo da Construcao Civil: O Posicionamento Competitivo na Contribuicao ao Desenvolvimento do PaõÂ s. Seminario Internacional, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 5±6 December, 1994: 5±13. 6. Crovetto A. Quality Improvement Program for Construction Companies. Master Thesis, Department of Construction Engineering and Management, Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, 1995.
Acknowledgements The author expresses his gratefulness to CorporacioÂn de InvestigacioÂn de la ConstruccioÂn and to FONDECYT, for the ®nancial support granted that made possible this research through the Project 1940609.
References 1. Serpell A., AlarcoÂn L. F. Inspection of Construction Projects in Chile, Real Behavioural Analysis. Research Report ICC-II-1, Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, 1986. 2. Hirao S. Management and QualityÐas the basis of continuous improvement of the competitiveness of Takenata Corporation. In: Odd Sjoholt, editor. Quality Management in Building and Constructios. Norwegian Building Research Institute, 1994: 20± 28. 3. Baden Hellard R. Quality Management in ConstructionÐA State of the Art Report on a Worldwide Canvass. In: Odd
322
Alfredo Serpell is Associate Professor of Construction Engineering and Management at the Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile. He teaches project management, construction productivity improvement, construction quality management and construction procurement. His current research interests include quality management, productivity improvement, lean construction and construction procurement practices in Chile. Since 1990 he has directed and managed a consulting group that provides services to the Chilean construction industry and has been involved in the promotion of continuous improvement of this sector. He obtained a Civil Engineering Degree from the Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, an MSc. in Architectural Engineering and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering, both from the University of Texas at Austin, USA.
PII: S0263-7863(98)00048-9
Integrating quality systems in construction projects: the Chilean case Alfredo Serpell
Department of Construction Engineering and Management, Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, Casilla 306, Correo 22, Santiago, Chile
A summary of the principal characteristics, problems, limitations and bene®ts of the integration of quality systems based on the ISO 9000 in Chilean construction projects, is presented. These implementation processes were carried out by dierent construction companies with no previous experience on quality systems or ISO 9000, at the requirement of one owner. The particular and general characteristics of the processes and the lessons learned are analysed according to the appraisal of the dierent participants. Special focus is given to the impact that quality systems had on the relationship between the owner and its contractors. Finally, some recommendations are proposed for a successful integration of quality systems in construction projects, as well as for future implementations in countries with limited experience on this regard. # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved Keywords: quality systems, ISO 9000, construction projects, owners' requirements, construction procurement
Introduction During the last decade, the activities of quality assurance in most of Chilean construction companies have been limited only to meet the technical speci®cations of ®nal products, with a strong dependency on the owner's inspection.1 However, this approach is changing rapidly and several owners are now transferring the responsibility for quality assurance to contractors. This situation has impelled construction companies to make eorts to implement quality systems in their projects. It is important to note that in Chile, most of the construction projects are contracted using the traditional approach and that other approaches like the design-construction or turn-key contracts are seldom used. Quality assurance and quality management are topics that have received high level of attention during the last decade in many countries and industrial sectors. As stated by Hirao,2 company-wide quality management has become a serious concern for businesses all over the world. However, in the construction industry the application of quality management concepts and tools has been more dicult due to its reactive nature and the complexities of the construction process. As reported by Baden Hellard3, in a study of experiences in 12 countries, the construction industry has lagged behind other industrial sectors in these countries. This has also been the case in Chile and most of the Latin American countries.4, 5
Research was carried out to understand the problems, limitations and bene®ts expected from the integration of quality systems (QS) in an environment with limited knowledge and experience in this topic, and how the relationship between an owner and its contractors can be aected by this situation. An additional focus of this study was to observe how it possibly aects the procurement of construction services. In the cases studied, QS was a procurement obligation and the longer term issue here is whether it should always be one or whether QS becomes `second nature'. To achieve the previous objectives, three construction companies which were running ®ve construction projects between November 1993 and April 1994 were observed and interviews applied to projects' personnel. The contractors were contractually required by the owner to apply quality systems based on ISO 9000 series during the execution of mining projects. The description of the projects observed in the study is shown in Table 1, along with the time at which the observation on site was carried out. The interviews were carried out through all the levels of personnel involved in the QS implementation processes. A total of 33 persons were interviewed, as shown in Table 2. Figure 1 shows the relationship between the dierent participants involved in the QS implementation processes. Regarding the projects included in the study, the following aspects are interesting to note for clari®cation purposes: 317
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell Table 1 Description of projects studied (adapted from Crovetto6) Project
Type
A B C D E
Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil
Completion term (months)
Contractor's Previous QS Experience
Date of study* (months)
12 7 6 6 11
NO NO NO NO YES
2.5 2 2 1.5 10
works and steel structures works, piping and steel structures works, piping and steel structures works, piping and steel structures works, piping and steel structures
*Time from the beginning of the project Table 2 Description of interviewed personnel (adapted from Crovetto6) Project
Top company management
Site Professionals
QA/QC Oce
Crew Foremen
Site Administratives
Owner's Representatives
A B C D E Totals
2 0 0 1 0 3
2 1 2 1 1 7
3 2 2 0 1 8
2 1 2 1 1 7
2 0 0 0 0 2
2 1 1 1 1 6
Figure 1 Relationship between projects' participants
. Two of the three companies involved did not have previous experience in the application of quality systems in their projects, neither did they possess any knowledge of the ISO 9000 series.
Figure 2 Description of the phases of the implementation process
318
. The time between the adjudication of contracts and the beginning of projects was 45 days and this was used for the preparation and development phases of the QS for each project. . The two contractor companies without experience in QS, required the services of a consulting company which had acted as the owner's inspection in a previous contract. . The control of the quality system was exercised by the owner itself through quality auditors at the site that were trained during a previous contract. The structure of the implementation processes was similar for all the projects and it included three sequential phases: preparation, development and implementation, as described in Figure 2. Each phase was
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell
considered concluded when speci®c planned objectives were reached. Then it was possible to continue with the development of the next phase.
Characteristics of the implementation process The QS implementation introduced changes in dierent aspects of the organisations involved in the process. Interviews served to analyse the impact of this changes and to identify ideas for improving future implementations. In the next sections of this paper, the main issues observed are discussed. Characteristics associated with the organisational structure of the work Concerning their organisational structure on site, contractors had to incorporate a Quality Assurance and Control Oce (QA/QC), which was directly under the control of Project Management. Contractors' site organisations were quite similar, but dierences were found in their support towards the QA/QC oce which depended on the magnitude of the project and on each contractor's commitment to the QS. The principal novelty for the owner's organisation, was the inclusion of site quality auditors in charge of assuring the eectiveness of the contractors' quality systems. Due to the lack of experience of contractors and indeed of their own, they had to be very ¯exible and appeal to the good faith of contractors to achieve this purpose. Characteristics related to incentives In order to motivate and achieve the workers' commitment to the system, the contractors took some of the following actions: . Key implementation processes personnel received monetary and non-monetary incentives. . There was a permanent presence of management on site to show commitment to the quality system. . Supervisors were consulted about operating procedures and they participated in the elaboration of procedures associated with their jobs. . Objectives pursued through the implementation of QS were communicated in a clear and precise way to site personnel. . Personnel were convinced that training on QS would provide them with better quali®cations for future jobs. The main incentive given by the owner to contractors, was the promise to incorporate them into a `short list' for future projects. In spite of this incentive, contractors were not very convinced of the bene®ts of QS and the system was only seen as an owner's contractual requirement. As a direct consequence of this, none of the construction companies was able to maintain the application of the system beyond the time speci®ed by the contract. Characteristics related to training The contractors took several actions to confront the training needs of personnel, as follows:
. An intensive all-level training program at work was developed, with the objective of reducing the lack of knowledge and experience in the use of the concepts and techniques that sustain the application of a QS. . A permanent evaluation of the learning and progress of participants was performed, and a periodical evaluation of the training program was carried out. . Knowledge matrixes were developed, in which each member of the organisation was associated to the needed quality knowledge and abilities. It is also important to underline that the results obtained by one contractor that extended the training programs to direct labour levels were not better than those which only trained down to foremen level. This situation was basically due to the lack of workers' interest, to the work pressure produced by the short construction time allowed, and to the lack of appropriate incentives.
Barriers or limitations At the beginning of the QS implementation processes, both cultural and operational barriers were observed, some of which could not be surpassed and notably aected the success of the processes. The most important faced by the contractors were as follows: . Lack of knowledge of the concepts and tools of QS systems. . De®cient communication of objectives to personnel. . Unlinked implementation processes between the main oce and the site. . Improper organisation of the company, not adequate for the implementation process. . Lack of real commitment, leadership and interest of the company's top management. . Problems with the de®nition of the QS project scope due to inexperience in the topic. . Lack of interest and commitment of site personnel. Furthermore, particular barriers faced by project managers at the construction sites were as follows: . Lack of knowledge about the company's quality manual and procedures. . Short project completion times. . Lack of participation in the elaboration of operational and administrative procedures. . Insucient knowledge of project documents, a fact that produced an inadequate handling of changes and supplies as well as late detection of design quality problems. . Bad attitudes in front of the system's application. . Lack of knowledge and expertise in the construction market, in order to involve designers, suppliers and subcontractors in the process. . Natural rejection of the system due to the extra eorts that its implementation implied. . Lack of quali®ed personnel on quality and quality systems in the construction market at all levels. The owner's sta also faced several important barriers which are mentioned below: . Rejection of the QS by owner personnel. . Insucient management of changes and supplies that aected the owner/contractor relationship. 319
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell Table 3 Problems mentioned by contractors' personnel (adapted from Crovetto6) Projects C
Problems
A
B
Lack of knowledge and expertise of site personnel Lack of performance parameters to evaluate the implementation process Rejection to the system by site personnel Diculties associated with system documents Rotation of site personnel (foremen and workers) Diculties in the design and implementation of the ®les required by the system Objectives con¯icts between production area and the QS Diculties in management and consolidation of the QA/QC oce at work Lack of presence and motivation in site of companies' top management Mistakes and diculties in the training program Diculties in the integration of professionals to the implementation process No prior knowledge about the system Negative reaction and bad initial attitude Diculties associated with training and communication of the system at the site Lack of relationship between the new system and bene®ts that workers could receive
q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q
q q q q q q q q q q q q q q
q q q q q
D
E
q q q q
q q q q
q
q q q
q
q q q q q
q q q
q q q
. Once the system was put under way and accepted, it increased the order and the speed in the projects progress. . Trust between the hierarchic levels on site increased considerably. . A re-evaluation of workers' responsibility, image, and ethics by professionals was achieved. . The disappearance of the classic antagonistic point of view about work inspection for workers and foremen was encouraged.
. Improper training of the contract administration team. . Insucient control of the main parameters of project management: quality, time and cost. . Divergence of objectives inside the owner's team. . Weaknesses in the creation of owner/contractor teams.
Particular problems of the implementation processes
Bene®ts perceived by the owner's sta from the implementation of QS's are mentioned below:
The principal problems as identi®ed by contractors' personnel are shown in detail in Table 3. The answers have been individualised by each project. According to the owner's personnel, the following problems were associated with the contractors' performance:
. The relationship owner/contractor shifted to an issue of mutual trust. . The combination of the QS with the organisational structure of the owner reduced the `work dead times', due to better decision making on site. . Re-work was reduced due to the fact that the personnel became conscious of a greater responsibility on the quality of their assigned tasks. . The management of changes and/or modi®cations was improved. . The completion of tasks was documented and registered in detail, reducing the possibility of subjective interpretations.
. Diculty for generating commitment of site personnel to the system. . Contractors demonstrated severe diculties in the management of system documentation and in the maintenance of the system ®les. . Lack of initiative of contractors to begin with the implementation process, that ampli®ed the impact of the short construction completion time.
Success factors
Bene®ts of the system
The processes were also supported by success factors or positive aspects found in the cultural characteristics of the members of the construction companies, which should be taking into account for future QS implemen-
The most relevant bene®ts as perceived by contractors' professionals are shown in Table 4. Foremen also added the following bene®ts:
Table 4 Bene®ts mentioned by contractors' professionals (adapted from Crovetto6) Bene®ts
A
B
Relationship with the owner improved ostensibly System provided order, control and planning to site works System favoured quick treatment of doubts and/or work modi®cations System increased the participation and communication at site System improved team working of personnel Implementation processes allowed to spread companies and projects objectives Implementation processes improved the leadership conditions of people in charge of workers
q q
q
320
q q q
Projects C q q q q
q
D
E
q
q q
q q q
q
q
q
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell
tation processes. Among the most important factors mentioned are the following: . Local companies showed high levels of personal involvement in their human relationships. Their relationships with owners, suppliers, and personnel were based on seriousness and honesty. . There were adequate levels of self-examination between the professional and management levels. . Many workers felt very identi®ed with their companies, a fact that was used for motivation purposes.
Recommendations The analysis of the research results provided several recommendations for future improvement of QS implementation processes. These are discussed in the next sections of this paper. Regarding the contractors' organisation of the work . To assure that company and project organisational structures are ®tted to the proposed projects objectives. . To adequately structure and support the QA/QC oce at the site, according to the tasks that it must ful®l. . To reduce the hierarchies and delegate decision making at site level, in order to achieve a greater ¯exibility and decrease `work dead times'. . To provide the necessary training and abilities to QA/QC oces members. . To establish means for improving communication among dierent levels. . To assure the use of a clear and common language to avoid distortion of QS concepts and terminology, specially at the lower organisational levels.
For owners . To introduce the contractors at early stages of the project in order that they can better understand owner's requirements. . To consider the possibility of `partnering' with projects participants.
Regarding incentives Contractors can use the following recommendations: . To develop statistical tools to measure the achieved results and communicate them in order to increase the commitment to, and trust in the system. . To stipulate adequate incentive plans for critical implementation personnel. Owners can also play an important role: . To establish actions for increasing QS knowledge and expertise in the construction market, by requiring their use within their procurement processes.
. To promote by incentive, ISO certi®cation of suppliers and service companies, as well as the involvement of designers and subcontractors.
Related to training Contractors developed several training activities: . To increase the quality of persons in charge of the training program. . To continue with training at all levels, given the fact that the fundamental limitations for the implementation processes were the lack of knowledge and expertise of site engineers and personnel on the topic. . Construction companies should keep applying quality systems in their projects even if it is not a contractual requirement, to learn and acquire expertise on it. . To use quality circles as a better and quicker way to acquire knowledge, expertise and search of solutions. Owners should foresee realistic periods between contract adjudication and the beginning of the construction project, to allow proper planning and implementation of the QS by contractors, and in this way, to avoid the contractor's dilemma of attending to the system or to the production.
Conclusions The introduction of the modern concepts of quality systems is not an easy task in environments where the lack of knowledge and experience create particular limitations or barriers to implementation processes. This exploratory study allowed us to know the limitations and the most important characteristics which were present in dierent QS implementation processes. Also some bene®ts produced by a QS were identi®ed. Furthermore, an eort was made to transform the information obtained into useful recommendations. These recommendations are directed to prevent foreign and local companies which want to implement a QS basing it on external experience, without taking into account the particular characteristics of the local construction market. It is stressed, ®nally, the need of creating a `domino eect' in the market towards quality systems, in order to convince construction companies about the advantages of its application and in this way to induce their use by their own initiative and not as an owner's contractual requirement. Also, this initiative should be extended to suppliers, designers, subcontractors and other organisations in the construction industry. Regarding construction procurement, the main conclusion is that quality systems can provide a suitable mechanism to improve the relationships between an owner and its contractors. The main advantages oered by this approach are as follows: . It establishes a common goal for all parties involved. . It performance depends on the creation of a team spirit between the contractor and the owner, and it favours partnering. 321
Quality systems in construction projectsÐthe Chilean case: A Serpell
. It creates communication channels between owner and contractors, as required by the QS. . It requires a formal and rigorous handling of documentation and the creation of records that help to solve problems. . Because of its nature, a QS requires the attendance to problems and con¯icts in the short-term. However all these advantages can also be sources of problems if the QS is not well applied and if there is a high level of distrust between the parties. This fact makes it necessary to teach contractors and owners to work under this scheme.
Sjoholt, editor. Quality Management in Building and Construction. Norwegian Building Research Institute, 1994; 41±48. 4. De Solminihac, H., Serpell, A. and Figari, C., Quality in the Chilean construction industry: a general diagnosis (in Spanish). BoletõÂn de InformacioÂn TecnoloÂgica BIT, 1996, 3(6), 27±30. 5. Covelo Silva M. A. A Modernizacao do Macrocomplexo da Construcao Civil: O Posicionamento Competitivo na Contribuicao ao Desenvolvimento do PaõÂ s. Seminario Internacional, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 5±6 December, 1994: 5±13. 6. Crovetto A. Quality Improvement Program for Construction Companies. Master Thesis, Department of Construction Engineering and Management, Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, 1995.
Acknowledgements The author expresses his gratefulness to CorporacioÂn de InvestigacioÂn de la ConstruccioÂn and to FONDECYT, for the ®nancial support granted that made possible this research through the Project 1940609.
References 1. Serpell A., AlarcoÂn L. F. Inspection of Construction Projects in Chile, Real Behavioural Analysis. Research Report ICC-II-1, Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, 1986. 2. Hirao S. Management and QualityÐas the basis of continuous improvement of the competitiveness of Takenata Corporation. In: Odd Sjoholt, editor. Quality Management in Building and Constructios. Norwegian Building Research Institute, 1994: 20± 28. 3. Baden Hellard R. Quality Management in ConstructionÐA State of the Art Report on a Worldwide Canvass. In: Odd
322
Alfredo Serpell is Associate Professor of Construction Engineering and Management at the Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile. He teaches project management, construction productivity improvement, construction quality management and construction procurement. His current research interests include quality management, productivity improvement, lean construction and construction procurement practices in Chile. Since 1990 he has directed and managed a consulting group that provides services to the Chilean construction industry and has been involved in the promotion of continuous improvement of this sector. He obtained a Civil Engineering Degree from the Ponti®cia Universidad CatoÂlica de Chile, an MSc. in Architectural Engineering and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering, both from the University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Related Documents
Integrating Quality Systems In Construction Projects
November 2019 6
Building Trusts In Construction Projects
May 2020 9
Quality Systems
June 2020 7
Integrating With Quality Center
May 2020 11
Projects - Hayward & Barrett Construction
May 2020 4