IJIE 2003

Quality and Safety

Management Systems in
Construction: Some Insight
from Contractors
Todd W. Loushine, M.S., P.E.
Peter Hoonakker, Ph.D.
Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Funding provided by CPWR (no. 1020-48)

Overview
Safety statistics for construction indicate high
fatality and injury rates
Quality research indicates inefficiencies and
mismanagement are wasting billions of dollars
The nature of construction requires the work
processes to deal with uncertainties,
continuous changes, and risk
We are investigating a new type of
management system, to deal with the
dynamic and uncertain nature of construction
work

Safety Statistics

Construction fatalities account for 22% of the U.S. total,

while employing only 7% of workforce. In comparison,
manufacturing employs 15-21% and accounts for only
11% of fatalities (BLS, 2003)
W.C. premiums cost contractors anywhere from 1.5%
to 6.9% of total project costs (Agarwal & Everett, 1997)
A construction company operating on a 3% profit
margin would need to increase sales by $333,000 to
pay for a $10,000 injury, such as amputation of a finger
(Construction Chart Book, 2002)
Indirect costs associated with worker medical injuries
were estimated up to 20.3 times greater than direct
costs (Hinze & Applegate, 1991)

Safety Issues in Construction

Safety Issues in Construction

Cost of Quality in Construction

From a quality/productivity standpoint, labor

typically accounts for 30% of project costs
(Picard, 2000)
Manpower mismanagement and construction
delays were found to contribute to 40-60% nonproductive time for onsite work (Jereas et al.,
2000)
Rework costs up to 12% of total project costs and
up to 11% of total project work hours (Love et al.,
1999)
Dun & Bradstreet data indicate that construction
business fail at a higher rate than all other
businesses (Construction Chart Book, 2002)

The Nature of Construction

Three primary participants (Carty, 1995):
Owner: wants something built
Designer: develops a plan
Contractor: converts a plan into a product
Construction is very complex and nonstandardized (Rowlinson & Walker, 1995)
Exposure to weather, dynamic site conditions,
coordination of multiple parties, etc.
81% of U.S. contractors have less than 9
employees (Construction Chart book, 2002)

Our Concept: Integrate Quality

& Safety Management

Apply traditional safety management (OSHA,

1989)

Management commitment
Employee involvement
Hazard identification and control
Training and education
Accident investigation
Program documentation and Review

To Quality Management principles (Dean &

Bowen, 1994)

Customer-focus
Team work
Continuous Improvement

Our Basic Research Question

Can quality and safety be integrated
into a management system?

Literature Review
Conducted Fall 2001, updated Fall 2003
Key search engines: ABI inform, WebSPIRS,
ProQuest, PsychINFO, and Web of Knowledge
Key words: quality, TQM, quality management,
safety, safety management, occupational
safety, construction, and construction industry
18 construction safety articles
26 construction quality articles
2 empirical and 3 theoretical articles on safety
and quality management

Safety Management Articles

Positive effect on safety performance indicators

Management commitment (9)

Audits/observations (8)
Strong safety culture/climate (8)
Communication (6)
Employee involvement (5)
Continuous improvement (4)
Safety through Designers (3)
Partnerships (1)

Training (alone) was not found to improve safety

Safety performance comprised of incidence rates,
EMR, survey response, and observations

Quality Management Articles

Positive effect on quality performance indicators:

TQM, in general (7)

Employee empowerment (4)
Partnering with subs and suppliers (4)
Customer focus (3)
Team work (3)
Management commitment (3)
Communication (2)
Continuous improvement (2)

Quality performance indicated by cost (budget) and

time (schedule) growth, number of defects/errors,
survey response, audit/observations, and customer
satisfaction rating

Quality Management Articles

Barriers
nature

to successful implementation

of construction
poor understanding of customer
expectations
lack of management
commitment/leadership
lack of worker empowerment
Self-assessment tools, such as ISO 9000,
MBNQA, and BS 5750 were helpful
Also found to improve safety performance in a
two studies

Safety and Quality

Management Articles
Safety and quality criteria used in prequalification for hiring subcontractors
The complexity of an integrated S&Q
management system requires expertise and
resources
Based on a survey, quality managers were
more positive than safety managers about
integrating quality and safety
The Deming approach was applied to safety
management (theoretical)

Objectives for Interviews

The literature review indicated:

Characteristics of safety programs
Safety performance indicators: EMR, IR
Characteristics of quality programs
Quality performance indicators: budget and
schedule growth
Safety and quality integration has been given
minimal attention by researchers

We wanted to know what contractors were

doing for safety and quality, and what they
thought about integrating quality and safety

Methods
Interviews (face-to-face and telephone) were
conducted in the Summer and Fall of 2002.
A list of interview candidates was provided by
the WI ABC, attempted to provide a variety of
work specialty and contractor size
Out of 12 candidates, nine interviews were
conducted
Semi-structured interview format was used
Interviews ran between 30-75 minutes, and
were tape recorded for transcription

Study Sample
Type of
Contractor

Union
or
Merit*
Union

Size
Category

Years in
Business

Annual
Sales

Insurer
Status

EMR

Quality
Awards

20-99

20+

$3M

Private

0.78

None

ST:
mechanical

Merit

10-19

20+

$1.5M

Private

1.02

None

ST: roofing

Merit

20-99

10-20

$3M

Private

0.61

None

Both:
carpentry

Merit

1-9

10-20

$150K

Private

0.83

None

GC

Both

100-499

20+

$60M

Private

0.43

Many

GC

Merit

20-99

20+

$30M

Private

0.50

Many

ST:
electrical

Merit

500+

20+

$100M

Self

0.66

Many

GC

Merit

20-99

20+

$10M

Private

0.62

Some

ST:
paint/glass

Union

100-499

20+

N.R.

Both

1.04

Some

ST:
concrete

Results - Safety

5 contractors felt that the EMR was the best

representation of safety performance
Safety goals cited varied, zero accidents(6)
and/or reduction of the EMR(3)
Education/training of workers(3), more involvement
by GC(3), and management commitment(2) were
cited for safety performance improvement
Contractors felt that worker attitude(3) and nature
of construction(5) were barriers
I think the biggest barrier (to safety) is the worker
himself. They have an uncanny belief that its not
going to happen to them, and they dont need to
do it (work safely).

Results - Quality

Cited measures for quality: how it looks, work

hours to complete, productivity or efficiency
rating, meeting schedule deadlines, visual
inspections, number of building defects, repeat
business, customer satisfaction rating, and
cleanliness of jobsite
Quality improvement methods reported:
education/training(4), teamwork(2),
accountability(2), audits(2), and use of prequalification(1) data for hiring subs
Reported barriers to quality improvement
included: worker attitude(4), lack of
awareness(3), product/supply problems(2), and
the nature of the construction process(2)
Boy, I dont know how you would collect data on
the quality performance.

Results Quality and Safety

Concerning similarities, 2 acknowledged the

potential benefits (improved productivity, happier
workers, better business)
6 contractors felt that safety and quality were two
entirely different issues (and required special
attention)
3 contractors indicated that a strong safety
program would probably improve quality
performance
You have people that either have their stuff
together and are doing well, and then those who
are not following safety are not running a good
business either.

Discussion
Safety response were similar to the literature
Use of EMR & IR for safety performance
Traditional safety characteristics
However, focus on worker
Quality responses were not similar to the
literature
Varying definition of quality, and metrics
Limited acknowledgement of a formal system
Similar to safety, focus on worker
Integration of quality and safety not well
understood, limited application

Summary
Construction is a complex process, involving
multiple parties (with individual interests) to
transform a mental concept into a physical
structure.
The non-standard or unpredictable nature of
construction increases the variability within
the process
An integrated safety and quality management
system could help reduce some variability in
the construction process, however it is not
very well understood at this time

Acknowledgements
Professors P. Carayon, M.J. Smith, UWMadison
Professor E.A. Kapp, UW-Whitewater
WI ABC Safety Director Don Moen
CPWR for support

Thanks for Listening!

For more information or copies of reports,
contact Todd W. Loushine at
twloushine@wisc.edu