Contractor Performance: Clients’ Perceptions

J SMALLWOOD
Department of Construction Management
University of Port Elizabeth
P O Box 1600, Port Elizabeth, South Africa
coajjs@upe.ac.za

Abstract

The traditional project performance measures of cost, quality and time are frequently used to measure con-
tractor performance by clients. However, performance relative to other non-traditional measures and as-
pects affects both performance, relative to the traditional measures, and overall. The other non-traditional
measures include, the environment, health and safety, productivity and worker satisfaction. Various aspects,
among other, management expertise, housekeeping, material waste and facilities affect the traditional and
‘non-traditional’ project measures.

However, the causes of poor contractor performance and image have their origins in the client, design and
contractor teams. Unsuitable procurement systems, client and/or design changes, late information, design
errors, poor contractor planning and productivity, and inadequate plant and equipment affect performance
relative to both the traditional and non-traditional measures. Various interventions such as, use of suitable
procurement systems, optimum client brief, implementation of Quality Management Systems (QMSs) and
prequalification of contractors enhance overall contractor performance.

Given the aforementioned, a descriptive survey was conducted among members of the South African Prop-
erty Owners Association (SAPOA) to determine clients’ perceptions relative to contractors’ performance,
image and related issues. Findings include the following. Contractors achieved: relatively high ratings in
terms of top and middle management; average ratings in terms of health and safety and quality, and poor
ratings in terms of concern for the environment and facilities. Contractors’ performance relative to the tradi-
tional performance measures, is influenced by client, design and contractor originated causes. Project man-
agement predominated among procurement systems in terms of suitability. Implementation of QMSs was
identified as the predominating intervention to improve the performance of the construction industry.

Keywords: Contractor performance, performance measures, procurement systems, image

LITERATURE SURVEY

Introduction

The client’s project performance measures are cost, quality, time and utility (Rwelamila & Savile, 1994).
Utility includes constructability. Traditionally, cost, quality and time have constituted the parameters within
which projects have been procured and managed (Smallwood, 1998). Although this traditional approach
has been perpetuated by tertiary construction education, clients, designers, project leaders and the construc-
tion industry, it has not been successful with the greater percentage of contracts not being completed within
budget and to quality and time requirements (Allen, 1999).
Given the aforementioned the objectives of this paper are to:

• determine the frequency to which clients’ requirements relative to the performance measures of cost,
quality and time are met by contractors;
• investigate the aspects negatively affecting contractors’ performance relative to the performance meas-
ures of cost, quality and time;
• determine clients’ perceptions of contractors’ general performance;
• determine the frequency of use of procurement systems, and their suitability; and
• investigate the effect the separation of design and construction has on the construction process, and if
any, the means by which it does.

Procurement related issues

Procurement systems and related issues are important as they affect, among other, contractual relationships,
the development of mutual goals, the allocation of risk, and ultimately, provide the framework within which
projects are executed (Dreger, 1996).

During research conducted by Smallwood and Rwelamila (1996) among general contractors (GCs) in South
Africa, a number of important indicators arose from the GCs’ stated frequency of exposure to various pro-
curement system characteristics:

• the traditional construction procurement system (TCPS) is used most frequently;

• design is not complete before selecting a contractor;
• prime costs, which do not constitute finality, are frequently made use of in contract documentation;
• architects are not always able to co-ordinate and supervise the design team;
• contractors are selected predominantly on price;
• design is separated from construction;
• the incidence of lump sum contracting is increasing; and
• contractors’ expertise is not included in design.

Further research conducted in South Africa investigated the frequency at which architectural practices en-
countered eight particular situations (Smallwood, 2000). Given the possible range of responses, namely
often, sometimes, rarely, never and don’t know, an importance index was computed to determine prevalence
and enable a comparison of situations. The importance index ranged in value between 1.0 and 4.0, with a
mid-point value of 2.5. Competitive tendering, clients revise their requirements, VOs, and drawings are
revised, were ranked first, second, third, and fourth respectively, the majority of respondents identifying
‘often’ for all four situations. The aforementioned, along with optimum project period, pre-qualification of
contractors, and design is complete when construction commences, all achieved importance indices below
the mid-point value of 2.5, indicating prevalence. However, less than half of the respondents identified ‘of-
ten’ relative to optimum project period (43.3%), prequalification of contractors (34.5%), and design is com-
plete when construction commences (43.3%).

Customer satisfaction

Research conducted in the USA by Cook et al. (2000) among a range of electrical contractor customers de-
veloped a customer satisfaction model. The model consists of five satisfaction quality dimensions: safety;
project management; contractor/customer relationship; cost, and prepared/skilled workforce.

Safety entails understanding and following safety regulations, maintaining a safe work environment and em-
ploying workers who practice safe work habits. Project management includes the ability to plan, schedule,
manage, and execute all aspects of a project from the conceptual design stage to project completion. Con-
tractor/customer relationship encapsulates the overall relationship and is addressed in terms of trust, respect,
integrity, willingness to partner, responsiveness, and communication ability. The dimension of cost includes
initial project estimates, value engineering services, lower cost alternatives, variation order pricing and pro-
ject billing activities. Staff who are knowledgeable of the electrical code of practice, skilled in electrical
construction techniques, take pride in quality work and understand advanced technologies, constitute pre-
pared/skilled workforce.

A national survey conducted during the research indicated safety to be the most important quality dimen-
sion, followed by project management and contractor/customer relationship. The prepared/skilled work-
force and cost dimensions were jointly ranked lowest in importance. Further investigation determined a
strong negative correlation between contractor/customer relationship and cost, which can be interpreted in
two ways. First, customers who value long-term contractor relationships and partnering place less impor-
tance on cost issues when determining satisfaction levels. A second interpretation could be the nature of the
bidding process. For example, a public sector customer may be forced to consider cost the most important
dimension, thus minimising the importance of long-term contractor relationships.

Kometa et al. (1995) conducted research in the UK among consultants to determine the fundamental needs
of clients. Based upon a relative importance index, functionality of a building was ranked first, followed by
safety, both during construction and throughout the life of a building, quality, time, and cost.

However, Marsh (1999) adopts a different approach. He maintains customers have two requirements for
any service or product, namely needs and wants. The needs, referred to as the hard issues, are the items
which the product must fulfil, namely time, initial cost, quality, size and whole life costing. The wants are
the soft issues that the customer desires: values; trust, and security. However, these are highly individualis-
tic and the perceived level of requirement is different for each individual. A further aspect is that the supply
of the hard issues is based upon the lowest price. The customer will only divert from the lowest price
through a perception of an increased value by another supplier. This decision is based upon the supplier’s
influence on the soft issues.

Research conducted in South Africa investigated the degree of importance of project parameters according
to architects (Smallwood, 2000). Based upon an importance index, client satisfaction was ranked first, fol-
lowed by project quality, project cost and project schedule.

Status quo

According to Allen (1999) a Construction Clients Forum survey conducted in the UK in the first quarter of
1999 revealed that:

• clients were experiencing time overruns on more than half their projects, only one third were completed
on time, with 9% finishing early;
• almost one-third of projects were over budget; and
• ‘zero defects’ was achieved on handover on 10% of projects.

IMAGE

Poor contractor performance in the form of cost over-runs, rework, late completion, an unacceptably high
accident rate, insensitivity to environmental considerations, poor work practices and adversarial relation-
ships result in a poor image of contractors and the industry (The Civil Engineering and Building Contractor,
1998).

Rutland (1986) stresses the importance of environmental, human and back-up factors. Environmental fac-
tors such as plant and equipment and sites, and human factors such as employees’ presentation attitude and
behaviour impact on the visual image. Back-up factors such as stationery, signage and various public rela-
tions related activities also affect image.
Various authors maintain the construction industry does not have a good image (Chandler, 1992; Cole,
1996; Eksteen, 1992).

Role of clients

Latham (1994) maintains clients “have a substantial role to play in setting demanding standards and insisting
upon improvements.” Ultimately, they have the most to gain from ensuring the implementation of ‘best
practice’.

According to Latham (1994) certain clients in the UK, among other, Stanhope, British Airports Authority
(BAA) and large retail chains have emerged as leaders of the construction process, introducing new methods
and techniques of procurement and site performance.

The Business Roundtable (1994) maintains cost effectiveness has been enhanced when clients have exer-
cised leadership and when there has been client/contractor co-operation. To improve cost effectiveness re-
quires that the client needs to ‘put the money in’. Clients have the economic incentive and the means to es-
tablish the goals, set the standards and control the process.

Role of design

The impact of design on contractor performance is universally acknowledged. Designers design, detail,
specify materials and processes, conduct quality and progress inspections and contribute to the health and
safety process.

Effective management of the design process is crucial for the success of projects. This includes, among
other, the development of an accurate design brief to confirm client requirements and the integration of the
work of designers, and variations, which result in out of sequence operations (Latham, 1994).

Causes of poor performance

The research conducted among GCs in South Africa by Smallwood and Rwelamila (1996) investigated,
among other, the causes of poor performance in terms of health and safety, productivity and quality. The
computation of an overall average percentage for each aspect enabled the aspects to be ranked. Inadequate
training was ranked first, followed by lack of management expertise, worker participation, QMSs and im-
provement processes. Tam and Harris (1996) cite, among other, equipment, and quality of management
team as factors which affect the performance of contractors.

However, according to the Department of Public Works (DPW) (1999), international precedents indicate
that many of the difficulties associated with the aforementioned issues arise at the design stage. The current
tender adjudication practice by the public sector, and most clients, in South Africa places undue emphasis
on price at the expense of overall value for money. This has compelled sectors of the construction industry
to seek immediate cost savings to remain competitive, with little regard for long-term consequences, among
other, inadequately trained workers, with resultant consequences for industry and client. The DPW (1999)
further maintains that the promotion of health and safety, productivity, quality and environmental protection
and the enhancement of contractor performance in South Africa will be difficult, as long as the division be-
tween design and construction persists.

Inefficient process

The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) (1998) in the UK says that various
studies suggest that there are significant inefficiencies in the construction process and that there is potential
for a much more systematised and integrated project process in which waste in all its forms is significantly
reduced and both quality and efficiency improved. The BSRIA’s study of the installation of building ser-
vices in office building and the ‘Genesis’ project undertaken by BAA with support from the BRE confirmed
that as much as 40% of the labour used on construction sites can be wasted (DETR, 1998). Given that the
efficiency of project delivery is presently constrained by the largely separated processes through which they
are generally planned, designed and constructed, integration is a pre-requisite for efficiency.

Improving performance

In terms of a multi-stakeholder perspective, the DPW advocates the following interventions to improve in-
dustry performance in South Africa (DPW, 1999):

• improvements in the work processes of contractors in co-operation with clients and designers;
• promotion of best-practice standards for, among other, health and safety, productivity and quality,
which standards contractors can aspire to;
• a shift towards a partnering approach between clients and contractors which includes design-build and
DBOT procurement systems;
• introduction of health and safety programmes, productivity improvement processes (PIPs) and QMSs.
Initial costs are likely to be offset by the benefits of the resultant improvement in efficiency;
• integrated, as opposed to piecemeal implementation of work-process improvement techniques to en-
hance the likely success of such implementation due to the synergy between health and safety, produc-
tivity and quality;
• incremental implementation of best-practice due to the debilitated condition of much of the industry;
and
• reinforcement of measures intended to protect the environment, workforce and public i.e. health and
safety.

The New South Wales Government (1998) intends to engender focus on the following as part of their strat-
egy to improve the performance of its industry: management and workforce development; workplace im-
provement; industrial relations; health and safety, and environmental management.

In terms of a contractor’s perspective, The Associated General Contractors of America (1992) advocates
Total Quality Management (TQM) as a strategy to improve overall contractor performance. TQM has as its
main thrust continuous improvement in health and safety, productivity, quality, and employee and client
satisfaction. The TQM mission in construction is to construct a quality product – an error-free one – for the
customer by preventing errors in the construction process. TQM is the linkage of the processes, which deal
with health and safety, productivity, quality and satisfaction, with the real benefit being the synergy between
them (Levitt and Samelson, 1993).

‘The SubContractor’ (1995) relates the strategies used by three contractors to realise organisation wide im-
provement. Although the strategies do not constitute a formal TQM strategy per se in terms of principles,
supporting elements and steps, they do incorporate aspects of the aforementioned.

LTA Civil Engineering’s A-Team on the Namakwa Sands Smelter project: adoption of a partnering ap-
proach; quality assurance; comprehensive programming system; training; prioritisation of health and
safety, and worker participation.

Con Roux Ltd: affirmative training and worker participation.

Neil Muller Construction: provision of a ‘Jika Hut’ (a dedicated tearoom and communication forum); daily
meetings; peer group communication; weekly site management meetings; fortnightly production meetings;
monthly unity forums between management and workers; literacy training; worker information sessions
upon project start using a 3-dimensional model to explain the project; reward system, and prioritisation of
health and safety manifested by among others, competitions.
According to ‘The SubContractor’ (1995), the aforementioned GCs, which all won awards in the 1994
South African national construction productivity awards competition, all realised a substantial improvement
in overall performance.

Neil Muller Construction, winner of the Diamond Award, achieved among other, the following results after
embarking on a productivity and quality improvement drive five years previously: an increase of 18% in
real terms in output per employee in 1994 compared to 1993; a decrease in the time period between practi-
cal completion and agreement of the final account from 12 to 4 weeks over a period of 6 years; the presen-
tation of an up-to-date cost report to clients for turnkey contracts on a weekly basis whilst agreement of the
final account was generally reached before practical completion; a 12% saving in construction time on the
Sanlam Business Park, and the achievement of a BIFSA 5-Star health and safety grading for 85% of their
projects.

A further design related issue is that of integration and co-ordination. According to Latham (1994) the in-
terim report leading to the final report ‘Constructing the Team’ found widespread acceptance among con-
sultants that a lead manager should be appointed to head an integrated design process. Such a lead manager,
hereafter referred to as a project manager (PM), is necessary due to the complexity of modern construction
techniques and the difficulty for designers to be responsible for all aspects of design and also to act as con-
tract administrators.

RESEARCH

The literature survey indicated that: cost, quality and time are the traditional project performance measures,
and that contractors generally do not meet requirements thereto; other aspects influence performance rela-
tive to the traditional performance measures; the type of procurement system influences overall perform-
ance, and the separation of design and construction negatively affects the construction process, and various
interventions can contribute to enhanced performance and consequently image. Given these findings, the
objectives of the empirical survey were to determine the following:

• the frequency to which contractors meet clients’ requirements;

• the general performance of contractors and the resulting image;
• the aspects negatively affecting contractors’ performance relative to cost, quality and time;
• the suitability of various procurement systems;
• whether the separation of design and construction affects the construction process, and if so, the manner
in which it does; and
• ways to improve the performance and image of the industry.

The South African Property Owners Association (SAPOA) is the body which represents must property own-
ers and developers in terms of monetary value. Given the scope of the research a postal, as opposed to a
telephonic survey was opted for. 32 Members responded to the national postal survey, which constitutes a
response rate of 20.1%.

90.6% of respondents undertook developments. The ‘>R10m ≤ R50m’ category (40.6%) predominated in
terms of the value of developments undertaken in the year prior to the year in which the survey was con-
ducted. This was followed by ‘>R50m ≤ R100m’ (28.1%), and ‘>R100m ≤ R500m’ (18.8%). 6.2% of
respondents had undertaken developments in excess of R1000m in value.

Many respondents employed built environment and other practitioners ‘in-house’, project managers (63.3%)
predominating, followed by quantity surveyors (56.7%), designers (50.0%), construction managers (40%)
and legal practitioners (36.7%).
96.9% of respondents had business relations with GCs who were members of the Building Industries Fed-
eration South Africa (BIFSA).

Given that on occasions respondents were required to respond in terms of a range of frequencies, or to rate
performance using a range of responses, it was necessary to compute an importance index with a minimum
value of 0, and a maximum value of 4, to enable a comparison of various aspects. The importance index is
calculated using the formula:

4n1 + 3n2 +2n3 + 1n4 + 0n5

(n1 + n2 +n3 + n4 + n5)

where n1 = Always/Excellent
n2 = Often/Good
n3 = Regularly/Average
n4 = Seldom/Poor
n5 = Never/Very poor

The importance indices in Table 1 indicate that in terms of contractors meeting respondents’ requirements,
cost (budget) was ranked first, followed by quality and time. The percentage responses relative to ‘always’
for all three requirements is significant. Similarly, the responses relative to ‘often’, one-third or less of re-
spondents, is notable. Although contractors generally do not have control over clients’ budgets and do not
initiate variation orders (VOs), they can contribute to containing increases in cost and reducing cost through
‘responsible’ contractual claims, and contributions to value engineering. However, contractors can exercise
substantial control over cost when undertaking design-build, and similar projects.

Table 1: Frequency to which contractors meet respondents’ requirements

Requirement Response per frequency (%) I I* Rank
Always Often Regularly Seldom Never
Cost (Budget) 0.0 35.5 41.9 22.6 0.0 2.13 1
Quality 3.1 25.0 21.9 50.0 0.0 1.81 2
Time 0.0 25.0 31.2 34.4 9.4 1.77 3
*II = Importance index

Respondents were asked to rate contractors in terms of twenty six aspects (Table 2). The first sixteen
ranked aspects achieved an importance index higher than the midpoint value of 2.0, indicating above aver-
age performance in these aspects. It is notable that budget, quality and time performance achieved rankings
of 13, 17 and 18 respectively, both quality and time performance having importance indices equivalent to,
and below the midpoint value of 2.0 respectively. All three levels of management were ranked within the
top ten, top and middle management achieving rankings of 1 and 5 respectively. Although safety achieved a
ranking of 6, the aspects of concern for the environment and health, both essentially measures of project
performance, achieved rankings of 26 and 20 as a result of importance indices of 1.45 and 1.83 respectively.
 Table 2: Rating of contractors in terms of various aspects
Aspect Response per frequency (%) II Rank
Excellent Good Average Poor Very Poor
Management (Top) 12.9 61.3 16.1 9.7 0.0 2.65 1
Signage (project) 3.2 51.6 35.5 9.7 0.0 2.48 2
Claims orientated 9.7 35.5 41.9 9.7 0.0 2.47 3=
Site offices 0.0 59.4 28.1 12.5 0.0 2.47 3=
Management (Middle) 0.0 59.4 28.1 9.4 3.1 2.43 5
Safety 0.0 43.8 37.4 9.4 0.0 2.38 6
Management (Site) 9.4 40.6 28.1 18.8 3.1 2.34 7=
Relations with site neighbours 0.0 37.5 46.9 6.3 0.0 2.34 7=
Plant & equipment condition 3.1 34.3 46.9 9.4 0.0 2.33 9
Administrative (project) 6.3 37.5 40.6 12.5 3.1 2.31 10
Communication 6.3 34.3 43.8 12.5 3.1 2.28 11
Storage 0.0 34.4 43.7 9.4 3.1 2.21 12
Remaining within budget 0.0 38.7 41.9 16.1 3.3 2.16 13
Industrial relations 0.0 32.3 41.9 12.9 3.2 2.14 14
Public Relations 0.0 21.9 65.6 12.5 0.0 2.09 15
Hoarding/site enclosure 0.0 37.5 37.5 9.4 12.5 2.03 16
Quality 0.0 34.4 31.2 34.4 0.0 2.00 17
Time performance 3.2 32.3 25.8 25.8 9.7 1.93 18
Housekeeping 0.0 21.9 46.9 25.0 3.1 1.90 19
Health 0.0 15.6 50.0 18.8 6.3 1.83 20
Worker attire 0.0 16.1 58.1 9.7 12.9 1.80 21
Worker skills 0.0 18.8 40.5 28.1 6.3 1.77 22
Post project service 3.1 15.6 40.6 31.3 9.4 1.72 23
Facilities (change rooms, toi-
lets, etc.) 0.0 12.5 43.8 28.1 12.5 1.58 24
Material waste 0.0 12.9 38.7 25.8 12.9 1.57 25
Concern for the environment 0.0 6.3 43.8 34.3 12.5 1.45 26

Late information, which achieved an importance index of 2.61, predominated among aspects negatively af-
fecting contractors’ performance in terms of client cost, followed by design changes, client changes and de-
sign errors (Table 3). Given that the importance indices for the aforementioned aspects are above the mid-
point value of 2.0 they can be regarded as prevalent. Although inclement weather achieved a ranking of 5,
its importance index of 1.94 is marginally below the midpoint value of 2.0. Late information and inclement
weather invariably result in claims. Design changes, client changes and design errors result in variation or-
ders (VOs), which have both financial and ‘sequence of work’ implications. Work executed out of sequence
can marginalise quality.

Table 3: Aspects negatively affecting contractors’ performance in terms of client’s cost

Aspect Response per frequency (%) II Rank
Always Often Regularly Seldom Never
Late information 22.6 35.4 22.6 19.4 0.0 2.61 1
Design changes 21.9 24.9 31.3 21.9 0.0 2.47 2
Client changes 15.6 28.1 31.3 21.9 0.0 2.39 3
Design errors 21.9 15.6 21.9 37.5 3.1 2.16 4
Inclement weather 12.5 15.6 25.0 46.9 0.0 1.94 5

Worker skills and lack of Quality Management Systems (QMSs), which achieved importance indices of 2.74
and 2.68 respectively, predominated among aspects negatively affecting contractors’ performance in terms
of quality (Table 4). Out of sequence work and late information achieved importance indices above 2.00,
and consequently can be regarded as prevalent. However, out of sequence work can be a result of late in-
formation and inclement weather. However, inadequate or poor management can also be causes. Emphasis
on production, which achieved an importance index marginally below the midpoint value of 2.0, is likely to
be contractor originated. Although client changes, design changes, poor specification and project duration
achieved importance indices below the midpoint value of 2.0, between 33.3% and 50% of respondents re-
sponded in the frequency range of regularly – often – always. The aforementioned aspects are all client and,
or design originated.

Table 4: Aspects negatively affecting contractors’ performance in terms of quality

Aspect Response per frequency (%) II Rank
Always Often Regularly Seldom Never
Worker skills 21.9 40.6 25.0 6.3 3.1 2.74 1
Lack of QMSs 21.8 31.3 34.4 9.4 0.0 2.68 2
Out of sequence work 9.4 31.3 28.1 28.1 0.0 2.23 3
Late information 12.5 18.8 40.6 25.0 3.1 2.13 4
Emphasis on production 3.1 31.3 28.1 34.4 3.1 1.97 5
Project duration 3.1 25.0 21.9 37.5 9.4 1.74 6
Poor specification 3.1 21.9 21.9 50.0 3.1 1.72 7
Design changes 9.4 6.3 31.2 50.0 3.1 1.69 8
Client changes 9.4 6.3 28.1 50.0 3.1 1.68 9
Inclement weather 0.0 15.6 25.0 50.0 9.4 1.47 10

Rework and poor productivity, which achieved importance indices of 2.61 and 2.55 respectively, predomi-
nated among aspects negatively affecting contractors’ performance in terms of schedule (Table 5). Informa-
tion flow, poor planning, client changes and design changes, all achieved importance indices above the mid-
point value of 2.00, indicating prevalence. Although inclement weather achieved an importance index mar-
ginally lower than the midpoint value of 2.0, namely 1.94, clearly it is acknowledged to be an aspect which
influences contractors’ performance in terms of schedule. Accidents have the least affect, followed by in-
adequate plant and equipment and labour unrest.

Table 5: Aspects negatively affecting contractors’ performance in terms of time

Aspect Response per frequency (%) II Rank
Always Often Regularly Seldom Never
Rework 21.9 34.4 21.9 18.7 0.0 2.61 1
Poor productivity 15.6 34.4 34.4 12.5 0.0 2.55 2
Information flow 18.8 21.8 40.6 18.8 0.0 2.41 3
Poor planning 18.8 15.6 37.5 25.0 0.0 2.29 4
Client changes 15.6 12.5 40.6 31.3 0.0 2.13 5=
Design changes 15.6 15.6 34.4 34.4 0.0 2.13 5=
Inclement weather 0.0 31.3 31.3 37.4 0.0 1.94 7
Labour unrest 9.4 9.4 21.8 56.3 0.0 1.71 8
Inadequate plant &
Equipment 0.0 19.4 29.0 45.2 3.2 1.67 9
Accidents 0.0 9.4 9.4 65.6 9.4 1.20 10

Table 6 indicates that project management, a hybrid of the TCPS, and the TCPS predominated among the
various construction procurement systems (CPCs) respondents were involved with, both achieving impor-
tance indices above the midpoint value of 2.00. The next two most frequently used procurement systems
were ‘package deal and turnkey contracts’ and design-build.

With the exception of management contracting and construction management for a fee, the CPSs ranked in
the top four in terms of suitability are the same as those ranked in the top four in terms of frequency of use.
In theory, frequency of use should reflect suitability.
 Table 6: Extent to which respondents are involved with various procurement systems
Procurement system Response per frequency (%) II Rank
Always Often Regularly Seldom Never
TCPS (project management) 20.7 20.7 38.0 10.3 10.3 2.31 1
TCPS 10.0 26.7 46.6 6.7 6.7 2.20 2
Package deal & turnkey contracts 3.1 28.1 25.0 25.0 18.8 1.72 3
Design-build 9.4 12.5 25.0 28.1 25.0 1.53 4
Management contracting 3.3 13.4 20.0 33.3 30.0 1.27 5
Construction management for a fee 3.2 6.4 19.4 25.8 45.2 0.96 6

Table 7: Suitability of various procurement systems

Procurement system Response per frequency (%) II Rank
Always Often Regularly Seldom Never
TCPS (project management) 10.0 36.7 33.3 16.7 0.0 2.41 1
TCPS 10.0 26.7 46.6 6.7 6.7 2.39 2
Package deal & turnkey contracts 6.5 38.7 25.8 22.6 0.0 2.31 3
Design-build 3.2 32.3 32.3 19.4 6.4 2.07 4
Construction management for a fee 6.9 20.7 17.2 31.1 20.7 1.61 5
Management contracting 3.3 6.7 23.3 36.7 23.3 1.25 6

Although only 32.3% of respondents maintained that the separation of design and construction does not
negatively affect the construction process, most of those that responded in the affirmative identified the vari-
ous means by which the separation could do so (Table 8).

Table 8: Means by which the separation of design and construction negatively affect the construction
process
Means Response (%) Rank
Yes No
Non-utilisation of contractor expertise 100.0 0.0 1=
Increased project time 100.0 0.0 1=
Increased design cost 100.0 0.0 1=
Communication gap between client and contractor 100.0 0.0 1=
Lack of cost effectiveness 90.0 10.0 5=
Extended lines of communication 90.0 10.0 5=
Retarded decision making 80.0 20.0 7=
Poor constructability 80.0 10.0 7=

With the exception of ‘construction site hotline (report concerns and problems)’, the majority of respondents
identified the various ways to improve the performance and image of the construction industry (Table 9).
Implementation of QMSs, identified by 100% of respondents, can be linked to the second ranked ‘lack of
QMSs’ negatively affecting contractors’ performance, and quality only achieving a ranking of 17 in terms of
the rating of contractors in terms of 26 aspects.

50% of the respondents had comments in general regarding the performance of contractors. Selected com-
ments include:

• “The relationship between the professional team and the contractor, with a greater emphasis on team-
work would far improve not only the industry image, but the project success rate.”
• “Inadequately trained personnel and lack of appreciation and pride in the job. Often workmen do not
know what is being built until it is finished.”
• “Very seldom deliver on time and always blame others for their own shortcomings.”
• “Generally good public relations at pre-contract stage, but all suffer from poor quality tradesmen and
labour, and to some extent, site supervision.”
• “Because anyone can be a contractor the worst contractors convey the general image. Answer: Regis-
tration.”
• “Contractors are not customer orientated and focused. Service and quality seem not to be words in
contractors’ vocabulary.”

Table 9: Ways to improve the performance and image of the construction industry
Aspect Response (%) Rank
Yes No
Implementation of QMSs 100.0 0.0 1
Minimum qualification requirement to contract 90.6 9.4 2
Registration of contractors 71.0 12.9 3=
Prequalification of tenderers 71.0 16.1 3=
Construction site hotline (report concerns & problems) 61.2 19.4 5

CONCLUSIONS

Literature indicates cost, quality and time to be the traditional project performance measures and the pri-
mary measures of contractor performance. Contractors generally do not meet requirements relative to these
performance measures, which is supported by the descriptive research findings emanating from South Af-
rica.

However, non-traditional performance measures such as health and safety and the environment, and other
aspects such as management and worker skills, industrial relations and facilities, affect performance relative
to cost, quality and time.

Although contractors received high ratings relative to management expertise, they received substantially
lower ratings relative to worker skills.

Lack of QMSs, poor worker skills/inadequate training, and poor management practices, namely poor plan-
ning, predominate among contractor related causes of poor performance.

Both the literature and descriptive research findings indicate that clients and designers directly influence
contractors’ performance through client changes, design changes, VOs and late information. This is likely
due to the more frequent use of the hybrid TCPS, project management, and the TCPS, even though clients
maintain the two CPSs are the most suitable. Although the majority of clients do not acknowledge the sepa-
ration of design and construction to have a negative effect on the construction process, most of the client and
design originated causes of poor performance relative to cost, quality and time, are engendered by the sepa-
ration of design. This conclusion is reinforced by the level of response relative to the means by which the
separation of design and construction negatively affect the construction process.

The ways identified to improve the performance and image of the industry amplifies the need for the imple-
mentation of QMSs, and ultimately, the need for qualified and skilled personnel in all occupations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Appropriate CPSs should be selected with an emphasis on projects which engender the integration of
design and construction. Similarly, project durations should be commensurate with the nature and
scope of the work to be undertaken and cost should not be the sole criterion for selecting a contractor.
2. Given the impact of client and design changes, and late information, clients and designers should en-
deavour to ‘freeze’ design.

3. Contractors should evolve their quality management process to realise a documented QMS. Clients and
designers in turn should prequalify contractors on quality. This will exert pressure on contractors to
achieve ‘best practice’. Contractors should also implement health and safety programmes and produc-
tivity improvement processes and concerted efforts should be made to educate and train all personnel.

REFERENCES

1. Allen, JD (1999) Measuring performance. Construction Manager, May, pp.18.

2. Chandler, D (1992) What price a dirty, dark and dangerous industry. The Chartered Builder,
April, pp. 29, 31-32.
3. Cole, M (1996) It’s not all mud and old boots! Construction Manager, November, pp.24-25.
4. Cook, JR, Andersen, NJ and Andersen, KW (2000) Customer satisfaction in electrical construc-
tion. The American Professional Constructor, Vol.24, No.1, pp.2-5.
5. DETR (1998) Rethinking Construction. London. Department of the Environment, Transport and
the Regions.
6. DPW (1999) White Paper Creating an Enabling Environment for Reconstruction, Growth and
Development in the Construction Industry. Pretoria, Department of Public Works.
7. Dreger, GT (1996) Sustainable development in construction: Management strategy for success.
Proceedings of the 1996 CIB W89 Beijing International Conference: Construction Modernization
and Education, Beijing, October, CD Rom file: //D1/papers/160-169/1633/p.163.htm
8. Eksteen, B (1992) Are builders thoughtless, dishonest or incompetent? SA Builder/Bouer, January,
pp. 20-22.
9. Kometa, ST, Olomolaiye, PO and Harris, FC (1995) An evaluation of clients’ needs and respon-
sibilities in the construction process. Engineering, Construction & Architectural Management,
Vol.2, No.1, pp.7-76.
10. Latham, M (1994) Constructing the Team. London, HMSO.
11. Levitt, RE and Samelson, NM (1993) Construction Safety Management. 2nd Edition. New York,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
12. Marsh, C (1999) Meeting the Customers Needs. Construction Manager, February, pp.18-19.
13. New South Wales Government (1998) Construct New South Wales. Sydney, New South Wales.
14. Rutland, P (1986) Presenting the company image. The Professional Builder, September, p.27.
15. Rwelamila, PD & Savile, PW (1994) Hybrid value engineering: the challenge of construction
project management in the 1990s. International Journal of Project Management, Vol.12, No.3,
pp.157-164.
16. Smallwood, JJ (1998) Health and safety and the environment as project parameters. Proceedings
of the CIB World Building Congress 1998 – Symposium C: Legal & Procurement Practices –
Rights for the Environment, Gavle, Sweden, June 7-12, pp.1587 – 1594.
17. Smallwood, JJ and Rwelamila, PD (1996) Department of Public Works Enabling Environment
18. Initiative Final Report on Initiatives to Promote Health and Safety, Productivity and Quality in
South African Construction. Unpublished report.
19. Smallwood, JJ (2000) A study of the relationship between occupational health and safety, labour
productivity and quality in the South African construction industry. Unpublished PhD (Construc-
tion Management) Thesis, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth.
20. Tam, CM and Harris, F (1996) Model for assessing building contractors’ project performance.
Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, Vol.3, No.3, pp. 187-203.
21. The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) (1992) An Introduction to Total Quality
Management. Washington, D.C., AGC.
22. The Business Roundtable (1994) CICE The Next Five Years and Beyond. New York, The Busi-
ness Roundtable.
23. The Civil Engineering and Building Contractor (1998) Constructing a better image. The Civil En-
gineering and Building Contractor, January, p. 18.
24. The SubContractor (1995) Diamond award achieved in productivity competition. The SubCon-
tractor, March/April, pp.12-21.