The rationalization of quality in the construction industry: Some empirical findings

Abstract

The industry's attempt to rationalize construction quality is examined. Two schools of thought are identified. While the determinist school of thought envisages a belief that every construction element can be quantified and accounted for in writing, the indeterminist school, on the other hand, suggests otherwise. The socio-political effects on quality as well as the technical safeguards taken by both the contractor and the employer are investigated. Emphasis is then directed towards workmanship and the relevance of Quality Assurance as a management process for achieving quality standards in the construction industry. The empirical results of a field study from six building sites in the West Midlands, England are presented to highlight the salient factors which influence respondents’ perceptions and attitudes towards construction quality. The findings from this study tend to mirror the existence of both the rational and irrational approaches to quality in the construction industry. The industry needs to recognize this phenomenon in its attempt to institutionalize any procedure to both achieve and maintain quality construction.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.