Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Developments in the Built Environment

journal homepage: www.editorialmanager.com/dibe/default.aspx

Addressing the capital cost barrier to sustainable construction

Mohammad Nasereddin a, *, Andrew Price b
a
Middle East University (MEU)/Jordan, Queen Alia Airport Street, Amman, 11831, Jordan
b
School of Architecture Building and Civil Engineering, Loughborough University, Epinal Way, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, United Kingdom

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper aims to address the capital cost barrier to sustainable construction (SC). Concepts and processes
Sustainability associated with sustainable construction, value management (VM) and total quality management (TQM) have
Housing been integrated into a novel approach to whole life cost reduction based on a framework and three supporting
Whole-life cost
processes aimed at improving project management understanding and decision making. Data collection was a
Value
Quality
triangulated approach across three stages: focus groups (23 participants); Delphi study (8 participants – 2 rounds);
and validation questionnaire (20 respondents). The research revealed that the capital cost of a LEED silver
certified building in Jordan is around 20–25% over the traditional buildings' capital cost. However, the increased
capital cost that clients’ in Jordan consider being acceptable for LEED is 5–10% - irrespective of the savings in
operational costs.

1. Introduction
This paper aims to discover the scientific knowledge needed to
develop a cost reduction tactical framework for ensuring sustainable
buildings’ whole-life costs are acceptable to clients. The framework in-
tegrates sustainable construction (SC) with value management (VM) and
total quality management (TQM) and is supported by three processes.
The construction industry plays a significant role in the journey of
quality improvement associated with human life. Despite this, it has been
observed that development and improvements led by the construction
industry have given rise to multiple environmental complications,
affecting the entire globe (Dilawo and Salimi, 2019). As mentioned by
Xiao (2017), as per estimation, the construction industry has become the
reason for an approximate 40% of energy consumption, 30% of the total
carbon dioxide emission as well as 40% of the solid waste production.
With continuous improvement associated with the construction sector, it
has provided an improved opportunity for the sustainable practice and
policy developments and through these it has strengthened the sustain-
able development associated aspirations and dreams of the country
(Wahi et al., 2016).
Sustainability’s should be considered with construction projects
which aim to develop accessible, productive, healthy and secure build-
ings through strategies that have minimal impact upon society, economy
and environment (WBDG Sustainable Committee, 2014). Although sus-
tainability concepts are vital for the world and crucial for safeguarding
the future generations, there are multiple potential barriers and hurdles
that can impact implementation. One of the key barriers, is the initial
capital cost of sustainable construction projects tend to be 2%–7% higher
than the cost of less sustainability buildings (Yang et al., 2017). Also,
according to Goh and Sun (2016), these negative perceptions about the
initial costs have developed into one of the primary challenges to
delivering sustainable products.
2. Literature review
2.1. Sustainable construction
Sachs (2015) stated that sustainable development can be defined as a
process that enables the present generation to meet their own needs and
demands without compromising the ability of future generations to seek
sustainable values, growth, and development in terms of using sources
and resources. Whereas sustainable construction it is defined as ‘the
sustainable production, use, maintenance, demolition, and reuse of
buildings and constructions or their components', while sustainable
buildings and built environments are ‘the contributions by buildings and
the built environment to achieving components of sustainable develop-
ment’ (CIB, 2021) – which means a sustainable whole life cycles for
construction projects. Al Subeh (2013) stated that sustainable construc-
tion has attracted significant debate in Jordan in the wake of concerns
regarding environmental degradation. Despite the large-scale

* Corresponding author. Middle East University, Queen Alia Airport Street, Amman, 11831, Jordan.
E-mail addresses: mohdyn696@outlook.com (M. Nasereddin), A.D.F.Price@lboro.ac.uk (A. Price).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2021.100049
Received 6 April 2020; Received in revised form 27 April 2021; Accepted 29 April 2021
Available online 29 May 2021
2666-1659/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
developments in the field of construction to preserve the natural envi-
ronment whilst delivering sustainable built environments and supporting
infrastructure, there is still intense need for socially and ecologically
responsible response. Jordan faces serious problems in terms of imple-
mentation of sustainable construction practices and technologies. Al
Subeh (2013) noted, local communities in Jordan only play a minimal
role in supporting and implementing sustainable architecture. The most
appropriate intervention would thereby require a “strategy for address-
ing medium-term and long term technological, institutional and value
enablers for development” (Al Subeh, 2013).
Al-Qatarneh et al. (2018) revealed several issues and challenges are
being faced by Jordan in the form of rapid urbanisation and use of vast
sources and resources. Most of the population lives in urban areas
resulting in increased demand for infrastructure. This has put pressure on
the government in terms of meeting energy demands especially water as
Jordan is one of the highly water-stressed countries. Also, issues associ-
ated with construction delays and poor productivity have affected the
achievement of sustainability goals.
Hussein (2018) also added that there a knowledge gap between
stakeholders and a lack of benchmarking that have hindered industry
growth. These factors collectively adding value to sustainable construc-
tion practices.
2.1.1. Relevant environmental assessment tools cost review
The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is to the
United States what the Building Research Establishment Assessment
Method (BREEAM) is to the UK. Environmental aspects of buildings are
fundamentally linked to the design economics which often includes a
complex trade-off relationship between the environmental cost, capital
cost and life cycle cost. LEED and BREEM provide the methods to better
appreciate these relationships (Colombo et al., 2013).
2.1.1.1. Cost of LEED. In the early days of green construction or SC,
when there was uncertainty regarding the concepts, the certification of
LEED was higher than compared to the current situation. With skepticism
in relation to the framework of the LEED requisites along with inexpe-
rience resulted in costs premiums in many LEED projects. In a study
conducted by the energy-efficiency and sustainability standards on
behalf of the United States of Americas’ defense department on the cost
and benefits of sustainable buildings; findings revealed that the extra cost
of design and construction varies between 0 and 8% over the traditional
building (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine,
2013). Hence, due to the higher costs of the project, the construction
companies stuck to conventional construction rather than green con-
struction (Chegut et al., 2014). But now the scenario has changed. As SC
evolved the construction materials are easily available, the required
technology for SC is also approachable now. The cost of achieving LEED
certification has thus decreased in the recent years. In constituting the
project cost limitations or budgets, it is highly advisable to discriminate
between the cost of construction which primarily considers only the hard
costs, for example, the construction cost of the building, cost of the
equipment, furniture and fixtures, cost of the property (Chen et al.,
2015).
2.1.1.2. Cost of BREEAM. It is states that there are several sustainability
measures that can be implemented for little or no capital cost but can
have a positive impact on the operational cost. BREEAM certification is
based on having a “PASS, or “EXCELLENT” rating showing an increase in
the cost of capital from 0 to 1.71% for office and school buildings and
5.51% for healthcare buildings (Sharifi and Murayama, 2014). As per the
research conducted by Parker (2012) based on “The Value of BREEAM”,
it was found that the cost increase varies from 1.2% to 20% and the
variation was mainly because of the clients’ experience of BREEAM
application and material used.
2
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
2.2. Value management
VM has evolved as an effective technique to reduce costs, increase
productivity and improve quality for construction projects (Atabay and
Galipogullari, 2013). VM is “is an underlining concept applied within
existing management systems and approaches based on value and func-
tion-orientated thinking, behaviours and methods, particularly dedicated
to motivating people, developing skills, promoting synergies and inno-
vation, with the aim of maximising the overall performance of an orga-
nisation.” (IVM, 2021). Rangelova and Traykova (2014) stated that VM
addresses the needs of all the stakeholders. A VM study should thus affect
everyone linked to the project. It helps the customers achieve value for
money at the same time fulfilling their needs. Rangelova and Traykova
(2014) also stated that VM studies ensure project managers meet dead-
lines and remain under the budgets initially decided. Simultaneously, the
result is a product or service that conforms to the performance standards.
If VM is implemented correctly, a company can save approximately
10–15% of the total project costs as it considers all alternatives and
reaches maximum efficiency ratios (Green, 2011).
2.2.1. VM timing and stages
There are various stages at which VM study can be implemented.
According to Zainulabidin and Pasquire (2005), VM can be implemented
at any stage of the project but it should be consistent throughout the
project life. This also means that the application of VM needs to be
well-defined and explained. This will help in understanding the overall
purpose and utility of applying VM to different processes and activities.
Additionally, when VM is implemented at the initial stage of any project,
there are higher prospects of creating more value and benefits as the
value process becomes consistent. Devaux (2014) added that projects
need to be managed as investments and values need to be ascertained and
analysed from the initial stages of projects. This also means that earned
valued from different projects and processes should be carefully related
to the business value to seek the right balance. This might require inte-
gration with international value standards. Additionally, the focus should
be more on applying the principles of value methodology along with
gaining multiple insights on the notion of a value proposition.
2.2.2. VM tools and techniques
As per the information shared by Malek et al. (2018), the notion of
value methodology is also associated with the value analysis and value
engineering and can be further applied to several other industries not
necessarily only construction. Karim et al. (2018) further added that the
application of a valuation methodology is aimed to improve the value
and has gained several synonymous in the form of value planning, value
process, value management, and value analysis. However, when it comes
to the standard related to the utility, the subject of the value study irre-
spective of its elements or recognition in the form of design, service,
process, product, or procedure is known by the name of “project”. The
structure of the value study is a part of the three-stage process in the form
of pre-workshop preparation, value workshop, and post-workshop
documentation and implementation.
2.3. Total quality management
The notion of Total Quality Management (TQM) was developed by
the manufacturing industry that was initially incorporated by Japanese
firms and has been marked with an increase in the quality, productivity,
and performance of sources and resources with an increased focus on
quality by lowering prices and improving efficiency (Bettina, 2017).
According to Leong et al. (2014), TQM is a process of improving the
overall quality aspect of an organisation by concentrating on improving
the quality standards related to operations and functions of an organi-
sation. It is also aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of
organisations systematically. Rupha (2013) stated that critical success
factors for TQM are mainly in the form of focusing on the quality aspects
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
of organisations and aiming at continuous quality improvement. It fo-
cuses on improving the quality of products and services along with
improving customer satisfaction and acceptance in the short and long
run. It also involves teamwork while achieving organisational objectives
in the most systematic manner. The most significant aspect of TQM is in
the form of maximising the potential of an organisation while adding
value to the organisational functions in a critical manner. Zaid et al.
(2018) further pointed out that implementing TQM in organisational
processes and activities require a lot of efforts and cooperation from
stakeholders. TQM is a process and approach that is based on a careful
assessment of sources and resources. It is based on understanding the
business dynamics and related environments and seeking inputs to add
quality to every business function and process.
2.3.1. Competitive advantage and zero defects
Leong et al. (2014) further added that TQM also leads to a competi-
tive business advantage along with adding sustainability to business
processes. Rupha (2013) added that TQM also helps in eliminating the
waste prospect along with making sure that sources and resources are
used optimally with zero defects and errors. This also ensures a higher
degree of productivity and value creation process. Nevertheless, waste
reduction links to the economic and environmental pillars of sustain-
ability – by minimising the recourses in use, waste is reduced, hence
profitability is increased.
Rumane (2013) posited that the core concept of the zero defects
principle is the premise that ‘the whole is the sum of its parts’. Many
organisations have and are keen to embrace TQM techniques and phi-
losophy in their workings, but some are hesitant or outright reluctant,
because of the common perceived misconception that the implementa-
tion of these techniques and philosophy is costly and can cause disrup-
tions and delays within the projects. Even though TQM has been
recognised to enable improvements in performance and costs within the
industries, it has been applied in, including the construction industry.
Zaid et al. (2018) pointed out that TQM suggests that all functions,
processes, and stakeholders of an organisation are inclined toward using
quality as the only source of adding value to business productivity. TQM
should be an integral part of an organisation rather than a process being
applied because of the external pressure. This ensures a greater degree of
competitive advantage and value by maximising efficiency of the orga-
nisation and customer satisfaction.
Rumane (2013) stated that TQM is a long-term business prospect that
needs to be implemented in a planned manner. It also means that orga-
nisations need to be sure of short-term issues and problems before sys-
tematically addressing long-term prospects. Jay and Barry (2014)
pointed out that TQM also helps in improving the competitiveness of
organisations along with reducing costs. It helps in adding a strategic
benefit to organisations by ensuring the quality remains the focal point of
business processes and activities. Zaid et al. (2018) further added that
proper implementation of TQM is useful in meeting customers' needs and
demands along with focusing on loopholes affecting the quality param-
eters of organisations.
2.3.2. TQM dimensions
Mazher et al. (2015) stated that within the construction industry four
dimensions are essential for the construction process, namely:

quality management;

quality control;

quality assurance; and

quality inspection.
The relation between business performance and customer satisfaction
is that of what can be defined as “cause and effect”, and TQM can
contribute to improving both performance and customer satisfaction as it
is premise is customer and performance centric.
According to (Douglas et al., 2015), to attain sustainability both
3
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
‘hard’ (technical) and ‘soft’ (cultural) dimensions of TQM must be
concentrated on as they both contribute to the ‘continuous improvement’
philosophy. But managers in organisations find it easier to implement the
technical or ‘hard’ dimension while ignoring the ‘soft’ dimensions lead-
ing to sub-optimisation of both TQM and performance elements resulting
in the endangerment of sustainability. To address and seek optimal so-
lutions to the construction problems plaguing the construction industry,
one must consider the all ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ aspects such as social, political,
technical issues and the inevitable trade-offs between them. Sachs (2015)
suggested that sustainability is a process of continuous development
aimed at integrating stakeholders for seeking mutual value in the social,
business, and competitive environment across the organisational frame-
work. It aims to improve connection and relationships between different
stakeholders. Through implementation of this dimension the organisa-
tion will be able to extract the best of skill and knowledge from their
employees that will resultantly make the organisation more competitive
with a focus and goal to be the best in the industry, and without this focus
on competitiveness, sustainability in terms of procedures and the
organisational overall cannot be attained (Douglas et al., 2015). For
sustainability concept to be best applied, it should be integrated with
different management philosophy like TQM to foster the hard and soft
dimensions by people involvement, conformance to specifications and
continuous improvement.
2.4. SC, VM and TQM conceptual linkages
Davies and Davies (2017) stated that there is a close relationship
between VM, TQM, and SC. They also suggest that VM is aimed to
maximise the value of a project leading to organisational benefit and
customer satisfaction. It helps in limiting risk factors along with
balancing values and benefits, and aims to use sources and resources in
an integrated manner leading to a better degree of benefit and advantage
in the long run. Sachs (2015) added that when SC and VM are applied to a
project, there is a better prospect of sustainable construction and prac-
tices. He further stressed on the usefulness of triple-bottom line (TBL)
that used social and environmental elements rather than measuring only
return on investment (ROI) and profitability. The implementation of VM
and SC helps in realising the value of TBL in a significant manner. Gillier
and Piat, 2015 further added that there several barriers related to the
application of sustainable construction and some of the key issues are
related to higher construction and maintenance cost and also estimating
the operational and functional costs.
Therefore, capital costs for sustainable buildings must be evaluated
against those of traditional buildings to highlight the benefits and worth
of ‘green’ buildings hence for motivating stakeholders to consider using
sustainable construction methods. Increased efficiency and low carbon
emissions of sustainable buildings result in reduced running costs; these
benefits provide builders with a strategic advantage and improve
competitiveness in the business (Dobson et al., 2013). VM and sustain-
ability can serve as an optimum combination for
sustainable/green-building principles, life-cycle costs and a project that
accomplishes in satisfying the needs of the people throughout the whole
life cycle of the project. During the conceptual and design phases of the
project, VM techniques and methodology can be linked with those out-
lined in the SAVE is to improve sustainable construction (WAO, 2014). As
per the insights of Gillier and Piat, 2015, VM is a long-term process that
helps in analysing the cost factor and when applied to the notion of
sustainability can help in creating a great deal of value. Thus, SC and VM
need to be integrated to achieve optimum value. Therefore, for VM and
SC to achieve absolute value under ‘whole life value’ umbrella, several
objectives must be fulfilled as indicated in Fig. 1.
The main reason to apply VM practices in construction is to obtain
maximum benefits from the project; in cumulative terms maximisation of
yields and profits. A project that has alternatives, that costs less and
provides higher outputs resultantly providing maximum benefits and
quality than a traditional project, benefits could manifest into usage of
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
Fig. 1. Conceptual aspects for SC, VM and TQM adapted from (Al yami, 2005).
renewable/new materials, improvements in design, increasing employee
participation and enthusiasm in decision-making processes, continuous
progress, enhancing skill set of employees from team participation,
enhancement in performance, functional consistency and quality (WAO,
2014). VM is a systematic approach, which allows its users to assess the
value of a project in a low-cost way. VM applied at any stage of the
project will deliver great value, but it always bests that it should be
implemented in the earliest or initial stages of the project to derive
maximum benefits. Typically, reductions in costs, improvements in
quality of processes and construction, identify and isolate any shortage in
design.
The theoretical concept discussed earlier highlighted several impor-
tant factors of integration. These factors are:

identification of sustainability issues relevant to the VM workshop;

client's commitment to these sustainability issues before the
workshop;

the role of VM facilitator to raise awareness of sustainability to
clients;

the support of team members to uphold these issues; and

the need to integrate these issues within the process of VM itself.
The field studies conducted raised several more issues to deepen our
understanding of the roles of the three groups of players of VM namely
clients, facilitators and team members. The studies revealed where sus-
tainability issues need to be focused and what are the hurdles that need to
be accountable to promote effective integration. From the knowledge
gathered, a structural model of integration is proposed, which integrates
the concept and issues of sustainability within the activities of VM.
Bateh et al. (2014) define sustainability as “a state of affairs where the
sum of natural and man-made resources remains at least constant for the
foreseeable future, so that the well-being of future generations does not
decline”. A clarification from Lacoste (2016) indicates that achieving
corporate sustainability requires an organisation to consider economic
development intersection, protection of the environment as well as social
responsibility. TQM and sustainability aspects are defined by proactive as
well as preventive approaches used to instil long-term goals and maintain
4
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
performance level and its achievements. More so, sustainability and TQM
processes are used as philosophies that develop organisation tools as well
as technical know-how, hence providing guarantee real processes gov-
erning. These technical, organisational tools include zero defects, waste
reduction, continuous improvement, employee involvement and training
and life cycle assessment (Galvagno and Dalli, 2014). According to Tiong
Kung Leong et al. (2014), TQM can be defined as a process that can be
included in the process of SC to improve social and construction pro-
cesses. It also leads to a social and environmental value that is important
as construction processes tend to affect the social and general environ-
ment. TQM embedded with SC leads to a process of generating benefits
for several stakeholders.
In the last decade, many organisations across the world have
embraced TQM. According to Aziz and Hafiz (2013), TQM is an inte-
gration of performance improvement techniques with TQM leads to full
potential achievement. However, the aspect of cross-fertilisation is taken
into consideration based on the value analysis (VA) that focuses on the
cost and function of the products (Rupha 2013). VA and TQM share
common areas as far as TQM process is concerned. TQM is made up of
three distinct basic principles namely, customer focus, continuous
improvement and teamwork. These basic principles are fully addressed if
TQM tools, as well as techniques that are defined by manufacturability
design and Quality Function Deployment (QFD), are blended (Ho et al.,
2010). More so, VA is utilised since it serves as a mechanism that makes
TQM principles work together without fail.
Due to quality improvement during the long term, the whole-life cost
of products can be lower. The attention and effort of the customer are
drawn through the production of high-quality products that satisfy their
needs. Zaid et al. (2018) stated that reviewing factors that can reduce
costs and improve quality can help in manufacturing high-quality prod-
ucts and sustainable services. However, cost reduction and quality
improvement are a process that needs to be supported by the inputs of
people working with organisations. This requires an active role of
stakeholders. More so, the objective of VA is necessitating equivalent
performance and lower cost without affecting the safety, reliability, de-
gree of the quality, dependability, life and the features as well as effec-
tiveness needed by customers (Ho et al., 2010). TQM is supported by VA
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
in three ways. First, it helps an organisation to determine the needs and
wants of the customers in terms of quality and functional requirements.
Secondly, VA helps in the identification as well as prioritisation of targets
to enhance improvement aspect. Finally, VA supports TQM by fostering
teamwork as well as collaboration across organisation departments (Hill
and Wilkinson, 1995).
Overall, SC, VM and TQM are similar concepts especially regarding
people involvement, improvement, safety, satisfaction, cost, resource,
energy, process, efficiency, productivity and continues development –
which should collectively lead to competitive advantage through
customer satisfaction.
3. Methodology
3.1. Research concept
Fig. 2 below illustrates the research concept that elaborates the
problem that needs to be solved and the process for solving it. The
problem is by adopting sustainable building (Bs) practices, and for the
building to be LEED-certified, it costs more than traditional building (Bt)
which makes it less attractive for the client to adopt it, neglecting the
reduction in the running and maintenance cost of the building on the
long run. Thus, by certifying the building with LEED, the cost of energy
consumption in sustainable buildings (Es) is less than traditional build-
ings (Et). So, this research aims to reduce the capital costs of the (Bs) to
make it similar to (Bt) therefore make adopting it more attractive to
clients by using (VM) in the planning stage and (TQM) in the execution
stage by adopting tactical sustainable whole-life cost (TSWLC)
framework.
3.2. Literature review scope
A comprehensive literature review was conducted in the areas of SC
and VM to find gaps in the knowledge. After discovering the cost barrier,
an extensive literature review on the topics of TQM, project management
(PM) and whole life costing (WLC) to determine the best tools and
techniques for reducing the cost of sustainable construction and
increasing its consideration in Jordan - which resulted in the adoption of
TQM due to its continual organisational improvement for waste/cost
reduction and all stakeholders satisfaction which links to the economic
Fig. 2. Research concept.
5
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
and social sustainability pillars (environmental, social and economic).
Fig. 3 explains the research methodology components and procedure for
the research.
3.3. Focus groups
In that pursuit, three exploratory focus groups were conducted to help
formulate tactical whole life framework/process diagrams for optimising
the cost of sustainable buildings. The focus groups included twenty-three
participants (i.e. designers, contractors, project managers, consultants,
quantity surveyors and site engineers) and covered all the practical
processes and roles of stakeholders in the building lifecycle. The template
for the focus group questions comprised four sections: background in-
formation and agenda; the integration of SC and VM; the integration of
SC and TQM; and defining processes of whole-life building cycle for
developing a tactical framework and process diagrams.
3.4. Design and development of tactical framework/process diagrams
After the completion of the focus group interviews, the development
of the frameworks/process diagrams initiated. The first developed pro-
cess diagram is the planning stage sustainable VM (SVM) represented in
Fig. 7, which was inspired by Zainulabidin’s (2005) VM process diagram
but re-engineered according to the focus groups' qualitative data to make
it more economically/technologically oriented and relevant to the Jor-
danian industry. The aim of the process assesses alternative potential
feasible sustainable and non-sustainable solutions for a building using
VM tools and techniques in the planning stage.
The aim of the second developed process diagram - sustainable total
quality management (STQM) represented in Fig. 8, to improve the con-
struction stage by reducing project waste and cost through the adoption
of TQM - that was inspired by the teachings of Oakland (2014) and the
data from focus group sessions.
The first two process diagrams are at the operational level; however,
the third developed process diagram is at the strategic level - sustainable
value total quality management (SVTQM) represented in Fig. 6, that in-
tegrates: whole-life building value; SC; VM; TQM; aspects of RIBA plan of
works; and the opinions from the focus group sessions in an IDEF0 pro-
cess diagram. The diagram aims to provide a holistic strategic view of the
lifecycle of a sustainable building and to integrate the previous two
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
Fig. 3. Research methodology.
frameworks under one plan – to increase the value of the proposed
research solution. Lastly, a sustainable tactical whole-life cost (STWLC)
framework was developed to locate each process diagram in its con-
struction stage and organisational level of use as shown in Fig. 4.
3.5. Modified Delphi study
After formulating the framework/process diagrams from the data
collected in the focus groups and literature review; a series of Delphi
study interviews were conducted with four academics/research col-
leagues in the School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering at
Loughborough University and four practitioners from the Jordanian
construction industry. The Delphi method is one of the most popular and
effective forecasting processes. It is a structured framework of forecasting
future trends based on the results provided by the panel of experts. These
results are provided based on the different rounds of questionnaires given
to them. This method is a quantitative approach which aims at generating
unanimity. With the help of this process of conversance which takes
common trends and analysis of exceptions into account, a general
agreement can be ascertained (Rowe and Wright, 2001).
The study aimed to develop the framework/process diagrams further.
The studies’ question sheet comprised ten questions regarding the clarity
of structure, contents, stages, inputs, outputs, function, people involve-
ment and the necessity of each function or stage with any recommen-
dations on making it leaner (Seker, 2015). The study took two rounds of
6
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
interviews, analysis and modification before the framework/process di-
agrams reached their maturity level. To note, there was a slight modifi-
cation on the protocol of the modified Delphi study as changes were
applied to the framework/process diagrams after each interview – to
increase the efficiency and accuracy of the sessions.
3.6. Framework/process diagrams validation
The aim of the process was to improve and validate the delivered
framework/process diagrams. The tactical framework validation process
comprised a questionnaire to twenty respondents in the Jordanian con-
struction industry. The questionnaire comprised three sections: the cost
of LEED-certified buildings and the acceptable margin of increase by the
client above the traditional buildings in Jordan; the clarity and purpose
of the structure for each framework/process diagram; and the robustness
of the process diagrams to the industry and their potential for contribu-
tion to cost reduction.
3.7. Data analysis
Most data collected were qualitative, based on preliminary semi-
structured interviews, focus groups and validation interviews. As per
some scholars, Bogdan and Biklen (1982), qualitative data analysis is a
study which is conducted where the gathered data is further broken
down to make sense while looking for patterns or hidden trends which
M. Nasereddin, A. Price Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049

Fig. 4. Tactical framework.

Fig. 5. Framework/process diagrams key signs.

give information which is vital to any study. For the study, the interviews
were also recorded, and their transcription was studied in depth to collect
that vital information. As per some scholars, Bogdan and Biklen (1982),
qualitative data analysis is a study which is conducted where the gath-
ered data is further broken down to make sense while looking for pat-
terns or hidden trends which give information which is vital to any study.
For the study, the interviews were also recorded, and their transcription
was studied in depth to collect that vital information.
While any quantitative research centers around collecting statistical
information and cross-checking it across responses of different people for
clarifying an event, for this study, an approach for quantitative analysis
utilizing validation questionnaires has been adopted. That is expected to
validate the framework created to test the study. The survey that has
been prepared measures ratios, ordinal, nominal as well as dichotomous
data obtained through responses received. Additionally, the analysis and
storage of the quantitative validation questionnaires was done by
Microsoft Excel software.
4. Research findings
4.1. Research gaps and contribution to knowledge
There are several barriers that stand in the way of implementing SC
by clients, designers and construction companies. These barriers include

7
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
Fig. 6. SVTQM process diagram.
the lack of financial incentives, lack of integrated design and affordability
(Serpell et al., 2013). Since monetary evaluation often dominates in the
process of decision making, the lack of financial incentives prevents SC
from being used widely since it decreases economic viability. Shi et al.
(2013) conducted a survey to investigate the status of green construction
in China and the most critical barriers. Their study found that the three
most critical barriers are “additional cost”, “incremental time” and
“limited availability of green suppliers and information”. This concludes
that the extra cost of sustainability is a major problem that needs to be
addressed to increase the consideration of SC.
Due to limited understanding and the concern about cost, many de-
velopers are still reluctant to pursue SC (Gharakhani et al., 2013). Dobson
et al. (2013) discussed that although sustainability has become a signif-
icantly important issue concerning the construction industry, the costs of
implementing such strategies is a major practical hindrance. According to
the literature, there is a need to find more cost-effective strategies for the
implementation of SC (Dobson et al., 2013).
The novelty of the research lies in the fact that the framework pro-
posed will integrate three important concepts for the construction in-
dustry: SC, VM and TQM to reduce buildings' capital costs, thus making it
more attractive for investors to adopt SC practices. Further justification
comes in Sir John Egan’s governmental report “Rethinking Construction
(1998)” ‘the industry as a whole is under-achieving and called for dra-
matic improvements’. He proposed that this would be possible ‘if we
focus all our efforts on delivering the value that our customers need, and
if we are prepared to challenge the waste and poor quality arising from
our existing structures and working practices’, that means the costumers
have to get the best value (i.e. VM), best quality (i.e. TQM) and challenge
waste (i.e. SC and TQM).
4.2. Tactical framework
It is an action or strategy carefully planned to achieve a specific end to
8
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
accomplish a set of beliefs, ideas and rules that are used as the basis for
making judgments and decisions. (Oxford Dictionary, 2021). The tactical
framework as depicted in Fig. 4, provides a basic structure that explains
where each process diagram is used in the construction cycle and on what
organisational level is it applied to reduce the extra cost of LEED-certified
buildings toward inspiring “a development that meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs” (WCED, 1987). The formulation process came after an
extensive literature review in construction and project management
realms. However, key signs for the framework and process diagrams are
also developed to make the understanding process easier as shown in
Fig. 5 below.
The framework is divided into the following four components.
A - Strategic process diagram (SVTQM): This process diagram is used
on the strategic level of the organization – to execute the building in
an optimum manner and to forecast its further development.
B - Operational planning process diagram (SVM): The process dia-
gram intends to increase value in the operational planning stage by
using VM to incorporate sustainable solutions and optimising cost.
C - Operational executing process diagram (SVTQM): This process
diagram is used on the operational level of the organization or project
and it intends to increase the value of the process by reducing wastes
and hence, optimising the cost of the building through TQM tools and
techniques.
D - Building running stage: This stage is included in the framework to
feedback to the database on the performance of the used solutions –
for better planning (selection of options) and executing measures in
next projects that aim at continues improvement.
E - Documentation: The database is adapted to foster integrated in-
formation management for better benchmarking and decision-
making process.
M. Nasereddin, A. Price Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049

Fig. 7. SVM process diagram.

9
M. Nasereddin, A. Price Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049

Fig. 8. STQM process diagram.

4.3. Strategic sustainable value total quality management process diagram
– SVTQM
This process diagram, Fig. 6, explains the strategic whole-life cycle
process of building projects with all its inputs/outputs, controls/mech-
anisms and where each other process diagram is applied (SVM, STQM) to
optimise the whole life cost of sustainable LEED-certified buildings. Its
formulation was inspired by integrating whole life building cycle; SC;
VM; TQM; inputs from practitioners in the Jordanian construction in-
dustry; and aspects of RIBA plan of works in IDEF0 frameworks meth-
odology to formulate a strategic and inclusive management plan.

10
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
4.4. Operational sustainable VM process diagram - SVM
The SVM process diagram Fig. 7, was inspired by Noor et al. (2015)
showcasing sustainability concerns among stakeholders from the
perspective of value management. ZainulAbidin and Pasquire (2007)
diagram aimed at increasing awareness among stakeholders and not for
cost reduction. This research diagram is similar to the previous in stages
flow and some aspects of the stages but edited according to the literature
review and data collected in the focus groups and modified Delphi study
to make it more economically oriented by rearranging and renaming
some stages and the addition of documentation/database to find alter-
native solutions faster by either using previous knowledge on materials
and designs from previous projects documented or by searching the web
on solutions locally and internationally. Also, the plan has included a
stage of checking the aesthetics of the design and the inclusion of
checking the safety of the building plus, checking building performance
with the BIM expert.
4.5. Operational sustainable total quality management process diagram -
STQM
The operational sustainable total quality management process is
presented in Fig. 8. The aim is to reduce the projects wastes/costs and the
time of construction corrections by using TQM tools and techniques. The
aspects that make this plan innovative and state of the art is the inclusion
of technology in an inspection by using electronic tablets instead of paper
check sheets and linking the data to a documentation database to store
and analyse the data. The database is also used to find previous solutions
to the problem at hand on-site by benchmarking on previous solutions on
the database in the form of photos and method statements. So, the
inspector/supervisor records the problem and try to provide the best
solution to the team member who is executing the work. Also, the plan
includes training to team members on the problems raised in the project
and has an incentives scheme to the team members that have least errors
which foster efficiency and the organisation's culture of quality.
Furthermore, tools like control charts are used to quantify the problems
to make the training process more precise, plus to quantify the produc-
tivity of the team members by the number of errors done in the project.
Fish and bone diagram tool are used to find the root causes of the
problem and generate solutions by benchmarking on previous solutions
on the database to solve the problem more efficiently and accurately.
4.6. Results from an increase in cost associated with LEED certification in
Jordan
This section explores the additional costs associated with LEED-
Fig. 9. Approximate increase in cost for green certification.
11
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
certified buildings and the accepted margin of increase by clients in
Jordan. The section comprises two questions that address the approxi-
mate increase in cost and willingness of clients to pay additional capital
required to provide a building with green certification and silver certi-
fication and the results are represented by Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 respectively.
The questions were framed to get an understanding of the approximate
cost that would increase for certification and how much more would the
client be willing to pay the extra additional capital.
When asked about the approximate increase in cost for a building to
be certified green building: 35% of the participants felt that the certifi-
cation would lead to an increase of 10%–15%; 15% respondents felt that
the increase in cost could be anywhere between 10% and 20%; 25% of
the participants said the increase in cost would be between 15% and
20%; while approximately 30% feeling the cost increase will be any-
where between 20% and 30%. For a building to obtain a silver LEED
certification: 35% of the participants felt that there would a 15%–20%
cost increment; 30% felt it would be between 20% and 25%; whereas the
remaining 35% were in the opinion that the cost would increase by 30%–
40%. The data for the responses has been graphically presented in Fig. 9.
From the results obtained it is evident that majority of the participants
are in the view that the cost increase for a building to be certified would
lie in the range of 10%–20% while for the building to obtain a silver LEED
certification the cost would increase by 15%–25% respectively.
After understanding the view of participants regarding what they
think would be the increase in cost for a building to be certified and silver
LEED-certified. participants were asked about the acceptable added costs
that clients would be willing to pay for getting their buildings certified
and silver LEED-certified. Most of the participants responded by saying
that their clients would accept an increase of up to 5% for their buildings
to be certified while all of them responded that the clients would be able
to increase their capital cost from 5 to 10% for their building to be silver
LEED-certified. The responses are graphically represented in Fig. 10
below.
The general response according to the industry professional is that
there would be a cost increase of 10%–20% for building certification and
the cost further escalates by 30%–40%. When asked about the willing-
ness of the client to pay for the cost of extra capital required the pro-
fessionals stated that they believe the client would happily pay up to 5%
more for certification and up to 10% for getting a silver LEED
certification.
From participants’ responses, it is evident that the increase in cost
estimated by the industry professionals for green certification and silver
LEED certification is higher than what they expect the client to bear for
their buildings comfortably. This difference in the increase in cost and
willingness of the customer to pay that cost is huge and might deter the
clients from going towards adopting sustainable construction techniques
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
Fig. 10. Acceptable additional capital that the client is willing to pay.
and getting there building certified.
A participant to the questionnaire suggested how to address the in-
crease in cost so that more clients are inclined towards adopting sus-
tainable construction techniques and getting the building certified and
silver LEED-certified. He commented that:
“ … I like the logic and the graphics visualisation above. The concern I have
is that many clients are reluctant to spend time and effort (money) upfront,
on a team of experts, when they have already selected a lead professional
to perform the planning and design of their project. The clients have to see
their benefits (including financial rewards) and agree to this level of
planning effort, or it will be omitted. Investors are usually short term (quick
ROI) thinkers. It would be helpful, if government demand and/or subsidies,
or somehow ward this level of a long-term effort that will be beneficial for
future generations as well as the present population ….”
5. Research implications and limitations
The research presented itself with certain limitations that could in-
fluence the proposed framework. Firstly, the information collected dur-
ing research lacked in quantitative and empirical data and focused more
on qualitative data. The lack of available quantitative data in terms of
practicality, cost-saving and benefits of management practices (SC, VM
and TQM) hindered in generating a better understanding of the appli-
cation of these practices. Additionally, empirically evidence and cross-
comparative analysis would have offered additional information on the
usefulness of VM, SC, and TQM in different countries.
Secondly, the data collection method mainly applied to collecting
qualitative data was the use of interviews. The interviews conducted
were semi-structured and face to face that might have led to the rise of
issues related to the way in which the questions were put across to the
interviewee’s influencing their responses. In the case of focus group
discussions, the opinion of one member could result in forming an
opinion of another member thus affecting their answers. Also, during the
interviews, certain interviewees were reluctant to express their view on
the tools used by their organization for sustainable construction prac-
tices. The interviewees were assured about the confidentiality of their
responses and identity, but they were still hesitant to answer. Hence the
outcomes of the research are not free from adverse effects of methodol-
ogy such as research bias.
Thirdly, the sampling population for the research consisted of clients,
construction managers, architects, contractors, designers and a key
representative from the construction industry since the starting of the
12
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
project. However, there are other certain key stakeholders that are
involved in the construction process. Hence it is fair enough to assume
that the outcomes of the research could have varied if opinions from all
the stakeholders in a construction project were to be gathered. Even
though the current study applied the best possible sample size for the
research, the results could have differed if the sample size and the
number of interviews for the research were to be increased. However,
limitations caused due to difficulties in reaching out to interviewees,
conducting a face-to-face interview, availability of time and resources
and the geographical dispersion limited the selection of sample size used
for this research.
Fourthly, during the Delphi study data collection stage of the pro-
posed STWLC framework, the validation question sheet was presented to
the same sample size as the preliminary interviews. Hence the results
were constrained to small sample size, and a wider population who
would implement the proposed design were kept out of consideration.
Also, since the duration of a construction project is very long it was not
possible to practically implement the proposed tactical framework/pro-
cess diagrams to identify the outcomes in real-life scenario.
Lastly, in terms of the research being specific to the region of Jordan,
the information related to value management practices and sustainable
construction techniques used in Jordan were also limited. The research
uses the general practices that are used globally to develop the frame-
work. However, the present research offers much-needed insights
regarding the construction industry of Jordan and can be assumed as the
basis of further development of research in the related field.
6. Discussion
The formulation of the framework/process diagrams came from the
literature review, preliminary interviews, focus groups, modified Delphi
study and validation questionnaire, which formulated process diagrams
to be allocated in a single tactical framework. As it allocates (SVTQM,
SVM, STQM) diagrams in their organisational levels - strategic, opera-
tional and building operation stages, plus links the whole process to an
integrated information database.
A validation questionnaire was conducted to evaluate the clarity,
functionality and robustness of the framework/process diagrams. The
results indicated that the framework/process diagrams are clear in con-
tents, flow, purpose and role of people. Additionally, they could not be
simplified, or any functions are done in parallel. Further, the participants
agreed on the robustness of it and potential effectiveness. However, some
participants indicated that the framework/process diagrams are
advanced for the Jordanian construction industry in terms of the
M. Nasereddin, A. Price
technological tools used as it wouldn't be easy to integrate it in the
normal construction process. Nevertheless, the integration of the
framework/process diagrams would be easier in the UK/EU because of
the region advancement in construction technology. But other higher
scaled contractors/project managers indicated that such a system is not
hard to apply but would require initial capital and training to be
implemented in its right manner.
The findings also revealed that there are several opportunities to
enhance the framework for reaching a higher potential and value which
will increase its applicability in the industry. Thus, the framework should
be done to all areas of construction and not only in buildings; should few
modifications be done accordingly to suit the project ex — dams, high-
ways, bridges etc. Additionally, higher value and applicability will be
harnessed from, if it would be done in software like expert systems and
the documentation/database function could be done in machine learning
and hence artificial intelligence. Furthermore, a new dimension to the
framework would be created, if it would be integrated into Building In-
formation Management (BIM); the dimension would include project
management which will enhance furcating and managing the project
more comprehensively.
Furthermore, it was found that the notion of SC is quite challenging in
the context of the Jordanian construction industry because of the barriers
ordered in descending order as: the increase of capital cost, lack of
knowledge and awareness, the culture factor – the use of certain mate-
rials, lack of sustainable suppliers, lack of experts in SC area. And the
drivers of SC are government legislation, good reputation, managerial
concerns, reduction in running costs due to sustainable systems.
As for VM, the main barriers are lack of experts that have enough
knowledge on alternative solutions and right management tools and
techniques, incremental time, reduction in quality, change of planned
client’s specifications. The drivers are: Reduction of cost, better team
coordination, good reputation through client satisfaction and increase in
the functionality of the building.
The main competitive factors for buildings are: cost of the property;
ease and economy in design; quality of the building; location of the
building; selection of materials; and time for completion.
Moreover, the perception of sustainable buildings in Jordan is nar-
rowed to the use of solar panels and LED lights as other sustainable so-
lutions are still unused due to awareness and high costs. VM should be
considered in early stages of the project to reduce the most cost as
changes are costly further in the project. The effectiveness of the study
varies from project to the other as that depends on how the facilitator
manages it and the teams’ knowledge on alternative feasible solutions.
However, the quality of the product should not be compromised.
TQM in Jordan is used frequently in most projects but the main
barrier for adopting it is the culture of the country as the perception of
quality for construction stakeholders is moderate to low which makes the
quality of product low. This problem could be solved partially by using
technology, training and beneficial incentives scheme.
Nevertheless, the additional cost of LEED certification is between 10
and 20% and for the building to be silver certified is between 20 and
25%. However, clients in Jordan are only willing to pay an extra of
5–10% over the traditional buildings.
Most of the participants have agreed that the framework/process
diagrams are clear, robust and would reduce the capital cost. However,
there was uncertainty in the easiness of application due to the advanced
technological aspects adopted.
In a comparative study (Karunasena et al., 2016) conducted in Sri
Lanka construction industry, the findings revealed that complications
and limitations associated with VP and SC applications could be associ-
ated with the lack of awareness among the clients of VP and SC. While
developing sustainable designs, it is considered that the costing would be
higher than any other regular designs. Furthermore, if the initial costs are
considered, lack of governmental support or the time associated with the
initiated stages are taken into consideration, sustainable designers are
unable to develop proper proposals as well as spread awareness about the
13
Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049
sustainability. Besides this, it was also found that shortage of the experts
associated with sustainability also faced the lack of regulations focusing
upon SC or VP concepts for construction and this is the primary reason
that sustainable or value enhancement technologies are lacking the
guidance from the government, from experts and impacting the clients.
While discussing the sustainability concepts, the benefits associated
with resource conservation, environmentally friendly construction,
improved structures with energy efficiency, enhanced attributes and
skills of people as well as the enhanced comfort and health levels of users
should be discussed. It helps in reduced wastage of projects at initial and
operational stages and discusses improved satisfaction of the employees
so that the level of strain on the local resources could be decreased. The
clients always go with the improved VP concepts as well as reduces or
eliminate unnecessary costs so that improvement in the quality of
outcome and enhance attributes and skills of people involved in a project
could be obtained. It also helps the people associated with VP and SC to
improve their quality of outcomes and helps in VP by offering incentives
and rewards, giving stakeholders. Hence, governments must implement
strategies so that awareness related to SC and VP could be improved.
7. Conclusion
Overall, this paper aimed to discover the scientific knowledge needed
to develop a cost reduction tactical framework for ensuring sustainable
buildings’ whole-life costs are acceptable to clients in Jordan. The
research pursued the development of a tactical framework which will
encourage clients to adopt sustainability concepts as to reduce its capital
cost by management tools and techniques (VM, TQM) and running cost
by sustainable systems and materials; hence to focus on whole life costs.
This is new framework was developed to promote decisions in projects
which allow clients to recognise the whole-life value of investing in
sustainable design and construction. The novelty of this research is in
integrating SC, VM and TQM in a framework/process diagrams to reduce
the whole life cost of construction and operation of a sustainable
building.
SC, VM and TQM are different management philosophies in appli-
cation that have a similar aim in concept – to increase productivity of
employees and organisation; increase efficiency of resources, employees
and organisation – through creativity, quantitative analysis and con-
tinues improvement and technology – to achieve competitive advantage;
customer satisfaction; and sustainability of organisation.
The framework process diagrams are made for buildings in Jordan,
but they can be used in various project management projects. As indi-
cated in the validation process, the framework/process diagrams are
advanced to Jordan as due to their technological aspects; it wouldn't be
easy to integrate them to organisations in Jordan. But, the framework/
process diagrams could be integrated easier in the more developed region
like the USA or EU/UK due to their advancement in the technological
aspects in construction. In the case of an organisation or a country that
would like to adopt the current framework/process diagrams; another
validation process is recommended to adjust the variables to the area or
the organisation of adoption.
It is also recommended to conduct a barriers/drivers of SC study in
most countries or regions; to utilize the drivers for easing the barriers – in
hope to save the planet.
Funding
Middle East University (MEU)/Jordan – PhD.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
M. Nasereddin, A. Price Developments in the Built Environment 7 (2021) 100049

References Leong, T.K., Zakuan, N., Shoki, M., Ariff, M., 2014. Using project performance to measure
effectiveness of quality management system maintenance and practices in
construction industry. Sci. World J.
Al Subeh, 2013. A strategic framework for sustainable construction in Jordan. Civ.
Malek, et al., 2018. Value creation and capture through human resource management
Environ. Res.
practices: Gazing through the business model lens. Organ. Dynam.
Al-Qatarneh, G.N., Al Smadi, B., Al-Zboon, K., Shatanawi, K.M., 2018. Impact of climate
Mazher, et al., 2015. A Study on the factors affecting total quality management in the
change on water resources in Jordan: a case study of Azraq basin, 2018 Appl. Water
Saudi Arabian construction industry. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Res.
Sci. 8, 50.
Noor, N.F., Kamruzzaman, S.N., Ghaffar, N., 2015. Sustainability concern in value
Atabay, Galipogullari, 2013. Application of value engineering in construction projects. J.
management: a study on a Governments building project. Int. J. Curr. Res. Acad. Rev.
Traffic Transport. Eng.
(2), 72–83.
Aziz, Hafiz, 2013. Applying lean thinking in construction and performance improvement.
Oakland, 2014. Total Quality Management and Operational Excellence. Routledge.
Alexandria Eng. J.
https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/framework?q¼framewo
Bateh, et al., 2014. Defining sustainability in the business setting. J. Manag. Sustain.
rk, 2021.
Bettina, W., 2017. Problem with Quality Management Process orientation, controllability
Parker, James, 2012. The Value of BREEAM. BSRIA.
and zero-defect processes as modern myths. Walsrode construction: analysis of its
Rangelova, Traykova, 2014. Value management in construction project. Proj. Manag.
costs and benefits. Am. J. Civil.
Constr.
Bogdan, Biklen, 1982. Qualitative Research for Education. Allyn & Bacon.
Rowe, Wright, 2001. Expert opinions in forecasting: The role of the Delphi process.
Chegut, Eichholtz, Kok, N., 2014. Supply, demand and the value of green buildings.
Principl. Forecast.: A Handb. Res. Practition.
Urban Stud.
Rumane, A., 2013. Quality Tools for Managing Construction Projects. CRC Press, New
Chen, et al., 2015. Energy assessment of office buildings in China using China building
York, USA.
energy codes and LEED 2.2. Energy Build.
Rupha, R., 2013. Critical success factors of TQM: a study, 2013 Int. J. Manag. 4 (Issue 1),
Colombo, et al., 2013. Chapter 12: Environmental Assessment Tools: An Overview of the
266–275. ISSN Print: 0976-6502.
UK’s BREEAM and the U.S.’ LEED. openresearch.lsbu.ac.uk.
Sachs, Jeffrey D., 2015. The Age of Sustainable Development. Columbia University Press,
Davies, O.O.A., Davies, I.O.E., 2017. Barriers to implementation of sustainable
New York.
construction techniques. MAYFEB J. Environ. Sci. 2, 1–9.
Seker, S.E., 2015. Computerized argument Delphi technique. IEEE Access 3 (2), 368–380.
Devaux, Stephen A., 2014. Managing Projects as Investments: Earned Value to Business
Serpell, A., Kort, J., Vera, S., 2013. Awareness, actions, drivers and barriers of
Value. CRC Press, pp. 160–171.
sustainability concepts and value planning for sustainable construction. Built.
Dilawo, R.S., andSalimi, Z., 2019. Understanding TQM implementation barriers involving
Sharifi, Murayama, 2014. Neighborhood sustainability assessment in action: Cross-
construction companies in a difficult environment. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag.
evaluation of three assessment systems and their cases from the US, the UK, and
Dobson, D.W., Sourani, A., Sertyesilisik, B., Tunstall, A., 2013. Sustain. Econ. 19 (2),
Japan. Build. Environ.
272–288. Engineering and Architecture, 1(2), 32-38. Engineering, 1(3), 46-50.
Shi, Q., Zuo, J., Huang, R., Huang, J., Pullen, S., 2013. Identifying the Critical Sustainable
Environment Project and Asset Management, 6(2), p.125. factors for green
Construction in Chile. Technological and Economic Development of.
construction–an empirical study in China. Habitat.
Wahi, N., Joseph, C., Tawie, R., andIkau, R., 2016. Critical review on construction waste
Douglas, Douglas, Ochieng, 2015. Lean Six Sigma implementation in East Africa: findings
control practices: legislative and waste management perspective. Procedia Soc.
from a pilot study. The TQM J.
Behav. Sci. 224 (11), 276–283.
Galvagno, Dalli, 2014. How does value creation manifest itself in the nexus of sport and
WAO, 2014. Value Engineering Methodology to Improve Building Sustainability
business? a systematic literature review. Open J. Bus. Manag.
Outcomes. University of Florida. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Gharakhani, D., Rahmati, H., Farrokhi, M.R., Farahmandian, A., 2013. Total Quality.
https://www.are.admin.ch/dam/are/en/dokumente/nachhaltige_entwicklung/dokumen
Gillier, S. Hooge, Piat, G., 2015. Framing value management for creative projects: An
te/bericht/our_common_futurebrundtlandreport1987.pdf.download.pdf/our_comm
expansive perspective. Int. J. Project Manag. 33 (4), 947–960.
on_futurebrundtlandreport1987.pdf, 1987.
Goh, B.H., Sun, Y., 2016. The development of life-cycle costing for buildings. Build. Res.
Whole Building Design Guide (WBDG) Sustainable Committee, 2014. National Institute of
Inf. 44 (3), 319–333.
Building Sciences Innovative Solutions for the Built Environment, Washington, DC.
Green, 2011. Making Sense of Construction Improvement. Wiley-Blackwell.
Xiao, W., 2017. Experimental Assessment of the Mechanical Behavior of Immersion Joints
Hill, Wilkinson, 1995. In search of TQM. Employee Relat.
and a Seismic Mitigation Method in Immersed Tunnels. Doctoral dissertation. Ghent
Ho, et al., 2010. Integration of value analysis and total quality management: The way
University.
ahead in the next millennium. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excel.
Yang, M., Vladimirova, D., Evans, S., 2017. Creating and Capturing Value through
Hussein, H., 2018. Lifting the veil: unpacking the discourse of water scarcity in Jordan,
Sustainability: the Sustainable Value Analysis Tool A new tool helps companies
2018 Environ. Sci. Pol. 89, 385–392, 4): 349–357. international, 40, 1-8.
discover opportunities to create and capture value through sustainability. Res.
Jay, H., Barry, R., 2014. Principles of Operations Management- Sustainability and Supply
Technol. Manag. 60 (3), 30–39.
Chain Management, ninth ed. Pearson Education Limited, England, pp. 245–246.
Zaid Malik, M., Rajiv, Rajiv, Anerjee, B., Syed, A.A., Ahmad, Aqeel, 2018. A review paper
Karim, et al., 2018. Developing the value management maturity model. J. Des. Built
on implementation of total quality management (TQM) in construction industry. Int.
Environ.
J. Recent Sci. Res. 9 (5), 26515–26517.
Karunasena, G., Rathnayake, R.M.N.U., Senarathne, D., 2016. Integrating management
ZainulAbidin, Z., 2005. Using VM to improve the consideration of sustainability within
and organizational performance. Am. J. Indus.
construction. NazirahZainulAbidin.
Lacoste, 2016. Sustainable value co-creation in business networks. Ind. Market. Manag.
Zainulabidin, Pasquire, 2005. Delivering sustainability through value management:
Leong, et al., 2014. Implementation of quality management system in Malaysian
Concept and performance overview. Eng. Construct. Architect. Manag.
construction industry. Adv. Mater. Res.

14