Search results

The Nigerian construction industry is bedeviled with poor project performance and outcomes which value management (VM) could address if applied. The application of VM on Nigerian construction projects is very minimal due to certain obstacles, namely, lack of VM experts, paucity of knowledge on the techniques, etc., which inhibits the adoption into the construction industry. Therefore, this study aims to develop a conceptual framework of the adoption of VM on construction projects in a typical developing economy.

This study engaged 15 selected VM experts in two rounds of Delphi survey to develop a conceptual framework of VM adoption. The method of data analysis includes mean score, standard deviation, Kendall’s coefficient of concordance, chi-square (χ²) test, interrater agreement analysis and significant level analysis. The developed conceptual framework was sent to a team of local and international VM experts for validation.

This study reveals that the adoption of VM requires the collective effort of relevant stakeholders in the construction industry. The framework developed presents individual and collective activities to be undertaken by the stakeholders. The activities include training, legislation, government-funded research, etc. Thus, the adoption of innovative management methodology like VM requires the collaboration of academics, construction professional bodies and government parastatals. This will assist in the judicious use of limited construction resources and boost the relevance of the Nigerian construction industry among developing nations and in the global construction market.

This study used the opinions of few construction professionals that can be regarded as VM experts in Nigeria, as against engaging a pool of construction professionals who may not be knowledgeable in VM process. Engaging the few VM experts in the Nigerian construction industry is important to have a valid basis for drawing conclusion, as large questionnaire survey could be possibly filled by inexperienced or unqualified respondents if stringent criteria are not considered at the outset of this study.

As the challenges confronting a system are better addressed when known and understood, this paper aims to report the findings of a study that investigated the factors confronting professional quantity surveying using Nigeria as a case.

A questionnaire was developed and pre-tested as the instrument for collecting data. A total of 64 quantity surveyors practicing in Lagos, Port Harcourt and Enugu completed the questionnaire out of a non-probabilistic sample of 100. Severity Index and Spearman rank correlation coefficient were used in data analysis.

The outcome revealed that the top five factors perceived to be confronting the profession include poor marketing of the profession, opposition from engineers, the dominance of multinational companies that do not have quantity surveying as a distinct profession in their country of origin, widespread corruption in Nigeria and professional incompetence of some quantity surveyors. Furthermore, the two categories of respondents – professional quantity surveyors and probationers – agree in their ranking of the factors confronting the profession. The ranking of the 17 factors between the two categories of respondents was tested using Spearman’s rho. The result showed that the difference in perception of professional members of the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors and the probationers with regard to factors confronting the quantity surveying profession is not significant at p < 0.01. These findings are then discussed in the light of previous works, and implications for both academics and professionals within the quantity surveying profession were highlighted.

This study has highlighted the key issues to consider as stakeholders attempt to advance the course of quantity surveying and construction cost management profession.

The purpose of the work presented here is to assess the cost management practices of civil engineering organisations in Nigeria, with an overall aim of developing a generic cost management process map. The first objective is to compare existing frameworks theoretically to highlight their strengths and weaknesses. The second objective is to use the findings of the first objective to assess or benchmark the developed process map obtained from the multiple cases. The third objective is to compare the generic process map with the traditional building cost management process map to evaluate the strengths and shortcomings of the generic process map, which resulted in conclusions and recommendations made at the end of the research.

Data for the work was collected via semi-structured interviews, review of literature and official documents of the civil engineering organisations visited. To achieve the stated objectives, comparative analysis technique was used to compare existing frameworks on cost management to obtain the basis to benchmark the generic process map. The single case narrative technique was used to present each case; and the cross-case synthesis technique was used to present the multiple cases on each cost management process examined. Then, process maps were deployed to represent the homogeneous sets of civil engineering organisations, out of which the generic process map was developed. Comparative analysis was again deployed to compare the generic process map with the traditional building process map of cost management practice to evaluate the findings.

It was found out that the generic civil engineering process map is not as detailed and effective as the building process map in providing best value for money, accurate early cost estimates, accurate cost certainty and post-contract cost control.

This research study provides an industrial impetus to push for the involvement of more quantity surveyors (QS) as cost management process owners in the procurement of civil engineering projects in Nigeria, hence encouraging government’s efforts in the enforcement of more accurate project cost estimates and promoting the QS’s project-specific advice on capital, operational, maintenance and life cycle costs.