هزینه کیفیت در دبی: مطالعه موردی تحلیلی از پروژه های ساخت و ساز مسکونی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|5302||2009||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||7820 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : International Journal of Project Management, Volume 27, Issue 5, July 2009, Pages 501–511
In a city like Dubai, where one of the biggest and fastest growing construction markets in the world exists, the need to estimate the cost of quality in the construction projects becomes a vital task. This research used the prevention–appraisal–failure (PAF) model to evaluate the cost of quality (CoQ) and to determine its optimum value – the level of quality that minimizes the total CoQ – for the residential construction projects in Dubai. The results revealed that the CoQ in such projects in Dubai represents 1.3% of the total project civil work cost and that the optimum CoQ value was estimated to be 1.34% of the total CoQ. Failure costs, on the other hand, were estimated to be .7% of the project cost.
The construction sector in the Arab Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries has been witnessing a booming expansion; with more than $800 billion of active projects in the Gulf and this figure is growing by up to $10 billion a week. Trends indicated this market to worth over $1 trillion in 2007. Dubai, the Gulf’s regional centre, was expected by the Middle East Economic Digest (MEED) to be preparing to invest up to $200 billion mainly in residential, tourism, transport and utility projects by 2025 . According to recent statistics, up to five million residential units are under construction in the GCC, including more than 1,400 new high-profile developments collectively valued at over US$ .66 trillion. In 2006 there was about 2100 projects either planned or underway in the Gulf region, of which the UAE and Saudi Arabia made up 29% and 20%, respectively . In the United Arab Emirates (UAE), particularly in the Emirate of Dubai, the construction sector is one of the leading sectors of economic growth in the country (growing by 10% in 2005), and is among the biggest and fastest growing construction markets in the world. The growth in construction has, in turn, fueled the growth of the UAE economy contributing 8% of the country’s overall growth domestic product (GDP) and representing 11% of the non-oil-related GDP in 2005 . According to a study by the Dubai government, “Dubai construction sector’s absolute contribution to the GDP is on an upswing, achieving an increase of 23% during the period 2000–2004, and an annual growth rate of 5% ”. In 2005, there were 304,983 workers employed in the construction projects in Dubai . A prominent feature of the construction activity in Dubai is the construction of large-scale projects with very high standards, such as the Emaar Marina Complex and Burj Dubai – the world’s tallest tower. Obviously, these types of projects require very high scale of quality management. Unfortunately, construction contractors working in Dubai rarely have a realistic idea of how much profit they are losing to attain an acceptable level of quality. In addition, they don’t realize the relationship between the costs incurred to prevent defects – through prevention and appraisal techniques – and the costs incurred to rectify defects. The competitive pressures facing firms in today’s environment have led to increasing reliance on quality-oriented, results-based improvements. As a way of meeting the challenges they’re facing today, organizations throughout the world have made quality a priority in the form of total quality management (TQM), continuous improvement (CI), and similar initiatives . Organizations’ ability to measure costs related to quality has, thus, become a necessity; ‘‘unless it can become measurable, it cannot be manageable .’’ In such a rapidly growing construction market in Dubai, the need to estimate the cost of quality in the construction projects becomes a vital task. However, any serious attempt to improve quality must take into account the costs associated with achieving quality since the objective of achieving a product with a good quality is not only to meet the customer requirements, but also to do it at the lowest cost. This can only happen by reducing the costs needed to achieve quality, and the reduction of these costs, in turn, is only possible if they are identified and measured. Therefore, measuring and reporting the cost of quality (CoQ) should be considered an important issue for companies . The objectives of this research are: (1) to use the prevention–appraisal–failure (PAF) model to evaluate the cost of quality (CoQ) as a percentage of the overall cost of residential construction projects in Dubai; (2) to determine the optimum value for CoQ; and (3) to test the relationships among different variables affecting CoQ. Following the introduction, the rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 briefly reviews the cost of quality concept and the PAF model. The research framework is given in Section 3 followed by findings and analysis in Section 4. Finally, conclusions are given in Section 5.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
One main objective of this analytical study was to use the PAF model to study the CoQ for the residential construction projects in Dubai. Work included analyzing a mega project – as a case study – in Dubai in which there were more than 200 large construction companies working representing a sample size of 14.55% of the total number of large construction companies in Dubai. While all people in the construction industry know the rule stating that it is better to do things right from the first time, they do not know how much ‘better’ it is. This research concluded that the average failure cost in the construction industry in Dubai is .7% of the project total cost. The contractors, now, have to be aware that around .7% of the total project cost will be lost due to not doing the things right from the first time. Therefore, they have to try to minimize the defects and reworks in their projects. However, in their attempt to do so, they should consider the optimum value for cost of quality calculated in this research, above which it will be more economical for the contractors to rectify the defected items rather than increasing the preventive and appraisal costs to try to do them right from the first time. Although the PAF model assumes that the more the preventive plus appraisal costs, the less the failure costs, this research failed to conclude a clear direct relation between increasing or decreasing the values of preventive plus appraisal costs on the failure costs. This can be reasoned to uniqueness of the construction industry in Dubai, project’s owners (clients) have to interfere, using the PMT and the consultant, to improve the quality of the performed works in the project, with no additional cost on the contractors. This external interference made some deviation in the original PAF model. Despite that the research was able to identify relationships between some independent variable and the dependent variable (CoQ), one drawback was the reliance on a small sample of expert to develop the theoretical framework. However, bearing in mind the uniqueness of this research with respect to the region, this limitation was not easy to be avoided. A suggested future work would, typically, include using this work results to re-operationalize the dimensions of the dependent variable. In this research, the cost of external failures was not studied because the project was not yet handed over to the client or to the end user. As a matter of fact, after handing over, some defects are expected to occur to the handed over works. The contractor may be affected by the immersing of these defects after handing over as he will be requested to rectify all these defects and his image as a contractor delivering high quality products may be affected. Thus, we suggest that another research paper to complete this research and include the external failure costs in the calculation of the CoQ. We assume that by including the external costs, the optimum value for CoQ will be more accurate than the one calculated in this paper. One other interesting point for future research would be the time impact for repairing the quality defects. As a matter of fact, repairing the defected works or redoing any work will require more time than making the work correctly from the first time. This additional time will result in two things; either the contractor will accelerate his works so he can catch up the planned completion date, or the contractor will not meet the planned completion date. In both cases additional money will be paid by the contractor either to accelerate the works, in the first case, or to pay liquidated damages to the client, in the second case. That is, the time impact of repairing the defected works affects the contractor’s CoQ.