User Involvement in Value Management of Construction Projects

Abstract

The investigation was conducted to determine the impact of end-user Involvement in value Management of mega construction projects to ensure their satisfaction. The underlying objectives consisting of the history of value management, managing value in construction work, meeting value objectives, integrated value and risk management, user involvement in quality function deployment were achieved by use of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms.

The qualitative research was based on a review of related literature and interview responses that revealed a significant gap in knowledge on end user satisfaction based on their involvement in project work at the earlier and implementation phases of construction work. However, empirical evidence adduced from the use of statistical analysis of data collected using questionnaires using a target population of 600 people and a sample size of 203 indicated that the responses were skewed towards the right or sometimes towards the left with some the behavior of a normal distribution.

The results showed that the variables that build the items used to investigate the objectives could be manipulated by involving end users could be manipulated to achieve the desired outcomes of end user satisfaction. That is further evident with the kurtosis generated from the data that was analysed with SPSS software, showing that value could be manipulated with end user involvement to meet the needs and expectations of end users in airport construction projects. By integrating quality and risk management techniques to develop high quality functionally reliable projects, it was possible to increase end user satisfaction by getting end user involvement at earlier stages and implementation stages.

Introduction

Airport authorities know well that the use of airport infrastructure for transport and service delivery to customers on air travel spans the entire globe. Efficiency in executing operations depends on the flexibility and design of various components such as terminals, sky-bridges, walkways, ground transportation activities, concourses as is evident in many airports such as the San Fransisco International Airport (Chan, Scott & Chan 2004).

The general configuration of the airport provides the core infrastructure that supports service delivery based on a well-designed airport. According to Chan et al. (2004), it is fundamentally critical to ensure that project owners and end users get the satisfaction they want while operating or using the airports because of the security issues and the myriad of complex activities that take place there and the end points of service delivery.

Kerzner (2013) notes that the planning and construction of airports must be done properly to ensure that those who use them get the satisfaction they want. That is because construction works lead to complex systems that provide the framework or structures for use as regional public and private transportation hubs besides being used to support execution of economic and socials services (Chen, Qiang & Wang 2009).

It draws on the concept of value management where focus is on function, scope performance, and the alignment of costs within the budget. The rationale is to use the creative substitution of ideas at the earlier stages of project execution with end user involvement leads to earlier completion of a high quality project that is cost efficient based on value engineering or value analysis. Among the several end users of airports include passengers, aircrafts, employees who work on the airports, carriers, intermediaries, and other people who take part in the airport processes that. However, the challenge is to ensure that end users get satisfied with the airport functionalities, terminal points and other physical infrastructure to ensure the smooth flow of services.

Empirical evidence shows that large complex construction projects such as airport infrastructure have miserably failed to deliver value leading to end user dissatisfaction. The rationale is lack of earlier end user involvement in the management of value within the project life cycle. Here, the results should be reflected in the airport infrastructure’s key elements such as the apron, landing, movement, runway strip, non-instrument runway, runway end safety area (RESA), side, taxiway, and terminal areas at the implementation phase.

According to Curkovic et al. (2000), the results have been serious errors, high cost overruns, inefficiencies, poor project safety, and long delays in design and construction besides poor project operational functionalities. For instance, the three terminals at the Newark airport are not connected and one needs to take a bus to travel from one terminal to the other. The complaint is that the space was not utilized properly at the design, construction, and implementation stages to create a structure that is flexible and provides passengers with the convenience to travel from one terminal to the other without the need to use public transport to move within the airports.

End-user involvement in value management of a project is an area of research that has received little attention in construction management (Chan, Scott & Chan, 2004). Project managers and their teams plan, design, develop, and implement construction projects with the aim of meeting end user needs and expectations by delivering value at the inception and eventual adoption of the project into the users’ mainstream business.

However, the expectations are not met and it becomes too late for the project team to make corrections that are often too expensive and sometimes cannot be accommodated at the implementation stage. Zhai, Xin and Cheng (2009) argue that maximum value and functional benefits that result in the desired level of project quality depends on continuous improvements to ensure consistence on the basis of the end user and project value systems.

The rationale is for the user to get the best level of quality at the least cost, which links value, quality, and cost with end user satisfaction. The focus of this study is to determine the impact of end user involvement in value management of mega projects on their satisfaction. The main areas of research include the historical development of value management, the context of value and value frameworks in construction projects, the need for value management in construction projects, the value management process in construction management, underlying value management techniques, methods of successfully managing mega projects with end user involvement, and total quality management to ensure end user satisfaction (Zhai, Xin & Cheng 2009).

That is in addition to an investigation on project contractor evaluation model and evaluation frameworks with key performance indicators, a model for continuous project appraisal from the context of the end user, underlying risk management theories for successful implementation of a project to ensure end user satisfaction.

A descriptive research approach with elements of the applied research paradigm were used to establish the patterns of data that occur in construction projects and end user satisfaction leading to a recommendation on the integrated nature of project management team roles and user involvement and their contributions to successful projects that satisfy the end user. The ex post facto study delineates from other forms of studies because it does not provide variables that could be manipulated by the investigator, but relied on measuring the basic postulates defined as empirical evidence with proven concepts.

The drivers of the research were based on a course of action with user involvement and value chain management of mega construction projects variables, which when properly manipulated lead to end user satisfaction. Besides, the research was based on secondary data collection from different sources on value management of mega projects worldwide. Deliberate sampling was used with the elements of quota and cluster sampling techniques to ensure equal and well distributed representation of samples for statistical analysis. Besides, data collection was done through personal interviews and administration of the questionnaire instrument using physical mailing and on-line delivery methods to reach the respondents for data collection and statistical analysis.

The theoretical basis of the study provides explanations of the meaning of value establishment to the customer based on the business priorities and benefits accruing from a complete project. That is besides establishing an agreement of what constitutes value of the business need, determining the correct options for meeting the business and functional needs of the end user, establishing a common ground upon which the project can be executed in terms of its objectives, and determining the right value engineering of the end user needs.

The unique feature of mega construction projects provide the ground for the demand of earlier involvement of end user because such projects are one-time activities that require value to be managed at every stage to ensure that it is done correctly for the first time. That is besides the level of complexity of the projects that involve a set of interrelated tasks that require the involvement of highly paid, skilled, and specialised personnel.

Such projects are time consuming, have high probabilities of the risk of failure, and operate on a difficult feedback mechanism because of their size. In addition, people working on the project have unique relationships, which make it difficult for the project manager and their teams to define quality standards for the entire project teams. For instance, the Australian Standard, AS 4183-2007 provides detailed guidelines on value management for construction projects and provides information on how the project manager. Such projects suffer from the end users lacking experience and expertise in providing appropriate inputs besides the adverse effects of untrained personnel at the operational project level.

The importance of mega construction projects cannot be underestimated especially because of the contributions made to the GDP of a country’s economy. Examples include the construction of roads, dams, housing, electricity connections, water and effluent treatment, and investment for the improvement of existing infrastructure projects. The rationale is to build a project on time, within budget, in a safe environment, and to the desired quality standards to ensure the end user need and expectations are addressed resulting in their satisfaction.

Value management is defined as “service that maximise the functional value of a project by managing its development from concept to use through the audit of all decisions against a value system determined by the client.”

Objectives of the study

1. Investigate the historical development of value management with end user involvement in mega projects
2. Investigate how to manage value in project construction with end user involvement for end user satisfaction
3. Determine how to meet value objectives in the context of end user involvement to ensure their satisfaction.
4. Determine how to integrate value and risk management to minimise project risks Investigate the end user involvement in quality function deployment in construction of airports
5. Model the end user involvement with total quality function deployment for continues quality management with end user involvement to ensure their satisfaction.

Problem statement

Mega construction projects are expensive and time consuming because they require expertise with specialized skills to carry out operational tasks. Often, once completed, many of the projects come as a surprise when handed over to the customer because they lack the intrinsic value anticipated by the end user. The results lead to expensive errors because of lack of earlier and continuous involvement of the end user. That leads to the question on, how should end user involvement in construction work in value, quality, and risk management lead to end user satisfaction?

Significance of the study

This study could provide the link between end user satisfaction and earlier involvement in project execution to achieve the goal of end user satisfaction.

Literature Review

Introduction

An overview of the design and construction of airports in the context of value management, end user involvement, and satisfaction form the foundation of this study with the specialized focus on investigating related literature on value management on the impact that end users have when involved earlier in the construction of airports and how that contributes to end user satisfaction. The key to value management is end user satisfaction when infrastructure development such as the construction of airport facilities factor end user requirements at the earlier stages of the project implementation.

An overview of the key elements that demand the inclusion of value within the design and construction of the airport are various sections such as the movement areas. Movement areas constitute the parts of the aerodrome that are reserved for take-off, taxiing, and landing of aircrafts. Value management involves end users who often include the pilots and those employees who work within the airport area to provide guidance and other services necessary for the operation of the airport.

Among the areas where end users work includes the apron, which consists of the area reserved for loading and unloading passengers, parking, fuelling, and for accommodating aircrafts for the provision of the mentioned services. Other elements include the on-instrument runway that enables the pilot to use visual processes. That is in addition to the instrument runway that allows the pilot to use on-board instruments without the need for visual procedures.

The rationale is that when value n not an integral component that factors end user involvement, the risk of rejection, poor design, lack of quality, and end value functions arise. The literature is an in-depth investigation of the historical development of value management as applied within the concept of value management with end user involvement and other related objectives.

History of value management

According to Leung, Ng and Cheung (2002, p.2), value is “the totality of features and characteristics of a product or service that bears on its ability to satisfy stated or implied needs”. Leung, Ng and Cheung (2002, p. 2) also defines value as “a facilitated process that is structured, systematic and analytical in which decision makers, users, technical and professional specialists and others work collaboratively to bring about value based outcomes in systems, processes, products and projects”.

Value management evolved as the best practices to use in construction projects. Engineers from different countries congregated and developed standards for value management. Nadim and Goulding (2010) argue that the standards provide benchmarked manuals for guiding the implementation of projects to meet the expected user needs and expectations based on an in-depth analysis of value management theories as applied in construction management. The structured approach to project management for adding value to meet end user needs and expectations constitute the product’s functional benefits that lead to the establishment and publication of standards to ensure high quality projects in many countries.

According to Nadim and Goulding (2010), the rationale was to develop products that had the right specifications and quality at the least costs, within the shortest time, and with the desired attributes to meet end user needs and expectations. Here, user involvement was the key to the development process. Over 65 years of value management have expired since the inception of the value management concept. Most of the development in value management was experienced in the manufacturing sector when it was first introduced in the USA in 1947. However, the concept was adopted into the construction industry in 1960 and in the UK; but it became widely accepted in the1980s.

A research study by Nadim and Goulding (2010) and Purna Sudhakar (2012) shows a model of value management and its application in the construction industry established it to be a tool that constitutes the three primary components of functional analysis of the value management system, team based processes, and the value system. Ogunlana (2010) notes that value management was widely used in project management to improve communication among the project managers and their team when collecting end user requirements and reflect them in the project implementation activities.

The concept has proved to be appropriate for conflict management within project teams and end users and besides it enables the project manager to challenge assumptions, determine the right project expenditure to keep consistence with the time and quality attributes required for a satisfactory work. Ogunlana (2010) notes that besides using value management to generate alternative ideas that are geared towards meeting end user requirements, generating new ideas on innovation, optimising resource usage, saving time, money, and energy, making procedures and execution methods simple, and eliminating redundancy. Value management enables the project manager to update standards, objectives, and criteria.

Value management of construction projects has evolved with time because of the spread of quality and the need to optimise product costs. That was facilitated by the growth in the quality movement that focused on the quality of materials and costs of products or projects as the drivers of value management (Ogunlana 2010). Despite the focus on cost and material quality as the paradigms on which value management was based, it was later realized that products were supposed to be designed and developed to positively respond to the end user needs and expectations.

However, value gained prominence in the field of construction engineering based on variables such as cost, time, performance, technical competence, and knowledge being encapsulated within the value system. Value management further evolved to capture the underlying project development processes with the aim of expressing value as a measureable attribute so that project teams could respond in effective ways as shown in figure 1 below.

Figure 1 shows the evolution of value with cost, quality, time, performance, knowledge articulation measures, and technical performance. However, it is clear that a gap exists that does not model the point at which the end user gets involved in value management and the likely impact that has on end user satisfaction. It is evident from figure 1 that value management has evolved its focus from the cost attribute only to quality, time, performance, and knowledge, articulation, measures, and technical performance.

The aggregate effects are quality, and timely completion of a construction project at the least cost leading to the results being end user satisfaction. However, a compelling conclusion from the analytical process shows that the evolution does not factor earlier end user involvement, creating a gap that has to be filled if at all end user satisfaction is to be addressed to avoid surprise rejection of the project.

Here, the expected outcome of a project which leads to end user satisfaction is the key driver of value management, which makes the difference with other processes. It is when the end user appreciates the project and its functionalities if the value manager engages the concept of value management process to deliver a product that is consistent with the project objectives and the desired benefits.

In theory, the project outcomes that provide value to the end user are based on the framework that consists of the business objectives. For instance, the construction of mega projects such as airports can be expressed in terms of what can be done to achieve the business goals. The business goals of constructing an airport facility include developing a safe environment for the movement of aircrafts and passengers from and to different destinations (Curkovic et al. 2000). That is in addition to the achievement of the level of service that makes the user satisfied because it is convenient to use the facility. Other objectives include developing the facility with sufficient space for future constructions besides effective land use such as zooning.

The North American definition of cost, worth, and function of a project in value engineering constitute the drivers of value management for a project that meets end user needs and expectations, leading to their satisfaction. In theory, function is defined as a characteristic activity that enables something to fit into the required use and deviated from the classical thinking where products could be designed to fit into the fashion and comply with tastes and regulations of a particular time. The rationale is to distinguish between secondary and primary functions.

Slack, Chambers and Johnston (2010) notes that in theory, the basic or primary function is related to the characteristics that enable a product to perform the basic functions based on the chosen technical solutions. The secondary function is defined on the basis of how a product performs certain technical functions besides its abilities to perform the basic functions. For instance, a window can be designed with the aim to perform both the primary and secondary functions to make the occupant of a building comfortable and the environment healthy to live in.

The basic function is to allow air and light to pass through while the technical function is achieved by the use of glass. According to Slack, Chambers and Johnston (2010), additional functions include all time functions, dependent, aesthetic, design, unwanted, time consuming, and cost functions. On the other hand, cost is the price paid for a project while value is the measurement expressed with the currency or some exchange expressed on a comparative scale. Worth is the least cost required to perform desired function at the lowest cost. Here, value engineering has been identified as the foundation for rationalizing the end user brief by determining the end user functional elements.

Principles of value management

In theory, Zhai, Xin and Cheng (2009) note that value management is the core competence that is driven by the value concept. Here, value is generated by comparing the accruing project benefits with the derived value and the resources that have been used. In construction management, value is gained by applying the resources that include time, labour, materials, land, and cost. Here, value management is used to determine and define the end product that is consistent with the end user requirements. Yang et al. (209) argues that not only does value management lead to cost reduction, but also maximizes value, reduces costs, and time required to complete the project, which results in high project quality. Here, the minimum of resources have to be consumed while the maximum benefits are derived to generate value.

The key difference in value and risk management with other project process methods is that value is generated from the start of the project and that forms the focus of the study. Winch (2010) notes that by clearly defining the outcomes to be delivered as a project deliverable, it becomes possible for the project engineer and teams to work towards delivering the desired outcomes. The desired outcomes must incorporate the end user requirements.

Here, value and risk management are expressed in terms of project objectives and the expected end user benefits that could lead to their satisfaction. As the project progresses, the better design and implementation solutions are sought for while ensuring that the project manager and the team do not lose sight of the expected outcomes. Value is bound to increase as risks are reduced to the minimum and the value ratio is increased.

According to Winch (2010), it is important for the project team to make the best use of available resources and part of that responsibility rests on the project manager who hires the right skilled people to work on the project. The project manager has to embrace a wide range of techniques to ensure project value is achieved such as the use of value engineering. Value engineering builds on the function model where the project objectives and expected outcomes are defined as the inception stage. Within the value system, the value is reflected in the customer value chains, supplier value, and business value chains.

The strategic approach is to integrate the value activities into the construction activities based on the airport management’s operational requirements. Yang et al. (2009) notes that the underlying paradigm is to split each function and assign resources in each of the project value phases consisting of corporate, business, feasibility, construction, and corporate with a specialized focus on the construction value.

That is in addition to constructing a picture on how and what to expect from each component and the associated costs. Inputs from the team members are important to generate alternatives ideas and determine the best approach to create value. Here, risks are assigned to each function and the one with the best output, minimum input, and lowest risks are taken as the best candidates.

Importance of value management

The theoretical proposition that most projects today are fit for value management underpins the rationale for studying value management. Yang et al. (2009) notes that the construction of airports is in the category of heavily funded construction projects. Value managing such projects has shown that up to 5% of the total cost can be saved. Besides, complex projects into which airport infrastructure projects are categorised also qualify to be value managed to get the expert opinion from the value engineer offers expert second opinion that fits well into cost savings and end user satisfaction because of the achievement of desirable outcomes on the least cost (Tang, Shen & Cheng 2010).

Sometimes, some projects are done repeatedly and others are new and unique and that calls for the use of value management as a tool to manage the progress of the project. Besides, the rationale for using value management is because the value driven tool enables the value analyst to create a more focused framework for achieving project objectives, establishing a project design that accommodates end user needs and that ultimately leads to their satisfaction. Here, identification and use of alternative construction methods enables the value engineer to ensure quality, time optimisation, cost savings, and end user satisfaction.

It is also important to note that value management has been used to discover project risks, issues that arise in the execution and implementation process, constraints that occur as the project progresses, and better project briefing and decision making. Studies by Tang, Shen and Cheng (2010) and Stevens, Baker and Freestone (2010) show that value management enables the project manager and other beneficiaries to remove unnecessary costs such as those incurred in the life cycle of the project, earlier identification of problems at the project level, determine and obtain maximum efficiency rations, and enable the definition of the project performance criteria.

Managing value in construction work

In construction management, managing value is the fundamental tool that enables the project manager and the end user to ensure that the outcome is a product that meets end user needs and expectations with the goal of achieving end user satisfaction. Stevens, Baker and Freestone (2010) notes that the approach is systematically applied on a project to obtain value for money because it enables the project manager to identify those project aspects that could be done differently in designing and developing the project to avoid costly construction. However, there should be a balance between the project outcome and meeting end user needs and expectations.

The logical application of the phases includes identifying the best methods to test the end product for suitability and satisfaction in construction, maintenance, and operations (Stevens, Baker and Freestone 2010). The main elements analysed in this case include those that when factored provide the functional fulfilment of the project in terms of the system, the processes, and other necessary components and how to achieve them at the lowest cost.

Here, end user satisfaction is aligned to the product value by linking worth to the minimum cost that is incurred when providing the resurging project with the functional equivalent of a similar airport project that was implemented at a higher cost. In theory, value within the airport infrastructure can be improved by the use of strategies that increase the utility of the airport without increasing the associated operating costs and by combining more utility with a lower cost. A fairness of deal can be reached by establishing an equilibrium point between cost and worth to achieve maximum utility ant the lowest cost. Here, it is important to consider multiple facets of value delivery before the construction work on the airport begins.

It is important to ensure that all expenditure related to the construction of the airport infrastructure such as design, development, maintenance, and replacement and the use of alternative materials that are developed from new innovations to substitute traditional products should be kept at a minimum (Shehu & Akintoye 2010). That besides the use of the latest construction methods and materials to reduce the cost of construction while ensuring that end user inputs are captured using new technologies such as information systems.

The important point is to devolve construction so that user requirements at the earlier stages of project development are captured to eliminate unnecessary costs and waste. According to Shehu and Akintoye (2010), the steps of ensuring that the processes based on end user requirements in each project construction activity are based on:

1. Identifying alternatives in terms of ideas and costs that is based are a rough screening process and end user involvement and acceptance of the new design. For airport projects, it is important to note that an inquiry can be done by issuing questionnaires and conducting interviews to understand and capture user requirements (Shane & Gransberg 2010). Here, the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative are enumerated to evaluate their consistency with the user needs and expectations. In particular, the advantages and disadvantages are not the only ones that should be accounted for, but the weight of each merit and demerit must be critically evaluated to determine the best alternative. It is important to drop some alternatives at this stage after the evaluation process is through to ensure that the alternatives carried to the next step are the most viable.
2. After the best alternatives have been moved to the next step, it is appropriate to establish performance criteria upon which to evaluate the remaining alternatives. The process of establishing the best alternatives is based on conducting a literature review of previous projects and the best methods that have been used in the development of similar projects elsewhere. This is the most critical point because end user involvement is important and in most cases a questionnaire survey has to be conducted to collect end user inputs o suggestions (Shehu & Akintoye 2010). However, the questionnaire instrument has to be administered with the elements that are spread on a predetermined scale. Then, the performance criterion is evaluated depending on an analysis of the mean values. Here, the criterion that has the highest score is chosen as the most appropriate for the construction project to proceed.
3. An investigation on the performance criteria and selection of the best methodology for construction of mega projects showed that the value engineer relied on an evaluation matrix to determine the weights of each performance criteria. Here, unique numbers were assigned each performance criteria according to the preferences of the end users for each particular project (Shane & Gransberg 2010). The matrix is used to provide the best design that is consistent with the end user requirements to ensure their satisfaction.
4. It is important to ensure that the performance criterion meets the minimum cost and maximum quality criteria to meet end user needs and expectations and satisfaction.
5. It is important to select the alternative with the best score by assessing it to ensure that it meets the functional requirements to satisfy the end user.

End user involvement in stages of value management

End user involvement in the main stages of value management is important in the orientation and diagnostic phases where value is evaluated and appraised by the end user and the workshop phase where the value manager and the project team get involved in the acquisition of information (Shane & Gransberg 2010). In the implementation phase, the end user provides useful feedback when using the airport infrastructure to determine the suitability of the quality and functional attributes of the already established infrastructure.

Researchers such as Kerzner (2013) contend that that value management can be effective if the end user involvement is based on value assessment, value engineering, and value review processes. However, those elements when integrated with other value management methods and techniques yields a value management process that amalgamates value engineering and value management strategies for effective value integration into project development and implementation.

According to Kerzner (2013), the project owner gets involved to ensure their satisfaction at each project development phase. Here, successful projects depend on the coordination of different aspects of the project in addition to the harmonious coordination of time, cost, quality, productivity, and teamwork under a highly dedicated value management team led by a creative and highly skilled manager (Shane & Gransberg 2010).

In each of the project implementation phases, value management elements account for the quality of the project to give the best value to the end user. However, an interactive environment must be made to exist to ensure that the end user, contractor, and project developer share information to effectively capture the end user needs and expectations at the earlier stage of project development. Here, the users can be classified as the main user and the visiting user. Others are occasional users and infrequent users.

In an airport environment, end users can be those who visit the facility, employees, passengers, and occasional users. Their satisfaction can be guaranteed when the value management process reflects their contributions, needs, and expectations.

Value context

Cronin, Brady and Hult (2000) recommended that the parameters for value management have to be established to model end user involvement when implementing airport projects so that they are designed with the right attributes to ensure that the end users get their needs and expectations addressed, leading to their satisfaction. Leung, Ng and Cheung (2002) maintain that activities such as aircraft operations, passenger and aircraft safety, and construction costs are interrelated.

Here, value and value systems play the significant role at the inception of the project when the end user or client information is communicated to the professional project teams. The underlying process involves evaluating different alternatives while ensuring that value for money is made an important part of the project to ensure that appraisal, value enhancement, and life cycle costing is done correctly. However, Zhai, Xin and Cheng (2009) note that it is critical for a preliminary mechanism to be established and set up to ensure that value decisions made in monetary terms add value to the project for end user satisfaction.

End use user involvement in this case is done by defining project use qualities at the earlier stage of project inception. That is besides esteeming features that related to ownership characteristics while ensuring that the cost characteristics such as the cost of labour, finance, and materials are determined in advance. Here, value is determined in terms of the physical properties of the product in this case the physical design of the airport and the services rendered to the end users at a price that is commensurate with the quality of services.

It is important to note that some aircrafts and passengers sometimes opt to use different airports because of the services rendered due to the poor design of the infrastructure. Here, value entails providing services for consumption that the user gets involved in to get the optimal utility from the airport use.

In theory, satisfaction is closely interrelated with the intrinsic property of value and the outcome of the decisions made at the individual level after using a service that is rendered using the available infrastructure (Zhai, Xin & Cheng 2009). However, different people make different decisions on the consumption and satisfaction they gain by consuming a particular service. Because of many decisions are made concerning a product or service, the entire process of making the right judgment about the product or service becomes complex. The whole process becomes complex because of the additional issues such as the departmentalization of people who work at different levels within institutions such as airports and who use the facilities that have been developed for use (Zhai, Xin & Cheng 2009).

Besides, if the quality of services is affected in any way based on the infrastructure projects, then, the complexity of decisions, and the content within which users make decisions on the satisfaction they gain from the use of the product, and the level of interference in determining the value of the airport as a product for consumption based on organizational units, groups, and individuals becomes more complex.

The psychological and social dimensions of value depend on people who consume a product at individual and group levels and that becomes very important in making the right decisions in value management in project management. Here value is part of the cognitive structure of the consumer which depends on the perceptions one has towards the product being consumed. According Zare Mehrjerdi (2010), the way the consumer sees the product, develops attitudes, sees the world structures and information, and behaves.

Behavior, on the other hand is based on the satisfaction derived from the consumption of a product, which that influences the positive perceptions about the product and the end result is satisfaction or dissatisfaction. In theory, Wang, Lin and Huang (2010) argue that beliefs and values have developed and emerged from social psychology and provides the foundation of understanding on how people behave when interacting with product and services in the society. Here, integrating values and beliefs together result is attitude whereas knowledge must be derived from the information gained about a product.

Researchers agree that attitude is derived from the three responses that occur when one is subject to emotions and feelings that affect the beliefs about the use of a product and the affect that arises. Here, attitude is not permanent and varies with time and that depends on the satisfaction derived from the use of airport facilities that have been designed and developed by project managers.

End user value system

Touran et al. (2010) note that a number of issues surround the value system of the end user in trying to model and understand how to apply value management to develop a successful project. However, value management as a strategic management process comprises several interacting components that are under the value manager’s administration. For instance, the value system of the end user of the North American client solutions consists of the need to shorten the project implementation time.

Tang, Shen and Cheng (2010) argue that the elements that define the shortest implementation time include using innovative procurement routes which involve specialised construction firms that use professional techniques to design the project according to end user needs and expectations. The process must be based on efficient fast-track approaches using efficient operations at the construction site.

That is besides the need to link strategy with the project to ensure strong emphasis is placed on the pre-project planning stage. According to Cronin, Brady and Hult (2000), the rationale for emphasizing the planning stage is to ensure end user involvement and requirements are captured before the start of the project implementation stage. Project planning and development have to be closely linked to ensure that value is managed appropriately. Here, project objectives must be realized with the project manager and teams at the beginning besides ensuring that whole project life cycle issues are addressed appropriately (Tang, Shen & Cheng, 2010).

This is where emphasis on project cost, value, operational functionalities, and end user requirements are evaluated to ensure that the implementation process results in end user satisfaction. On the other hand, the need for non-adversarial relations is important to ensure that conflict do not arise between the project manager and the client or the end user of the project. Here, highly skilled teams and team development strategies are important because value management is a team work exercise and not just confined to the project manager only.

Research studies by Tang, Shen and Cheng (2010) and Sun (2000) show that end user value systems can be achieved through long term supply chain partnering based on the use of innovative procurement methods that use lean methods for the supply of construction materials from source to destination and allow teams to work together effectively for the entire project activities. Here, the use of an effective supply chain system involves project value chain management activities that enable effective sharing of resources besides the use of information technology to enable real time communication.

In addition, the value system can be enhanced by involving suppliers at the earlier stages of project inception to ensure end user involvement in the identification of the best suppliers. However, the processes need to be simplified to reduce variations in project quality by involving end user values to ensure agreed targets for improvement are met.

Project value system

Besides being designed to fulfill the objectives of service delivery, infrastructure airport projects such as the San Fransisco International Airport are designed with the goal to fulfill the end user satisfaction in mind. Project value chain provides a mechanism for the end user to get involved earlier in the development and implementation process by ensuing that the end user satisfaction is addressed earlier (Sun 2000).

According to Stevens, Baker and Freestone (2010), project progress is constrained by internal and external; factors to the project. The design and implementation is consistent with the demand placed on the project that depends in the end user needs. However, by incorporating the end user, the implications are more than just the complex legal, financial, corporate, and regulatory environmental requirements and translate into additional implications that affect the end user based on their needs and expectations as well as the pre-determined goals.

Here, a comprehensive understanding of the project in its environment is critical because it allows earlier interventions. The project value system provides the framework for the contractor to operate the value management at each stage of project progress using the intellectual capital and the ability to liberate innovations that lead to better project value.

Meeting value objectives

A study by Stevens, Baker and Freestone (2010) on how to meet value objectives shows that the value engineering method that, which has been widely accepted for meeting the project budget which is a critical component of ensuring that every value of the invested money is used for an infrastructure that satisfies the end user. Here, the value manager or engineer is able to meet the objectives by use of appropriate tools that provide the guidelines on the project value progress.

According to Shokri et al. (2012), it has been suggested that to achieve the value objectives that address end user needs and expectations, those in the realm of leadership have to identify the starting point of project implementation by involving the project team at the onset of the project. Typically, the project team consists of members and a team leader who has collected end user requirements and is able to communicate and make contributions to the project team on end user requirements.

It is important to ensure the team budget is prepared to include the time and cost to perform value management activities that are necessary to ensure that the project functionalities are built in to as milestone events. The team has to get involved with the challenges that happen for each item in terms of the end user needs, expectations, and requirements. Here, the team has to be defined with a common goals and leadership that provides direction on the pursuit of the common plans that are tailored towards a common purpose. The team must work in such a way to accomplish the management value objectives by gathering information which is based on end user requirements and project design.

At this point it is important to identify project constraints and develop a project plan that enables the team to work within the constraints to achieve the project goals. Here, a top down strategy must be used to determine the budget for each project item, which is later reviewed by the team members to establish the correct option to work with. Shokri et al. (2012) suggests that the top down approach enables the project manager to develop a detailed project budget that must be followed as the project evolves and as the products are refined in each upcoming step.

After the completion of each step, it is important to document the progress in value management to ensure that the user needs and expectations are achieved as agreed with the project owner. However, the important aspect of time management must be factored in the process to ensure that quality and time are consistently maintained in the project progress. By expressing the project objectives clearly, it is possible to work within the time constrains to ensure that the work progresses within the project budget and time.

Shokri et al. (2012) provides empirical evidence, which points out case studies which show that an effective value team is composed of pre-selected team members with inbuilt sub-teams entrusted with the duty to review the value objectives and how to achieve them. The goal is to ensure that the value objectives are attained as the project progress continues. However, the most of the value objectives can be achieved with an interdisciplinary involvement. The strategic approach of selecting the team members is by ensuring that the members represent the interdisciplinary contributions to the items.

According to Slack, Chambers and Johnston (2010), Tang, Shen and Cheng, (2010), and Shokri et al. (2012), value management strategy is important to ensure that the most economical items are chosen according to specification such as appearance, size, weight, time schedule, temperature, and vibration. The goal is to improve the value of the product under consideration. At this point, it is important to consider end users to collect their requirements that reflect their expectations and experience. In addition, the engineer must ensure that the product reflects end user functionality is developed by creating a design that factors their needs and expectations.

Here, the use of the state-of-the art materials and techniques is important to ensure value addition and optimal cost benefits to the project owner and the end user. According to Tang, Shen and Cheng (2010), the goal is to ensure that end user value management goals are achieved by making sure that they are reflected as project attributes. Achieving the value objectives is important because it makes the program manager to strike a balance of performance, cost, and time schedule. It is important to make all the ingredients available for the value manager and the project engineer to enable them to make the right decisions that enables the production of the most economical infrastructure.

During the design and construction of airports, engineers and those responsible for purchasing materials and constructions products used in the construction work should ensure value addition to the resulting infrastructure. It is the responsibility of those who purchase raw materials and products to determine the suitability and quality if the products and to reject those products and materials that do not add value to the final project (Tang, Shen & Cheng 2010).

The strategic approach that can be sued by the purchasing department is continuous communication with the suppliers and the use of supply chain systems that are efficient and effective to provide materials at the least cost or economically. Here, managers have to make their cases to proof that the project is carried out economically and at the least cost in terms of money, materials, and time. In this case time, cost, and value are aggregate concerns of the project owner and end users. However, it is the responsibility of the project manager to ensure that the right business tools are made available to manage the project value.

Reducing life cycle costs

Tang, Shen and Cheng 2010) note that Life cycle costs are mandatory components for the successful execution of a project. However, the construction of mage project can cause the project costs to escalate beyond the project budget. Besides, the project value manager must operate on those costs that should be given priorities and those that need to be given lower priorities. Here, the costs depend to a large extend the type of cost and the project component being developed.

That is in addition to the different categories of costs that usually are in two categories, variable and fixed costs. Variable costs are usually incurred as the project progress goes on and fixed costs arise as a result of administrative functions and other related activities. Here, Gardiner and Stewart (2000) have proposed that the value manager has to identify several objectives related to the project development and suggested:

1. Intangible costs which include building activities, modification of a construction to enable access to a building, and those that cannot be borne by the project owner, but the client.
2. The development and death of a firm especially if it had a share in the construction project. A projection of the likely life span of the project is critical to determine the risks of working with firms that have a short lifespan.
3. Once the assumptions mentioned above have been refined by the value manager and the project team, it is important to work out the life cycle analysis of the project by assessing the site and land clean procedures, implications of waste disposal mechanisms, and recycling of material sand products, and demolition of some aspects of the buildings.

Kim (2010) notes the importance to consider additional factors such as the service quality of the infrastructure components, the risk of failure of various components within the airport facility, the quality of fabrication of various components and their lifespan, the service life and maintenance requirements based on certain management plans, and cost constraints. In addition, the frequency and time interval between successive maintenance and replacements should also be factored into the process.

Love et al. (2000) note that it is worth to consider the survey conditions of the project, the quality of existing infrastructure, the service lives of the existing components, budget requirements, and critical components and how to ensure they are kept functional. The quality of maintenance required to meet the needs and expectations of the end user besides meets their satisfaction.

On the other hand, Love et al. (2000) proposed an alternative by suggesting that the obsolescence and end of use vale of a project have to be factored during the project design and implementation period with due consideration of the resulting end user value. Besides, the capital costs are important to consider because of the return on investment for investing in such a capital airport infrastructure project. The real issues to consider from the end user perspective include land acquisition and associated costs. Land use details include the location of land and how it directly affects the operational efficiency and end user value and satisfaction.

It is important at the design stage to consider the predesign costs, which generate the amount of time, and project quality, which includes the project brief and the specification of the infrastructure to be development (Shehu & Akintoye 2010). At this stage, end user requirements and satisfaction are factored because the resulting products have critical implications on the performance of the resulting facility.

At this point, optimising the project costs and aligning them with the user requirements is important to ensure that a high quality and highly functional infrastructure is set up. According to Shehu and Akintoye (2010), it is imperative for the value manager to consider design costs because the quality of design in terms of the being free from errors and that enables those who are responsible to be able to establish the details in terms of the cost of production and maintenance.

The importance of factoring operational costs should be underscored because they change with time due to the uncertainties that happen in the lifespan of the project. Operational costs are influenced by various expenses such as staffing, waste management procedures, risk management systems, utility management procedures, and disruptions that occur due to corrections and dental use of assets.

Shehu and Akintoye (2010) argue that the value manager should consider maintenance costs that arise because of replacements and rehabilitations that happen as the project continues to progress. The rationale is to establish and assess performance indicators that are used to evaluate the project progress. Additional costs result from the replacement of components that have a short lifespan and break down regularly, decreasing the end user satisfaction and project value.

However, it has been suggested that asset characteristics are critical components to consider in value management because a close relationship exists among the assets and their characteristics, which have a lasting effect on the value of the project. It is therefore important for the value management team to assess the functionality of each component that is used in the construction of the project, the type of contrition technology in use, the area being utilized, and the size and number of buildings o set up.

According to Gardiner and Stewart (2000), within the process of developing and implementing the project life cycle costing involves making major decisions and considerations. Among the factors to consider are justification for the construction project that meets end user needs and expectations; leading to their satisfaction, the rationale for the design, development, operational functionalities of the project components, and the end of economic life of the project.

Here, the project manager takes the project team through the project plan, which in this case consists of conceptual explorations, component development in advance, and system integration of the various components that make up the entire system, implementation, and operational support.

However, Gardiner and Stewart (2000) note that the consequences of bad decisions include poor structural frameworks, high costs, poor project quality, rework and associated costs, disposal of waste product and materials, poor quality roofing systems for housing units and other offices within the airport, adverse environmental impact especially in relation to waste disposal, and frequent replacements.

Adding value

Gardiner and Stewart (2000) and Gido and Clements (2014) suggest that adding value to the infrastructure project is one of the key drivers of end user satisfaction. Different strategies have been suggested for value addition into the project life cycle. Among the recommendations includes the project team and the value manager devoting time and resources to investigate the breakdown of projects. In addition, the project value manager should constitute a team to calculate the cost of confirmation and determine the deviation from the original costs based on an analysis of the high cost to worth areas to determine the type of investment to be done. That is besides determining the entire project life cycle costs to identify those areas of improvement to bring down costs and areas to improve on.

Delgado‐Hernandez, Bampton and Aspinwall (2007) argue that when end-users get involved in value management, the manager and the project team should seek to determine the cost to perform each specific function of the materials and products that are used in the construction work to optimize quality and cost for the best outcomes. Stevens, Baker and Freestone (2010) note that several tasks in the range of thousands are performed in airport construction before the project gets successfully complete.

Gardiner and Stewart (2000) propose that a suitable should be applied to determine the cost of each major component factored and major areas considered in the study. The value mismatch areas are then determined and the areas where value needs to be added is determined. It is important to consider high worth to low cost areas and low worth to high cost areas to get the right information on where to start the value addition process.

However, Delgado‐Hernandez, Bampton and Aspinwall (2007) and Gido and Clements (2014) recommend that the value mismatch underpins the correct method to determine where value addition begins. However, value mismatch should be established by looking for various indicators within the high cost worth and low cost worth scenario. Here, the indicators that have been suggested include identifying the number of functions and matching them to see if they add value to the project value objectives, determining if fewer functions can fulfill the same objective, and the amount of effort required to fulfill certain functions.

Some functions can be done with the minimum effort while others need a lot of effort and time to perform them. Besides, the worth and net value of the function has to be assessed and the one with the highest worth and highest value chosen. It is important to remove those functions that are of little or no value to the overall project value.

However, Gido and Clements (2014) note the importance for the project manager and his team to bear in mind that the project schedule must be maintained to ensure successful completion at the right time. That calls for effective time management. Time management is the responsibility of the project manager and that can be achieved by informing the team members of the time required to complete the project, assigning tasks to each team member with deadlines to ensure earlier task completion, and informing the team about the project goals and objectives and how to achieve them. It is important to be cognizant of the time to design, implement, and maintain various project components by identifying areas of improvement during project implementation to optimise on time.

Value addition or improvement happens as a group and not a single person’s activity. The team can improve value by meeting opportunities, evaluating their knowledge, and solve problems that happen during project implementation. Such an approach could help the project manager to drive the project further by ensuring that its quality is maintained (Gido & Clements 2014). The rationale is that the project team members are users of the value objectives and the project team leader is responsible for directing the teams.

To be successful as a team leader, it is necessary to evaluate one against several leadership qualities such as: ability to motivate, avoid bias, interact with teams, remain fair and decisive, control problem solving methods, maintain schedule, and utilize high quality work. Go and Govers (2000), Kerzner (2013), and Gido and Clements (2014) suggest that the team leader should manage conflict, provide direction, keep an open mind, handle confrontational issues, be persuasive, clear, and concise, see the big picture, and inspire the teams to commit, organize, facilitate, and set common goals. To ensure that the project value is a team based approach, it is important to conduct a project briefing.

Project briefing

Gido and Clements (2014) recommend that project briefing is an iterative process that enables the project manager to progress from general to specific issues that relate to project implementation in value management. Besides, the iterative process enables the project manager and the team to capture end user requirements and successfully evaluate them against the resulting work to determine the suitability of the best alternatives aimed at increasing infrastructure value. The objectives are for the client to inform the project team and manager of their needs and expectations that are later documented in the project brief.

To achieve the project goals and objectives, a research study by Leung, Ng and Cheung (2002) narrates that the concept of project briefing should be based on a document that has varying details of information and includes:

1. The desired outcomes, content, purpose, scope, and background of the project.
2. The purpose for which the infrastructure project is set up and the functionality of the components.
3. The time and cost targets, organization of the project and procurement instructions.
4. Environmental conditions which include safety and end user interests that influence the infrastructure design.
5. The entire process is influenced by various factors such as end user types and expectations, size and nature of the project, and skills required for the project team members to execute the project successfully.

A critical analysis of the briefing methodology that is appropriate for use in airport construction management projects is based on qualitative and quantitative paradigms (Lindlof & Taylor 2010). The approaches used include informal interviews, literature reviews, and discussion as applied within the construction industry and involves professionals and such as the resident engineer and value management managers.

A structured approach to project briefing has elements that have a purpose in each case of project progress and include:

Purpose, which is a summary of the activities that occur within the project to ensure that anticipated and unanticipated problems are overcome. The rationale is to ensure that end user requirements are factored to avoid the last minute modifications and rework.

In principle, Shane and Gransberg (2010) note that a pre-construction meeting should be convened and conducted by the project manager, the end users, and other parties who make contributions to the end user requirements. It is important to ensure that the project participants are those who make contributions to different aspects of the construction work on the operations of the airport. Proposed suggestions show that government, which is the main sponsor of the project, should invite the resident engineer, the company for testing and ensuring compliance to requirements, the airport management authority, subcontractors and the prime contractor, users of the airport such as pilots, environmental agencies, and affected utilities. Once the team has been set up, various points of discussion emerge:

1. Details on the project purpose, scope, and the sequence of activities for the implementation and successful completion of the project
2. Assigning roles and responsibilities to the resident engineer and others in leadership position with the power to terminate the project, alter the project specifications, and make any other changes to ensure conformance to project requirements
3. The relationship between the project sponsor and airport authorities
4. Identification of authorities
5. The details of the work schedule, details of the project activities and operational problems that may happen during the project execution
6. Issuance of notice and complete the project according to schedule

Integrated value and risk management

Shane and Gransberg (2010, p.2) define risk management as “coordinated activities to direct and control an organisation with regard to risk”. Here, risk is the result of the ‘effects of uncertainty on project objectives. Mega project cannot be risk free as there is no project that operates without risk. However, risks must be accepted and managed according to ensure that they are kept as low as possible by accepting, transferring, or sharing the risks. However, when both risk and value management are combined together, the project manager makes the best methodology that is widely accepted in value engineering as the best approach to successfully complete a high quality project that meets the end user needs and expectations.

Risk provides the foundation for determining the unforeseen outcomes of a construction project during and after implementation. Some amount of risk can be tolerated and some cannot (Wang, Lin & Huang 2010). However, the value to the business makes it worthwhile to accept risk. Here, the aim of the value management process is to ensure that the end product, which in this context is the airport project enables the project team to capture and clearly define the true scope and needs of the customer.

The rationale is to ensure that the end product measures up to the end user needs and expectations. According to Wang, Lin and Huang (2010), the excellence of the assertions is that risk provides the foundation for value management of a construction project. The rationale is that risk factors must be identified and ameliorated to enable the project manager proceed with the minimum risk of the end product or project getting reflected and maximize project value.

Besides, construction projects such as airports are one time undertakings and the risks associated with the processes occur at each stage of the process and the effects could have certain outcomes on the perception of value of project. The rationale is that the project is expensive and time consuming with complex structures that consumes a lot of energy in the operational processes. The overall objective is to integrate value management into the execution of the construction project to ensure that value addition occurs in terms of cost, time, functionality, and quality.

Wang, Lin and Huang (2010) note that end user involvement in the risk management stages is important because it enables the project manager to embark on the project with the full knowledge that risk can be minimized and not ignored. End user involvement is known to be one of the critical success factors for project implementation (Davis 2014). According to Kim (2010), the best approach is to factor the proximity principle in getting the end user on board.

The proximity principle dictates that the end user can get involved at the earlier stage of project execution at the requirements gathering and analysis stages, getting involved in the review stage, getting involved in other project execution and implementation stages, and using cross functional teams to get end user involvement (Chen, Chang & Huang 2010). Besides, the manager is able to capture the end user feelings and contributions to ensure a risk mitigated project. Here, the risk factors can be categorised into many sections in terms of technical complexity, organizational complexity, project size, overambitious demands, and requirements incompleteness risks.

It has been widely argued that risk must be factored into a project if the project manager is to maximize the benefits accruing from the complete project. The rationale is to ensure that the project manager does not engage in firefighting at the completion of the project. Therefore, it is important for the value management team to be able to recognize and establish a formal risk management process to be able to realize the benefits accruing from the implementation practice that factors the risk management process elements. Kim (2010) argues that the formal risk management process that includes the end user at the earlier stage with value management is able to deliver the following benefits:

1. Enables those in the leadership position to deliver value and put in place the necessary infrastructure for providing successful outcomes that are consistent with end user needs and expectations. The rationale is to enable the project team to create achievable and clearly articulated project objectives.
2. The project team leader is able to establish the correct risk profile that enables the right allocation of risk, to enable those whose roles are to manage the risk to do it effectively. It is important to note that risk profiling is one if the critical components of a large infrastructure project and contract documentation.
3. It enables the team members to get involved in the main tasks and responsibilities and execute them effectively; leading to the overall effect of risk reduction as the project progresses in the right direction. Sometimes opportunities happen as the project progress continues and that enables the project team to capitalize on them when they happen.
4. The end user gets inspired with confidence that the end product meets their needs and expectations will be delivered because of their involvement in the risk and value management phase. That is in addition to getting the assurance that the project team will be delivered within the constraints of cost, time, quality, functionality, and schedule.
5. Through the judicious application of risk control concepts, the project manager is able to raise the requisite funds to control the project. It is also possible to transfer the risk to other project portfolio because airport construction projects are large and risk transfer is possible from one section of the project to the other.
6. The project manager and those other project team members are able to report risk at a regular interval to enable the team review the risks and assign them the necessary levels so that those risks that are severe can be escalated in an orderly manner.

Once the project risks have been profiled, it becomes important to integrate then with value management to be able to enjoy additional benefits with the ultimate goals of end user satisfaction. Satisfaction can only be guaranteed when the end user involvement is factored into the entire value and risk management process (Kim 2010). Additional benefits that arise because of the integration of risk and value management to the project progress and ultimately to the end user satisfaction include:

1. The possibility of using a complimentary process to ensure project value is achieved in each stage of development.
2. Deep knowledge acquisition is required for the project manager and those responsible for risk and value management to demonstrate their competence in the disciplines in developing a project that meets end user needs and expectations leading to the end user satisfaction. The rationale for better knowledge acquisition is to enable the team leader to make better informed decisions and improved communication among the project team members. The cyclical process of better communication is that it leads to better understanding.
3. Besides, better communication between the project team and other external parties such as end users enables the teams to come up with better understanding of what should be done to improve the project in terms of end user satisfaction.
4. An audit trail is important to establish because it shows how those activities that add value were managed and how risk was controlled during the execution and implementation stages. Here, when third parties review the projects, it becomes possible and easy for them to understand how the project progressed successfully.
5. It is critically important to document the project activities to enable the records to be kept for future use.

Integrating the value and risk management to mega project such as airport construction is becoming a necessary because modern project have become more and more complex and end user who are often the customers have become more demanding (Cambraia, Saurin & Formoso 2010). That makes it necessary for the project team to arrive at the right combination of the behaviour and value.

However, the value and risk management strategy should be modelled to effectively capture end user involvement and points of satisfaction that includes the risk components by filtering the risks according to the end user requirements. For instance, a risk component can include default in the side of the project contractor. That is besides the scope risks that represent a significant amount of sources of risk as is evident in the Project Risk Information Library database.

The main risks that are noted in the database include the defects and change risks that happen in terms of the project design and functionality (Kim 2010). Here the moist damage is due to the poorly managed change process and the high exposure to of the project to vulnerabilities in the change process. Sometimes, some of the risks such as the scope and defects are unknown at the beginning of the project and need to be identified as the project proceeds. Case studies show that the cumulative impact of such risks happen several weeks after the project has started and change management should be carefully implemented to ensure value is managed effectively.

End user participation is one of the critical components that define the risk profile. Here, internal integration and formal planning are additional components that can be used to develop the integrative contingency risk model (Kim 2010). However, empirical evidence suggests that when the risk model is properly integrated into the value management framework, it enables the project manager to create the right management profile that enables the project team to work carefully to achieve higher project performance.

Here, the risks can be conceptualized as risk exposure and risk management, which when fully managed, ends in better project performance. However, the model has some weaknesses such as the inability to identify the risks and profile them according to the cost implications and the inability to calculate the risk exposure score on the project. Here, the cores cannot enable the project manage to determine precisely the effects of the risks on each project component.

That is besides the inherent weakness where the risks cannot be assigned on the project components to determine an optimal fit (Shane & Gransberg 2010). However, the upside of the model is that the risks can be assigned with higher end user intensity of participation. Here, the end user involved in the value and risk management process, the type and intensity of user participation in the process, and the depth of involvement the rationale is that risk preference in the projects are driven by the complexity of the organization, demands that are overambitious, technical complexities, incomplete end user requirements, and the project size.

Example, a research conducted by Shane and Gransberg (2010) to determine end user participation to mitigate project risks showed that a significant number of projects were successful as compared to those that were unsuccessful. A summary of the results showed that 94% of the projects were successful in terms of technical complexity while success those that were successful without end user involvement constituted only 53%.

On the other hand, 90% of the projects were successful when end user participation was factored with organizational complexity as compared with 84% success for those without end user involvement. For the project size, 86% success rates were achieved with end user involvement while 40% were unsuccessful. On the other hand, incomplete user requirements, overambitious demands with end user involvement scored 95% and 82% success rates and 84% and 50% success rates respectively.

Technical complexity was factored as one of the risk elements that emerge in complex mega projects because of the usage of new technologies that require new skills and knowledge and changes that happen due to innovation. That is in addition to the changes in end user demands and new changes in regulations especially with the changing needs in airport security. The rationale is to develop measures that assure a design integrates various aspects to monitor contractors closely and enable continuous compliance to safety and security requirements.

Here, the standards for access control, tenant personnel, and movements of ground vehicles should be factored into the design to meet the security specifications. It is important to ensure a design that factors security and safety in the context of traffic control, gates and fencing, radio communication, rapid response to security issues, and construction equipment and pedestrian control.

Shane and Gransberg (2010) investigated a series of construction projects and demonstrated that from the management responses, 72% of the managers asserted that technical complexity had serious implications on the development and completion of the project. The success rates for projects with and without end user involvement were 94% and 53% respectively. For the successful projects, the project managers factored end user involvement by factoring end user requirements and participation modes such as the use of legacy systems and the difficult of using legacy systems.

The results based on the side of the complexity and size of the project, incomplete end user requirements, and overambitious projects showed that with well captured end user involvement, it results in better project performance and risk mitigation. Here, actual participation was important for each category of risk (Shane & Gransberg 2010). For instance, with incomplete end user requirements, the results were drawn from the top, middle, and lower level managers who agreed that end user requirements could best be captured through workshops to mitigate the risks.

It is important to note that scope creep is one of the most critical risks that can happen and hinder project progress. Most of the change risks are in the category of scope Crip and represent a significant amount of unanticipated and additional risks. It has been established that such risks cause an average of 2 months of slip. Here, the risk has already impacted on the project schedule, which translates to more time and higher project costs and sometimes can lead to compromises of quality and cause negative end user satisfaction.

According to Shane and Gransberg (2010), dependency risks such as those that affect the project time line translate into the schedule risks because they affect the completion date of the projects. In airport construction, dependence risks arise because of rapid changes to environmental factors that are external to the project such as a supplier backing out of the project, reduced involvement of the project owners. That is besides the legal requirements and other statutory requirements remaining the same. Examples of the impact of risks in the risk databases include those that occurred because of unplanned delays in the access to new construction materials and equipment and the required infrastructure to cover the transportation of the components to the designated points.

Wang, Lin and Huang (2010) note that strategic risks are often the main causes of project delay, rework, and at times losses that happen when not investigated and ameliorated properly. However, it is important to note that strategic risks are under the control of the project manager and such risks have a substantial impact on the project progress and end user satisfaction, once the project has been delivered. In this case, strategic risks are driven by the market conditions, the economy of the country, consumer needs and expectations, litigations, legal contracts, technology, and competition. Here, the government and the prevailing economic factors have an impact on the use of new technology, competition from other firms, costs, prices of products, sales, and service delivery. By accumulating those risk factors and managing them with consistent focus on value at each project progress stage, it is possible to ameliorate the risks while ensuring high project value.

The best strategy that has been proposed in dealing with risk is to conduct a risk assessment at the earliest project phases. Here, the project manager can use risk assessment tools that are appropriate for getting insight and assign values to the project risks (Wang, Lin & Huang 2010).

The most critical tools include the risk assessment grid, risk complex index, and the risk framework. A combination of the methods is necessary because each tool generates a risk map that is appropriate for a particular project implementation, For instance, in airport construction work, the risk framework and complexity index are necessary because some sections that are worked on produce tangible products due to some technical involvement. On the other hand, the risk assessment grid is appropriate for deliverables that are less tangible such as the processes that are supported within the airport infrastructure.

The relative occurrences of the risks are generated of the project and the resulting effect in case such a risk ends up not being mitigated. Here, the risk index is a combined product if technology, architecture, and the system with a specified scale. Architecture denotes the high level functionality of the project while technology is the custom development that is unique to the project and the system is the interrelated components that make the airport infrastructure usable.

User Involvement in Quality Function Deployment

Zare Mehrjerdi (2010) recommends that the quality function deployment is an important strategic approach of involving end users at each project implementation phase to capture their requirements and develop product attributes and technical specifications that reflect end user needs and expectations and leads to their satisfaction. It is a framework for capturing the voice of the end user needs, and prioritizing different them to ensure that they are measurable, meaningful, and global. In theory, the house of quality acts as the basic tool for capturing the end user requirements, the technical means to convert the wants into physical products, and a component that shows the relationship between how and what in the house.

Project managers and teams work towards achieving the desired quality in construction work manly by using the tool in each phase of project implementation. One characteristic of the involvement quality function deployment is to determine how well the construction work fits into end user satisfaction.

The typical attributes that provide end user perceived benchmarks based on the interrelationship between technical specifications and end user requirements depend on the scope of the project (Zare Mehrjerdi 2010). The uniqueness of the quality function deployment is to focus on the customer requirements. However, the QFD can be successful if the required information is collected from the customer to determine the true meaning of end user requirements. The rationale is to capture end user requirement and reduce the time required to complete the construction work and achieve end user satisfaction.

In theory, the QFD works on the basis of the conception of an idea, which in this case is the construction work that is built on end user requirements. The rationale is to reduce the construction costs by concentrating on what meets end user needs and expectations, which leads to the concentration of less effort in the redesign of the product. The resulting benefits of using QFD are illustrated in the figure 3 below.

According to Zare Mehrjerdi (2010), the quality approach is customer driven and enables the project manager to link value with quality by focusing on customer needs and expectations by using information effectively, determine the best approach to deal with specific items, prioritizing resources, and restructuring the resident involvement. One of the core functions and goals of a value management strategy is to deliver the project within schedule and ensure end user satisfaction.

The QFD reduces project implementation time by getting end user involvement at earlier stages to avoid midstream redesign, removal of future redundancies, and other elements shown in the diagram. Other areas of benefits include the promotion of team work that drives quality through consensus, enables communication to occur among the team members to clarify issues, and creating global views out of the user requirement details (Cronin, Brady & Hult, 2000). Besides, using QFD enables the project to assimilate the design, provides the required framework for sensitivity analysis, and adapts change as a living document.

In summary, the quality function deployment captures the voice of the end user based on a framework that consists of the design, analysis, development, and full launch. In airport construction work, several activities such as construction of runways, aprons, parking areas, and taxiways and the results should not only be consistent and compliant with the quality specifications to adhere to, but should result in those products that end up as satisfying the user needs and expectations.

A comprehensive review of literature on the use of the tool shows that the design stage is important in capturing end user needs and expectations and the requirements to be fulfilled (Cronin, Brady & Hult 2000). It shows how and what to capture, generation of ideas such as how best to design a parking way to ensure safety, and allow free movement of ground vehicles and people without causing interferences. That is in addition to the development of the surface architecture and strategy formulation in the design process. Value, quality, and time are factors that facilitate the execution of the phase in an economic way.

In the analysis, every component and construction mechanism is evaluated to determine the suitability of fulfilling the functionality of the product to ensure end user satisfaction. On the other hand, the development stage proceeds with the execution of the project once the end user requirements have been captured and reflected in the product design (Cronin, Brady & Hult 2000). The development process occurs with the details that show how the products fit into the project work. However, in the deployment phase, the product is put into o use and the end user data is captured to determine how well the processes and the products work.

User Involvement with total quality management

Academic literature involving research by Cronin, Brady and Hult (2000) presented empirical evidence, which shows that end user involvement in total quality management of airport construction projects guarantees fitness for use of an infrastructure project, high end user product quality, and satisfaction. The enablers of the concept in project work include the people, processes, and the resulting infrastructure. People, or end user involvement is a strategic approach that can be achieved by collecting and analysing data on end user satisfaction based on the appropriateness of the use of the end product, which in this case is the airport infrastructure, adaptability of the infrastructure to the needs of the users, flexibility in the use of the end product, durability, and product reliability.

Here, total quality management is a concept that was practiced in Japan before it became universal in its application. Curkovic et al. (2000) contend that quality has to be managed in order to achieve the quality objectives of the construction work. Several approaches to managing quality have been suggested with the resulting framework being defined by quality planning, quality controls, and quality improvement.

Despite a lot of literature falling short of showing how end users get involved in the quality processes, the conceptualized process consists of key elements that the project manager and the team have to follow in order to achieve the project quality and value objectives (Kerzner 2013). It has been recommended that in quality planning, the project manager and his team should establish the quality goals to be achieved, identify the end users, establish their needs and expectations, develop those features that are able to address those needs and expectations, develop the process features, and establish the control mechanisms that can be used to implement the quality planning strategies.

On the other hand, it has generally been agreed that quality control can be achieved by selecting the quality control objectives, specifying the standard measures for ensuring quality is achieved, setting goals for the quality objectives, creating a sensor, establishing measures for evaluating the actual performance, establishing the difference between the anticipated and the actual performance outcomes, and taking action to correct the performance deviations.

On the other hand, Curkovic et al. (2000) note that once the quality goals have been achieved, it is important to commence the quality process by assessing the project goals, establishing and organizing project teams to pursue the quality objectives, and diagnosing the problems that happen with the product quality. Besides, the quality improvement framework provides the rationale for correcting the errors that happen within a project, and proving that the methodology for solving the errors yields successful results. In addition, the strategy should enable the project manager to deal with resistance, change and controls, and hold on to the new change.

Data analysis of end user responses that are collected through surveys, observations, and questionnaires provide the foundation for integrating user perceptions into the quality management framework (Kerzner 2013). The resulting data can be modelled according to the TQMEX model for managing quality. In this case, the resulting model leads to universally accepted step-by-step guidelines on how to implement quality.

The key defining elements are based on the Japanese practice of 5-S business process re-engineering approaches, which include quality control circles, total productive maintenance, and quality management systems. A critical assessment of the total productive maintenance has shown the effectiveness of involving end users for the assurance of the resulting project quality (Kerzner 2013). The rationale is to improve the productivity of the engineering equipment by improving on the use of equipment and optimising the usage.

The strategy is achieved by defining the project objectives clearly and the tasks to be performed by avoiding stoppages that occur due to failure to clearly define end user requirements (Gido & Clements 2014). In addition, the right equipment has to be used to achieve the project goals and objectives by identifying the equipment in line with the stated requirements to avoid reworking on the project.

The overall objective is to ensure a quantitative and qualitative enhancement of equipment capability. In addition, by improving the safety and health of those who work in the project, besides factoring environmental factors, it is possible to obtain better quality outcomes and higher productivity (Kerzner 2013). The underlying reason is that the end user requirements are well understood. Based on the concept of productive maintenance excellence for the award of construction projects to construction companies, ten main elements in the checklist have to be examined. Those elements include organization and operation, policy and objectives, training, equipment maintenance, planning and management, safety, environment, situation, volumes of production, equipment maintenance, autonomous maintenance, scheduling, quality, and cost.

According to Delgado‐Hernandez, Bampton and Aspinwall (2007), earlier end user involvement is in the context of understanding the end user requirements, evaluating them, preparing equipment that factors those requirements, and implementing the requirements using the right tools and procedures. The ultimate goal is end user satisfaction.

A critical assessment of the approaches used in total quality controls shows that some of them do not fit into the construction of mega projects. However, that allows other strategies to be integrated into the processes such as the BPR to re-engineer the resulting infrastructure to meet the expectations of those users of the airport. An overview of the Japanese approach on the use of 5-S method is that when used as a strategic process, it provides the framework for project teams working on details of the project to separate those project aspects that do not fulfill the quality objectives and keeping them as low as possible to optimise on cost, time, and quality (Gido & Clements 2014)..

The strategic enabling elements which enable the team to distinguish between the necessary and unnecessary include work in progress, unused machinery, unnecessary tools, defective products, and documentation methods. The best methods that have been suggested for use in this case include stratification management where the project manager who is responsible for value management to decide on the usage frequency of the products, and establishing the difference between needs and wants. It is also important to ensure that the project team and the team manager puts things in order, conducts an analysis of the status quo of the project, provides guidelines in how things should be done, and keeping the place of work clean.

However, the above paradigms are achieved through the correct implementation of the concept of total quality management based on sustained employee feedback, participation, and respect for social beliefs and values, compliance with government regulations and statues (Delgado‐Hernandez, Bampton & Aspinwall 2007). The entire people, product, and processes are embodied in the five pillars of total quality management paradigm.

Sun (2000) notes the underpinning concept in TQM to be continuous improvement that is based on systematic integrated, consistent values that involve not only those who work in the construction process, but the contributions of end users. The TQM five pillar models is a tool that the project manager uses to achieve total end user satisfaction that come from the internal and external environments. The responsibility of those involved is to ensure continuous improvement of processes and systems that work in the construction industry (Delgado‐Hernandez, Bampton & Aspinwall 2007). It has been shown that TQM is a necessity if the project has to be successful in guiding the project team to achieve end user needs and expectations. The rationale is to ensure survival and success.

Researchers argue that quality underpins the rationale that is found in cost reductions because it pays for itself in cost reductions, increase in profits that are generated because of the ease of the flow of customers who use airports, pilots, and other end users. Quality can also be seen in the growth in the preferences to use the airport as opposed to those that do not factor end user needs and expectations. Here, the smooth flow of business increases the volume of transactions, leading to the growth of business, a reduction in the operating costs, and a reduction in the cost of quality improvements that are incurred in the process.

Typically, an increase in the flow of users of the airport infrastructure increases revenue collection from airport making enough money to be available for the provision of services to the end users (Sun 2000). It has been noted that the long term effect of total quality management resulting from capturing and adhering to end user requirements are reduction in expenditure that is devoted in most cases to rework, repair, and maintenance of the infrastructure.

Researchers who have based their analysis on various case studies and empirical evidence argue that TQM provides the value manager with the tools and techniques to complete project modules that are right at the first time and to be consistent with the principles of value management that capture end user requirements in construction projects (Sun 2000). The guiding objectives include working with the aim of creating a defect free end product, factoring the preventive culture to avoid poor quality work, using structured processes and properly trained people, and avoiding making mistakes in the design process.

It has been suggested that quality pays for itself and getting every business fiction factored into the quality process leads to better quality improvement. However, Curkovic et al. (2000) argue that researchers need to understand and outline the best strategies for ensuring that the right quality levels are achieved.

According to Curkovic et al. (2000), suggestions for communicating quality among the project team have been put across based on project quality and value management objectives and includes writing policy statements that show how to comply with end user requirements, collecting the views of end users and subjecting the project to end user inputs at the earlier stages, writing articles and emphasizing on quality in different briefing meetings, explaining quality to the project teams using videos and other materials, creating quality groups, and holding employee sessions to discuss quality.

In addition, it has been proposed that holding status meetings with project teams and end users, offering forums where team members and other participants express their views without being victimized and organizing parties to recognize quality performance provides the strategic direction for communicating quality to the project participants.

A research study by Curkovic et al. (2000) on quality standards shows that to achieve the right quality level, dual performance standards have to be factored into the quality process. The objective is to reduce defects at the first time and implement the right products at the right time. The basis for the argument is that the cost of quality can be prohibitive and ends in the end users getting dissatisfied. Here, the costs of poor quality that are reflected in the end users not getting satisfied include failure costs, hidden costs, prevention costs, and appraisal costs.

Curkovic et al. (2000) note that failure costs have been attributed to the failure of the product to meet the correct product specifications and quality requirements that are classified as internal costs that occur in the context of cost of materials, labour, machine hours, and scrap items. In addition, additional costs arise in rework and assembling of subsequent phases, loss of worker morale, and failure to meet the project schedule, which is one of the core elements in value management.

On the other hand, the cost of usage failure is critical because of the failure to comply with project and product specifications (Curkovic et al. 2000). The rationale is that the costs arise due to the need to attend to end user complaints, which include repairs, replacements, services, and loss of consumer good will. Other related costs include imputed cost of failure that result from damages and legal liabilities, downgrading, and loss of sales due to equipment failure.

Love et al. (2000) argue that additional costs include appraisal costs that arise due to the implementation of a routine quality controls program. The program is designed to provide the managerial function with the ability to control auditing, measurements, and evaluation on the resulting infrastructure on existing levels of the quality of manufactured engineering products. The typical costs that arise because of the failure to factor total quality management into the construction process include the overall data acquisition procedures (Gardiner & Stewart 2000).

Data acquisition costs enable the engineer to determine inward, processes, and inspection costs, the costs incurred when conducting destructive tests, costs incurred when preparing reports and conducting audits, calibration and maintenance of facilities and test instruments, administrative machinery costs, inspection and appraisal testing, production review costs, and appraisal costs, quality engineering, filed evaluation, and process control costs.

It has been established that prevention costs that occur due to failure to factor total quality management as a paradigm for value management with end user involvement at the earlier stages of project implementation leads to a wide range of prevention costs, which could be avoided. Prevention costs need to be identified to determine the cause and the effective methods of countering the effects and the costs from occurring (Gardiner & Stewart 2000).

Empirical evidence points out that additional cost that are categorised into prevention costs include that of engineering quality design, quality planning and organization, produce development, process controls, review of products and analysis, training for quality and failure analysis and trouble , shooting, and testing and research, quality enhancement, and assurance. Besides, preventive costs are incurred in terms of planned adjustments, system staff, and administration, and scientific product development.

It is important to note that when a facility has been constructed and implemented for use, satisfactory quality is not always achieved and marginal costs have to be incurred to make corrections and rework those areas that the product did not meet its expectations. According to Go and Govers (2000), the rationale is to reduce a much as possible failure costs by implementing TQM framework into the value management process that focuses in end user needs, expectations, and earlier involvement. The rationale is to ensure that preventive measures should be factored into the process to avoid later multiple complex failure problems from occurring.

A comprehensive list of additional costs is important for the resident engineer, the project manager, the airport management authority and those responsible for the construction work to determine the best strategies to address end user satisfaction at the best cost product quality. Love et al. (2000) argue that the products include those infrastructure components that are integrated into the design and development of the airport. Costs that are hidden make significant contributions include redesign that occurs due to quality reasons, potential lost sales, process costs that increase to make the products of acceptable quality, defects corrections, product replacements, and changes that occur due to new the new manufacturing of products when they have been rejected.

One of the value management goals is to achieve product quality at the least cost while ensuring that end user satisfaction is achieved (Nadim & Goulding 2010). One area of end user involvement is to model the economic costs with the project engineer and the management authorities concerned with project work that constitute quality costs. It has been illustrated in the economic model that failure costs are zero when the product performs flawlessly and greatest when the product defect is 100%. However, with a product that is 100 % defective, the appraisal and prevention costs are zero and keep increasing as the product tends to perform perfectly.

Within the cost model, it is possible to determine the costs that are incurred when operating within the zone of project improvement when the failure of the project is 100% includes failure costs that are above 70%, prevention costs that are less than 10%, and optimum costs when the model operates on the zone of indifference include failure costs below 50%, and prevention costs within the 10% range.

Researchers such as Love et al. (2000) recommend that of the end user rejects or are dissatisfied with the project; emphasis should be shifted to quality control to bring the project and its components within the conformance range. However, when the project operates within the zone of high appraisal costs, failure costs are usually less than 40% and appraisal costs greater than 50%. Any end user dissatisfaction can be addressed by analysing the costs per defect, conducting a verification of the validity of standards, audit the decisions, and reduce inspection levels.

The quality cost of information has proved to be fundamental in guiding project managers and those end users to contribute positively at the first time to ensure that product quality conforms to end user requirements and the usage of such products in construction work produces work that leads to end user satisfaction.

Curkovic et al. (2000) note that the quality conformance model has different zones reflecting what is required to take corrective action to ensure end user satisfaction and involvement in the construction work to ensure that construction work is done right at the first time. Typically, the quality cost information is important in providing information on avenues that need to be exploited to reduce the costs that are incurred later in error correction. In addition, the costs provide the foundation for making capital budgeting as construction projects are expensive and such an investment decision could enable the project team to avoid sporadic and chronic quality problems as shown in figure 6.

The graph shows the areas that need to be addressed to improve supply related costs and to determine the occurrence of wastes that are inconsistent with end user requirements. According to Curkovic et al. (2000), it provides the framework for determining the systems that introduce redundancy and remove them, establish and evaluate the justification of the distribution of quality costs among the elements used in construction works, decided the right quality planning goals, and establish the source of quality problems. The quality tool enables the project manager to differentiate between the vital few and the trivial many, enable performance appraisal to be done, allocate resources for strategy formulation and implementation, and perform competitive benchmarking.

TQM provides the foundation for end user involvement by advocating psychological ownership of the construction project and enables the project manager to devolve the project to end user inputs and participation. Different models have been developed to enable quality managers and those responsible for collecting end user requirements to implement continuous improvements to enable the integration of quality and value into the project progress (Curkovic et al. 2000).

The end user satisfaction is the key element to focus on here. Different models have been proposed by different authors such as that of Crosby with its 14 steps, which identifies management commitment to inform the project manager and end users of management’s stand on quality, the quality improvement team who are responsible for running the quality program, and quality measurement, which provides the project teams with the ability to conduct an objective evaluation of the design of components used in construction work to take corrective actions.

Here, the cost of quality is used to define the key elements and design characteristics of the project modules and components and the ingredients necessary to integrate and used to achieve project quality. According to Curkovic et al. (2000), Grosby proposed quality awareness, corrective actions, supervisor training, goal setting, zero defects planning, and error cause removal, establishing quality councils, and laying emphasis on quality improvement programs.

Quality control

Go and Govers (2000) denotes quality to be one of the critical aspects of end user satisfaction. In theory and practice, quality is defined by the customer or the end user. Besides, there is a strong link between quality and the cost of products in the market. Researchers agree that people continue to change their perceptions about product quality, which is a concept that has become part of the strategic planning process that requires the entire construction teams to get involved at all stages of infrastructure development life cycle. A brief background on the concept shows that it has shifted through different stages, which include: quality inspection, quality controls, quality assurance, and total quality controls (Go & Govers 2000).

Here, the characteristics of a product are used to define quality in terms of conformance to the desired end user specifications at a cost that is affordable by the customer. The rationale is that quality can have different perceptions such as value based quality where the product is assessed according to the degree of excellence of the product at the customer’s affordable price. Love et al. (2000) contend that manufactured quality is defined simply as the conformance to requirements such as specifications and design. On the other hand, user based quality in based on a definition which captures end user satisfaction when they put the end product to use.

In construction management, quality is difficult to define when applied to products and structures that are designed to fulfill end user needs and expectations, that is because the end product is not only being applied on the end user alone, but includes the characteristics of many products that are integrated together to work as a system to fulfill end user needs and expectations (Curkovic et al. 2000). Because of the wide range of products that are used in an integrated fashion to develop the final product, which is airport construction, quality can be defined with a specialised focus on expectations of the community of end users of the product, airport management authority, construction cost, time, and the time of completion of the project.

The quality control paradigm can be modeled under four basic steps, which include setting standards for ensuring the quality of the product is assured by evaluating the cost, reliability, performance, and the safety of the product. The next step is to appraise performance (Sun 2000). Performance appraisal entails the resident engineer and those in the management undertaking the process of comparing the service being offered, the quality of the products, and the existing standards. The next step in the model is to make accurate and real time corrections of any errors that arise in the process of implementing the project while the execution is ongoing. The last element in the model is to develop strategies for continuous improvements.

The construction of airports depends on a wide range of activities and responsibilities, which make different contributions to project quality. However, it has been established that airport and in general aviation airports do not have expert engineers to test and supervise construction work to determine the quality and acceptability of the resulting construction (Sun 2000). Researchers have suggested that for most aviation airports, it is the responsibility of the resident engineer to reject or accept work that has been done. According to Curkovic et al. (2000), the engineer is the one with the underlying knowledge and skills necessary to execute and manage the projects.

It is important for the resident engineer to be skilled enough to participate in the conversion of end user requirements into detailed design specifications according to drawings based on precise client or end user specifications to avoid the rejection at the end of the project process. It had been established that it is possible to audit the end user requirements during the design and construction process. A thorough understanding of the project progress can be maintained to ensure the project briefing when combined with user requirements leads to a high quality output.

However, the briefing process can be made effective by providing clearly defined end user client requirements, involvement of more participants such as architects, clients, and quantity surveyors, and the airport management authority. Razak Bin Ibrahim et al. (2009) argues that the briefing should also include clear and concise briefing from the client to ensure that fewer modifications are done on the end user requirements in the design and construction phases. Besides, continuous feedback and client briefing improves end user education and ensures realistic time scale construction activities. In addition, the resident engineer is supposed to respond as accurately as possible.

The primary duties of the resident engineer entail working with the project team to ensure value addition that has consistence with end user requirements that leads to their satisfaction when using the resulting airport. A description of the activities of the resident engineer underpins the primary responsibilities that the resident engineer needs to perform to be successful (Gido & Clements 2014). Among the activities are to check and ensure that the resulting construction work is compliant with the plans and specifications of the structures and inform the contractor of those sections or sections that are not compliant.

That is besides performing tests to check for compliance to specifications for all products that are commercially produced and used in the construction work (Razak Bin Ibrahim et al. 2009). Examples include pipes, cement, reinforced concrete, and reinforced steel among others. Besides, the resident engineer should make it a practice to constantly visit the testing laboratory to determine the qualifications of the personnel working there and the quality of the equipment used for specimen testing.

It is important to check whether the tests are done as frequently as recommended in the specifications, witness the tests, and determine when and where the test should be conducted. If the tests are nit indicated and the frequency stated, it is important to conduct new tests to confirm product conformance to the required specifications.

Gardiner and Stewart (2000) note that the responsibility of the resident engineer is to review the certifications and test reports of materials used in the construction works to assess the compliance to minimum specifications by showing the date the tests were performed, the test location, results from the tests, projection specifications, applicable standards, and any action taken if the tested material failed to pass the test. That is in addition to the specification of test price and location along with statistical acceptance procedures and other provisions that allow for reduced payments.

Gardiner and Stewart (2000) argue that the resident engineer should take steps to verify the quality of the equipment used to conduct the tests and be informed on the test specifications. However, if the tests have not been done on the materials, researchers argue that the resident engineer should sanction several tests to be done to verify the quality of the materials before they are used for construction work. In addition, it’s necessary to review the test reports that detail the strategies used to conduct the tests and the results to determine if they conform to the required specifications and make recommendations before the materials are used for construction work. The resident engineer should maintain the file of all the tests, the results, and the recommendations for future use.

Besides, once a piece of construction has been completed, Gardiner and Stewart (2000) argue that the resident engineer should take the responsibility to report the quality of the end product by conducting various inspections that are non-destructive, which include visual, ultrasound, eddy current, thermography, radiography, and magnetic particle among others. However, the level of success and accuracy of the resident engineer’s inspection work depends on the level of human error, completeness of the inspection planning, accuracy of the instruments used, errors due to the techniques used, conscious errors, inadvertent errors, and communication errors.

Implementing the quality system

Several factors have to be considered by the resident engineer and the airport construction management authority when implementing the quality management system to ensure that quality is reflected in the airport construction with the strategic objective of end user satisfaction.

According to Delgado‐Hernandez, Bampton and Aspinwall (2007), the main objectives of using the quality system is to ensure end user focus by engaging those who are responsible for construction and value management to continuously review end user needs and expectations through dialogue, making end users aware of conceptualised changes and new alternations in the construction work, making the airport authority aware of end user needs and expectations, outlining the strategic approaches that could be sued in case the product of design fails to achieve the desired objectives, and engaging in the continual improvement of working environment, services, and products that are used in the construction works to enable better service delivery and end achievement of end user goals and objectives.

Besides, the quality management system enables those responsible for value management to engage in effective and economical use of resources to minimise waste, a repeat of corrective work, and avoidance of unnecessary processes.

However, Curkovic et al. (2000) conducted careful reviews of various strategies and concluded that certain elements were critical to implement for the success of a construction project. The rationale is to exploit the advantage associated with the implementing the quality management system such as assisting the airport management authority towards achieving accreditation, facilitating uniformity in the construction practice, facilitating of training of those responsible for the construction work, eliminate the introduction of important changes in the construction work, and eliminating unnecessary instructions during the construction and implementation work.

In addition, it has been demonstrated that implementing a quality management system in value management in the construction of mega projects has shown better productivity with the end users of the airport, higher and improved customer flow, better and improved security, better employee morale, effective cost management, defect elimination, improved and innovative processes, and the ultimate end user value and satisfaction. The image is bound to improve with the users of the airport, supplier relationships can be enhanced, higher levels of user satisfaction and commitment, effective organization, and better management of work.

Curkovic et al. (2000) argue that end user involvement and satisfaction can be achieved by redefining and structuring the re-engineering of critical construction processes to achieve the desired quality goals and objectives. If the quality goals and objectives are effectively achieved, they provide the framework and drivers of successfully completed projects, which leads to end user satisfaction. However, the main drivers of success include management commitment, analytical presentation of end user needs and expectations, use of quantifiable end user objectives, establishment of sufficient resources to complete the project, and earlier involvement of the people and the project teams in the re-engineering process.

Research Methodology

The goal of this study was to establish the end-user involvement in value management of mega construction projects to ensure their satisfaction. Mega construction projects such as airports are costly and time consuming. The approach used in the construction should be assessed and evaluated to determine the best options to proceed with construction work that adds value, quality, ensures completion on time, and fulfills the technical functions to satisfy the end user.

In this study, the involvement of the end user at the earlier stages of the project was investigated to determine how such an involvement could lead to better quality project completed within schedule and in compliance with specifications by investigating the history of value management, how to align end user with value with end user requirements, integrate value with risk management, investigate end user value deployment function, establish the value context for modeling end user involvement, and model end user involvement with total quality management for end user satisfaction.

Qualitative and Quantitative paradigms

According to Fellows and Liu (2015), the research paradigm was used to capture end user involvement in value management that leads to their satisfaction was based on both qualitative and quantitative methods. The rationale was to gain familiarity with the strategies of integrating value and quality into the construction work to achieve the overall objective of end user satisfaction (Daymon & Holloway 2010). Besides, the study was used to portray the real characteristics of the underlying factors, determine the associations among value and quality management, end user involvement, project quality, time, schedule, and end user satisfaction.

According to Marlow (2010) notes that an evaluation of the research paradigm showed that it was consistent of various components that could be categorised into descriptive and analytical. The rationale is that the researcher did not have any control over the variables that were investigated in the study because of the inability to control end user needs and expectations and mainly was to report on the findings of the causal relationships.

Here, a survey was utilized as the mechanism for data collection. Gratton and Jones (2010) notes that besides, the analytical component was achieved by analysing related literature on the areas of study. On the other hand, some elements of the applied research were used to establish solutions to the problems experienced in construction projects such as delays, poor quality results, and reworks, costs incurred due to construction errors, failure to fulfill end user needs and expectations leading to their disappointments, and failure to meet the recommended standards for airport construction.

In summary, both qualitative and quantitative paradigms were applied as the best mechanisms to collect the required data for analysis to answer the research questions and meet the research objectives. Tashakkori and Teddlie (2010) argue that the underlying research paradigm was based on a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. The qualitative research was done by reviewing relevant literature and the subjective assessment of attitudes of end users, behaviour and opinions of the participants. However, conceptual and empirical research was not used in the study because the methods depend on the generation of abstract ideas to develop new concepts and enhance existing ones.

While it is true that the idea of end user involvement and its relationship with end user satisfaction has not widely been investigated in academia in the areas of construction management, the paradigm has widely been studied in information systems development. A shift in the application of the concept in construction management is a new idea that fits well into the empirical research paradigm. Empirical research fits well into the qualitative and quantitative paradigms to gather relevant data at first hand, from the data source, and stimulating end user participation to collect data for analysis.

Research design

Lord and Mannering (2010) note that various research designs were evaluated in the study to determine the most appropriate to address the research problems and achieve the research objectives. Among the candidate research designs evaluate were the conclusive and exploratory. In each case of the designs, the research objectives and research problem were evaluated to determine the best approach that could fit well with this research.

In theory, exploratory research is used to unearth the reasons for the occurrence of phenomena based on hypothetical suggestions of the solutions to the problems to know the unknown. According to Lord and Mannering (2010), it is in addition to determining the alternative courses of action to take achieve the study objectives. In summary, exploratory research aims are achieved by defining the problem, courses of action, alternatives, isolating key variables, and developing an insight into the problem. On the other hand, conclusive research is conducted in a more formal setting using large representative samples (Marlow 2010).

Descriptive research provides the researcher with the answers on who, what, when, and how the subject under investigation behaves in certain circumstances. Here, descriptive research is based on prior knowledge on the subjective being investigated and exploratory research is based in hypothesis. In this study, some aspects of descriptive research as well as exploratory research were factored to address the research objectives.

However, the research included the elements of cross sectional study approaches because such an approach is used in an environment where surveys can be conducted from a sample of a large population such as end users, project teams and managers, airport construction authorities, and for the fact that it is economical and requires less time as compared with other methods (Marlow 2010). The key factors considered in data collection were the means of obtaining data, availability of a skilled researcher, time devoted to the research, the cost factor of conducting the research, and the methods used to collect meaningful data.

The elements in the study which constitute the universe or population were considered in the inquiry. The population consisted of end users of the airport infrastructure and appropriate methods of collecting data from the participant or the population.

Target population and sample size

According to Marlow (2010), the target population consisted of different categories of people including the end users who were the project manager, team members, end users who consisted of customers, pilots, airport employees, and the resident engineer who served the role of the project manager/value manager. The roles of project manager/value manager were sued interchangeably but as per the research paper, the project manager was responsible for value management.

The following steps were applied to calculate the sample size from the given population of 650 participants. A population of 650 and a Margin of Error (Confidence Interval) and the margin of error of +/- 5% were used at a confidence level between 90% and 95% interval. A standard deviation that was expected to occur when the data was analysed was 5.

• ((1.96)² x.5(.5)) / (.05)²
• (5.075 x.25) /.0025
• 0.5075 /.0025=203 (sample size)

Findings, Analysis and Discussion

Sample Characteristics

In order to investigate the impact of end user involvement in value management of mega construction projects on end user satisfaction, with a specialized focus on airport construction work, a questionnaire survey was conducted with 650 questionnaires issued and a response of 203 valid questionnaires collected. The results shown below were obtained by analyzing the questionnaires. Here, the percentage responses were collected and tabulated as shown in table 1. The analysis consisted of the educational levels, single or married, monthly income, and daily incomes.

Table 1: Characteristics of the sample (N=203).

Table 1 is a summary of the respondents’ characteristics that were factored into the questionnaire survey. A total of 203 participants returned the questionnaires in this study in all, showing a high reliability of the responses. Of the respondents, 53.2% were male and 47.8% were female. According to the distribution of age, it is evident that 25.6% of the respondents were under the age of 21, 27.1% of the respondents were in the range of 21-30 years, 24.1% of the respondents were in the range of 31–40 years that is almost similar to the same number of participants in the range of 41-50 years, which consists of 23.2%.

It is evident form the table that 59 participants had an educational background of high school or below, which was 29.1% of the entire sample. The bachelor degree accounts for 24.6% and those with a master’s degree were 26.6% followed by those with a doctorate degree and above, constituting 19.7%. The participants’ marriage information shows that 49.3% of the sample is married, with those who are married constituting a smaller percentage than those who are married, making 50.7% of the entire sample.

With regard to the monthly income before taxation of the respondents, it is evident that the monthly income which is under $3000 is made of 20.7%, the monthly income in the range of 3000 $ and 5000 $ consists of 22.7%. Besides, the percent of monthly income between 5000 $ and 8000 $ is more than the others, consisting of 27.1%. Besides, the monthly income of 8000-10000 $ is composed of 21.7%. In addition, it is evident that the percent of monthly income beyond 10000 $ only accounts for 7.9% of the income of those in the sample bracket.

Besides the basic information obtained from the participants, it was possible to collect data and information on the frequency with which the participants communicate among themselves as shown in table 1 on the elements of value and how to achieve them. First of all, the time to communicate within the team members in a period on various issues of value management occurs once a day, accounting for 21.2% of the total participants. In addition, the value manager is evident that communicates with all the people within the project team to ensure that the value elements are properly integrated within the project construction team. Here, it is possible to communicate value as the project progresses with the team members several times per week, which accounts for 52.7% of the participants. The part of participant who communicates with team members once each week accounts for 26.1%.

Descriptive diversity descriptive statistics

Questionnaires were administered on the respondents who provided answers according to the objectives of the investigation. The first group was to provide a response on whether they understand the history and context of value management and the impact of end user involvement in value management during the project inception and implementation phases. The study consisted of 3 statements, the history of value management, the principles of value management, and the importance of value management.

The team members were issued with questionnaires to determine the commitment to involving end users due to the position they occupy in the construction work and their responsibilities within the construction teams besides their functional expertise in terms of knowledge and skills construction work and in value management who were willing to participate in study. The team members had similar organizational experience.

The 5-point Likert scale was used to measure the responses to each question for each statement, which were later checked in terms of the mean values, standard deviation, and normal distribution of the responses using the descriptive statistical analysis of the resulting data. The results are shown in the following table and each number is uniquely represented according to: 1-strongly disagrees, 2-disgaree, 3- neither agrees nor disagree, 4-agree and 5-strongly agree.

Table 2: Descriptive statistics on history of value management.

According to results in table 2, the mean value of three items measure the responses on how conversant the construction teams were with the history of value management, principles of value management, and importance of value as applied in the airport construction work for end user satisfaction based on their earlier involvement. On the history of value management, end user involvement, an average score of 3.9 was obtained showing an increase in end user satisfaction, with a standard deviation of 0.797 and a skewness of -0.715.

The negative skewness shows that most of those working in airport construction were conversant with the positive impact of value management on end user satisfaction and strongly support the inclusion of end users at the earlier stages and implementation phases of project work. End users include the pilots, ground service men, and technical staff who use vehicles and aeroplane responsible for the movement of people among different destinations.

On the application of the principles of value management, a mean of 3.961 showed a strong commitment to the use of the principles, which include time, cost, quality, and consistence of project work with end user requirements and satisfaction. Value can be maximized here in terms of giving informed and skilled inputs and use of minimal resources based on an earlier user involvement. Hiring people with the right skills, using the customer value chain system, integrating value addition activities into the project work and use of minimum inputs for construction to produce optimum outputs provides the foundation for value management and end user satisfaction.

The importance of value management is seen in the context of a mean of 3.931, a standard deviation of 0.853, and a skewness of -0.978 if the end users involvement is captured earlier. The kurtosis has a positive value showing that the variable can be manipulated by getting end user involvement at the implementation phases to produce a given output end user satisfaction. Project teams, which consist of end users, airport management authority, resident engineer, and construction teams view value management as a tool for achieving project objectives and other value management activities.

The skewness of all the three items is below 0, indicating that the scores a left skew. However, the statistical skewness and kurtosis values were less than 1, suggesting a normal distribution of the three items. In conclusion, it shows that end user involvement at earlier stages leads to normal or skewed distributions, implying that such an involvement has a positive effect on the end user satisfaction.

Managing value in construction work and meeting value objectives

Managing value is a strategic approach used by value managers to ensure the best project alternatives are achieved at the earlier stages of project work to be consistent with end user requirements. That is achieved by use of effective value integration and management progresses. However, the impact of the effects of value management with end user involvement on end user satisfaction at the earlier and implementation stages shows a mean of 4.128, while the application of value management in each stage and its impact on end user satisfaction has a mean score of 3.675, and a mean score of 4.030 for adopting end user value system into the value management system.

A mean score of 3.810 shows that the project value system needs to be factored to create a positive impact on end user satisfaction with the involvement of end users at the earlier and implementation phases of construction work occur.

According to the results in table 2, value management means that members of the construction team focus on outputs and have similar thinking in terms of their personal values in implementing value. The results show a mean score of 4.128, followed a mean score of 3.675, which shows that team members are aware of value and how to integrate the value elements into the construction work to obtain the functional fulfillment of the resulting products for end user satisfaction.

Besides, it shows that members of the team are similar in terms of their attitude towards the project value. The next element shows that members of the team have similar thoughts in terms of the common goals of increasing product utility, lowering operating costs, and optimum design considerations. The mean score of 3.810 shows that the project value system is a factor that is given strong consideration when implementing the projects to be relevant and consistent with the end user needs and expectations so that the end result lead to satisfaction.

The skewness of all the elements is below 0 while the skewness of involving end users in the Stages of value management is above 0, indicating that the other elements are skewed to the left while value system element is skewed to the right. However, the skewness statistics and kurtosis are statistical measures that are less than 1, suggesting that the distribution of the score of these 4 items is normal.

Table 3: Managing value in construction work.

Value objectives are important because it is through those objectives that value can be achieved that reflect end user need and expectations. Meeting value objectives is achieved by investigating how end user involvement at the earlier stages of project execution leads to the compliance to the budget. It enables the project manager to identify those points that can be used for value optimisation.

The impact of end user involvement at the earlier project implementation phases and how that leads to end user satisfaction based on effective earlier team involvement, effective leadership, managing the project budget, effective communication, and reliable project functionalities. The mean value, standard deviation, and skewness, and the Kurtosis as summarized in table 4 below provide empirical evidence of the positive impact of end user involvement in project implementation on end user satisfaction.

Table 4: Meeting value objectives.

According to the results contained in table 4, it is evident that that meeting the value objectives is one strategy for determining the earlier end user involvement and it means that team members are skilled and knowledgeable in working towards meeting the value objectives to ensure end user satisfaction. The mean score is 3.813, followed by the minimizing the life cycle costs that has a mean of 3.650, which mean that members in the team view it as one of the elements of ensuring commitment towards achieving the value objectives.

A mean of 3.670 suggests that value addition occurs at every stage of project progress and that is done by capturing end user requirements to integrate value that is reflected in meeting end user needs and expectations. A mean score of 3.801 implies that the project team members acknowledge the importance of getting briefed on various value items and how to implement them to achieve the value objectives. The skewness and kurtosis statistics value are less than 1, suggesting that the distribution of the score of these four items can be regarded as normally distributed.

Integrating value with risk management

Value and risk management are important variables to integrate into the project to ensure project are done correct at the first time. Knowledge sharing is composed of 3 items. In order to check the mean value, standardized deviation, and normality of these four statements, the descriptive statistics analysis was conducted on these four elements. The results are shown in the following table.

Table 5: Integrating value and risk management.

According to the results of table 5, all of these three items have mean value around 3.8, indicating a relatively high level of agreement with identification of risk factors, end user involvement in risk identification and treatment by sharing risk information among team members. The 3.808 means that members of this team share their knowledge on risk management and how to integrate it into the value management process, the 3.852 is the highest followed by the 3.818, which means that the teams share their functional experience on risk and value management know-how within others on the team.

The mean score of 3.852 means that members in this team share work reports on risk and value management. The skewness of all items is below 0, indicating that a left skewness scores. All the skewness statistics and kurtosis statistical values are less than 1, indicating that the scores of the three statements show a normal distribution.

User involvement in quality function deployment

The impact of end user involvement in quality function deployment shows a positive effect on the outcome of project on end user satisfaction. Here, value management of the project is based on the four items that were used to investigate the effects on end user satisfaction as shown in table 6. Involvement in quality function deployment is composed of 4 items. In order to understand the mean, standardized deviation, and normality of these 4 items, the descriptive statistics are summarized in the following table.

Table 6: User involvement in quality function deployment descriptive statistics.

According to results in table 6, the use of involvement in quality function deployment reduces project schedule that the project team works to achieve the highest quality because of the mean value of 3.108, followed by the mean of 3.084, where the end user product attributes are captured. The rest of the statements such as use of quality tools and convert wants into products have 3.039 and 3.074 scores respectively. The results indicate that the participants the team’s effectiveness is neutral because of a mean of 3. All the skewness statistics and kurtosis statistics values are less than 1, indicating that the scores of the four statements are normally distributed.

Communication quality with value teams

Communication is a quality that enables the team members and end users share the project values that lead to end user satisfaction when implemented appropriately. Table 7 summarizes the mean, standard deviation, and normal distribution of the responses on the question. According, the results, the statement on the effectiveness of communication among the project teams and the management imply that communication is timely because the highest mean value is 3.69.

Table 7: Communication quality descriptive statistics.

Here, accurate communication occurs among team members and has the mean value of 3.507, indicating that participants agree with the opinion that the frequency, times, and accurate communication on value management issues, end user contributions, and other project value elements are important. The skewness of all 3 items is below 0, indicating that these scores are skewed to the left. However, the statistics on skewness and kurtosis shows a value that is less than 1, suggesting that the distribution of the score of the three items can be regarded as normal.

Quality control

Quality control is an aspect of value management that when captured in the earlier stages and during the implementation project stages yields positive results of end user satisfaction. Quality control is composed of conformance to standards, reliability, and safety. The following table is a summary of the mean, standard deviation, and normal distribution of the variables. The skewness of all three items is below 0, indicating that these scores are skewed to the left. However, the skewness statistics and kurtosis statistics value are less than 1, suggesting that the distribution of the score of these three items can be regarded as normally distributed.

Table 8: Quality control descriptive statistics.

Reliability Analysis

Reliability analysis was used as an important index to evaluate the quality of the questionnaire and its responses and the stability of the questions. Reliability evaluated based on the result of the measurements and the repeatability of the results, which shows the difference between the data and the average value of the questionnaire. Typically, the research used internal consistency as an index often used in various research areas to show the homogeneity among the observed items.

The internal consistency was measured using Cronbach’s coefficient, which is any value that lies between 0 and 1. A value close to 1 indicates high reliability and most values generally occur within the 0.70 range, which is acceptable for reliability purposes. However, if the value is 0.60, it is said to show a low reliability and the results have to be revised. The Corrected Item-Total Correlation (CICT) was used to evaluate each item for validity and reliability and for the results to be reliable; it should have a CICT value of 0.5.

Composition of the respondents

The Cronbach’s Alpha value for the academic qualifications and knowledge of the respondents, which qualify them participate in the study such as those who to do the project work in managing value according to end user requirements were evaluated. The project specifications with the goal of fulfilling end user satisfaction were 0.742, which was within the acceptable range 0.7. By inspecting the CICT, it was established that each item had a CICT value that were above 0.5, indicating that no problems could be experienced with a low correlation among items used in measuring the behaviour of value management variables.

Table 9: Reliable knowledge diversity.

The Cronbach’s Alpha value for reliable educational skills and knowledge was 0.754, which is above the minimum requirement of 0.7, indicating that the items measuring knowledge and skills on value management with end user involvement was reliable because it showed strong internal consistency.

Table 10: Evolution of value management.

An inspection of the CICT established that each of the four items have CICT that was above 0.5, showing that no problem could occur in case of a low correlation among the items used in the variable.

Value management in construction work

The Cronbach’s Alpha value for evaluating the quality of the questionnaires in measuring value management in construction work was 0.814, which was a relatively high level of reliability. It showed that several items were used to measure the internal consistency including value context in relation to end user involvement and end user satisfaction, capturing end user value system, and project value system. The validity and reliability of the measures are shown in table 10 below.

Table 11: Value management in construction work.

Meeting value objectives

The Cronbach’s Alpha value for meeting value objectives were 0.795, which is above the minimum requirement of 0.7, indicating that the items measuring the variable showed internal consistent and reliability. An inspecting of the CICT showed three items with a CICT above 0.5. The interpretation was that no problem could be experienced if a low correlation among the measurement items was seen.

Table 12: Measuring value objectives.

Integrated value and risk management

The Cronbach’s Alpha value for integrated value and risk management was 0.745. As a relatively medium level reliability value, it also indicates that the 4 items measuring the variable showed significant internal consistency and reliability. By inspecting the CICT, it was established that the 4 items had CICT values above 0.5, indicating that no problematic could occur even with a low correlation among measurement items.

Table 13: Integrated value and risk management.

User involvement in functional quality management

The Cronbach’s Alpha value for communication quality is 0.739, which is above the minimum requirement of 0.7, indicating that the items measuring communication quality are reliable. By inspecting the CICT, it was established that the CICT values were above 0.5, indicating that no problematic could occur with low correlation among items used in the measurement.

Table 14: User involvement in functional quality management.

Correlation analysis

Correlation between end user involvement in value management to determine the impact on end user satisfaction was done and the results shown on table 15 below. Based on the results, earlier involvement in construction work of mega project showed a strong project correlation value of 0.761 in either positive or negative correlation, which was significant at the 0.05 level. As correlation value above 0.39 represents very weak correlations and those above 0.4and 0.7 represent moderate and strong correlations respectively.

The findings show that higher end user involvement leads to better project value, which leads to better end user satisfaction. In other words, when the end user gets involved in value management of the construction project, the results are better design quality, timely completion of the project, user need and expectations addressed, and error free structures.

Table 15: Correlation between end user involvement in value management and end user satisfaction.

Correlation value management and end user satisfaction

In order to check the correlation between end user involvement and end user satisfaction, a correlation analysis was conducted and the results shown in table 15 indicate a positive relationship at a significant level of 0.05 having a correlation coefficient of 0. 661. Analytical results show that a correlation coefficient that is below 0.3 shows a weak relationship among the variables.

Table 16: correlation between value management and end user satisfaction.

Importance of value management and end user satisfaction

Table 16 shows the effects of value management on the end user satisfaction. A correlation analysis was conducted and the results shown in table 16 indicate a correlation value of 0.657 between value management and end user satisfaction. It does not show whether the correlation is negative or positive. However, in each case, the effect on the change of one variable is strong on the outcome of the other variable. According to the results, the importance of value management is significant and positively related to end user satisfaction, with correlation value of 0.457 and significant at 0.01 levels. As correlation value between 0.4 and 0.6 represents medium correlation, the results indicate that importance of value management and end user satisfaction is strong.

Table 17: Correlation between end user involvement in value context and end user satisfaction.

End user value system and end user satisfaction

To assess the correlation between knowledge sharing and virtual team effectiveness, a scatter lot was created. A correlation analysis was conducted to confirm the relationship between knowledge sharing and virtual team effectiveness. The results are shown in table 4-4 below. According to the results, knowledge sharing is significantly related to virtual team effectiveness, with correlation of 0.381, and significance value of 0.000, which is below 0.05.

Table 18: Correlation between involvement in value system and end user satisfaction.

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Involvement in value system and end user satisfaction

In order to check the correlation between communication quality and virtual team effectiveness, a scatter plot was created. As following, a correlation analysis was conducted to confirm the relationship between communication quality and virtual team effectiveness. The results are shown in table 4-5 below. According to the results, communication quality is significantly related to virtual team effectiveness, and the correlation value is 0.438, with significance value of 0.00, which is above 0.05.

Table 19: Correlation between involvement in project value system and end user satisfaction.

Involvements in project value system and end user satisfaction

In order to check the correlation between project value system and end user satisfaction, a correlation analysis was conducted and the results are shown in table 20 below with correlation value of 0.508 and significant at 0.01 levels. As correlation value between 0.4 and 0.6 represents medium correlation.

Table 20: Correlation between involvement in functional quality management and end user satisfaction.

Regression analysis of end user involvement and their satisfaction

Regression analysis is used to evaluate the impact of independent variables on dependent variable. More specifically, regression analysis is normally used to understand how the change of independent variable can affect the change of dependent variables. The correlation analysis above indicates a strong relationship among the end user involvement in value management, principles of value management, value in project work, value context, end user value systems, project value systems, value objectives, reduction the life cycle costs, communication quality, value addition, project briefing, integrated risk and value management, quality function deployment and total quality management, and business process re-engineering.

The data items in table 20 are the explanatory variables and the explained variable of the complex correlation coefficient, the coefficient of determination, the adjustment coefficient and the standard error of the regression equation. According to the table, all of the variables can be used for goodness of fit test. And for the equation has 1 explanatory variables, the analyse results should be referenced to determine coefficient, that the coefficient of determination (0.581) is more than 0.5, so it can be thought about the goodness of fit is good, and the interpretation of variables can be explained a larger part by the model. The adjusted R square is 0.459, indicating that the independent variables of functional diversity, deep level diversity, mutual trust, knowledge sharing, communication quality showed a 45.9% of the variance of virtual team effectiveness.

Table 21: Model Summary ^b

The meanings of the data items in table 21 are the variation source, the sum of the squares of the difference, the freedom, the mean square and the regression equation of significant test of F statistic’s value of observation and probability p. It can be seen that the total sum of the variables is 129.048, the sum of squares of regression and the mean square sum are 36.242 and 6.040 respectively, and the remaining sum of squares and mean square sum are 92.806 and 0.474 respectively.

Table 22: ANOVA^a

ANOVA test

An analysis of the results tabulated on table 23 shows the impact of earlier end user involvement in value management has on end user satisfaction. One of the tabulated variables can be done a significant test of regression equation. If significant level, ɑ is 0.05, due to the probability p values close to 0, less than significance level ɑ, we should refuse to regression equation significance test of the null hypothesis, and think that the regression coefficients are not 0 at the same time, and the linear relationship between the explained variable and the explanatory variables is significant, which can establish a linear model.

Table 23: Coefficients ^a

By summarizing table 23, it is possible to see the partial regression coefficients, the standard error of the partial regression coefficient, the standard partial regression coefficient, the regression coefficient of the t test, and the corresponding value of probability p in connection with the research variables tabulated in table 23.

According to the table and the analytical results, a significant test of the regression coefficients, the probability p values of usefulness regression coefficients, and the significance t-test are less than the significance level ɑ of 0.05, indicating the strong linear relationships with the explanatory variables to be significant.

It is evident that value management has a probability p of the regression coefficient with a significance t-test of 0.003, which is less than the significant level ɑ of 0.05. It shows the significance of the strength of the linear relationship with the explanatory variables. On the other hand, the regression coefficient of 0.334 was observed, which shows that the end user satisfaction due to their involvement in project value management increased by 1 point, and that of the end user value systems improved by 0.334.

For the variable of Involvement in value context, it is evident from the table that the probability p of the regression coefficient on the significance t-test is 0.033, which is less than the significant level, ɑ of 0.05, indicating that the linear relationship with the Involvement in value context of end users has a positive effect on end user satisfaction. The rationale is that coefficient is.22, which shows that the end user involvement in value management leads to end user satisfaction.

The next variable subjected to the regression analysis was end user involvement in integrated risk and value management as a vital component that is applied on value management of mega projects with an impact on their satisfaction. It is evident from the tabulated results that the probability p of the regression coefficient is significant on a t-test of 0.00, which is less than the significance level, ɑ, of 0.05. It implies that a linear relationship with the explanatory variables of integrated risk and value management is significant. The regression coefficient was 0.473, which shows that the end user satisfaction could increase by 1 point if end user involvement is factored into the integrated risk and value management process.

Quality function deployment is a variable that Then for the variable of knowledge sharing, we can see that the probability p value of the regression coefficient significance t-test is 0.00, which is less than the significant level ɑ (0.05), indicating that the linear relationship with the explanatory variables is significant. What’s more, the regression coefficient was 0.38, which shows that the functional diversity increased by 1 point, the virtual team effectiveness of team work would improve 0.38.

For the total quality management variable, it is evident that earlier end user involvement leads to better quality control, continuous quality improvement end other aspects of total quality management that leads to better quality products. The probability p value of the regression coefficient significance on a t-test is 0.027, which is less than the significant level, ɑ, of 0.05, which shows that a linear relationship that occurs among the explanatory variables has a significant effect. The regression coefficient was 0.227, which shows that the end user satisfaction increased by one point and the quality of the resulting project could increase by a factor of 0.227.

A regression analysis of end user involvement in quality control shows the probability p value of the regression coefficient on the t-test significance is 0.00, which is less than the significant level, ɑ, of 0.05. That shows a linear relationship with the explanatory variables used is significant. The regression coefficient was 0.517, which shows that end user satisfaction with project design features by 1 point, and that could improve the end user satisfaction by improve 0.517.

Analysis of interview responses

Interviews were conducted to collect the responses from various participants on the impact of end user involvement in value management in the construction of airports, one of the particular kinds of mega projects on end user satisfaction. The participants were in this case end users, resident engineer, one member of the airport management authority, and the value engineer.

History of value management

On the history and rationale of value management and its impact on end user satisfaction, it was noted from the interview responses which included interviewees such as the project manager, one official of the airport authority, and one end user that value management is a system that is being integrated into the construction industry. The responses showed that value management emerged with the aim of adding value into the project.

The development of value management as a concept to apply for best practice in the construction industry gained momentum because it could enable the project managers and those responsible for the project development to add value into the project phases that could help reduce the project costs, time required to compete project deliverables, and ensure that high quality projects were achieved. The rationale was that value management enabled the project manager and those responsible for working on construction projects to develop standards by enabling the use of structured approaches to value management.

The rationale was to ensure end user satisfaction by using appropriate tools to capture end user needs and expectations and amalgamate them into the project at the inception and implementation phases to improve project value, project outcomes, and be consistent with the business objectives.

The drivers of value management, which include cost, worth, and function provide the rationale to integrate value in the development and implementation of projects that provide the design satisfaction, which implies that the infrastructure must be designed and developed to meet the needs of the end users.

The overall importance of value management in the context of end user satisfaction was investigated and the responses were that such an approach could help the project manager and his team to remove those factors that lead to a poor quality project and which do not perform as per the end user needs and expectations. The goal is end user satisfaction.

Principles of value management

On the principles of value management, the respondents agreed that the principles provide the foundation on which end users get involved to generate value. Better value leads to end user satisfaction because of the functional quality of a product. Besides, the principles provide the foundation upon which project resources time, cost, skills, energy, environment, and land are applied in the best way to achieve high quality projects.

It also enables the project manager to hire the best skilled and knowledgeable employees work on projects with the aim of achieving better outcomes. However, the most important aspect here is to involve users at the earlier stages of project inception and implementation. Earlier involvement enables the project manager or the resident engineer to conduct the preliminaries necessary together the requirements by creating a workshop to identify the end user value systems and align it with the project mission and visions statements. Once the process is through, it is possible to decide on whether to carry on with the project.

Besides, the principles provide the framework for conducting workshops with the end users in a briefing workshop and enable them to build the project team consisting of the structural engineer, project manager, designer, service engineer, resident engineer, and the airport management authority that understand what should be done.

The specification on the objectives to be achieved to meet end user needs and expectations and specify the end user needs that should be factored into the client requirements. In addition, the process calls on the project manager to work with the project teams to develop the project details to ensure that the project is implemented according to user needs and expectations. In all these, the project orientation, diagnostic, workshop, and implementation phases provide the framework for implementing projects according to the inputs from the end users.

In summary, end user involvement is evidently the best approach to manage value at each stage of project development and implementation, which leads to better end user satisfaction.

Managing value in construction work

The responses on managing value in construction work show that the end users could be given the framework to provide their inputs at the earlier phases of project work and their inputs could be used to evaluate various alternatives to arrive at the most appropriate design to adopt. In that context, the requirements could be translated to meet the end user needs and expectations. The project manager and the project team get involved to ensure that value is maintained and managed at every stage of the project life cycle. The objective is to develop a successful project that reflects the end user requirements.

The key elements that are focused on include the value context with end user involvement and its connection with end user satisfaction, end user value system and the planning stage, the project value system and how to address the value objectives.

Integrated value and risk management

The respondents were asked to provide their answers on risk management when factored with end user involvement in value management and the resulting effect on end user satisfaction. The responses showed that once the end users provide their requirements, the project manager and project team create the foundation for determining those risks and uncertainties that affect the project quality and resulting value and endeavour to work the project right in the first place.

Risk is identified earlier because the end user requirements have already been captured and enables the project manager to ameliorate those risks that happen within the project at earlier stages. End user involvement enables the project manager to profile those risks and uncertainties that happen within the project to avoid the cumulative impact of those risks.

User Involvement in Quality Function Deployment

Responses from the participants on the end user involvement in quality function deployment showed that the project manager and the end users with the project team could get involved in the management of value to achieve the desired project functionality that meets the expected outcomes. Quality function deployment is based on the requirements of the house of quality for creating a framework to determine how well construction work fits into the end user requirements and how to fulfill them. The focus on end user requirements could be done from the users’ perspectives after the project has been discussed and is on the implementation stage.

The responses showed that because the approach was customer driven, it was possible to create an environment to capture the requirements and factor them into the design and development of the project. In addition, the respondents showed that factoring those requirements using the value management framework could enable the completion of the project in time, according to specifications, with the desired quality, and ensure continuous improvements as the construction work progressed an interactive manner.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the impact of end user involvement in value management to ensure their satisfaction showed a net positive effect based on the qualitative research of a literature review, and quantitative analysis of the responses from the questionnaires. An investigation of the history of value management, meeting value objectives, managing value in construction work, integrated value and risk management, and end user involvement in quality function deployment constituted the study objectives. The results showed that an increase in end user satisfaction could be achieved for each objective when investigated in the context of end user involvement at the earlier stages and implementation phases of the airport construction project.

For the history of development of value management, it is critical to note a gap in knowledge on end user involvement was filled in this study based on the principles of value management. The rationale was that the structured and systematic approach to value management was based on the collaboration of systems, processes, and products and developed as the best practise for construction work with the underpinning principles of value management and associated importance. Here, the effects were that the product, cost, quality, time, performance, and functionalities were consistent with the end user requirements.

The management of value in construction work that involved end user at the earlier and implementation stages resulted in project outcomes that were satisfying to the end users. Value management involved the logical application of value with end users at the inception and implementation stages besides being applied at every stage of project implementation. The certainty of the results were also drawn on the strategies used to achieve the value objectives by determining the right project attributes to use to develop the right performance evaluation criteria, and the strategies to work with.

In addition, risk management when integrated with value management was strategically used to determine how to ameliorate risks when they happen to ensure the project remained in course by avoiding wastes and other project related uncertainties. The quality function deployment was further integrated into the value management paradigm with end user involvement to ensure their satisfaction with the resulting quality of the airport construction project. The results showed that end user involvement skewed the results towards the left or the right showing that when end users were factored at the earlier and implementation phases, the resulting project was consistent with their needs and expectations, leading to their satisfaction. WORD COUNT: 27, 520

References

Cambraia, F B, Saurin, T A & Formoso, C T 2010, ‘Identification, analysis and dissemination of information on near misses: A case study in the construction industry’, Safety Science, vol. 1, no. 48, pp. 91-99.

Chan, A P C , Scott, D & Chan, A P L 2004, ‘Factors affecting the success of a construction project’, Journal of construction engineering and management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 23.

Chan, A P, Chan, D W, Chiang, Y H, Tang, B S., Chan, E H & Ho, K S 2004, ‘Exploring critical success factors for partnering in construction projects’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 12, no. 120, pp. 188-198.

Chen, P, Qiang, M & Wang, J N 2009, ‘Project management in the Chinese construction industry: Six-case study’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 10, no. 135, pp. 1016-1026.

Chen, W T, Chang, P Y, & Huang, Y H 2010, ‘Assessing the overall performance of value engineering workshops for construction projects’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 5, no. 28, pp. 514-527.

Cronin, J J, Brady, M K. & Hult, G T M 2000, ‘Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments’, Journal of retailing, vol. 2, no. 76, pp. 193-218.

Curkovic, S, Melnyk, S, Handfield, R B & Calantone, R 2000, ‘Investigating the linkage between total quality management and environmentally responsible manufacturing’, Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 4, no. 47, pp. 444-464.

Davis, K 2014, ‘Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 2, no. 32, pp. 189-201.

Daymon, C & Holloway, I 2010, Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications, Routledge, London.

Delgado‐Hernandez, D J, Bampton, K E & Aspinwall, E 2007, ‘Quality function deployment in construction’, Construction Management and Economics, vol. 6, no. 25, pp. 597-609.

Fellows, R F & Liu, A M 2015, Research methods for construction. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Gardiner, P D & Stewart, K 2000, ‘Revisiting the golden triangle of cost, time and quality: the role of NPV in project control, success and failure’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 4, no. 18, pp. 251-256.

Gido, J & Clements, J 2014, Successful project management, Cengage Learning, New York.

Go, F M & Govers, R 2000, ‘Integrated quality management for tourist destinations: a European perspective on achieving competitiveness’, Tourism Management, vol. 1, no. 21, pp. 79-88.

Gratton, C & Jones, I 2010, Research methods for sports studies. Taylor & Francis, New York.

Kerzner, H R 2013, Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Kim, S G 2010, ‘Risk performance indexes and measurement systems for mega construction projects’, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 4, no. 16, pp. 586-594.

Leung, M Y, Ng, S T & Cheung, S O 2002,’ Improving satisfaction through conflict stimulation and resolution in value management in construction projects’, Journal of Management in Engineering, vo. 2, no. 18, pp. 68-75.

Lindlof, T R & Taylor, B C 2010, Qualitative communication research methods, Sage, New York.

Love, P E., Li, H, Irani, Z & Faniran, O 2000, ‘Total quality management and the learning organization: a dialogue for change in construction’, Construction Management & Economics, vol. 3, no. 18, pp. 321-331.

Lord, D & Mannering, F 2010, ‘The statistical analysis of crash-frequency data: a review and assessment of methodological alternatives’, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 5, no. 44, pp. 291-305.

Marlow, C 2010, Research methods for generalist social work. Cengage Learning, New York.

Nadim, W & Goulding, J S 2010, ‘Offsite production in the UK: the way forward? A UK construction industry perspective’, Construction innovation, vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 181-202.

Ogunlana, S O 2010, ‘Beyond the ‘iron triangle’: Stakeholder perception of key performance indicators (KPIs) for large-scale public sector development projects’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 3, no. 28, pp. 228-236.

Purna Sudhakar, G 2012, ‘A model of critical success factors for software projects’, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 6, no. 25, pp. 537-558.

Razak Bin Ibrahim, A, Roy, M H., Ahmed, Z & Imtiaz, G 2010, ‘An investigation of the status of the Malaysian construction industry’, Benchmarking: An International Journal, vol. 2, no. 17, pp. 294-308.

Shane, J & Gransberg, D 2010, ‘Coordination of Design Contract with Construction Manager-at-Risk Preconstruction Service Contract’, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1, no. 2151, pp. 55-59.

Shehu, Z & Akintoye, A 2010, ‘Major challenges to the successful implementation and practice of programme management in the construction environment’, A critical analysis. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 1, no. 28, pp. 26-39.

Slack, N, Chambers, S & Johnston, R 2010, Operations management, Pearson Education, London.

Shokri, S, Safa, M, Haas, C T, Haas, R C., Maloney, K & MacGillivray, S 2012, ‘Interface management model for mega capital projects’, Construction Research Congress, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. pp. 447-456.

Stevens, N, Baker, D & Freestone, R 2010, ‘Airports in their urban settings: towards a conceptual model of interfaces in the Australian context’, Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 2, no. 18, pp. 276-284.

Sun, H 2000, ‘Total quality management, ISO 9000 certification and performance improvement’, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, vol. 2, no. 17, pp. 168-179.

Tashakkori, A & Teddlie, C 2010, Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Tang, L, Shen, Q. & Cheng, E W 2010, ‘A review of studies on public–private partnership projects in the construction industry’, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 7, no. 28, pp. 683-694.

Touran, A, Gransberg, D D., Molenaar, K R, & Ghavamifar, K 2010, ‘Selection of project delivery method in transit: Drivers and objectives’, Journal of Management in Engineering, vol. 1, no. 27, pp. 21-27.

Wang, J, Lin, W & Huang, Y H 2010, ‘A performance-oriented risk management framework for innovative R&D projects’, Technovation, vol. 11, no. 30, pp. 601-611.

Winch, G M 2010, Managing construction projects, John Wiley & Sons, London.

Yang, J, Shen, G Q, Drew, D S & Ho, M 2009, ‘Critical success factors for stakeholder management: construction practitioners’ perspectives’, Journal of construction engineering and management, vol. 7, no. 36, pp. 778-786.

Zare Mehrjerdi, Y 2010, ‘Quality function deployment and its extensions’, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, vol. 6, no. 27, pp. 616-640.

Zhai, L, Xin, Y & Cheng, C 2009, ‘Understanding the value of project management from a stakeholder’s perspective: Case study of mega‐project management’, Project Management Journal, vol. 1, no. 44, pp. 99-109

Appendix I

This is one of the transcripts of the interviews conducted to determine the impact of end user involvement in value management on their satisfaction.

The preparations were done and the respondents informed in advance to create time for the interview. The first person to be interviewed was the resident engineer who was responsible for value management.

Interviewer: How long have you worked as a manager in the construction industry?

Manager: I have over twenty years working experience in the construction industry and already I have managed very successful projects in the industry without giving examples.

Interviewer: What do you learn from the history of value managements and its implications on end user satisfaction?

Manager: My knowledge on the history and development of value management and its interrelated nature with end user satisfaction is that it is a concept that has found its way into construction management. Here, many organizations and especially construction companies have found value management to be a tool that enables them, when properly applied to capture the end user requirements and develop products or implement projects that fit the functional requirements of end user. Of course, the concept is not new, but in the construction of airports, it becomes very important on various fronts such as in managing the construction of the complex airport infrastructure that fits into a myriad of end user needs and expectations.

Besides, value management today enables the value manager or however is in authority to focus on various aspects of construction work to optimize quality, cost, development time, and technical performance to ensure that the end results provide the desired outcomes.

Interviewer: How do you apply the principles of value management to factor value into the project to achieve the desired objectives?

Manager: I would like to reiterate that the principles of value management are not only valuable tools for managing value, but provide the direction for using available resources effectively to ensure optimal use and lowering of costs.

Interviewer: How much time is dedicated to educating the project teams on the principles of value management?

Manager: Previously, the management did not have any program on value management, but as the need for value management has gained momentum and its application become important in the construction industry, a value management program has been developed that is tailored to suite the construction industry. We train our teams when someone has been hired to work in the construction industry and we regularly hold meetings to discuss inputs from the end users, the project teams, and the management on value management and application in the construction industry.

Interviewer: How do you manage value in the construction work?

Manager: There are several strategies that have been recommended. However, in airport construction, the projects are really complex and take a lot of time. In addition, the cost involved is big. All those factors taken into account, value management in construction work is systematic, logical, and focuses on those aspects of project management that increase the utility of the project.

New alternatives have to be identified, analysing current and previous approaches that have been used in value management, developing a value matrix, establishing a performance criterion, and determining the functional requirements that have to be met to satisfy the end user.

Interviewer: How do you factor end user involvement in value management?

Manager: Again the process is quite involving. First, end user involvement is important because they are the ones to use the project later on when it is fully developed and delivered for use. End user involvement usually begins at the earlier stages when engineers collect requirements to ensure they are integrated in the design stage. The process is iterative and However, the first step is to define the end users, project and end user requirements and how that fits into functional product requirements, which leads to end user satisfaction.

Interviewer: How do you integrate the end user value system into the value management process?

Manager: End user value system in theory involves the issues that are used to model end users’ needs and expectations. The areas we focus on include planning, project objectives.

Interviewer: As a manager, which strategies have you in places that enable you to work towards the achievement the value objectives you have set in place?

Manager: Many strategies are in place. Some of them include identifying and creating a well-skilled team, creating those milestones to be achieved, identifying those strategies for reducing life cycle costs, and iteratively adding value.

Interviewer: What is your take on the impact of quality on end user satisfaction?

Manager: Quality is all about developing a project with the desired attributes that meet the end user needs and expectations. However, quality is assured through several strategies among which include total quality management at all stages of the project implementation process.

Interviewer: Time was over and I had to come the following day for another interview with one end user involvement and the implications on end user satisfaction.

Interviewee: what is your take on earlier end user involvement in value management and its connection with end user satisfaction?