Surveying the Field: Changes in Quantity Surveying

Written by Aref Fanous

Edited by Aaron Mullins
Copyright Aref Fanous 2012. All rights reserved.
Smashwords Edition
The original research presented in this eBook received ethical clearance from
Coventry University.
I would like to thank Aaron Mullins for undertaking the editing process.

www.aaronmullins.wordpress.com
Smashwords Edition, License Notes
Thank you for downloading this free ebook. Although this is a free book, it remains
the copyrighted property of the author, and may not be reproduced, copied and
distributed for commercial or non-commercial purposes. If you enjoyed this book,
please encourage your friends to download their own copy at Smashwords.com,
where they can also discover other works by this author. Thank you for your support.

About the Author

Aref Fanous graduated from Coventry University with an Honours Degree in Quantity
Surveying and Commercial Management. He has many years experience working in
the quantity surveying profession and further qualifications in construction and the
built environment. He is a member of CIOB and RICS.

Abbreviations
BIM - Building Information Modelling
BREEAM - BRE Environmental Assessment Method

Introduction
In recent years, recession has greatly affected the UK economy. This is not an
isolated problem within the UK, as it is recognised that this is part of a global
financial crisis. This uncertain financial climate has meant that companies have less
opportunities and resources to commission new building projects. Furthermore,
certain professions have found that there is now a lack of job security, due to
financial instability. Therefore, within the construction industry, the role of the
quantity surveyor becomes of greater importance, as they are perceived to be
responsible for ensuring that the company meets its financial targets on its projects.

These financial changes are only one of many factors which raise further important
questions about the quantity surveying profession. For example, what have been the
major influencing factors over time on the quantity surveying profession? Are there
any differences in the degree to which each of the quantity surveying sectors has
been affected by these changes? Are the theoretical changes that the literature
suggests have occurred a true representation of the actual, real-world changes that
have occurred within the quantity surveying field? This eBook addresses these
questions, identifying the key changes which have taken place and the influencing
factors which have been instrumental in bringing about these changes.
The traditional role of the quantity surveyor is reviewed, with the traditional
expectations and responsibilities identified. These are then compared to the new
roles and responsibilities adopted by quantity surveyors, as a result of the factors
which have changed the profession over time. Once the review of past factors and
changing roles has been completed, the investigation will go on to explore how the
quantity surveying profession may be influenced by proposed future changes. In this
case, what will the likely reception be towards the incorporation of the emerging roles
of Whole-life Costing Assessments, Sustainability, British Research Establishment
Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) and Building Information Modelling
(BIM) within the quantity surveying field? This will provide cutting edge data towards
important, emerging areas of research. This also enhances the wider social and
political importance of the research, as the current government has recently
published its Building Information Modelling (BIM) Working Party Strategy, which
seeks to make 3D BIM a required element within all projects by 2016 (BIMIWG
2011). Therefore, the results of this investigation will be of interest and importance to
academics, practicing quantity surveyors and key stakeholders involved with
institutional policies and agendas.
This investigation will gather new data from currently practicing quantity surveyors,
through the implementation of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. These
are designed to address gaps in knowledge regarding the perceptions that people
have of the changes within the quantity surveying profession. For example, to what
degree have practicing quantity surveyors willingly adapted to the changes brought
about by the influencing factors, compared to being forced to change? To what
degree do practicing Quantity Surveyors feel that the changes have been relevant to
their particular sector? To what degree is the acceptance level of previous changes
within each quantity surveying sector an indicator of acceptance levels of proposed
future changes, such as BIM?
This eBook will begin by establishing the history of the quantity surveying profession
and identifying key changes that have taken place over time.

Origins of the Quantity Surveying Profession

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) was established in 1834 in order to
create exclusivity within the architectural profession and create a distinct body of
professionals, separate to surveyors (Cartlidge 2010). In turn, this meant that the
quantity surveying profession was also formed as a separate element (Cartlidge
2010). The construction industry would continue to grow and develop around these
two distinct professions. During the 19th century the quantity surveying profession
became more widely recognised as a specialised trade, having evolved from earlier
tradesmen (surveyors) who would estimate the amount of resources required for a
building project, based upon previous projects (QSBC 2009). The tradesmen would
receive priced tenders from different builders, who had used the same information to
reach their price, allowing comparisons to easily be made (QSBC 2009). Given the
large amount of money associated with building projects, the value for money gained
by using standardised building information, combined with budgetary control
expertise, has helped to make quantity surveying an important role within the
construction industry (Seeley 1997).
The financial management aspect is the root of the quantity surveying profession
and since the need was recognised, it has remained the main expectation when
employing a quantity surveyor (QSBC 2009). As the quantity surveying profession
grew out of these early roots, it was not without its problems. There were issues
surrounding procurement strategies, documentation, contracts that lead to excessive
project costs, time delays, low building quality standards and often a conflict of
interests within projects (Cartlidge 2010). Latham (1994) and Egan (1998) both
produced reports on the UK construction industry and suggested ways in which the
quantity surveying profession and building projects as a whole could become more
efficient and cost-effective. These were based around modernisation, innovation and
mass-production (Cartlidge 2010). However, it has also been suggested that the role
of the quantity surveyor has expanded over time beyond the main financial-based
concerns to encompass not only knowledge of costs, values, labour and materials,
but also to include contractual and legal matters, as well as being consultants on
construction matters and being knowledgeable about developers, the government,
contractors and general project management (QSBC 2009). In order to determine
the degree to which changes have taken place, the traditional roles and expectations
of the quantity surveyor must first be understood.

Traditional Role of the Quantity Surveyor

With regards to expectations, there has always been the requirement for quantity
surveyors to conduct themselves in a manner befitting membership of the institution,
set out in the 9 core values by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS
2007). Any member wanting to become a chartered surveyor within the RICS must
adhere to these ethics. The individual must behave in an ethical manner, meaning
they must act in a professional manner inside work and outside work, and always

abide by the law. The 9 core values set out by the RICS rules of conduct are to act
with integrity, always being honest, be open and transparent in any dealings, be
accountable for all actions made, know and act within your limitations, be objective at
all times, treat others with respect, set a good example and have the courage to
make a stand.
It is noted that these core values are of a personal, rather than professional, nature
and the specific traditional expectations of working practices should also be
considered. Traditionally, quantity surveyors are expected to conduct initial cost
planning, measure and quantify all elements of a project, control costs throughout
construction, give procurement advice and prepare financial documents, accounts
and valuations (Ashworth and Hogg 2007). This is known as a simple measure and
value system and still remains the main, if not only, purpose of modern quantity
surveyors working on smaller projects (Ashworth and Hogg 2007). Therefore, the
majority of the most important functions traditionally carried out by quantity surveyors
are based upon the measuring and pricing of construction works (Olatunji, Sher and
Gu 2009).
From the sources discussed so far, it is possible to identify the 9 most important
traditional roles and responsibilities of a quantity surveyor.
1. Providing Approximate Cost Estimates
2. Advice on Procurement
3. Cost Planning
4. Measuring Items on Site

5. Preparing Bills of Quantities

6. Preparing Schedules of Works

7. Preparing Financial Statements

8. Controlling Costs Throughout Project
9. Assessing and Negotiating Tenders

Changing Role of the Quantity Surveyor

It has been stated that the changes within the quantity surveying profession have
evolved due to the increased options available for acquiring resources for building
projects, the increased complexity in building projects and the large number of
contractual and legal disputes which occur within the industry (Ashworth and Hogg
2007). In the current financial climate quantity surveyors are using lower fee scales
to attract more business. This emphasis on the cost aspects of a project, over the

other traditional aspects of time-scale and quality, can be attributed to the changing
financial pressures under which quantity surveyors now work. The diversity of job
roles and responsibilities of the quantity surveyor may also be related to the current
global financial crisis. This is because quantity surveyors are employed in a range of
roles, by a number of clients, developers or contractors. The greater skills set
possessed by a quantity surveyor, the greater the benefit to their employer, which
can lead to more work, but with increased expectations of responsibilities. Therefore,
given this change of focus and expectations, it is reasonable to suggest that the
changing financial climate has been a factor which has changed the quantity
surveying field over time and this point will be further explored within this eBook.
These represent the academic textbook view of factors which have affected the
profession. However, it unknown the degree to which current practicing quantity
surveyors agree with this theoretical assessment. Are there factors which academics
have failed to acknowledge? Or have these factors affected some sectors more than
others?
In addition to identifying these factors, the main focus of this eBook is to explore the
ways in which these pressures have changed the roles and responsibilities of the
quantity surveyor. During the 1970s the role of the quantity surveyor had adapted in
response to changing demands, with quantity surveyors now being placed in charge
of labour and resource planning and control, as well as considering the long term
impacts of each project (RICS 1983). In the 1980s it was stated that the quantity
surveying profession had grown to incorporate accounting, legal and resource
control aspects, with quantity surveyors becoming contractors, engineers and project
managers, in addition to their measuring and costing role (Newton 1985). This
suggests that the role of the quantity surveyor has remained flexible over time to
adapt to changes within the construction industry.
This is supported by the changing role of quantity surveyors in other countries. In
China, the preparation of tender documents and valuations associated with
infrastructure projects were traditionally conducted by civil engineers; however, there
has been a change in working practices, with quantity surveyors now carrying out
much of this work, despite these aspects still being listed as a civil engineering role
within government regulations (HKIS 2008). In addition, many aspects of the building
works that were traditionally conducted by architects are now being carried out by
quantity surveyors, with this role change being acknowledged by changes to both
government and private contracts (HKIS 2008). This supports the view that quantity
surveyors are now carrying out a more varied role, with greater responsibilities.

Evolved Roles and Responsibilities of a Quantity Surveyor

The quantity surveying profession has been able to evolve and diversify into new
areas of practicing, providing a wider range of services, with the modern quantity

surveyor covering all aspects of project cost management, procurement and contract
management (Lee, Trench and Willis 2011). This has occurred in all sectors of
quantity surveying, including consultants, main contractors and sub-contractors.
Despite these evolved roles and responsibilities Lee, Trench and Willis (2011) stress
the importance of the traditional roles still being the sole root of the profession and
the ability to successfully carry out all tasks within the measure and value
procedures.
The information discussed so far has detailed what the evolved roles and
responsibilities of a quantity surveyor may be. From these sources, the 11 most
prominent changes are listed:
1. Investment Appraisal
2. Analysis of Financial Risks
3. Project Planning
4. Contractual Dispute Resolution
5. Facilities Management
6. Project Management
7. Insurance Valuations
8. Providing Insolvency Services
9. Measuring Environmental Impact and Costs
10. Managing Maintenance Programmes
11. Cash Flow Accounting Forecasts
This list shows a number of aspects that have emerged from the changes that
having taken place within the quantity surveying profession. However, it is largely
unknown the degree to which each of these aspects has become a part of the
modern quantity surveyor role. Are some aspects considered to be a more important
part of a quantity surveyors job than others? To what degree do current practicing
quantity surveyors believe these aspects should be a part of their job description?
Furthermore, have these newer changes reduced the time quantity surveyors spend
on doing more traditional tasks? Or the importance they place upon meeting these
traditional expectations? Finally, have these changes affected different types of
quantity surveyors differently? For example, are some aspects more important to the
building sector than to the civil sector? This eBook seeks to provide information
towards these gaps in knowledge.

Emerging Roles in Quantity Surveying

In addition to researching the impact of previous changes, this eBook will also
address other aspects regarding the reception that future changes are likely to have
upon the quantity surveying profession. In the current economic climate, with
particular relevance paid to the UK economic recession, there are fewer resources
available for companies to commission new building projects. Given the traditional
and evolved financial roles and responsibilities that a quantity surveyor is believed to
possess, it becomes of great importance that new ways are found to make building
projects more financially efficient. Therefore, future changes appear to be an
inevitable part of the quantity surveying profession and their impact should be
explored. This eBook will explore perceptions related to the emerging roles of
Whole-life Costing Assessments, Sustainability, British Research Establishment
Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) and Building Information Modelling
(BIM).
Whole-life costing is a technique, which aims to improve sustainability, efficiency,
enable cost savings both short-term and long-term and provides more substantial
information for a client to assess whether a project/product is going to be beneficial
and financially viable once built/installed (Clift 2004). Whole-life costing assessments
calculate costs for the whole-life expectancy of the building/item and items
incorporated. This takes into consideration the maintenance, operation, associated
finances, depreciation and demolition costs. This creates the whole-life costs of the
item, enabling an informed decision when choosing between different products. All of
this can be calculated prior to any purchasing of materials and products, providing
accurate information and showing the products durability, which also provides the
client/public with value for money and increases efficiency. The technique is part of
the emerging innovation into the construction industry, BIM, which enforces wholelife costings being produced for any type of project, prior to any works being carried
out on site (Clift 2004).
Sustainability is becoming more influential in the construction industry as we are
globally moving towards going green to reduce greenhouse gases and
environmental pollution. Sustainability is being incorporated into the construction
industry in a number of ways, such as using recycled materials, installing innovative
renewably sourced systems, efficient waste management and efficiently resourcing
materials and labour. Sustainability is primarily for increasing efficiency (Quantity
Surveying Practices 2011). In the construction industry it will (typically) increase
initial costs as the installation and higher costing items use renewable freely sourced
energy. The way in which it will effect quantity surveyors is how items are included
when being priced for, as direct quotes and life costs will be required from suppliers,
as the items will be specialised and known only by the manufacturer, any extra time
the items will require for installation for time aspects and the increase in quality is the
clients benefit (Quantity Surveying Practices 2011).

BREEAM is a worldwide system that assesses buildings on their design,

sustainability, performance and specification. BREEAM uses a scoring system,
which is flexible, transparent, supported by factual based science and research and
easy to understand. It is positively influencing sustainable design, construction and
management in place on projects (BREEAM 2012). BREEAM increases saleability of
a project upon completion as it provides a huge selling point for a project, typically
with high efficiency ratings, which mean the whole-life costs of the building are going
to be lower as renewable energy sourced components have been integrated within
the building (BREEAM 2012).
BIM uses a computer-generated model to collate all information about the design,
construction and operation of a project, and use this information to maximise
efficiency at each stage of the project (BIMIWG 2011). For example, it allows
detailed exploration of multiple variations in design, quickly and cheaply compared to
traditional measures (BIMIWG 2011). This represents further changes to the way in
which quantity surveyors are expected to work, in order to make improvements in
value, cost and carbon performance. This change is enforced by the government, as
3D BIM will be a required element within all projects by 2016 (BIMIWG 2011).
As previously stated, the most important functions traditionally carried out by quantity
surveyors include the measuring and pricing of construction works (Olatunji, Sher
and Gu 2009). However, BIM puts data input into the 3D model measures and
calculates the quantities, producing the schedules/bill of quantities, depending on the
clients requirements. This largely takes away the requirement or responsibility from
the quantity surveyor measuring the quantities, leaving only the requirement of
checking over the produced documents to ensure the quantities are correct. The
introduction of BIM is to help reduce workloads, reduce design risks, which will in
turn reduce cost implications and help the construction process become quicker,
more efficient and increase productivity (BIM Solution Centre 2012). Therefore the
likelihood of BIM influencing the roles and responsibilities of quantity surveyors is
substantial.
While the introduction of these emerging roles are recognised to be able to improve
building project management, because they are largely being forced into wider
usage, it is unknown how well received it will be by the quantity surveying
community. For example, will BIM be fully accepted as another proficiency to add to
the quantity surveyors diverse skill set? Or will be there resentment of yet another
government-enforced addition to an already overwhelming workload? This eBook will
address these questions and compare the reception of these emerging roles to the
acceptance levels of previous changes to the traditional role of the quantity surveyor.

Research Questions and Objectives

The investigation presented in this eBook is exploring the changing roles and
responsibilities of the quantity surveyor. Comparisons will be made between
traditional expectations and current practices, with perceptions of future changes
also investigated.
The 3 main objectives of the research are as follows:

Explore the degree to which changes within the quantity surveying field have
become incorporated and accepted by current quantity surveyors

Explore the perceptions that current quantity surveyors hold regarding future
changes

Explore differences between main-contractor, sub-contractor and consultancy

quantity surveyors

These objectives were used to form 4 main research questions:

1. What roles and responsibilities are the most important to the quantity
surveying profession?
2. How many of the traditional roles and responsibilities do quantity surveyors
still carry out?
3. What factors do quantity surveyors believe have brought about changes
within the field?
4. To what degree will emerging roles be incorporated and accepted as part of a
quantity surveyors role?
This eBook will now detail the research methods employed to achieve these
objectives and provide data to answer the research questions.

Participants
A total of 64 participants took part in both the questionnaire and interview elements
of this investigation. The participants consisted of practicing quantity surveyors.
Demographic data, such as age, gender and ethnicity, was not recorded as it was
not deemed relevant to the aim and objectives of this investigation.
The participants were placed into one of four categories, based on their practicing
sector. These categories were Consultancy, Main Contractor, Sub-Contractor and
Other.
Participants categories by sector:

Consultancy - 24 Participants

Main Contractor - 18 Participants

Sub-Contractor - 22 Participants

Other - 0 Participants

This list indicates that there was an even distribution of participants within each
category, with no participants registering in the Other sector. This means that the
results from each sector will be able to be compared to each other, due to equal
weighting of participant numbers.
Participants were also divided into further categories, based on what stage of a
project they are usually involved with. There were three possible stages consisting of
Pre-Contract, Post-Contract and Other.
Participants categories by project stage:

Pre-contract - 28 Participants

Post-contract - 36 Participants

Other - 0 Participants

This list indicates that all participants indicated that they were either involved in precontract or post-contract stages. There is also near equal distribution of participants
in each stage, making the results able to be compared due to similar participant
numbers.
The high number of participants and consistent distribution in each category means
that the results of this investigation are generalisable to a variety of quantity
surveying sectors at many stages of a project.

Research Design and Materials

This investigation used two main research methods, questionnaires and interviews.
The questionnaires provided quantitative data about the perceptions of quantity
surveyors, which were then placed into context through the extra information
gathered during the interview process. In addition, the questionnaires provide
objective data for analysis, while the interviews provide subjective data, which can
be explored to a deeper level to provide meaning behind the questionnaire data.
Participants received a standardised Participant Information Leaflet, which provided
them with information regarding what the investigation was looking at and what was
expected from them as a participant.

The investigation used a Quantity Surveying Questionnaire to gather data from the
participants. An Interview Schedule was also used to facilitate the semi-structured
interviews with the participants.

Research Questionnaires
Questionnaires are excellent for easily measuring perceptions from a large amount
of people. They are also adaptable to being distributed by hand, post or email. The
data gathered by questionnaires is also easily compared between participants, as
they are answering the same questions, with a limited number of responses. This
also helps eliminate biases which may have occurred due to the influence of the
researcher phrasing the questions. However, questionnaires also have to be short in
length, so that more people are willing to take the time to complete them. In the
current investigation the length of questionnaire has been kept short, while gathering
all the data required to meet the aim and objectives of the study, which have been
converted into question form.
It has been stated that there is no optimal number of potential responses for
questionnaires (Preston and Colman 2000) and it depends upon the subject being
investigated (Weisberg 2005). Therefore, the current Quantity Surveying
Questionnaire used a four-point Likert (1932) scale to explore perceptions regarding
the diversification of the roles and responsibilities of the quantity surveyor. This was
chosen because it means that the participants cant hide their perceptions behind a
neutral response, in fear of repercussions from honest responses. This is justified
because all data will be anonymised, eliminating this potential problem and
increasing the accuracy of the data, which has been found to lead to more honest
responses (Busch 1993). It also removes other problems associated with
questionnaires, such as central tendency bias. These measures increase the
reliability of the data gathered by this questionnaire.
Given that the questionnaire responses will involve either a Yes or No response, or a
score to be given, then the most appropriate way to analyse the data would be to
mathematically calculate percentages for each of the limited potential responses for
each question. This would provide an indication of participant perceptions and allow
patterns within the data to emerge. With the numerically scored questions, it would
also be appropriate to calculate the mean scores as a comparative figure. These
results will then provide the basis for deeper exploration with the interview transcripts
analysis.

Research Interviews

Semi-structured interviews are excellent for gathering a deeper level of information

than questionnaires, while also being able to expand upon their subject matters. The
questions themselves are open-ended, allowing participants the freedom to discuss
what they perceive to be the most important aspects related to each question, while
still being related to the questionnaire and investigation topics. The semi-structured
format can also provide a framework for the responses, allowing comparisons to be
made between responses and provide reasoning for the questionnaire findings.
Interviews can feel very personal, which means that people may decide to answer in
a socially desirable manner. This was overcome by ensuring that participants would
remain anonymous. Interviewer bias was overcome by ensuring that each participant
was only asked the same set of questions, in the same order.
Given that the interview transcripts will be typed up in a written format, then it is
reasonable to suggest that the most appropriate method for analysis should be one
based on exploring qualitative, written data. The method chosen for this investigation
is Thematic Analysis, which is an approach that analyses textual data to explore
patterns and hidden meanings by identifying codes within the text (Seale 2004).
These codes are words or phrases related to the same topic or idea, which are
represented on numerous occasions throughout the entire data set (Seale 2004).
These codes are then pooled together to highlight common themes (Seale 2004).
The greater the number of occurrences of codes, the stronger, or more important,
the theme. These themes are representative of the perceptions that participants
hold. The widespread acceptance and use of Thematic Analysis, particularly within
the social sciences which regularly deal with large amounts of qualitative data,
highlights its validity and reliability as an analytical tool.

Research Procedure
This investigation was conducted through Coventry University and carried out by one
researcher. Participants were found through existing contacts and the snowballing
method of acquiring further participants. Participants were asked if they would like to
take part in a study exploring perceptions about the roles and responsibilities
associated with the quantity surveying profession. The participants read the
Participant Information Leaflet and signed the consent form, before completing the
Quantity Surveying Questionnaire and taking part in a semi-structured interview,
based on the Interview Schedule, conducted by the researcher. The responses were
then gathered by the researcher, with the questionnaire data being scored and the
interview data being transcribed. The questionnaire data was then analysed
mathematically and the interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.

Reliability and Validity

So far this investigation has discussed numerous measures undertaken to increase

the reliability and validity of this research. These are the formatting and data
gathering techniques of the questionnaires and interviews in order to reduce
researcher and interviewer biases, as well as central tendency bias. In addition, the
investigation gained a good distribution of participants from different sectors to
gather representative data and ensured anonymity to increase the honesty within
those responses. This section discusses the further aspects which were taken into
consideration during this investigation.
Similar to the challenges faced by practicing quantity surveyors, there were time and
resource constraints placed upon this investigation. Within these constraints, the
researcher has managed to conduct a thorough literature review of relevant
research, highlighting the most important areas. This information was then used to
form the overall aim and objectives of this investigation, allowing the most
appropriate research methods to be identified. The procedure undertaken by the
researcher has also been detailed, allowing the study to be repeated by other
researchers, an important aspect of enhancing the reliability and validity of the
investigation and its results.
In addition to the strengths of these measures, it should also be noted that no
investigation can be completely free of all biases and its limitations must be
considered. The main limitation for the current investigation is that it was conducted
within the UK, so the generalisability of the results may be limited to understanding
the quantity surveying profession within the UK.

Ethical Considerations
The investigation received ethical approval from Coventry University. Participants
were given a written Participants Information Leaflet prior to taking part, so were well
informed of what the investigation was about and what was expected from them, with
their written consent also being gained. All data gathered was gathered
anonymously and participants were informed that they could withdraw their data at
any time, up to the point of returning it to the researcher, after which it would not be
possible to identify their anonymous data. The original recordings from the interviews
were deleted after being transcribed, to preserve anonymity. These measures
ensured this was an ethically sound investigation.

Research Results
The investigation had 64 participants, all of which took part in both the questionnaire
and interview elements. Within these participants, 24 (37%) worked in the
consultancy sector, 18 (28%) worked primarily as main contractors and 22 (35%)

worked primarily as subcontractors. Within these, 28 (43%) worked primarily on the

pre-contract stage of projects and 36 (57%) worked primarily on the post-contract
stage. Within the questionnaires, the first eight roles and responsibilities are defined
as being traditional roles, with a further 12 perceived to be responsibilities which
have become an expected part of the quantity surveying profession over time. The
following results highlight the most relevant similarities and differences between
each sector and contract stage, in relation to the questionnaire and interview
responses.
The questionnaires were analysed mathematically. The most important findings for
the aim and objectives of this investigation are presented here. The results are
discussed in relation to their different sections within the questionnaire.

Diversification Results
The diversification of roles and responsibilities section explored attitudes towards 5
different aspects of quantity surveying. For 4 of these aspects, 100% of all
participants answered that they either Agree or Strongly Agree with the statement.
This indicates the strength and similarity of perceptions regarding these aspects.
Therefore, 100% of participants agreed that quantity surveyors have a more diverse
workload than they used to and that the changes caused by political policies have
greatly affected the quantity surveying profession. In addition, 100% of participants
also agreed that the changing roles of quantity surveyors has been beneficial to the
profession, but that these changes have affected certain types of quantity surveyors
more than others. These findings indicate that there has been a widespread
acceptance of the changes within the profession and the level by which you are
affected is dependent upon the sector in which you work.
There was one statement upon which participants varied in their answers, which
stated that quantity surveyors were often asked to do tasks which were outside the
normal remit of their job role. From this statement, 40 participants (62%) indicated
that they agreed with the statement, suggesting that their work had become
extremely diverse. However, 24 participants (38%) indicated that they disagreed with
the statement, suggesting that they were only carrying out the roles and
responsibilities expected of a quantity surveyor. Interestingly, all 24 participants
(100%) who disagreed with the statement worked as either main-contractors or subcontacts. This suggests that quantity surveyors within the consultancy sector may be
less accepting of the newer changes within the profession, as they all believe that
they carry out tasks outside their normal job role. However, it may also be an
indication of the way in which different sectors have been affected, with consultants
perhaps carrying out more of the newer responsibilities, causing them to perceive
their role to be further from the traditional view of quantity surveyors, than those
quantity surveyors who work primarily as main-contractors and sub-contractors.

Summary of diversification section questionnaire results:

100% of quantity surveyors agreed that they have a more diverse workload
100% of quantity surveyors agreed that political policies have caused
changes within the profession
100% of quantity surveyors agreed that the changes had been beneficial to
the profession
100% of quantity surveyors agreed that the changes affected certain sectors
more than others
62% of quantity surveyors believed that they carried out tasks outside the
normally expected remit of their job role
38% of participants, all of which were main-contactors and sub-contractors,
believed that they didnt carry out tasks outside their normal job role
Results suggest widespread acceptance of changes as a whole
Results suggest differences exist between sectors and raise question as to
whether quantity surveyors in consultancy sector are less accepting of
changes than other sectors, or whether they simply perceive their roles to
have moved further from traditional expectations?

Traditional and Evolved Roles Results

The traditional roles section explored attitudes towards different roles and
responsibilities of a quantity surveyor, with participants indicating whether they
undertook particular tasks and the degree of relevance they felt it had to their role as
a quantity surveyor. The relevance score was indicated by a number between 0 and
10, with 0 being not relevant at all and 10 being extremely relevant to the quantity
surveying profession, with 5 indicating a mid-level score. There were 20 roles or
responsibilities for participants to consider and the most relevant results are
presented here.
The first 9 roles and responsibilities listed in this section represented the 9 traditional
roles highlighted in the literature review. There was a general widespread agreement
across all sectors regarding the relevance of these aspects to the quantity surveying
profession, with all 9 roles receiving very high mean scores, with little overall
variation. The mean scores were calculated by adding together the actual scores
given by all 64 participants and dividing this by the number of participants, correct to
three decimal places, with no rounding up or down. The percentage of people who
answered Yes they do carry out each task is also noted. The following information

lists the percentages and mean relevance scores for the 9 traditional roles and
responsibilities.
1. Providing Approximate Cost Estimates - 8.968, 98.4%
2. Advice on Procurement - 8.328, 98.4%
3. Cost Planning - 8.984, 100%
4. Measuring items on site - 7.265, 65.7%
5. Preparing Bills of Quantities - 8.750, 89.0%
6. Preparing Schedules of works - 8.515, 93.7%
7. Preparing Financial Statements - 9.000, 100%
8. Controlling Costs Throughout Projects - 8.687, 95.3%
9. Assessing and Negotiating Tenders - 8.781, 98.4%

The list indicates that traditional roles and responsibilities which quantity surveyors
possess are considered to be very relevant. The least relevant item, as perceived by
the participants in this investigation, was measuring items on site and the highest
relevant item was preparing financial statements. The remaining roles and
responsibilities were in the same relevance range and are shown to be of near equal
importance to the quantity surveying profession.
The data also shows that, despite the majority of similarities indicated by the high
mean relevance scores, there are differences in the changes between sectors, as
indicated by the results of the previous section, which can be seen where only 2
consultants (8.3%) measured items on site (responsibility number 4), compared with
100% of main-contractors and sub-contractors (which also accounts for the lower
overall percentage). However, the consultants still perceived it to be a traditional role
of the quantity surveyor, as their mean score for its relevance was 7.333, which is
similar to the mean score given by the main-contractors and sub-contractors of
7.475. This result also provides some response to the question raised by the
previous section about whether the consultancy sector was less accepting of
changes or had simply moved further away from traditional expectations. The results
support the view that quantity surveyors in the consultancy sector do accept the
relevance of these traditional roles, regardless of whether they personally carry them
out in their own job role. It is their job role which has changed, not their perceptions
of acceptance. This result also suggests that quantity surveyors may be accepting of
future changes, regardless of whether it affects them personally or not.
The further 11 roles and responsibilities listed in this section of the questionnaire
represented the 11 evolved roles highlighted in the literature review. There was
greater variation within the results, with clear differences between sectors. The main-

contractors and sub-contractors responses were very similar, but were in contrast to
the responses given by consultants. Therefore, the mean scores and percentage
scores for the 24 participants from within the consultancy sector are given
separately. The following information lists the percentages and mean relevance
score for the 11 evolved roles and responsibilities. Consultants only information in
brackets.
* Indicates entire percentage consisted of participants from within the consultancy
sector
1. Investment Appraisal - 6.437 (8.125), 34.3%* (91.6%)
2. Analysis of Financial Risks - 6.687 (7.791), 34.3% (79.1%)
3. Project Planning - 6.078 (8.125), 28.1%* (75.0%)
4. Contractual Dispute Resolution - 6.078 (7.666), 34.3% (70.8%)
5. Facilities Management - 5.796 (7.625), 35.9%* (95.8%)
6. Project Management - 6.265 (8.250), 48.4% (100%)
7. Insurance Valuations - 6.000 (7.833), 28.1%* (75%)
8. Providing Insolvency Services - 5.796 (7.791), 32.8%* (87.5%)
9. Measuring Environmental Impact and Costs - 6.156 (8.000), 35.9% (91.6%)
10. Managing Maintenance Programmes - 6.375 (8.500), 39% (100%)
11. Cash Flow Accounting Forecasts - 8.671 (10.000), 93.7% (100%)

The list shows that the consultants mean relevance scores for the evolved roles are
similar to those given for the previous traditional roles, suggesting that they have
accepted these roles and responsibilities as an important part of the quantity
surveying profession. However, the main-contractor and sub-contractor scores pull
the overall average relevance scores for the evolved roles well below the previous
traditional role scores. The consultants percentage scores for how many undertook
each task were very high and in some cases were the only percentages represented
within the overall figures. The percentage scores for how many main and subcontractors undertook each task were very low. This suggests that exposure to a
new role may increase acceptance of that role within the profession.
The data also indicates that the overall results given by all sectors shows that the
perceived roles and responsibilities are of a similar equal relevance. The only
evolved responsibility, which deviates from this pattern is Cash Flow Accounting
Forecasts, whose overall results are in line with the findings from the traditional
scores. Given that this was one of the earliest expansions of within the quantity
surveying profession, then it is reasonable to suggest that this may be viewed as an

original, traditional role itself, leading to the increased perception of relevance

scores.
With the other evolved roles, it appears that the various responsibilities have not
been taken on by all quantity surveyors. Instead, new sectors of the quantity
surveying professions have also evolved to focus on specific elements of these new
roles and responsibilities. This suggests that not all quantity surveyors will
experience future changes, but will be affected and respond differently, based upon
their practicing sector receiving exposure to that role.
Summary of traditional and evolved roles section questionnaire results:

Evidence of diversification of roles and responsibilities between different

sectors, particularly between those in the consultancy sector and those who
are main or sub-contractors

Level of acceptance of traditional roles and responsibilities remains consistent

across sectors, regardless of whether they actually undertake that duty or not

Level of acceptance of evolved roles and responsibilities is higher amongst

consultancy sector, who undertake those roles more in their daily work

Level of acceptance of the emerging roles and responsibilities may be

tempered by individual exposure to that role

Results suggest quantity surveyors may be accepting of future changes when

exposed to them in their daily work.

Emerging Roles Results

The emerging roles section explored perceptions and attitudes towards four different
responsibilities which are being, or have recently been, introduced into the quantity
surveying profession. These are related to the aspects discussed previously,
consisting of Whole-life Costing Assessments, Sustainability, BREEAM, and BIM. As
with the previous section, the relevance score was indicated by a number between 0
and 10, with 0 being not relevant at all and 10 being extremely relevant to the
quantity surveying profession, with 5 indicating a mid-level score.
Again, the mean scores were calculated by adding together the actual scores given
by all 64 participants and dividing this by the number of participants, correct to three
decimal places, with no rounding up or down. The percentage of people who
answered Yes they do carry out each task is also noted. Due to the differences
found between sectors, it is important to once again present the mean and
percentage results separately, with the consultants data analysed individually for
comparison. The following information lists the percentages and mean relevance

scores for the 4 emerging roles and responsibilities. Consultants only information is
presented separately in brackets.
1. Whole-life Costing Assessments - 6.609 (6.916), 50% (100%)
2. Sustainability - 5.406 (4.958), 15% (17%)
3. BREEAM - 4.578 (3.416), 48% (13%)
4. Building Information Modelling (BIM) - 4.015 (3.208), 0% (0%)

The results from the emerging roles data in this list supports the previous findings of
there being differences between the different quantity surveying sectors, as indicated
by the variation in consultancy mean scores from the overall mean scores.
Level of acceptance, as measured by perception of relevance, of emerging roles and
responsibilities is generally low, as indicated by the overall and consultant only mean
scores. However, when the mean scores are calculated only for those participants
who actually carry out the roles or responsibilities, then an increase in perceived
relevance occurs. These are listed here. The number in brackets is the number of
participants who undertake each role.
1. Whole-life Costing Assessments - 7.312 (32)
2. Sustainability - 5.733 (15)
3. BREEAM - 5.310 (29)

The results shown in this list support the previous findings which suggested that level
of acceptance of the emerging roles and responsibilities may be tempered by
individual exposure to that role. However, the sample size for each group is relatively
low, which may overly influence the results.
Summary of emerging roles section questionnaire results:

Further support for diversification of roles and responsibilities between

different sectors

Further support for level of acceptance being tempered by individual exposure

to roles

Overall level of acceptance of emerging roles and responsibilities is lower

than for both the traditional and evolved roles

In summary, the key results from the questionnaires are that each quantity surveying
sector has been affected differently by each role. There is wide acceptance of
traditional roles, even if that role is not personally undertaken. However, evolved and
emerging roles are better accepted if they are personally carried out by an individual.

Emerging roles are less well accepted than the evolved roles, further suggesting that
exposure to a role or responsibility increases acceptance.

Interviews Analysis
Thematic analysis was carried out to analyse the interview transcripts. This resulted
in 3 key themes emerging from the data. These themes were flexibility, financial
competition and quality compromise. As previously explained, these themes were
found by identifying codes within the transcript data. The codes listed here are
representative of many examples of these codes with similar meaning found within
the transcript data.
The first theme to emerge was flexibility. This theme relates to the greater diversity
that quantity surveyors must have in order to incorporate new roles and
responsibilities into their working practices. The codes to identify and support this
theme can be found in interview responses stating that there is a higher work load,
with greater flexibility and diversity. Although it is also noted that quantity surveyors
feel that they have been forced to change, despite the reluctance demonstrated by
old school training up of QS [who are] stuck in their ways. This suggests that
flexibility and diversity are big changes within the profession, but there is some
reluctance to accepting these changes. Furthermore, it is believed that more
specialists are required and quantity surveyors have less confidence in their widely
distributed or newly acquired abilities. The following information lists example codes
related to the flexibility theme.
1. higher work load
2. flexibility and diversity
3. old school training up of QS stuck in their ways
4. more specialists required
5. less confidence
6. forced to change
The second theme to emerge was financial competition. This theme relates to the
extra competition that quantity surveyors are facing, caused by the recession and
reduced financial resources available. The codes to identify and support this theme
can be found in interview responses stating that changes are due to the recession
[and having to] reduce overhead costs. The increased competition [is] making
people work harder and that people who cant perform can go. Quantity surveyors
due to recession become more contractual and work more hours for less money.
This suggests that quantity surveyors perceive the competition to have increased to
the degree where they have no choice but to take on the extra roles and

responsibilities, because if they dont then there is always another quantity surveyor
who is willing to. Furthermore, one participants stated that it is difficult to cost as
there is not enough experience as it is new technology, suggesting that quantity
surveyors are struggling to keep up with the fast-paced changes taking place within
the profession. The following information lists example codes related to the financial
competition theme.
1. due to the recession, reduce overhead costs
2. increased competition making people work harder
3. people who cant perform can go
4. due to recession become more contractual
5. work more hours for less money
The third theme to emerge was quality compromise. This theme relates to the extra
time and financial constraints placed upon a quantity surveyors working practices,
which can lead to a compromise in quality. The codes to identify and support this
theme can be found in interview responses stating that a compromise to quality has
been one of the key changes to the profession, quantity surveyors have to work
faster under time constraints and that quality is being compromised for cost.
Quantity surveyors have to do more work in less time [and] sometimes cut corners.
Quantity surveyors are also expected to work outside work hours [so] quality is
being compromised severely. This suggests that a number of factors are merging to
create increased pressures, which compromise the quality of work. This also
indicates that future changes which can remove some of these constraints, or ease
working practices may be well received. However, future changes which simply add
to the expected workload will be less well received. The following information lists
example codes related to the quality compromise theme.
1. compromise to quality
2. work faster
3. time constraints
4. quality is being compromised for cost
5. more work in less time, sometimes cut corners
6. expected to work outside hours
7. quality is being severely compromised
In summary, quantity surveyors have taken on a more diverse range of roles and
responsibilities, but feel that this has been forced upon them, either through
legislation or by a more competitive working environment. There are greater

expectations placed upon them and this often leads to compromises in quality. This
is particularly caused by financial constraints as a result of the recession.

Research Discussion
This section discusses the results of both the questionnaires and interviews. This will
firstly be done in general terms and then specifically in relation to how the results can
provide new knowledge towards answering the 4 research questions and meeting
the 3 main objectives of this investigation, which are repeated here for reference:
The 3 main objectives of the research were:

Explore the degree to which changes within the quantity surveying field have
become incorporated and accepted by current quantity surveyors

Explore the perceptions that current quantity surveyors hold regarding future
changes

Explore differences between main-contractor, sub-contractor and consultancy

quantity surveyors

The 4 main research questions were:

1.
What roles and responsibilities are the most important to the quantity
surveying profession?
2.
How many of the traditional roles and responsibilities do quantity surveyors
still carry out?
3.
What factors do quantity surveyors believe have brought about changes
within the field?
4.
To what degree will emerging roles be incorporated and accepted as part of a
quantity surveyors role?
The questionnaires indicated that there was a diversification of roles and
responsibilities between different quantity surveying sectors. In particular, the
consultancy sector displayed different working practices and levels of acceptance of
various roles than the main and sub-contractors. This diversification was supported
by the results from the thematic analysis of the interview transcripts, where flexibility
was found to be a key theme. The interview analysis found that quantity surveyors
believed that more specialist roles will be required in the future, particularly as there
was some objection to all quantity surveyors being forced to adopt all new working
practices. The consultancy sector can therefore be considered an example of the
way in which previous changes within the profession have created specialist roles
and this trend is set to continue, and potentially become even more specialised, in

the future. This is of even greater importance when we consider that the interview
analysis revealed quantity surveyors to be struggling to adapt to the fast pace and
number of changes within the profession, which has lead to a compromise in the
quality of work being provided and with quality compromise being identified as
another key theme.
The questionnaires indicated that level of acceptance of different roles and
responsibilities may be tempered by an individuals exposure to that role. This is
supported in the interviews analysis, where it is generally accepted that quantity
surveyors do not have a choice but to accept these new roles and responsibilities, or
their business will fail due to others taking their place. Due to the competitive
environment, highlighted by the financial competition theme, quantity surveyors must
incorporate and provide these new services, even if it means they have less
confidence in their ability to carry out the work, or means the quality of the work is
compromised.
The questionnaires indicated that the overall level of acceptance of emerging roles
and responsibilities is lower than for both the traditional and evolved roles. This is
supported within the interviews analysis, where there is a reluctance for existing
quantity surveyors to take on these new roles, even when forced to. This is
particularly true of the older generation of quantity surveyors, who require extra
training. Furthermore, the increased workload that new changes often bring to an
already stretched profession in an increasingly competitive environment means that
the new changes will not be well received, unless they are able to lift some of the
time or financial constraints already placed upon quantity surveyors.

Discussion of Research Question 1

Research question 1 asked what roles and responsibilities are the most important to
the quantity surveying profession? The results indicate that the traditional roles of a
quantity surveyor are still perceived to be of more importance than evolved or
emerging roles. This is, in part, due to the reluctance of quantity surveyors to take on
an increased workload, whilst already under a multitude of constraints. It is also
related to the lack of confidence that they have in their more recently acquired
abilities. The questionnaire results clearly found the traditional roles to be perceived
of greater relevance, followed by the evolved roles and lastly there was a much
lower acceptance of the emerging roles. This met objective 1 because it
demonstrated the degree to which traditional roles were still being carried out, while
also highlighted the level of incorporation and acceptance of the changes brought
about by evolved and emerging roles. It also met objective 2 because the results
from the emerging roles provided information regarding the perception and
acceptance of future changes within the quantity surveying profession. Objective 3

was also met because it highlighted differences between the different quantity
surveying sectors.

Discussion of Research Question 2

Research question 2 asked how many of the traditional roles and responsibilities do
quantity surveyors still carry out? The results indicated that the traditional roles and
responsibilities were still carried out by the majority of quantity surveyors, regardless
of sector. However, some specialisation has occurred, represented by the
measuring items on site aspect, where very few consultants carried out this task,
compared to main and sub-contractors. However, all sectors reported similarly high
levels of perceived relevance for all traditional roles, regardless of whether they
personally carried them out in their working practices. This met objective 1 and
objective 2 because it provided a basis by which to compare the evolved and
emerging changes. It also met objective 3 because it highlighted basic differences
between the different quantity surveying sectors.

Discussion of Research Question 3

Research question 3 asked what factors do quantity surveyors believe have brought
about changes within the field? The results indicated that the recession has caused
increased competition and the need to better control financial aspects. There are
also greater time constraints placed upon projects. The increased workload has also
resulted in changes designed to make working practices more efficient, which was
also highlighted as a need for the acceptance of future changes. This met objective 1
and objective 2 because it provided understanding towards the changes that exist
and how they affect working practices, which may then affect future changes. It also
met objective 3 because it highlighted that all quantity surveyors are working under
increasing pressures, which may have to result in greater specialisation of job roles
in the future.

Discussion of Research Question 4

Research question 4 asked to what degree will emerging roles be incorporated and
accepted as part of a quantity surveyors role? The results indicated that emerging
roles are generally not very well accepted at the moment, as their relevance is
viewed to be low. However, as with previous changes, exposure to these new
working practices may lead to an increase in acceptance, both from exposure to the
role and if the role is able to increase time and cost efficiency. This met objective 1
and objective 2 because it demonstrated initial acceptance levels of these emerging

roles. It also met objective 3 because it highlighted difference in acceptance of

emerging roles between the different quantity surveying sectors.

Conclusion
Re This investigation aimed to explore the factors influencing the roles and
responsibilities of quantity surveyors over time. This was achieved by meeting all 3
objectives and answering all 4 research questions. Questionnaires provided data
which was analysed mathematically and semi-structured interviews provided
transcripts which were analysed using thematic analysis. From the discussion of the
results there were 8 main conclusions. These are:
1. Quantity surveyors have a more diverse workload, with differences between
sectors
2. Traditional roles are still highly relevant to all sectors
3. Evolved roles become more accepted through exposure
4. Emerging roles are less well accepted
5. The recession caused financial constraints, which had knock-on effects for the
profession
6. Quality is often compromised due to excessive workload, as well as time and
financial constraints
7. Future changes need to ease the workload in order to be better accepted
8. There will be greater specialisation of job roles in the future
In response to the larger question of what have been the major influencing factors
over time on the quantity surveying profession, there have been three main factors
which have influenced the roles and responsibilities of quantity surveyors. These are:
1. The requirement of flexibility with the ability to diversify in the profession to
keep up with the industrys competition
2. The financial competition due to the recession and reduced financial
resources available
3. With the increased work load quality standards are harder to withhold giving
more of an influence to greater specialisation of roles and responsibilities
The results of this investigation have provided new knowledge to a number of
research areas. In addition, they have highlighted areas where future research could
make a further contribution. It is suggested that future research continues to monitor

the acceptance of emerging roles and responsibilities, perhaps promoting their

benefits more, in order to increase acceptance. Research should also explore ways
to improve quality within the working practices of quantity surveyors, while still
maintaining the time and cost constraints. Another item to research and explore are
the salaries of the quantity surveyors with higher diverse skill sets, as the more skills
attained the higher value the individual is to the client, meaning higher salaries.
Finally, it is suggested that future research should utilise a larger sample size and
conduct the investigation in different countries, so that a comparison can be made
between a broader range of sectors and between countries.

References
Re Ashworth, A. and Hogg, K. (2007) Williss Practice and Procedure for the
Quantity Surveyor. 12th Ed., Oxford; Malden, Mass.: Blackwell publishing
BIMIWG (2011) A report for the Government Construction Client Group Building
Information Modelling (BIM) Working Party Strategy Paper. BIM Industry Working
Group [online] available from <https://connect.innovateuk.org> [Accessed 15
January 2012]
BIM Solution Centre (2012) About us [online] available from
<www.bimsolutionscentre.com> [Accessed 2 February 2012]
BREEAM (2012) The worlds leading design and assessment method for sustainable
buildings [online] available from <www.breeam.org> [Accessed 28 March 2012]
Busch, M. (1993) Using Likert scales in L2 research: A researcher comments.
TESOL Quarterly (27), 733-726
Cartlidge, D. (2010) Quantity Surveyors Pocket Book, Reprinted First Edition,
Oxford: Kidlington Butterworth-Heinemann
Clift, M. (2004) Whole Life Costing. BRE Ltd [online] 3 (1). available from
<www.recoveryinsulation.co.uk> [Accessed 31 January 2012]
Egan, J. Sir (1998) Rethinking Construction. The Report of the Construction Task
Force [online] available from <www.architecture.com> [Accessed 3 January 2012]
HKIS (2008) QS Role in Infrastructure Projects The Hong Kong Institute of
Surveyors cited [15 December 2008], [online] available from <www.dlsqs.com>
[Accessed 5 January 2012]
Latham, M. Sir (1994) Constructing the Team. Joint Review of Procurement and
Contractual Arrangements in the United Kingdom Construction Industry [online]
available from <http://nec-discussion.web.officelive.com> [Accessed 3 January 2012]

Lee, S., Trench, W., and Willis, A. (2011) Williss Elements of Quantity Surveying
11th edn. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell
Likert, R (1932) A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of
Psychology 140, 5-53
Newton, S. (1985) Expert Systems and the Quantity Surveyor. London: Surveyors
Publications
O.A. Olatunji, W. Sher and N. Gu (2009) Building Information Modelling and
Quantity Surveying Practice. Emirates Journal for Engineering Research (15), 67-70
Preston, C. C., and Colman, A. M. (2000) Optimal number of response categories in
rating scales: Reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences.
Acta Psychologica 104, 1-15
QSBC (2009) A Brief History of Quantity Surveyors of BC [Online]. QSBC [cited 27
June 2009]. <http://qsbc.ca/quantity-surveyors-bc-history.htm> [Accessed 31
January 2012]
Quantity Surveying Practices (2011) Quantity Surveying and Sustainability [online]
available from < www.quantity-surveying-practices.com> [Accessed 14 February
2012]
RICS (1983) The Future Role of the Chartered Quantity Surveyor. London: Quantity
Surveyors Division, The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
RICS (2007) RICS Rules of conduct for members 2007 [online] available from
<www.rics.org> [Accessed 1 February 2012]
Seale, C. (2004) Researching Society and Culture. London: Sage
Seeley, I.H. (1997) Quantity Surveying Practice. 2nd edn. Houndmills, Basingstoke,
England: Macmillan
Weisberg, H. F. (2005) The total survey error approach: A guide to the new science
of survey research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
###