GEM Engserv Pvt. Ltd is an ISO 9001:2015 certified organization, certified by TUV India in accreditation with National Accreditation Board for Certification Bodies (NABCB).
GEM Engserv Pvt. Ltd is an ISO 9001:2015 certified organization, certified by TUV India in accreditation with National Accreditation Board for Certification Bodies (NABCB).
As proponents and service providers of the Quality Management System for construction, GEM Engserv has always been asked to suggest a schema which can determine the final product quality. While we have always been aware of this conceptually and have introduced this when engaged on an assignment, we are now attempting to create a standard framework. This will help users define the outcome that they would like to achieve and accordingly tweak the parameters of the Quality Management System that they deploy.
Today’s piece dives deep into a Maturity Model of the Quality Management System arbitrarily differentiated from Level 1 to Level 6, detailing the expectations and requirements on different parameters of the system.
While all organizations should strive to eventually reach Level 6, this will be a journey and not a quick transition.
The chart below shows the various QA/QC practices across various parameters and the likely outcomes.
Also, while this framework applies well to all types of construction, this fits best for real estate and has been tailored specifically keeping in mind this sector.
Now we shall examine each parameter of this model and how this impacts the maturity of the Quality Management System and therefore, the outcome of construction i.e. final product quality. Across each of these parameters, Level 1 is sure to result in several serious defects whereas the outcome which can be expected from a Level 6 maturity is nearly zero defects that to consistently.
One of the definitions of Quality is “conformance to specification”. Quality of the final outcome largely depends upon adherence to the materials and their specifications. This becomes especially critical as we move up in the grade of the product (high end, luxury).
In the scenario where no control is maintained over the incoming materials, the outcome is likely to be extremely poor. Imagine a case where crucial input materials such as steel, concrete, blocks, tiles, waterproofing chemicals, sanitary fittings, cables etc. are not in conformance with the specifications laid down in the design. If even one of these materials is accepted without thorough inspections and is therefore unfit for use, the consequences can be devastating.
An underlying principle of Quality Management is the separation between Doers and Checkers. In addition, independence in authority and reporting also plays a big role in ensuring control of the inspection protocol. While a Level 1 maturity model relegates the responsibility of Quality Inspections to the contractor’s team, the Level 6 model entails engagement of Third Party Quality Engineer(s) independently verifying and reporting the outcomes of Quality Inspections to the Corporate Management to ensure maximum attention to corrective actions.
Further, while the Level 1 maturity model does not prescribe any frequency of Quality Inspections, Level 6 ensures adherence to an agreed Quality Plan between the Client and Contractor, according to which Quality Inspections are performed for pre and post stages of every construction activity.
In addition to local verification of works by the project team, audits are also an essential function in the Quality Management System and are key to leveraging the benefits of the PDCA/Deming’s cycle. As we can imagine, Level 1 model does not engage any auditing practice. Level 2 provisions for audits to be performed by execution team which are not very effective. Level 3 invokes the Client’s Quality Engineer to perform the audit of the Quality Control processes and product, however this is often not adequate considering that they would often report internally to the Project Manager. Level 4 to Level 6 involves a Third Party (usually expert external consultants) to perform Quality Audits on the project.
The other variant in the auditing framework which determines the outcome of product quality is the frequency of Quality Audits. While a Level 1 model does not engage audits at all, Level 4 to Level 6 ranges from random product checks to a planned, periodic Quality Auditing strategy covering product as well as process checks. Level 6 ensures that a Third Party expert Quality Audit consultant monitors the project at a predefined frequency and ensures that the Quality Management System prescribed for the project is being implemented and checks whether the final product (at any given stage) reflects this fact.
The function “Quality Control” originated from the manufacturing industry where it was referred to as a hold point for preventing a defective product from reaching the customer. If we consider an absolute parallel of this function in construction (real estate), that would be the Snagging activity towards the end of the project.
An immature system (Level 1) engages the Snagging effort sporadically and allows even a poorly finished product to reach the customer. On the other hand, a tightly governed, structured, multi-stage audit of the finished product ensures compliance to specification before handing over the flat and common areas to the home buyer. This works best (Level 6) when this activity is performed by multiple stakeholders such as the contractor’s team, execution team, an independent snagging team as well as the sales team.
The hallmark of a robust system is its ability to record events as they occur and reproduce these records on demand. However, in the construction industry, documentation is often viewed as an unnecessary expense and a burden, usually till the time that a defect is identified, and a Root Cause Analysis is undertaken. Naturally, the Level 1 model gives no value to documentation and cannot produce any evidence of the practices prevalent at the project site. On the other end of the spectrum is the system which has built in ease into the documentation process, usually through digitization and can produce records on demand. This by itself does not guarantee a defect free product but undoubtedly has a strong correlation with a system that produces high quality outcomes.
In our initial stages during the setup of a Quality Management System, we always begin with identifying the as-is scenario for an organization. The current state of their system may not easily be defined within Levels 1 to 6. However, by reviewing their practices across these various parameters, we can quickly ascertain where they are the best way to move forward towards the end goal. It is important to note here that not all organizations will aspire to reach Level 6 but this framework shall help them take specific and targeted action to move in the right direction.
GEM Engserv Private Ltd. , A-103, The Great Eastern Chamber, Plot No-28, Sector-11, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400614