| dc.description.abstract | Project success means efficiency and effectiveness.Success is measured in terms of
how well these objectives have been met. Traditionally, evaluation of project success has
been based on the three constraints of time, cost, and quality parameters. However, there are
other indicators that can determine success in constructions projects. These are; absence of
legal claims and legal proceedings, meeting social obligations, good quality of work life to
users, minimum effect to the environment, safety requirements, client satisfaction, project
functionality, free from defects, profitability, positive reputation, development of new
knowledge and expertise, lower depreciation cost, aesthetic value, low cost of maintenance,
fitness for purpose, flexible for future expansion, etc.
This study therefore, set out to identify these other indicators and the irrating by the
various stakeholders for both the process and the results of construction projects. It also
sought to establish differences in ratings among stakeholders.
The study was done in Nairobi. A survey design was used to sample 490 stakeholders
in the construction industry namely: architects, quantity surveyors, electrical engineers,
mechanical engineers, civil/structural engineers, environmental impact assessment (EIA)
experts, developers and members of the public/neighbour‟s. Questionnaires were used of
which 158 (32.2%) were returned.The range of professional experience of the architects'
respondents in terms of number of years in the construction industry was between 10 and 36
years with an overall average of approximately 16.46 years. A 5-point likert scale was used to
rate the indicators that were divided into 13 process and 16 result indicators.
One-way sample t -test was used to determine whether the means of process and
result indicators were statistically significant at p=0.05 probability of error. The results
showed that, all indicators were generally highly rated by all stakeholders. Comprehensive
briefing by the client was highest on the hierarchy followed by delivery of project within the
budget, meeting safety requirements, meeting quality specifications, fast communication and
decision making process, minimum effects to the environment, efficiency of approving
authorities, efficiency in utilization of manpower, integration of design and construction,
absence of legal claims, meeting social obligations, minimum disputes and minimum scope
changes in that in that order.The results showed that none of the stakeholders had means
statistically significantly deviating from the overall mean for process indicators. The mean
difference for process success indicators between developers and architects, civil/structural
engineers and EIA experts were statistically significant (p˂0.05). While the differences
between the developers and remaining stakeholders namely: quantity surveyors, mechanical
engineers, electrical engineers and members of the public were not statistically significant
(p˃0.05). However, the mean difference between civil/structural engineers and EIA experts
was statistically significant at (p˂0.05).
Therefore, bearing these results in mind, early definition of success indicators is
important and can ensure an undisputed view of how the project will be judged and guarantee
a safe path to success. | en_US |
