230 likes | 257 Views
This study critically reviews the performance measurement of Value Management (VM) studies in construction, highlighting the importance and challenges faced. It covers key research objectives, methodological approaches, and possible frameworks for evaluating organizational and project performance in VM studies.
E N D
Measuring the Performance of Value Management Studies in Construction: Critical Review Gongbo Lin & Qiping Shen Journal of Management in Engineering January 2007
Contents • Introduction • Research Objectives • Research Methodology • Measuring Organizational Performance • Measuring Project Performance • Performance Measurement in VM studies • Possibility of Adopting Existing Measurement Frameworks • Desired Features of new system
Introduction • Value Management (VM) • Very useful method to use when dealing with issues such as budget and schedule constraints arising in the construction industry • Very little research to evaluate the performance of VM studies • Causes apprehension
Research Objectives • To provide a summary of previous studies on performance measurement • To give an insight on how to develop a frame-work to meet measurement requirements in VM studies
Definitions • Performance Measurements • The process of determining how successful organizations or individuals have been in attaining their objectives (Bititci et al. 1997)
Research Methodology • 7 Major Journals Based on a study by Chau (1997) • Construction Management & Economics (CME) • Journal of Construction Engineering and Management (CEM) • Engineering Construction and Architectural Management • Journal of Management in Engineering • International Journal of Project Management • Automation in Construction • Building Research and Information (BRI)
Search Words • Performance • Measure (measurement, measuring) • Evaluate (evaluation, evaluating) • Asses (assessment, assessing) • Critical Success Factors (CSFs) • Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Number of Papers Classified by Different Levels of Measurements
Organizational Performance • 1990’s • Increased competition, • Higher standards for competitive success • Scarce resources • Various studies stressed the need for performance measurement
Organizational Performance • KPI frame work developed in late 1990’s • KPI Working Group • Tool to benchmark activities at strategic and operational level • Time, quality, cost etc. • Construction Industry Institute (CII) introduced CII Benchmarking and Metrics • Companies with statistical measurements to improve the effectiveness of capital projects • Helps to identify the companies position among peer organizations
Organizational Performance • Kagioglou et al. 2001 • Performance measurement framework on the basis of Balance Score Card (BSC), adding ‘project’ and ‘customer’ perspectives • Beatham et al. 2002 & Bassioni et al. 2004 • Integrated business improvement system that used the European Foundation for Quality Management Approach
Project Performance • Traditional approach relied on 3 indicators • Cost, Time and Quality • Kumaraswamy and Thrope, 1996 • Client satisfaction, Project team satisfaction, Technology, Environment friendliness, Health & safety • KPI working group in 2000 • Time, Cost, Quality, Client Satisfaction, Change Orders, Business Performance, Health & Safety
Performance in VM Studies • Previous Measurements • Focus on reducing the cost and enhancing the function • Mostly talks about money • Highway & Transportation Department: • ROI of $121 for every $ spent on VM programs • Identifying CSFs of VM studies is critical
Performance in VM Studies Cont.. • Shen & Liu (2003) highlighted 15 CSF’s in 4 clusters • VM team requirements • Clients influence • Facilitator Competence • Relevant Departments impact • Did not identify KPIs to link these CSFs to an operational level
Performance in VM Studies Cont.. • Benchmarking • Male et al. (1998) • Client satisfaction good indication of the performance of VM process • Data on the project after the application of the VM studies overall indication of the performance of VM studies • No indication on how the performance was achieved and how to improve the performance
Considerations • Each VM study is unique • Calls for flexible measurements • Prompt and cost efficient because of the time and resource limitation of the VM programs • No such method which incorporates the 3 requirements without reducing the accuracy
Possibilities • BSC • Not comprehensive • 4 perspectives are insufficient for VM programs • BSC focuses on strategic perspectives, not sufficient for VM studies that last only a few days • BSC is developed at strategic, rather than operational level, different for different organizations
Possibilities • European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) Model • Provides perspective to Integrate result areas and organization areas in one model • But fixed criteria
Possibilities • KPI Framework • Lacks holistic viewpoint on the relationship between the various indicators • No measurement of suppliers • Doesn’t address the innovation and learning perspective
Desired Features • System that measures not only the financial outcomes, but also the VM process • Data collection and processing methods should be prompt and easy to provide timely feedback for corrective measures • Indicators like client satisfaction, improved communication between stakeholders etc should be included in the framework