COMPARISON OF CONSTRUCTION RELATED REWORK IN UGANDA AND MOZAMBIQUE
Main Article Content
Keywords
Mozambique, Public Construction, Rework, Uganda
Abstract
The realisation of the expected minimum client quality requirements in both the products and processes in the construction industry remains challenging. The effects have been increased wastage and value loss through rework in both public and private sector initiatives providing social services in developing countries. The purpose of the research was to compare the impact of construction related rework on project budgets and schedule in public building construction in both Uganda and Mozambique, being examples of developing countries. The objective of such comparison is to document where focus should probably be placed in ensuring that quality requirements in construction are achieved. Case study approach was adopted and separate case study protocols prepared. The scope of study in the Ugandan project involved construction of classroom blocks, health centres and staff housing between 2008 and 2011. The scope of study in the Mozambique project involved the construction of 209 public housing units in Mozambique. The units of study were rework-related project budget and schedule overruns with further comparison of rework-related impacts on both project budgets and schedules under study. In Uganda, the mean percentage rework range was 12.45% - 15.58% of the construction contract scope. It was determined that the mean percentage of rework-related impact on project budget and schedule was 4.53% and 8.42% respectively. In Mozambique, the mean percentage rework range was 3.35% - 4.40% of the construction contract scope. It was determined that the mean percentage of rework-related impact on project budget and schedule was 0.56% and
12.0% respectively. Acknowledging the differing cultural contexts of both countries where the study was conducted, these findings could improve governance and strengthen the regulatory framework on quality management in both Uganda and
Mozambique.
Article Metrics Graph
References
residential construction projects. International journal of project management,
27, 501-511.
Abdul-Rahman, H. 1996. Some observations on the management of quality among
construction professionals in the UK. Construction Management and
Economics, 14, 485-495.
Alinaitwe, H. M. 2008. An assessment of clients’ performance in having an efficient
building process in Uganda. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management,
14, 73-78.
Aljassmi, H. & Han, S. 2012. Analysis of Causes of Construction Defects Using Fault
Trees and Risk Importance Measures. Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management.
Arditi, D. & Lee, D.-E. 2003. Assessing the corporate service quality performance of
design-build contractors using quality function deployment. Construction
Management & Economics, 21, 175-185.
Arditi, D. & Lee, D. E. 2004. Service quality performance of design/build contractors
using quality function deployment. Construction Management and Economics,
22, 123-127.
Beamon, B. M. 1998. Supply chain design and analysis::: Models and methods.
International journal of production economics, 55, 281-294.
Briscoe, G. H., Dainty, A. R. J., Millett, S. J. & Neale, R. H. 2004. Client-led strategies
for construction supply chain improvement. Construction Management &
Economics, 22, 193-201.
Castillo-Villar, K. K., Smith, N. R. & Simonton, J. L. 2012. A model for supply chain
design considering the cost of quality. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 36,
5920-5935.
Cox, Morris, Rogerson & Jared 1999. A quantitative study of post contract award
design changes in construction. Construction Management and Economics, 17,
427-439.
Enshassi, A., Mohamed, S., Mustafa, Z. A. & Mayer, P. E. 2007. Factors affecting
labour productivity in building projects in the Gaza Strip. Journal of Civil
Engineering and Management, 13, 245-254.
Garvin, D. A. 1987. Competing on the 8 dimensions of quality. Harvard business
review, 65, 101-109.
Haupt, T. C. & Whiteman, D. E. 2004. Inhibiting factors of implementing total quality
management on construction sites. The TQM Magazine, 16, 166-173.
Hegazy, T., Said, M. & Kassab, M. 2011. Incorporating rework into construction
schedule analysis. Automation in Construction, 20, 1051-1059.
Idoro, G. I. 2010. Influence of quality performance on clients’ patronage of indigenous
and expatriate construction contractors in Nigeria. Journal of Civil
Engineering and Management, 16, 65-73.
Josephson, P.-E., Larsson, B. & Li, H. 2002. Illustrative benchmarking rework and
rework costs in Swedish construction industry. Journal of Management in
Engineering, 18, 76-83.
Kakitahi, J. M., Landin, A. & Alinaitwe, H. M. 2013. An exploratory study of rework
causality in Uganda. Construction Innovation: Information, Process,
Management, 13, 266 - 280.
Kam, C. W. & Tang, S. L. 1997. Development and implementation of quality
assurance in public construction works in Singapore and Hong Kong.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 14, 909-928.
Kazaz, A., Talat Birgonul, M. & Ulubeyli, S. 2005. Cost-based analysis of quality in
developing countries: a case study of building projects. Building and
Environment, 40, 1356-1365.
Lenferink, S., Tillema, T. & Arts, J. 2014. Lifecycle driven planning of infrastructure:
public and private experiences with more integrated approaches for managing
project complexity. EJTIR, 14, 82-101.
Love, P. & Mandal, D. 1999. Determining the causal structure of rework influences in
construction. Construction Management and Economics, 17, 505-517.
Love, P. & Li, H. 2000. Quantifying the causes and costs of rework in construction.
Construction Management and Economics, 18, 479-490.
Love, P. E., Edwards, D. J., Irani, Z. & Goh, Y. M. 2011. Dynamics of rework in
complex offshore hydrocarbon projects. Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management, 137, 1060-1070.
Love, P. E., Lopez, R., Edwards, D. J. & Goh, Y. M. 2012. Error begat error: Design
error analysis and prevention in social infrastructure projects. Accident
Analysis & Prevention, 48, 100-110.
Low, S. P. & Yeo, H. K. 1998. A construction quality costs quantifying system for the
building industry. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
15, 329-349.
Mills, A., Love, P. E. & Williams, P. 2009. Defect costs in residential construction.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135, 12-16.
Newcombe, R. 2003. From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping
approach. Construction Management and Economics, 21, 841-848.
Oyewobi, L., Ibironke, O., Ganiyu, B. & Ola-Awo, A. 2011. Evaluating rework cost-
A study of selected building projects in Niger State, Nigeria. Journal of
Geography and Regional Planning, 4, 147-151.
Palaneeswaran, E., Ng, T. & Kumaraswamy, M. 2006. Client satisfaction and quality
management systems in contractor organizations. Building and Environment,
41, 1557-1570.
Rwelamila, P. D., Talukhaba, A. A. & Ngowi, A. B. 1999. Tracing the African Project
Failure Syndrome: the significance of ‘ubuntu’. Engineering Construction &
Architectural Management (Blackwell Publishing Limited), 6, 335-346.
Sommerville, J. & Robertson, H. W. 2000. A scorecard approach to benchmarking for
total quality construction. International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 17, 453-466.
Wells, J. 1993. Appropriate building technologies: an appraisal based on case studies
of building projects in Senegal and Kenya. Construction Management and
Economics, 11, 203-216.
Yasamis, F., Arditi, D. & Mohammadi, J. 2002. Assessing contractor quality
performance. Construction Management & Economics, 20, 211-223.
Yin, R. K. 2010. Case study research; Design and methods, London, Sage
Publications.
Zwikael, O. 2009. Critical planning processes in construction projects. Construction
Innovation: Information, Process, Management, 9, 372-387.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
The Journal of Construction Project Management and Innovation (JCPMI) is committed to the principles of Open Access publishing and upholds the ethos of freely disseminating research findings to enhance knowledge and understanding within the field of construction project management and innovation.
In accordance with our commitment to open scholarly communication, all articles published by JCPMI are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC). This licensing agreement allows others to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the original author and source are credited. The license also ensures that authors retain copyright over their work while allowing the wider community to access, use, and build upon the content.
The terms of the CC BY-NC license are designed to facilitate the following:
- Attribution: Users must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. This can be done in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses the user or their use.
- Non-Commercial: Users may not use the material for commercial purposes.
- No Additional Restrictions: Users may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
By publishing with JCPMI, authors agree to these terms and ensure that their work is accessible and reusable under the conditions of the CC BY-NC license, thereby contributing to the ongoing exchange of knowledge and information in an Open Access environment.
Creative Commons CC Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License