An Assessment of the Role of Estate Surveyor and Valuer in Project Management
Chapter One
Aim
The principal aim of this research is to find out the project management practices carried out within the PM organizations that affect building projects performance.
Objectives
The specific objectives of this research are:
- To identify the project management practices carried out by estate surveyor and Valuer for management of the selected building projects
- To measure the time, cost and quality performances of the buildingprojects executed by estate surveyor and Valuer
- To determine if the performance of building projects managed by estate surveyor and Valuer differs significantly from the performance of building projects managed by another organization
- To determine the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer that significantly influence the performance of building projects managed by estate surveyor and Valuer.
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Project Management Practices
Introduction
According to the ASCE1 Quality Manual [1987], the discipline of project management can be defined as follows:
“Project management is the art of directing and coordinating human and material resources throughout the life of a project by using modern management techniques to achieve predetermined objectives of scope, cost, time, quality and participation satisfaction.”
The Project Manager, central to the project management process, is also defined as:
“A qualified individual or a firm authorized by the owner to be responsible for the day- to-day management and administration and for coordinating time, equipment, money tasks and people for all or specified portions of a specific project.”
Although quality management is a portion of the management of a whole project, the idea in the work of Das et al. [2000] describing quality management practices, is worth noting:
American Society of Civil Engineers
Quality management practices are described as “the decisions and actions involving quality planning and leadership, quality training etc.” The emphasis in this definition is the concept of management practices involving decisions and actions.
The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary also gives a relevant definition of “Practices” as:
“Ways of doing something that is the usual or expected way in a particular organization or situation.”
An articulation of the above concepts facilitates defining project management (PM) practices, in this study, as:
‘The day-to-day ways of carrying out management and administrative activities and decisions that is the usual or expected ways of directing and coordinating projects resources by authorized firm or an individual construction professional for the purpose of achieving set project performance in terms of the time, cost and quality objectives.’
Construction professionals within project management teams usually find themselves being part of one of the parties to a building project. The three main parties to a building contract (client, contractor and consultant) form an integral part of the project management team in the construction industry. They all come together to take decisions and carry out activities for the purpose of achieving satisfactory project performance.
Sharma and Gadenne [2002], in their investigation into an inter industry comparison of quality management practices and performance found out that there is a strong association between quality management practices and performance. This finding provides strong evidence concerning the effect that project management practices have on project performance. An investigation into this relationship is therefore necessary.
The Differences in PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer
Management practices vary from organization to organization and the performance of the outcomes is what makes a practice optimum [Bryde, 2003]. The cause of variation in the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer may not be only due to the kind of organization but also the type and purpose of project and most importantly the level of performance desired. This observation falls in line with the finding made by Sharma and Gadenne [2002], in an investigation into the effect of quality management practices on performance. They identified through an inter-industry survey of 140 respondents, comprising 58 from the service sector, 62 from the manufacturing sector and 20 from the construction sector, that quality management practices differed somewhat from industry to industry and organization to organization. The focus, though, was on quality performance and not overall project performance. Also, Gowan and Mathieu [2005] in the empirical study of 449 system managers found out that the good Information Systems (IS) project performance depends to a greater degree on the intervention of specific project management practices (formal project methodologies and outsourcing). The project performance was however in the context of meeting project target dates only.
These findings give an indication that the kind of project management practices engaged in for the management of a project depends on the kind of organization. This will hence have a subsequent relation to the project management team composition too. The practices present within different organizations therefore require identification and further examination. Subsequently, the influence of such practices on the performance of the corresponding projects executed becomes highly necessary to determine. The performance must also not be looked at with a highlight on time only or quality only. The effect will have to incorporate both time and quality not leaving out cost too. These three basic project objectives are fundamental to the totality of project performance.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHOD
General Approach for Research
Although the choice of research methodology is a difficult step in the research process, the particular approach adopted in any particular research is preceded by critical thought process [Walker, 1996]. The two main methodologies, qualitative and quantitative, were combined in this study. First, there was collection of qualitative data on the Project Management (PM) practices carried out within the selected organizations through interviewing and desk-based study. Second, the qualitative data on the practices were organized into categorical statements and assigned numerical values to enable a quantitative measurement. The effect of the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer on measured performance of cases of completed projects were thus determined through quantitative analytical methods; multiple regression analysis. Data for the measurement of project performance and the effect of the practices thereof were obtained through survey questionnaire. Thus by way of step-wise conversion, the qualitative was brought into the quantitative domain (Sarantakos, 2005).
– Identification of PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer
Data on the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer carried out within the organizations was obtained by means of semi-structured questionnaire and desk based study. This was after the following relevant research works have been examined for the purpose of choosing the suitable method:
- A research into the organizational learning practices in a project management environment by Kotnour (2000) in which he used survey questionnaire to study the organizational learning practices of practicing project
- Ling et al. (2004) used literature review only to get data on factors that have potential influence on design-build and design-bid-build projects
- In a case-study research into factors influencing project delivery, Blismas et al. (2004) used examination of relevant literature and exploratory interviews to identify factors that influence project delivery. They also employed Personal semi-structured interviews and examination of published
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Introduction
Data gathered from the field are two-fold. The first was data of some of the existing PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer of the selected organizations. The second set of data was on parameters required for measurement of the performance of selected cases of substantially completed projects and subsequent ranking of the importance of the identified PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer on the overall performance of building projects within the selected organizations. In both sets of data the respondents were construction professionals involved in the management of building projects. Performance indices were developed for the measurement of time, cost and quality performance whilst a 5-point scale was also developed for measurement of the significance of the effect that the identified PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer had on each project’s performance. The analysis is carried out mainly by use of significance testing and multiple regression.
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
The principal aim of this research is to find out the project management practices carried out within the PM organizations that affect building projects performance. Four objectives were thus set out in order to achieve this aim:
- To identify the project management practices carried out for management of the selected building projects within theorganizations
- To measure the time, cost and quality performances of the buildingprojects executed within the organizations
- To determine if the performance of building projects managed by estate surveyor and Valuer differs significantly from the performance of buildingprojects managed by another organization
- To determine the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer that significantly influence the performance of building projects within theorganizations
Identified PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer
Table 4.1 indicates the identified project management practices prevailing amongst the organizations. Whilst some of the practices are peculiar to one organization others are common to two or all the organizations. PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer such as: Contractor pre-financing works with money either than advance mobilizations provided by the client; obtaining project funds quarterly; and monitoring progress of works jointly between project consultant and local clients in conformance with specially developed project monitoring progress reporting format were peculiar to the ‘TETFund’, ‘Common Fund’ and ‘SIF” organizations respectively. The practice of bearing entire project cost with support from local clients too is identified to be peculiar to the ‘SIF’ organization. Other PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer: “selecting project consultants competitively”, “selecting contractors through open competitive tendering” etc. are common amongst all the estate surveyor and Valuer.
From the interview, all the practices possessed some amount of potential effect on project time, cost and quality objectives.
Measured project performance
A trend of project performance was obtained from computation of time, cost and quality performance of the projects within each organization. With regards to time performance 87.9%, out of the 66 projects obtained from the organizations, was below trend; these projects completed behind schedule. Also, 50.1% of the projects was completed above budget; performed below trend. With regards to quality performance only 15.2% of the projects performed below trend. Satisfaction with the general quality of the projects was found to be high.
Comparison of Performance of the Projects between the Organizations
The observation of existence or no-existence of significant differences between the projects studied within the estate surveyor and Valuer has been done pair-wise using the independent t-test. Where significant difference is found it was also observed that the respective significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer also varied and vice versa.
Difference in Time Performance of the Projects
From table 4.4, the test for equality of means with time performance as the test variable indicate that the time performance of the projects within the ‘TETFund’ organization does not differ significantly from those within the ‘Common Fund’ organization. The time performance of the projects obtained from the ‘SIF’ organizations is significant different from all the other organizations. The difference occurring have been observed to emanate from differences in practices regarding: release of project funds, entire financing of project and the honoring of payment certificates
Difference in Cost Performance of the Projects
The independent t-test in table 4.5 indicates that there is significant difference in the cost performance of projects across all the estate surveyor and Valuer. The significant difference observed have been found to emanate from differences in practices concerning: varying of original scope of works, consultant selection, determination of winning bid and the interim valuation of works.
Difference in Quality Performance of the Projects
The Quality performance of the projects studied under the ‘TETFund’ organization is not significantly different from the projects within the ‘SIF’ organization. This is similar with the projects studied under the ‘Common Fund’ and ‘SIF’ organizations. The Quality performance of the projects within the ‘TETFund’ organization studied significantly differed from the project.
managed by the ‘Common Fund’ organization as shown in Table 4.6. This significant difference is observed to mostly stem from the practice relating to pre-finacing of the construction works, the honouring of payment certificates, and execution of site instruction.
Significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer affecting Project Performance
Significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to Time Performance of the Projects
The regression analysis in table 4.7 (a) revealed that the model indicating significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to time performance can explain 84.7%, 76.4% and 89.3% of variation in the time performance of the projects studied under the ‘TETFund’, ‘Common Fund’ and ‘SIF’ organizations respectively.
Not all the significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer have positive relationship with the time performance of the projects within the ‘TETFund’ organization. However all the significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to time performance of the projects within the ‘Common Fund’ organization were found to exhibit positive relationship whilst those within occurring within the ‘SIF’ organization exhibited negative relationship.
A common PM practice of selecting contractors through pre-qualification largely based on previous working experience with client was observed to have significant effect on the time performance of the projects studied under both the ‘TETFund’ and ‘Common Fund’ organizations. However, between the ‘TETFund’ and ‘SIF’ organizations as well as between the ‘Common Fund’ and ‘SIF’ organizations, all the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer significantly relating to time performance of their respective projects varied from organization to organization.
Significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to Cost Performance of the Projects
The regression analysis in table 4.7 (b) revealed that the model indicating significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to cost performance can explain 58.5%, 80.5% and 97.0% of variation in the quality performance of the projects studied under the ‘TETFund’, ‘Common Fund’ and ‘SIF’ organizations respectively.
Not all the significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer have positive relationship with the cost performance of the projects within the ‘TETFund’ organization. However all the significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to cost performance of the projects within the ‘Common Fund’ organization were found to exhibit positive relationship whilst the single significant PM practice occurring within the ‘SIF’ organization related negatively to cost performance of the respective projects.
All the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer significantly relating to cost performance of the respective projects varied from organization to organization.
Significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to Quality Performance of the Projects
The regression analysis in table 4.7 (c) revealed that the model indicating significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer relating to time performance can explain 84.7%, 76.4% and 89.3% of variation in the time performance of the projects studied under the ‘TETFund’, ‘Common Fund’ and ‘SIF’ organizations respectively.
Not all the significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer have positive relationship with the quality performance projects within the ‘TETFund’ and the ‘SIF’ organizations. However the significant PM practice relating to time performance of the projects within the ‘Common Fund’ organization exhibited positive relationship with quality performance of the respective projects.
The involvement of client in the process of management of the projects is observed as a common characteristic dominating the PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer affecting quality performance of the projects within all the organizations.
Summary
As the objectively measured performance of the projects exhibit significant difference from organization to organization, it is observed that the corresponding significant PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer affecting the corresponding performance also vary from organization to organization and vice versa.
Recommendations
Specific Recommendations
- The function of identifying projects through systematic procedures should be encouraged on every individual project. This should not be left in the hands of only the end users of a project. This should be organized into anintegrated Bfunction where project financiers and end users as well as project consultants are involved.
- In the competitive selection of consultants for a contract or group of contracts, previous working experience with client should always be among factors given high
- Giving advance mobilization to contractors is said to motivate them to execute satisfactory work and this should therefore be possibly practiced on every
- In order to minimize delay in the honoring of payment certificates after they have been issued, the number of persons involved in the process of checking and endorsing them should be reduced; only those who would be held responsible in the event of wrong payment should be
- Contractors should always confirm verbal instructions, whether given by the consultant or client’s team members, before the
- A linkage between organizations’ regional/district/local client’s offices and national head offices should be emphasized and always made to function in order to facilitate effective monitoring of
- The practice of valuation of works for payment at defined stages of the project should be, as much as possible, carried out by project managers and this, is believed, will always urge contractors to work at an increased
Recommendation for Further Studies
- For further studies, it is recommended that more performance metrics recently developed in other research works (like: benefit to end users, benefit to national infrastructure etc.) be included for measurement. With this, the projects should not necessarily be organization-based. This should lead to the development of a predictive model for determining PM Practices by estate surveyor and Valuer that promote increased project performance as well as those that contribute to poor project.
REFERENCES
- Ahemed, S.A. and d’ Aston, A., 1993. Cross-national evaluation of made-in concept using multiple cues. European Journal of Marketing, 27 (7), 39-52.
- Andersen, S., 1983. Need assessment: a way of improving the value of new products. Design Studies, 4 (3), 183-187.
- Aqueveque, C., 2006. Extrinsic cues and perceived risk: the influence of consumption Situation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23 (5), 237-247.
- Bilkey, W.J. and Nes, E., 1982. Country-of-origin effects on product evaluations. Journal of International Business Studies, 13, 83-99.
- Bloch, P.H., 1995. Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response. Journal of Marketing, 59 (3), 16.
- Bruce, M. and Cooper, R., 2000. Creative product design: A practical guide to requirements capture management. Wiley, Chester.
- Brucks, M., 1985. The effects of product class knowledge on information search behaviour. Journal of Consumer research, 12, 1-16.
- Cordell, V.V., 1992. Effects of consumer preferences for foreign sourced products. Journal of International Business Studies, 23, 251-70.
- Crilly, N., Moultrie, J. and Clarkson, P.J., 2004. Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Design Studies, 25, 547-577
- Davis, F., 1994. Fashion, Culture, and Identity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
