IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v22y2004i3p263-275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The use of Process Cost Model (PCM) for measuring quality costs of construction projects: model testing

Author

Listed:
  • S. L. Tang
  • Raymond Aoieong
  • Syed Ahmed

Abstract

A 'Process Cost Model (PCM)' approach has been proposed previously (Aoieong et al., 2002) for measuring the quality costs of construction projects. The PCM is proposed because the traditional models on PAF (prevention, appraisal and failure) quality costs have been found to be unsuitable for the construction industry, although they may be successful in the manufacturing industry. The focus of PCM, unlike PAF model, is no longer on capturing the total quality costs of an entire project but the quality costs of a particular process. It is simple and more feasible to be applied in construction projects and is in line with the 'process approach' and 'continual improvement' concepts of the latest (year 2000) version of the ISO 9000 quality management system, which is a step closer to Total Quality Management (Aoieong and Tang, 2002). The current paper describes two case studies using the PCM to capture quality costs on two construction projects. The case studies reveal that the PCM is feasible, practicable and easy to use. It is also possible to use the model to achieve 'continual improvement' by referencing the quality costs of a particular construction process. The Process Cost Model (PCM) is therefore a better model than the traditional PAF model for application in the construction industry for measuring quality costs.

Suggested Citation

  • S. L. Tang & Raymond Aoieong & Syed Ahmed, 2004. "The use of Process Cost Model (PCM) for measuring quality costs of construction projects: model testing," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 263-275.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:22:y:2004:i:3:p:263-275
    DOI: 10.1080/0144619032000064091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0144619032000064091
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0144619032000064091?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Flamino Viola & Margarida Saraiva, 2015. "Quality costs and Corporate Taxation. Literature review," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2015_13, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
    2. Stelian BRAD, 2010. "A General Approach of Quality Cost Management Suitable for Effective Implementation in Software Systems," Informatica Economica, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(4), pages 97-113.
    3. Bradley Eeing & Jamie Brown Kruse, 2006. "Valuing self-protection: income and certification effects for safe rooms," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(10), pages 1057-1068.
    4. Markus Hoppe & Avner Engel & Shalom Shachar, 2007. "SysTest: Improving the verification, validation, and testing process— Assessing six industrial pilot projects," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 323-347, December.
    5. Olanrewaju Abdul Lateef & Lee Alice Hui Jing, 2022. "Investigation of the poor-quality practices on building construction sites in Malaysia," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 2583-2600, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:22:y:2004:i:3:p:263-275. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.