IMPACT STUDY ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IN CONSTRUCTION (QLASSIC) FOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION WORKS

Transcription

1 CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MALAYSIA (CIDB) IMPACT STUDY ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IN CONSTRUCTION (QLASSIC) FOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION WORKS i

2 All rights are reserved for this publication. Distribution of the entire or any part on the information of this document without prior consent of Construction Industry Development Board Malaysia (CIDB) is strictly prohibited. This publication and the findings illustrated, including any suggestions or advice given, are based on information, drawings, samples and tests mentioned in the document. CIDB is not liable for any compensation, payments, costs (including, but not limited to, litigation cost) or any expenditure related to or connected to any damages of properties or any loss (except in death or personal accident caused by negligence of CIDB) arising from direct or indirect use of this document, implementation of any suggestions included, following subjects, advise or use of goods and materials mentioned in the document. Published By: Level 34, Menara Dato Onn, Pusat Dagangan Dunia Putra (PWTC), No. 45, Jalan Tun Ismail, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA. Tel: Fax: CIDB Malaysia 2013 ii

3 CONTENT NO. CONTENT PAGE GE Executive Summary 1 1. Introduction 3 2. Findings of the Study General information on respondents Acceptance towards QLASSIC programme Effectiveness of QLASSIC programme Recommendations for improvement Discussion and Recommendations Conclusion Acknowledgement 27 iii

4 FOREWORD QLASSIC, an acronym for Quality Assessment System in Construction, is primarily used as a benchmark of quality for building construction works. It provides an effective assessment that measures and identify defects in pinpointing the level of perfection and performance of a building. The use of CIDB s QLASSIC assessment system not only measures the level of quality of a building project, but also a method to plan strategies and promote projects that constantly focuses on high quality works. High quality construction works also translates to meeting customers demand and satisfaction. The building process involves all processes in the building value-chain from design, procurement, building and operations. Increasing the stakes in quality is vital in building a local construction industry that is sustainable and competitive at the international level. Quality building does not necessarily translate to increased cost and time, it may be able to decrease cost because quality building have minimum defects and damages and does not require additional cost for repair works, which also saves time. The Impact Study on The Implementation of QLASSIC For Building Construction Works was undertaken to ascertain the level of usage and satisfaction of construction players that used QLASSIC on their respective projects. The data and analysis may assist various relevant parties, not only contractors and developer, but also consultants, government agencies, researchers and others in an effort to elevate quality in construction to a higher level. It is in this aspiration that this publication will benefit all stakeholders in the most positive manner. iv

5 LIST OF TABLES NO. LIST PAGE GE Table 1 List of the Top 10 QLASSIC Projects 5 Table 2 Respondents 6 Table 3 Respondents Designation 7 Table 4 Respondents Academic Background 8 Table 5 QLASSIC Number of Services 9 Table 6 Project Category 9 Table 7 Project Location 10 Table 8 ISO 9001 Certification 10 Table 9 Reasons for Applying QLASSIC 11 Table 10 Awareness on the Availability of CIS 7: Table 11 Media Used to Obtain Information on QLASSIC 12 Table 12 QLASSIC Average Score 13 Table 13 QLASSIC Increases Project Performance 14 Table 14 QLASSIC Enhances Marketability of Company 15 Table 15 Types of Building Defects 16 Table 16 Components That Achieve High Scores 17 Table 17 ISO 9001 Helps to Achieve High QLASSIC Score 18 Table 18 Future Involvement in QLASSIC 19 Table 19 Factors Affecting Low Scores 20 Table 20 QLASSIC Programme Effectiveness 21 Table 21 Recommendations to Improve QLASSIC Promotions 22 Table 22 Satisfaction Towards QLASSIC Implementation 23 v

6 LIST OF FIGURES NO. FIGURES PAGE GE Figure 1 Collective QLASSIC Score Distribution Chart for All 4 Categories From the Year 2006 to 2011 Figure 2 Respondents 6 Figure 3 Respondents Designation 7 Figure 4 Respondents Academic Background 8 Figure 5 Media Used to Obtain Information on QLASSIC 12 Figure 6 QLASSIC Increases Project Performance 14 Figure 7 ISO 9001 Helps to Achieve High QLASSIC Ratings 18 Figure 8 QLASSIC Involvement in the Future 19 Figure 9 Percentage of Factors Affecting Low Cost 20 Figure 10 Recommendations to Improve QLASSIC Promotion 22 vi

7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is prepared to share the results of the study undertaken by Construction Industry Development Board Malaysia (CIDB) to ascertain the impact of implementing quality assessment system in construction (QLASSIC) in the construction industry. The findings of the study provide an insight on the level of acceptance of QLASSIC by the construction stakeholders. The summary on this report is as follows: The study consists of 209 respondents, comprised of developers, consultants, contractors, government agencies and others. A majority of the building construction projects assessed by QLASSIC are based in the state of Selangor and Kuala Lumpur. Most projects that applied for QLASSIC assessment were in the Landed Housing building category. There is a correlation between ISO 9001 certification and a high QLASSIC score. Overall, the customer satisfaction towards the QLASSIC implementation programme is high. The majority of respondents were satisfied with the implementation conducted by CIDB. Customer satisfaction factors are as follows: * The study highlights that more than 50% of the companies have conducted QLASSIC assessment more than once. * As many as 180 respondents applied for QLASSIC assessment, out of self-awareness and realising the importance of quality. Another 18 respondents applied based upon their clients requests. * The highest overall percentage of QLASSIC average score given by respondents was 71%-80% (82), and followed by 61%-70% (79). Seven other respondents who were assessed by QLASSIC scored 81%-90%. * Most of the common defects that occur in the projects involved in QLASSIC are the internal walls, making up as many as 74 of the overall defects. External walls recorded 11 defects, whereas internal fixtures listed 3 defects. * Architectural work is one of the building components that received the highest score in QLASSIC assessment at 92, followed by M&E fitting works (82). * The main factors that led to low QLASSIC scores were lack of awareness on quality (48), followed by time constraints in completing construction works (29) and shortage of skilled workers (15). 1

8 * 141 respondents agreed that QLASSIC can improve the quality of construction projects. * 96 of the 209 respondents also agreed that QLASSIC assessment should be made mandatory for all projects (government and private). * Most of the contractors were very satisfied and want to be involved in future QLASSIC assessments. 2

9 CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MALAYSIA (CIDB) IMPACT STUDY ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IN CONSTRUCTION (QLASSIC) FOR BUILDING CONSTRUCTION WORKS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 QLASSIC is an acronym for Quality Assessment System in Construction. It was mooted by Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) in the late 1990s, which led to the introduction of QLASSIC Guideline. Eventually, in 2006, the said document was upgraded to Construction Industry Standard (CIS) known as CIS 7:2006 Quality Assessment System for Building Construction Works. The main assessment structure of this standard is adapted from Construction Quality Assessment System (CONQUAS), practiced by the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) in Singapore. There are several similarities in the categorisation of the buildings as well as the distribution of weightage on building components between QLASSIC and CONQUAS. Quality performance can be measured either qualitatively or quantitatively, and QLASSIC adopts both approaches. 1.2 The construction industry and private sector play important roles in generating wealth and improving the quality of living of Malaysians through the interpretation of government socio-economy policies to social infrastructure, economy and development. The construction industry provides job opportunities to an estimated 800,000 people. Additionally, the construction industry has created a multiplier effect for other industries, including manufacturing, financial and professional service providers. Therefore, the contruction sector is an engine of economic growth for the country as it spun off many other economic activities. 1.3 QLASSIC assessment is carried out through site inspection, and in accordance to the principle of first-time inspection, where any construction that is corrected after an assessment cannot be assessed again. Assessments are conducted only by qualified QLASSIC assessors who are registered, and have successfully passed the training conducted by CIDB. Currently QLASSIC assessors comprised of CIDB personnel as well as technical personnel from the industry. 1.4 The QLASSIC inspections are based on quality standards stipulated in CIS 7:2006. The method used to measure quality levels of construction work is through sampling, which is calculated using statistical approach. All construction elements in projects are taken into consideration during sample calculation to ensure the samples represent the entire project. 3

10 1.5 The objectives of conducting this study are as follows: To ascertain the impact of implementation of QLASSIC building construction work To analyse QLASSIC scores attained from projects that have conducted the QLASSIC assessment To explore the potential areas of improvement in the implementation of QLASSIC. 1.6 Past QLASSIC Performance Distribution Chart NUMBER OF PROJECTS QLASSIC SCORE (%) Figure 1: Collective QLASSIC Score Distribution Chart for All Categories From the Year 2006 to

11 1.7 In the year of 2011, a total of 371 projects were assessed by QLASSIC. The top ten highest QLASSIC score (as at year 2011) is shown in Table 1. Table 1: List of the Top 10 QLASSIC Projects No. QLASSIC Score (%) Contractor 1 88 BINA TEGAS SDN BHD 2 85 PJD CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD 3 84 PJD CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD 4 84 MAKASSAR SDN BHD 5 83 SIGMAL CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD (formerly known as MAKASSAR CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD) 6 83 DEKON SDN BHD Project Plan to demolish an existing single-storey bungalow and rebuild a 2-storey bungalow with a swimming pool on (Lot 216) No.7, Jalan 11/8e, Seksyen 11, Bandar Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan Siarah Oakleaf (20 units of 3-storey terrace and twin houses in Mukim Hulu Klang, Daerah Gombak, Selangor) 84 units of 3-storey semi-d in Mukim Pulai, Johor Bahru (Taman Pulai Bayu, Laman Calista) 80 units of 2-storey terrace houses and a electricity substation (double chamber), Phase B39 & B40, Bandar Kinrara, Mukim Petaling, Daerah Petaling, Selangor Darul Ehsan for Perumahan Kinrara Berhad Laman Seri (33 units of 2-storey bungalows at Seksyen 13, Shah Alam, Selangor) Challis Damansara (102 units of 3-storey townhouses at Seksyen 14, Kota Damansara, Mukim Sungai Buloh, Daerah Petaling) 7 83 SRI MANSANG SDN BHD 8 82 FNA BUILDERS & SERVICES SDN BHD 9 82 FNA BUILDERS & SERVICES SDN BHD N.V BINA SDN BHD 400 units of apartments (3-10 storey) and 61 units of cluster homes at Ara Damansara, Daerah Petaling (Phase 1) Al-Amaniah mosque in Kepong, KL (mosque block) Al-Amaniah mosque in Kepong, KL (employees quarters) 24 units of 2.5 storey semi-detached (Type A&B) in RP5 (Phase 3B) Kota Kemuning, Seksyen 31, Shah Alam 5

12 2.0 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 2.1 General Information on Respondents Based on the total number of respondents, 42.6% (89) of them were from consultancies and 38.3% (80) were developers and 11.5% were from contractors. The minority of respondents were from government agencies and other organisations. Table 2: Respondents Number of Respondent Percentage (%) Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others TYPE OF ORGANISATION Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Figure 2: Respondents 6

13 2.1.2 In terms of respondents designation, the majority were project managers 20% (42). Table 3: Respondent s Designation Respondent s Designation Project Manager Construction Manager Managing Director Project Engineer Architect Others Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others RESPONDENT S DESIGNATION Managing Director 92 Project Engineer Construction Manager Project Manager 33 Architect Others Figure 3: Respondent s Designation 7

14 2.1.3 In relation to academic backgrounds, 95 respondents were from engineering and 49 respondents from architecture, which represent about 70 % of the total respondents. Table 4: Respondents Academic Background Respondents Academic Background Engineering Architecture Others Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS Academic Background Engineering Architecture Others TYPE OF ORGANISATION Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Figure 4: Respondents Academic Background 8

15 2.1.4 The majority of the respondents, 99 (47.5%) of the entire number of respondents have used QLASSIC services only once while 95 (45.6%) respondents have been assessed by QLASSIC at least two to five times. Only 14 (6.9%) of the respondents have used QLASSIC more than five times. Table 5: QLASSIC Number of Services QLASSIC Number of Services Once Two to More than five times five times Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others A total of 112 (58.6%) projects that have undergone the QLASSIC assessment were from category A (Landed Housing) followed by category C (Public Building), totaling 48 projects, and category B (Stratified Housing) with 24 projects. A minority that conducted the QLASSIC assessment were from category D (Special Public Building) with a total of 7 projects. Table 6: Project Category Project Category (A) (B) (C) (D) Landed Stratified Public Special Housing Housing Building Public Building Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others

16 2.1.6 A total of 90 (45%) QLASSIC assessments were conducted in the state of Selangor. 34 projects were conducted in Kuala Lumpur while 33 (17%) projects were carried out in Negeri Sembilan. A small minority of the QLASSIC assessment was conducted in Pahang (14), Kedah (7), Penang (7), Perak (7) and Johor with 6 projects. 83 projects were from the consultancies while 78 projects were developers. This shows that majority of the application came mainly from Lembah Klang which represents almost 62%. Selangor Table 7: Project Location Kuala Lumpur Project Location Government Agency N. Sembilan Pahang Kedah P. Pinang Perak Johor Consultant Developer Contractor Others From the information in Table 8, as disclosed by the majority of the respondents, 160 (76%) of them are ISO 900-certified. Table 8 also unveiled that the majority of developers (94%) that have undertaken QLASSIC were certified to ISO 9001 QMS. Table 8: ISO 9001Certification ISO 9001 Certification Yes No Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others

17 2.2 ACCEPTANCE TOWARDS QLASSIC PROGRAMME Based on Table 10, 180 (87 %) respondents stated the reasons for applying QLASSIC assessment were based on quality awareness, followed by requests from clients (18) and other factors (7). Table 9: Reasons for Applying QLASSIC Reasons for applying QLASSIC Quality Client s Others Awareness Request Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Table 10 shows that 158 (77%) respondents were aware on the availability of CIS 7:2006. This indicated that the majority of the players in the construction value chain were aware on the existence of CIS 7:2006 while 41 were uncertain and 6 were unware. Table 10: Awareness on the Availability of CIS 7:2006 Awareness on the Availability of CIS 7:2006 Yes Not Sure No Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others

18 2.2.3 The media most used by respondent to obtain information on QLASSIC is via the CIDB website (90), followed by seminars/briefings/courses organised by CIDB (68) and the mass media (21). This deemed to reflect that CIDB website can be an effectife media in disseminating information on QLASSIC activities. Table 11: Media Used to Obtain Information on QLASSIC Media Used to Obtain Information on QLASSIC CIDB Website CIDB-Organised Seminars/ briefings/courses Mass Media From other industry players Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Figure 5: Media Used to Obtain Information on QLASSIC 12

19 2.2.4 Based on Table 12, the highest average score on percentages awarded to respondents for QLASSIC is 71% - 80% (82 projects), followed by 61% - 70% (79 projects). Only 7 projects were awarded the highest score of 81% - 90%. Consultancies received the highest score average of 71% - 80% (34 projects) while developers, 61% - 70% (42 projects). Table 12: QLASSIC Average Score QLASSIC Average Score (%) 51-60% 61-70% 71-80% 81-90% Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others

20 2.2.5 Table 13 highlights the majority of respondents, 178 (86%) agree that QLASSIC programme helps to enhance the performance of a project, compared to 30 respondents who thought otherwise. In addition, 88% of the consultants and 97% of the developers agreed that QLASSIC can have a positive influence on the quality performance of construction projects Table 13: QLASSIC Increases Project Performance QLASSIC Increases Project Performance Yes Uncertain Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others TOTAL NUMBER OF ORGANISATION QLASSIC INCREASES PROJECT PERFORMANCE Yes Uncertain TYPE OF ORGANISATION Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Figure 6: QLASSIC Increases Project Performance 14

21 2.2.6 Information from Table 14 denotes that 141 (70%) respondents opined and agreed that the QLASSIC score is able to enhance companies marketability. 53 respondents were uncertain while 7 opined that QLASSIC does not help in companies marketability. However, the majority of the contractors (75%) were uncertain on the infuence of QLASSIC on marketability. Table 14: QLASSIC Enhances Marketability of Company QLASSIC Enhances Marketability of Company Yes Uncertain No Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others

22 2.2.7 Most of the defects that commonly occur in projects found in QLASSIC are the internal wall (83), and external wall (19), as shown in Table 15. Table15: Types of Building Defects Building Defect Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Internal wall (41.1%) Basic M&E fittings (9.9%) External wall (9.4%) Window (7.9%) Door (5.4%) Ceiling (5.0%) Floor (5.0%) External works (4.0%) Apron and perimeter (3.5%) drainage Internal fixture (3.0%) Roof (2.5%) Others (3.5%) (100%) 16

23 2.2.8 Among the three building components, Table 16 shows architectural works obtained the highest score. Table 16: Components that Achieve High Scores Components That Achieve High Score Architectural Work M&E Fittings External Work Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others

24 2.2.9 As exhibited in Table 17, 176 (85%) respondents agreed that ISO 9001 Quality Management System certification can help to achieve high QLASSIC score. 26 respondents were uncertain while 6 opined that there is no connection between QLASSIC and ISO 9001 certification. Table 17: ISO 9001 Helps to Achive High QLASSIC Score ISO 9001 Helps to Achive High QLASSIC Score Yes es Uncertain No Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others NUMBER OF ORGANISATION Figure 7: ISO 9001 Helps to Achive High QLASSIC Score 18

25 Table 18 shows that 190 (93%) respondents wished to be involved in QLASSIC in the future. This indicates that the majority of the respondents are likely to continue to apply for QLASSIC assessment. Table 18: Future Involvement in QLASSIC Future Involvement in QLASSIC Uncertain Like Like Very ery Much Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others NUMBER OF ORGANISATION QLASSIC involvement Uncertain Like Like Very Much Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others TYPE OF ORGANISATION Figure 8: QLASSIC Involvement in the Future 19

26 Table 19 represents probable factors that led to poor overall average QLASSIC score, which is less than 65%. Based on the table, the main factors evaluated by respondents that cause low QLASSIC scores are low on quality awareness (48), followed by time constraints in competing construction works (29) and shortage of skilled workers (15). Table 19: Factors Affecting Low Scores Factors Affecting Low Scores Low on quality awareness Time constraint in completing construction work Shortage of skilled workers Problems arising from project management Building design Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Percentage of Factors Affecting Low Scores Figure 9: Percentage of Factors Affecting Low Scores 20

27 2.3 EFFECTIVENESS OF QLASSIC PROGRAMME The respondents were given a list of factors that can influence the effectiveness in implementing QLASSIC. They were required to give their scale rating based on the listed factors. Table 20: QLASSIC Programme Effectiveness No. Item Not Un- Agree Highly Mean Level agree certain agree 1 Assessment equipment currently High used is appropriate. 2 Applicants are informed on the High scoring method of each building element that has been assessed. 3 Site assessments are carried out and High completed within a reasonable time frame. 4 QLASSIC score is able to reflect the High level of quality of a project. 5 Safety aspects are always given high High attention when the assessments are carried out. 6 Weightage allocated to each High building element is appropriate. 7 QLASSIC assessments are always High conducted professionally and transparently. 8 Should QLASSIC assessment be Average made mandatory for all projects? 9 Level of knowledge and expertise Average level of QLASSIC assessors are satisfying. 10 The Personality of QLASSIC assessors are neat, tidy and Average convincing. 11 Assessment results are informed to Average the applicant within a reasonable time frame. 21

28 2.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT With regards to enhancing the promotion of QLASSIC, 50% (100) of the respondents share the same view of organising briefings on QLASSIC for contractors/developers involved in projects. 86 respondents agree that CIDB need to create a QLASSIC centre to increase QLASSIC promotions. A majority of the respondents submitted different suggestions, such as presenting awards to projects that score highly. Table 21: Recommendations to Improve QLASSIC Promotions Recommendations to Improve QLASSIC Promotions Hold briefings on QLASSIC for contractors/ developers involved in projects Create a QLASSIC centre under CIDB s administration Distribute leaflets/ brochures on QLASSIC to relevant industry players Others suggestion Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others Figure 10: Recommendations to Improve QLASSIC Promotion 22

29 2.4.2 Majority of the respondents, 154 (79%) indicated that they were satisfied with CIDB s implementation of QLASSIC. Generally, the industry players were satisfied with the level of quality services by CIDB. Nevertheless CIDB should continue to improve the quality in implementing QLASSIC, especially in the areas of impartiality, integrity and transparency. Table 22: Satisfaction Towards QLASSIC Implementation Satisfaction Towards QLASSIC Implementation Yes No Government Agency Consultant Developer Contractor Others

30 3.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Generally, QLASSIC is an important programme that determines the level of quality of a building and measure the quality of workmanship of a project. With the existence of this assessment system or methodology, the comparison of the quality performance can be carried out objectively between projects. Due to this, the importance of the QLASSIC programme is well accepted by developers and contractors who value and emphasise quality in their work. The conducted study has proven that the majority of QLASSIC applicants are companies, which has obtained the ISO 9001 recognition, and that helps to ensure the company to attain relatively high QLASSIC score. Survey results also indicated that the acceptance level for QLASSIC is high and well received by developers and contractors who used the system. The majority of applicants agree to engage with the QLASSIC programme in the future, and they have also used the QLASSIC programme several times to evaluate the quality of their buildings. Most respondents also agreed on the recommendation to make the QLASSIC system mandatory for all projects. The positive acceptance is also attributed to the advantage the QLASSIC has to offer, as professed by a majority of respondents that it can enhance the performance of a project and help in improving company marketability. Even though the respondents acknowledge the advantages and benefits of QLASSIC, the usage is still low and concentrated only in a few states, such as Selangor and Kuala Lumpur. The influencing factor may be that the economic development of a state differs in terms of areas and population density. In addition, the QLASSIC usage is also to be found to be very low amongst government projects compared to the private sector. This shows that the awareness of the importance of quality is more emphasised by the private sectors, whose orientation is focused on meeting customers needs. Notwithstanding the above description, another important area that needs to be considered by CIDB is to review the current document CIS 7:2006. Since its inception in the year 2006, the presence of this standard is over 5 years. Generally a standard being a dynamic document undergoes periodic review to align with the changes in technology or with the emergence of new technology. Therefore it is timely for CIDB to review CIS 7:2006. Any initiatives by CIDB to review the current CIS7:2006 and its implementation will provide an avenue to indentify the potential areas of improvement technically as well as addressing several of its operational issues. Consequently this novel effort by CIDB would enable to enhance the credibility as well as the integrity of QLASSIC. Therefore, the government and the private sector are identified to play crucial roles to ensure the effective use of the QLASSIC system. Apart from that CIDB should be more proactive to promote QLASSIC via briefings in courses and joint-trainings with contractors. CIDB can also play a major role in forming a QLASSIC centre for consumer reference as well as offer an advisory service for those who have the intention to further improve their QLASSIC performance. 24

31 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 The study consisted of 209 respondents, who are developers, contractors, government agencies and other agencies involved in projects that are assessed by QLASSIC. 4.2 According to study, more than 50% of the companies have undergone the QLASSIC more than once. 4.3 Most of the projects that apply for QLASSIC fall under the building category - Landed Housing. 4.4 The study has found that the majority of the respondents, 180 (87%) who apply for QLASSIC are based on self-awareness on the importance of quality as compared to 18 respondents who apply because their clients demanded it. This indicates that the awareness level on the importance of quality among contractors and developers must be further enhanced as to increase the usage of QLASSIC in building assessment. 4.5 This study also found that the majority of the applicants (160 respondents) who applied for QLASSIC are companies which have been awarded the ISO This indicates that applicants who apply QLASSIC are developers and contractors who take the quality performance of construction projects seriously. 4.6 The awareness on the availability of CIS7:2006 is high among respondents, amounting to 158 people. The awareness level stems from the effectiveness of promotion and briefings via the CIDB web portal and CIDB-organised seminars or courses. However, the effectiveness of promotion via the mass media is still low. 4.7 The majority of the respondents 176 (84%), opined that practicing ISO 9001 can influence in achieving QLASSIC score. 4.8 Lack of awareness in the emphasis on quality is found to be the main cause the low QLASSIC score, which is below 65%. 4.9 QLASSIC has proven to help improve the performance of a project. The study showed that the majority of respondents of 178 (85%), agreed with the statement that QLASSIC helps to improve the quality of a project QLASSIC score can also increase company marketability. A major percentage consisting of 141 (67%), respondents agreed that the QLASSIC effectiveness help to increase a company s marketability It is noticed that most common defects detected in QLASSIC is the internal wall, which were recorded by 83 respondents. External wall records about 19 defects while 20 respondents listed basic M&E fittings Overall, the QLASSIC implementation is well received by developers and contractors, whereby research results showed the majority of respondents, who were formerly involved in the QLASSIC, would like to practise QLASSIS in the future. This is further proven as the majority of respondent have utilised QLASSIC between one to five times. 25

32 4.13 In addition, 96 respondents also agreed that the QLASSIC must be made mandatory for all projects, encompassing private and government projects. This shows the importance of the QLASSIC programme in building quality is slowly acknowledged by developers and contractors who have practised QLASSIC As results show from the study on the satisfaction of players engaged with QLASSIC that almost all listed factors on satisfaction recorded high assessment by respondents. This shows that the QLASSIC programme performance QLASSIC is effective in fulfilling customer s needs and requirement. Factors on customer satisfaction are as follows: time frame for result of assessment suitability of the assessment tools informing the scoring method to the applicant ability to reflect the level of quality of the project always give high attention to safety during assessment 4.15 To increase the awareness on the QLASSIC programme in the construction industry, the majority of respondents opined that briefings on QLASSIC to contractors and developers should be carried out more effectively. In addition, a regional QLASSIC centre under the CIDB umbrella should be established to promote and manage QLASSIC programmes. 26

33 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Utmost appreciation is extended to CREAM for their concerted effort in undertaking this useful study. Not forgetting, a special note of appreciation is also offered to the panel of editors for their tireless effort in preparing this report. They are: 1. Ir Mukhtar Che Ali 2. En. Ibrahim Mohd Yusof 3. Pn. Heryanti Hilmi 4. En. Chuang Kuang Hong 5. En. Mohammad Faizal Abd. Hamid 6. En. Md Zahari Abd Rahman 27

34 28