Abstracts – Browse Results

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 8 results ...

Aghimien, D O, Aghimien, E I, Fadiyimu, A O and Adegbembo, T F (2018) Survival strategies of built environment organisations in a challenging economy. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 861–76.

Aghimien, D O, Oke, A E and Aigbavboa, C O (2018) Barriers to the adoption of value management in developing countries. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 818–34.

Chia, F C, Skitmore, M, Gray, J and Bridge, A (2018) International comparisons of nominal and real construction labour productivity. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 896–915.

Dang, C N and Le-Hoai, L (2018) Revisiting storey enclosure method for early estimation of structural building construction cost. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 877–95.

Hasan, A, Baroudi, B, Elmualim, A and Rameezdeen, R (2018) Factors affecting construction productivity: a 30 year systematic review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 916–37.

Lew, Y, Hassim, S, Muniandy, R and Hua, L T (2018) Structural equation modelling for subcontracting practice: Malaysia chapter. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 835–60.

Moussavi Nadoushani, Z S, Akbarnezhad, A and Rey, D (2018) Optimization of concrete placing operation based on competing carbon footprint, cost and production rate objectives. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 938–57.

Oechler, E, Molenaar, K R, Hallowell, M and Scott, S (2018) State-of-practice for risk-based quality assurance in state departments of transportation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(07), 958–70.

  • Type: Journal Article
  • Keywords: Quality management; Surveys; Construction; Construction materials; Optimization techniques; Quality assessment;
  • ISBN/ISSN: 0969-9988
  • URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-06-2016-0143
  • Abstract:
    Selecting an optimal quality assurance (QA) process can have significant implications on the long-term durability and lifecycle costs of transportation projects. Currently, the approaches used by state departments of transportation (DOTs) to optimize QA are undocumented and the impact of project-specific factors are unknown. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach State-of-practice was documented via a review of DOT guidance documents, standard specifications and minimum sampling and testing requirements; a survey of 58 state DOT representatives; and interviews with eight DOTs. Findings DOT approaches to QA management are very diverse but can be organized into five levels that range from ad hoc visual inspection of materials to DOT-managed sampling and testing. Project size, location and complexity have strong influence on the selection of a QA approach, but DOT demographics and project delivery method are less significant. Practical implications Present approaches to the selection of a QA approach are generally informal, subjective and do not involve formal risk analyses. A data-driven approach for transportation projects is clearly needed. Originality/value Understanding how state DOTs approach QA method selection will serve as a foundation for new methods of QA optimization.