International Journal of Construction Management

ISSN: 1562-3599 (Print) 2331-2327 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/tjcm20

Establishing Integrated Management Systems

(IMS) within Principal Contracting Organisations

Alan Griffith & Khalid Bhutto

To cite this article: Alan Griffith & Khalid Bhutto (2007) Establishing Integrated Management
Systems (IMS) within Principal Contracting Organisations, International Journal of Construction
Management, 7:1, 17-27, DOI: 10.1080/15623599.2007.10773092

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2007.10773092

Published online: 10 Feb 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 72

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tjcm20
 Establishing Integrated Management Systems (IMS) within
The International Journal of Construction
Principal Management (2007) 17 - 27
Contracting Organisations 17

ESTABLISHING INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT

SYSTEMS (IMS) WITHIN PRINCIPAL CONTRACTING
ORGANISATIONS
Alan GRIFFITH1 and Khalid BHUTTO2
1
Division of Built Environment, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, S1 1WB, UK
2
MLM Consulting Engineers, North Lodge, 25 London Road, Ipswich, IP1 2HF, UK

Abstract
The Integrated Management System, or IMS, is seen increasingly as an effective way of handling the
plethora of management functions and procedures that are conducted throughout construction projects.
Quality, safety and environmental management are at the forefront of management systems innovation
where the integration of these traditionally independent systems is expected to deliver a range of benefits
through efficiency gains at both project and corporate organisational levels. Contracting organisations
are implementing integration in different ways which makes potential benefits difficult to identify and
share across the industry. This paper reports on a survey and detailed case studies conducted as part of
the UK government-funded research project completed in 2004 which examined IMS developments.
Involving 30 UK contracting organisations and collaboration with five companies at the leading-edge of
management systems integration, the research provided evaluation of contractors’ experiences of
management systems, perceptions of IMS, and suggestions for developing an IMS framework based on
current best practices. IMS has the potential to create real benefits through delivering greater organisational
and operational efficiency, effectiveness and improved performance. However, this paper also identifies
that difficulties with implementation are not uncommon. The challenge is to overcome apparent
difficulties and establish a generic IMS framework around which contractors can develop their approach.
The findings presented in this paper can help principal contractors to become more aware of IMS generally
and, specifically assist them with system development and implementation.

Keywords
Construction management, environment, health and safety, management systems, quality, standards.

INTRODUCTION

Previous papers (Griffith, 2002; Griffith and Bhutto, 2004) introduced, described and
contextualised the concept of the Integrated Management System (IMS) as applied to
construction. The aim of this paper is to add to the evolving knowledge base in IMS. The
research presented in this paper is based on the findings of a Higher Education Funding
Council for England [HEFCE] sponsored PhD research programme examining IMS application
by major UK contracting organisations (Bhutto, 2004). The paper reflects upon the experiences
of contractors at the leading-edge of IMS developments within the UK. The findings examine
current perceptions of management systems, experiences of IMS, and points the way forward
with considerations and advice on developing a framework for IMS implementation within
construction. The findings in this paper are relevant to many contracting organisations in the
UK and to others worldwide who are embarking on IMS establishment.
18 Griffith and Bhutto

BACKGROUND AND CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE

RESEARCH

Management Systems
Almost all large organisations within construction rely upon management systems to provide
the necessary framework, communications, processes and arrangement of resources that enable
an organisation to achieve its business objectives (Hoyle, 1998). Contractors use management
systems to configure their approach to corporate business, translating these into operational
procedures for application on construction projects (Griffith et al., 2000). Most systems are
‘standards-based’, the most prominent and well recognised being BS EN ISO 9000:2000:
Quality Management Systems (BSI, 2000). As further standards-based systems have been
introduced to guide a systematic approach to other management functions, such as environment
and health and safety, an emerging challenge is to find ways of utilising the similarities and
potential compatibilities of different and conventionally separate systems to develop an
integrated approach which can deliver greater efficiency and effectiveness within both the
corporate and project dimensions. However, this is not straightforward as contracting
organisations have their own perspectives, levels of understanding and methods of approach.
This makes it difficult to recognise the practical issues and potential benefits of integration
and, moreover, to highlight current best practice.

The importance of understanding the developments in and implementation of management

systems, and the value of the research presented in this paper, is reflected in the number of
business organisations implementing standards-based systems for quality, safety and
environmental management. At the end of 2003, 500,125 organisations across all business
sectors in 149 countries worldwide were certified to ISO 9000: Quality Management Systems
[QMS] (ISO, 2004) and over 66,000 had established environmental management systems
[EMS] certified to ISO 14001, with approximately 12% of these organisations based in the
UK (ISO, 1996; ISO, 2004). Whilst the number of organisations certified to BSI-OHSAS
18001: Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems [H&SMS] (BSI, 1999) for the
same date is unknown, the number within the UK alone is likely to be considerable (Bhutto et
al., 2004). Moreover, thousands of organisations worldwide utilise management systems yet
to be certified to international standards (Bhutto, 2004).

Experiences of QMS, EMS and H&SMS have not always been positive. A survey by ‘Integrate’
(1998) reported that 50% of UK organisations perceived little added value from their
management systems, driven only to merely comply with current standards, regulations and
certification. The Construction Industry Research and Information Association [CIRIA] (2000)
criticised the rising trend in systems adoption as cynical market positioning by organisations
rather than the pursuit of improvement to business and project effectiveness. Moreover, systems
are frequently applied to isolated parts of an organisation rather than the whole and the efficacy
of this has been questioned (Hoyle, 1998). Such applications are seen as inefficient,
bureaucratic, divisive, and cost-ineffective. Furthermore, they often impart negative impacts
on stakeholders and those who implement the systems (Beckmerhagen et al., 2003).

Integrated Management Systems (IMS)

Townsend (1999) highlighted that quality management in the manufacturing and engineering
industries recognised the advantages of bringing systems together and pioneered ‘integrated
quality management’ [IQM] in the 1990s. The ‘QUENSH’{Quality, Environment, Safety,
Health} approach is a prominent example (Renfrew and Muir, 1998). Likewise, quality
 Establishing Integrated Management Systems (IMS) within
Principal Contracting Organisations 19

management within construction has become an established and accepted function over the
last twenty-five years. Pressure from clients, industry standards and legislation have emphasised
the requirements not only for high quality outputs but end-products delivered using safe and
environmentally empathic methods. The ‘SHE’ {Safety, Health and Environment} integrated
project management approach reflects such recognition (European Construction Institute, [ECI],
1995).

As contractors have gained experience from establishing multiple management systems and
learned from the early lessons of the manufacturing and engineering sectors so they too have
begun to challenge the conventional wisdom of utilising ostensibly separate and dedicated
systems (Moore, 1999; Thompson, 1999). IMS is seen by major contractors as a way of
addressing some of the difficulties of separate systems and the pursuit of greater efficiency,
effectiveness and business performance (Hall, 1998; Hoyle, 1998; Karapetrovic and Wilborn,
1998). This view has been strongly reinforced by the British Standards Institution [BSI]
following the introduction of ‘Integrated Management System Assessment’ [IMSA] facilitating
the integrated dual and triple certification of organisations for QMS, H&SMS and EMS (Griffith
and Bhutto, 2004).

Central to the understanding of IMS is an appreciation of: what it is; what it involves; and
what it seeks to achieve.

An integrated management system is:

“The organisational structure, resources and procedures used to simultaneously manage

quality, safety and environment” (Townsend, 1999).

Established at company, or corporate, level the system must be capable of translation into
management procedures and working instructions for implementation on construction sites.
Therefore, IMS applications to projects involve:

“The planning, monitoring and control of all aspects of a construction project that are
necessary to ensure that all those involved are aware of their responsibilities and perform
them safely, to the required quality and with due regard for the environment” (Moore,
1999).

An IMS is a single core management system that delivers the processes of the business through
modular and mutually-supporting quality, safety and environmental management configured
around the holistic needs of the organisation. It is the simplification of organisational structure,
resources and management which presents the opportunity to reduce the bureaucracy,
duplication of activity, paperwork and divisiveness commonly associated with separate
management systems.

Developing better knowledge in this field will assist contractors to better appreciate and improve
their management systems. Moreover, it will facilitate the re-focusing of systems around the
holistic needs of the corporate business and project activities. This will lead to greater
organisational effectiveness and directly add value to the wider construction process.
20 Griffith and Bhutto

RESEARCH AIM, OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

Aim
The aim of the research underpinning this paper is to better understand the evolving
developments in and applications of IMS by principal contracting organisations in the UK.
The specific sub-set of data, collected through targeted interviews and detailed case studies,
was aimed at addressing the following objectives:

Objectives
In examining the experiences of principal contracting organisations at the forefront of IMS
developments, the objectives underpinning the aim of the research were to:

1. Examine contractors’ experiences of traditional standards-based management

systems in application;
2. Determine contractors’ perceptions of systems integration and its potential through
recent IMS developments and application;
3. Identify the key features of systems integration;
4. Suggest a generic framework for IMS development and implementation based on
current best practice.

Methodology
The research followed a triangulated methodology comprising a qualitative approach consistent
with previous research studies (Griffith, 2002; Griffith and Bhutto, 2004; Griffith et al., 2005).
Grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) methodology was used for synthesising and
interpreting the data in conjunction with data-analysis computer software. Grounded theory,
where a theory is formed to explain and support observations made, allows themes to emerge
from the data without predisposition (Griffith et al., 2005). This is appropriate when handling
observations and opinion-based data from multiple sources (Strauss and Corbin, 1998) as was
the case with this study.

Data Collection
Data in the study was collected using two mechanisms: (i) semi-structured interviews with
the 30 contracting organisations; and (ii) detailed case studies through collaboration with five
principal contracting organisations from the group of thirty. All the companies were selected
by their size, specialisation, location and specifically, their experience in the use of formal, or
document-based, management systems and their knowledge of IMS. These companies represent
a cross-section of organisations from the top 100 contractors in the UK. The case profiles are
shown in Table 1. Within the five case study organisations, 22 semi-structured interviews
were conducted at six different managerial levels over a period of six months. The management
position of each respondent in the organisations consulted during the case studies is given in
Table 2. These managers were all well-qualified with an average of fifteen years experience
in implementing construction management systems and three years experience of developing
and using IMS. The 25 structured interviews provided information on contractors’ experiences
and perceptions of management systems and IMS whilst the detailed case studies, involving
22 interviews and reviews of documents and procedures, provided views on key features of
IMS and a generic framework for IMS based on best practices.

Data Analysis
The data from the case studies were collected in two forms, first from interviews and second
from organisational documents and reports. The interviews were digitally recorded, uploaded
 Establishing Integrated Management Systems (IMS) within
Principal Contracting Organisations 21

Table 1 Profile of case study organisations

Turnover Management Systems Implemented
Case Main Activity
£000* Quality Health and Safety Environment
A Principal Contractor 350,000 ISO 9001:2000 No Certification ISO 14001:1996
B Principal Contractor 450,000 ISO 9001:2000 No Certification ISO 14001:1996
C Principal Contractor 225,000 ISO 9001:2000 No Certification ISO 14001: 1996
D Principal Contractor 460,000 ISO 9001:2000 OHSAS 18001:1999 ISO 14001:1996
E Principal Contractor 2,000,000 ISO 9001:2000 OHSAS 18001:1999 ISO 14001:1996
* Industry Rankings, Building 20 July 2001
** Table modified from Bhutto et al. (2004a)

Table 2 Management positions of respondents in the case study organisations Case

Case
A Quality Environment H&S Project Site Managing
Manager Manager Manager Manager Supervisor Director
B Quality Environment H&S Project Site
Manager Manager Manager Manager Supervisor
C Quality Project Site
Manager Manager Supervisor
Business Quality Project Site
D Improvement
Manager Manager Manager Supervisor
Group Environment Project Site
E IMS
Manager Manager Manager Supervisor

and transcribed, using a digital voice recorder and accompanying software (Olympus DS-330
and DSS Player 2002 respectively). The interviews were formatted and coded to remove
names or any reference made to any other organisation or person by name. The data was then
analysed using the qualitative research analysis software NVivo, version 2.0.163. This software
coded the data to identify themes, and in particular key points, emerging from the respondents.
This information was collated with the output data from the semi-structured interviews with
the 25 contractors. Taken together, the data set enabled sufficient insight to address each of
the four research objectives.

FINDINGS

The findings of the study address each of the four objectives specified earlier in the paper.
For each objective, the key points are presented followed by relevant discussion.

Objective 1: To examine contractors’ experiences of traditional standards-based

management systems application.

Key points:
• The decision to implement management systems is predominantly influenced by
client pressure, legislation and the need to avoid competitive disadvantage;
• Quality systems to BS EN ISO 9000:2000 have successfully been implemented by
contractors over the last 25 years;
• There is growing emphasis on the implementation of environmental management
systems meeting BS EN ISO 14001:2004;
• Most contractors are not certified to comply with BSI-OHSAS 18001, relying upon
22 Griffith and Bhutto

first-party and second-party management systems for project application;

• Current management systems structure tends to be vertical and separate for each
system making them operationally independent and disparate;
• Document requirements for management systems are regarded as onerous,
bureaucratic, inefficient, ineffective and divisive;
• Whilst there is acceptance for a degree of formality and documentation, staff often
regard systems as a burden and a hindrance to getting their job done;
• Site staff, in particular, do not fully understand management systems such that real
and holistic benefits are lost to a compliance culture;
• Management systems implementation tends to be let down by lacking intra-
organisational culture change, commitment, education and support.

Discussion:
It is clear from the key points raised by contractors that their experiences suggest that traditional
standards-based management systems create considerable uncertainty in application. This is
made all the more problematic through lacking corporate understanding of systems needs at
project level. Moreover, the apparent perception that systems implementation is little more
than a compliance action means that the potential benefits of a sound and effective systems
approach will not be realised.

Objective 2: To determine contractors’ perceptions of systems integration and its potential

through recent IMS development and applications.

Key points:
• There is no clear understanding and consensus on methods and applications of IMS
with contractors interpreting approach in their own way;
• There is considerable duplication of effort and tasks in current systems application;
• There is agreement that current standards-based systems have many similarities which
should be seen as complementary to reduce duplication and effort;
• Large-scale integration is seen as possible but only through a workable IMS
framework or model;
• QMS and EMS have been integrated with some success by contractors, yet H&SMS
is seen as more inflexible and generally based on compliance with The Construction
(Design and Management) Regulations 1994 rather than systems standards;
• Current approaches to IMS focus ostensibly on ‘merging’ systems documentation
based on QMS;
• Practical implementation of IMS relies on the development of simple integrated
documents focusing on site processes;
• Project Management Plans [PMP] are seen as the most important tool for effective
IMS implementation on projects;
• IMS development requires considerable intra-organisational culture change, focused
vision and strong corporate and management commitment.

Discussion:
The data summarised in the key points shows that whilst contractors recognise the similarities
in the separate standards-based management systems which could be integrated to reduce
duplication and effort, the lack of understanding on how best to integrate systems is holding
back developments. It was reported that applications had focused on merging rather than
integrating systems. The perception that integration appeared complex called for a clear project
management plan and simpler documentation configured around site processes.
 Establishing Integrated Management Systems (IMS) within
Principal Contracting Organisations 23

Objective 3: To identify key features of systems integration and implementation frameworks.

Key points:
• It must be accepted that there is predictable cultural resistance to IMS implementation
on projects and this must be overcome;
• Differences in scope of the various systems must be recognised, with the core system,
usually QMS, used as a vehicle for perpetuation towards IMS;
• IMS will only be effective and successful if developed in a way that employees can
easily understand and in so doing embrace its ethos, spirit and opportunities;
• Rapid identification and alleviation of hindrances such as duplication, bureaucracy
and inefficiency is essential to acquiring early commitment and support;
• Creating visible benefits of IMS in implementation is vital to gaining wider
acceptance;
• BSI Integrated Management System Assessment [IMSA] should be the focus for
IMS dual and triple certification;
• IMS has strong similarities with ‘business process models’ as they are configured
around the holistic vision and objectives of the business and therefore a Business
Management System [BMS] orientation might be best adopted;
• A BMS approach is, in concept and application, compatible with standard construction
processes and contractors’ activities;
• Risk assessment is an essential element to all management systems and should form
the central feature of IMS and reflected in the PMP.

Discussion:
The key points highlight that an IMS could be best configured around a business process
model which is clearly compatible with construction processes. The tried and tested core
management system is the QMS and this should be used as the integrating system. Linking
systems to processes, risk assessment, an important element of all construction projects, should
be the central feature of the project management plan. Pre-requisite to such configuration,
IMS must engage with the hearts and minds of all system users if detrimental perceptions are
to be minimised and the positives to be perpetuated.

Objective 4: To suggest a generic framework for IMS development and implementation

based on current best practice.

From a synthesis of five case studies together with primary data from the questionnaire and
interviews, a current best practice framework for IMS development and implementation is
presented. This is a ‘composite’ based on those attributes of the most effective systems in use
at this time. Figure 1 outlines the framework. It is emphasised that this does not purport to be
a prescriptive framework for use by all contractors as each organisation will have its own
unique structure and modes of operation to satisfy its specific business within its own
marketplace. Rather, it reflects the generic characteristics of IMS, set within a business
management framework and operating within the construction process environment.

In brief, business management policy and objectives are determined and identified through
process mapping. These incorporate quality, safety and environmental management,
encompassed within a single integrated business management system manual. A QMS may
be used as the base system. The system is translated and applied to the construction processes:
procurement; planning; design, etc, through one project management plan [PMP]. The PMP
24 Griffith and Bhutto

Figure 1 Outline current best practice framework for IMS development

 Establishing Integrated Management Systems (IMS) within
Principal Contracting Organisations 25

assesses risk and tailors the appropriate management procedures, working instructions and
site rules. Within the various processes each management function meets the relevant sections
of standards applicable. This provides a regime of key performance indicators, feedback and
continual improvement, all tenets of effective systems. Management of the construction
processes is augmented by other business processes which serve to support project delivery in
specific areas, for example training. An important feature of the structure is that it facilitates
horizontal integration where information is shared across and throughout the various
construction processes and associated management functions. During project execution, work-
checking procedures are integrated and simplified to minimise duplication of tasks and
paperwork. Information from each process is channelled into business process records which
inform future policy and objectives.

The establishment of such a framework is not without difficulty as identified clearly in the
case studies. Five stages of best practice development and implementation were identified as
essential: (i) organisational mapping - to configure functional management in direct relation
to processes within the context of the holistic perspective of the organisation; (ii) statement of
vision, policy and objectives - to be clearly defined, communicated and accessible to all
employees; (iii) commitment to IMS / BMS - to deliver ‘integration’ rather than piecemeal
approach; (iv) structure - to ensure homogeneous and consistent application across functions
and throughout the organisation; (v) evolution - to ensure continual improvement and achieve
organisational betterment.

A traditional and major difficulty highlighted through the case studies was employee resistance
to organisational change and the need to “capture hearts and minds” to secure support for
system implementation. Communication and involvement was identified as vital to this. Whilst
it was admitted that systems initiatives are essentially top-management driven, and in business
terms perhaps rightly so, there has to be a facility for grassroots involvement and bottom-up
communication.

Verification of the findings

An essential aspect of the research was to verify the findings and suggestions for best practice
with practitioners from the leading-edge contractors involved in IMS developments. Four
senior managers scrutinised the findings and provided useful feedback to modify and improve
the framework and its constituents. Significantly, the framework was commended as a reflection
of current practice. Key suggestions for enhancement included: (i) clear differentiation of
project-specific information contained in the PMP from the generic information contained in
the business management manual as the PMP changes with each project; (ii) companies with
particular activities devolved from their corporate centre may require a homogenous framework
with modified or bespoke procedures; (iii) an IMS must cater for a variety of procurement
methods and subcontract elements; (iv) system development must be accompanied by IT
support to facilitate intranet-based documentation and ease of site implementation; (v) for
smaller contractors, it may be advantageous to first consider site practice and work back
through procedures to the development of a formal documented system.

CONCLUSION

Individually, contractors in the UK spend tens of thousands of pounds on developing and

implementing management systems for quality, safety and environment, whilst collectively,
the construction sector spends millions of pounds on these initiatives each year. However, as
26 Griffith and Bhutto

Integrate (1998) highlighted, many organisations they surveyed reported dissatisfaction with
traditional systems applications. The challenge is to question convention and seek an alternative
and more effective approach. Construction has accepted this challenge with a number of UK
contractors at the very forefront of IMS development. The notion of integration is melding
into a greater vision of contracting as a holistic business process guided by a single multi-
dimensional system of management.

A prominent concern raised by contractors in developing an IMS has been the absence of a
definitive developmental and implementation framework. This paper has presented a host of
research findings based directly on the experiences, views, concerns and suggestions of major
contracting organisations. Moreover, it presents a framework based on elements of best practice
at this time. Whilst the approach is not a panacea for all contractors it does provide a starting
point and outline to perpetuate greater awareness and consideration for IMS within the
construction industry.

REFERENCES

Beckmerhagen, I. A., Berg, H. P., Karapetrovic, S. V., and Wilborn, W. O. (2003). “Integration of
Management Systems: Focus on Safety in the Nuclear Industry”, International Journal of Quality
and Reliability Management, 20(2), 210-228.
Bhutto, K. H., Griffith, A., and Stephenson, P. (2004a). “Integration of Quality, Health and Safety and
Environmental Management Systems in Contractor Organisations”, Proceedings of the 18th Annual
Conference, Association of Researchers In Construction Management (ARCOM), (2), 1211-1220.
Bhutto, K. H., Griffith, A., and Stephenson, P. (2004b). “Evaluation of Quality, Health and Safety and
Environment Management Systems and Their Implementation in Contracting Organisations”,
International Construction Research Conference (COBRA), Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
(RICS), Leeds Metropolitan University, COBRA Published Proceedings, (1), 10-19.
Bhutto, K. H. (2004). The application of integrated management systems (IMS) by contracting
organisations. PhD Thesis. Sheffield Hallam University.
BSI. (1999). OHSAS 18001: occupational health and safety management systems - specifications. British
Standards Institution, HMSO, London.
BSI. (2000). BS EN ISO 9000:2000, quality management systems - requirements. British Standards
Institution. HMSO, London.
CIRIA. (2000). “Integrating Safety, Quality and Environmental Management”, Report C509, Construction
Industry Research and Information Association, London.
ECI. (1995). Total project management of construction safety, health and environment, Thomas Telford,
London.
Glaser, B. G., and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory, Aldine, Chicago.
Griffith, A. (1999). “Developing an Integrated Management System for Quality, Safety and Environment”,
Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB), Ascot, Construction Papers, 108.
Griffith, A., Stephenson, P., and Watson, P. (2000). Management systems for construction, Longman,
Harlow.
Griffith, A. (2002). “Integrated Management Systems for Enhancing Project Quality, Safety and
Environment”, International Journal of Construction Management, 2(1), 25-37.
Griffith, A., and Bhutto, K. H. (2004). “The Integrated Management System for Project Quality, Safety
and Environment: Pilot Study Research Findings of Developments in IMS”, The International Journal
of Construction Management, 4(1), 73-82.
 Establishing Integrated Management Systems (IMS) within
Principal Contracting Organisations 27

Hoyle, D. (1998). ISO 9000 quality systems handbook, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.

Integrate. (1998). “Integrate Project Survey”, The New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science and
Technology (FRST). Available at: http://www.integrate.co.nz
ISO. (2004). BS EN ISO 14001:2004 environmental management systems: specifications with guidance
for use, International Organisation for Standardisation, Geneva.
ISO. (2004). Standardisation, International Organisation for Standardisation. Available at: http://www.
iso.org.
Karapetrovic, S. V., and Wilborn, W. O. (1998). “Integration of Quality and Environmental Management
Systems”, The TQM Magazine, 10(3).
Moore, S. (1999). “Integrated Management System - A Key to Rethinking Construction?: An Industry
View”, Construction Productivity Network (CPN) Workshop Report No. E9080, Construction Industry
Research and Information Association (CIRIA), London.
Renfrew, D., and Muir, G. (1998). “Quenching the Thirst for Integration”, Quality World, (8), 10-13.
London.
Strauss, A. L., and Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basis of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and
techniques, Sage, London.
Thompson, D. (1999). “A System Approach to Engineering”, Manufacturing Engineering, June.
Townsend, P. F. (1999). “Integrated Management System - A Key to Rethinking Construction?: An
Overview of Integrated Management Systems”, Construction Productivity Network (CPN) Workshop
Report No. E9080, Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA), London.