Safer construction voluntary code of practice : implications for SMEs

The majority of Australian construction firms are small businesses, with 97% of general construction businesses employing less than 20 employees and 85% employing less than five employees (Lin and Mills, 2001; Lingard and Holmes, 2001). The Australian Bureau of Statistics’ definition of a small to medium enterprise was used for the purpose of this study (McLennan, 2000). This included small business employing less than twenty people and medium business employing less than 200 people. Although small to medium enterprises (SME) make up the major share of construction organisations in Australia, there is a paucity of published research in relation to occupational health and safety (OHS) issues for this group. Typically, SME organisations “are frequently undercapitalized and depend on continuous cash flow for their continued business” (Cole, 2003; 12). Research by Lin and Mills (2001) indicates that these factors influence the smaller operators’ ability and motivation to achieve high levels of OHS compared to larger firms which tend to integrate OHS into their management systems. According to Lin and Mills (2001; 137) small firms “do not feel the need to focus on OHS in their management systems, instead they often believe that the control of risk is the responsibility of employees”. This report documents findings from a qualitative research study that examined SME organisations’ views of a newly developed voluntary code of practice (VCOP), and ways in which they might implement the code in their businesses. The research also explored respondents’ awareness of current safety issues in industry in the context of their personal experiences.

Safer construction : the development of a guide to best practice

In Australia, an average 49 building and construction workers have been killed at work each year since 1997-98. Building/construction workers are more than twice as likely to be killed at work, than the average worker in all Australian industries. The ‘Safer Construction’ project, funded by the CRC-Construction Innovation and led by a task force comprising representatives of construction clients, designers and constructors, developed a Guide to Best Practice for Safer Construction. The Guide, which was informed by research undertaken at RMIT University, Queensland University of Technology and Curtin University, establishes broad principles for the improvement of safety in the industry and provides a ‘roadmap’ for improvement based upon lifecycle stages of a building/construction project. Within each project stage, best practices for the management of safety are identified. Each best practice is defined in terms of the recommended action, its key benefits, desirable outcomes, performance measures and leadership. ‘Safer Construction’ practices are identified from the planning to commissioning stages of a project. The ‘Safer Construction’ project represents the first time that key stakeholder groups in the Australian building/construction industry have worked together to articulate best practice and establish an appropriate basis for allocating (and sharing) responsibility for project safety performance.

Mapping the regulatory environment : implications for construction firms

As regulators, governments are often criticised for over‐regulating industries. This research project seeks to examine the regulation affecting the construction industry in a federal system of government. It uses a case study of the Australian system of government to focus on the question of the implications of regulation in the construction industry. Having established the extent of the regulatory environment, the research project considers the costs associated with this environment. Consequently, ways in which the regulatory burden on industry can be reduced are evaluated. The Construction Industry Business Environment project is working with industry and government agencies to improve regulatory harmonisation in Australia, and thereby reduce the regulatory burden on industry. It is found that while taxation and compliance costs are not likely to be reduced in the short term, costs arising from having to adapt to variation between regulatory regimes in a federal system of government, seem the most promising way of reducing regulatory costs. Identifying and reducing adaptive costs across jurisdictional are argued to present a novel approach to regulatory reform.

Sustainability and the Building Code of Australia

This was a two-stage project to inform the Australian property and construction industry generally, and to provide the Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) with information to allow it to determine whether or not sustainability requirements are necessary in the Future Building Code of Australia (BCA21). Research objectives included: examine overseas sustainability requirements for buildings and outline the reason why it is controlled and regulated in the particular country, state, principality etc. examine studies focusing on sustainability developments in buildings in Australia and overseas identify potential issues and implications associated with sustainable building requirements provide advice on whether provisions are necessary in the BCA21 to make buildings sustainable if the study determines there is a need for sustainability requirements in the BCA21, the study was to demonstrate the need to control and regulate along with the method to control and regulate. This research was broken down into two stages. Stage 1 was a literature review of international requirements as well as current thinking and practice for sustainable building developments. Stage 2 identified issues and implications of sustainability requirements for buildings and advice on whether provisions are necessary in the BCA21. This stage included workshops in all capital cities and involved key stakeholders, such as regulators, local government and representatives from key associations. This final report brings together the work of both stages, along with a searchable internet database of references and a series of nine key recommendations.

Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Environment and Heritage : Inquiry into a Sustainability Charter by the Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation

The Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation1 (hereafter called Construction Innovation) supports the notion of the establishment of a Sustainability Charter for Australia and is interested in working collaboratively to achieve this outcome. A number of challenges need to be addressed to develop this Charter. This submission outlines these challenges and possible responses to them by a Sustainability Commission.

Off-site Manufacture in Australia : Current State and Future Directions

Off-site manufacture (OSM) offers numerous benefits to all parties in the construction process. The uptake of OSM in Australia has, however, been limited. This limited uptake corresponds to similar trends in the UK and US, although the level of OSM there appears to be increasing. This project undertook three workshops — one each in Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia — and 18 interviews with key stakeholders to assist in identifying the general benefits and barriers to OSM uptake in the Australian construction industry. Seven case studies were also undertaken, involving construction projects that used OSM, ranging from civil projects through to residential. Each of these case studies has been analysed to identify what worked and what didn’t, and suggest the lessons to be learned from each project.

Drivers constraints and the future of off-site manufacture in Australia.

Much has been written on Off-site Manufacture (OSM) in construction, particularly regarding the perceived benefits and barriers to implementation. However, very little understanding of the state of OSM in the Australian construction industry exists. A ‘scoping study' has recently been undertaken to determine the ‘state-of-the-art’ of OSM in Australia. This involved several industry workshops, interviews and case studies across four major states of Australia. The study surveyed a range of suppliers across the construction supply-chain, incorporating the civil, commercial and housing segments of the market. This revealed that skills shortages and lack of adequate OSM knowledge are generally the greatest issues facing OSM in Australia. The drivers and constraints that emerged from the research were, in large measure, consistent with those found in the US and UK, although some Australian anomalies are evident, such as the geographical disparity of markets. A comparative analysis with similar studies in the UK and US is reported, illustrating both the drivers and constraints confronting the industry in Australia. OSM uptake into the future is however dependent on many factors, not least of which is a better understanding of the construction process and its associated costs.

The relationship between construction firm strategies and innovation outcomes

Survey results provide a preliminary assessment of the relative contribution of a range of tactical business strategies to innovation performance by firms in the Australian construction industry. Over 1,300 firms were surveyed in 2004, resulting in a response rate of 29%. Respondents were classified as high, medium or low innovators according to an innovation index based on the novelty and impact of their innovations and their adoption of listed technological and organizational advances. The relative significance of 23 business strategies concerning (1) employees, (2) marketing, (3) technology, (4) knowledge and (5) relationships was examined by determining the extent to which they distinguished high innovators from low innovators. The individual business strategies that most strongly distinguished high innovators were (1) ‘investing in R&D’, (2) ‘participating in partnering and alliances on projects’, (3) ‘ensuring project learnings are transferred into continuous business processes’, (4) ‘monitoring international best practice’, and (5) ‘recruiting new graduates’. Of the five types of strategies assessed, marketing strategies were the least significant in supporting innovation. The results provide practical guidance to managers in project-based industries wishing to improve their innovation performance.

Innovative Practices in the Australian Built Environment Sector : An Information Resource for Industry

PROJECT BRIEF Information provided by the Built Environment Industry Innovation Council as background to this project includes the following information on construction and innovation within the industry. • The construction industry contributes around $67 billion to GDP and employs around 970,000 and generates exports of nearly $150 million. • The industry has one of the lowest innovation rates of any industry in Australia, ranking third last across all Australian industries in terms of its proportion of business expenditure on innovation, and second last in terms of the proportion of income generated from innovation (ABS, 2006). • Key innovation challenges include addressing energy and water use efficiency, and housing costs in preparing for the implementation of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. The sector will need to build its capability and capacity to deliver the technical and operational expertise required.The broader Built Environment Innovation Project aims to address the following two objectives: 1. Identify current innovative practice across the Built Environment industry. 2. Develop a knowledge exchange strategy for this information to be disseminated to all industry stakeholders. Industry practice issues are critical to the built environment industry’s ability to innovate, and the BRITE project from the CRC for Construction Innovation has previously undertaken work to identify the key factors that drive innovation. Part 1 of the current project aims to extend this work by conducting a stocktake of current and emerging innovative practices within the built environment industry. Part 2 of the project addresses the second of these objectives, that is, to recommend a knowledge exchange strategy for promoting the wider uptake of innovative practices that makes the information identified in Part 1 of the study (on emerging innovative practices) accessible to Australian built environment industry stakeholders. The project brief was for the strategy to include a mechanism to enable this information resource to be updated as new initiatives/practices are developed. A better understanding of the built environment industry’s own knowledge infrastructure also has the potential to enhance innovation outcomes for the industry. This project will develop a coordinated knowledge exchange strategy, informed by the best available information on current innovation practices within the industry and suggest directions for gaining a better understanding of: the industry contexts that lead to innovative practices; the industry (including enterprise and individual) drivers for innovation; and appropriate knowledge exchange pathways for delivering future industry innovation. A deliverable of Part 2 will be a recommendation for a knowledge exchange strategy to accelerate adoption of innovative practices in the built environment industry, including resource implications and how such a recommendation could be taken forward as an ongoing resource.

Analysing strategic alliances in building construction

Building construction is a highly competitive and risky business. This competitiveness is compounded where conflicting objectives amongst contracting and subcontracting firms sets the stage for an adversarial and potentially destructive approach. There is a need for change in the construction industry—not only to a more cooperative approach to build mutual trust, respect and good faith—but also from a confrontationist and adversarial attitude to a harmonious relationship. It is necessary to change the culture to create a win-win situation. “Strategic Alliances” is one such concept. A strategic alliance is a cooperative arrangement between two or more organisations that forms part of their overall strategies, and contributes to achieving their major goals and objectives. This paper begins with an overview of the Australian building construction industry, then reviews the literature and describes an analysis framework comprising six attributes of strategic alliances—trust, commitment, interdependence, cooperation, communication, and joint problem solving. Given the trend towards greater emphasis on broader contracting firm performance criteria, indicators are proposed as a component of the tender evaluation process for public works.

Safety culture research, lead indicators, and the development of safety effectiveness indicators in the construction sector

Construction sector application of Lead Indicators generally and Positive Performance Indicators (PPIs) particularly, are largely seen by the sector as not providing generalizable indicators of safety effectiveness. Similarly, safety culture is often cited as an essential factor in improving safety performance, yet there is no known reliable way of measuring safety culture. This paper proposes that the accurate measurement of safety effectiveness and safety culture is a requirement for assessing safe behaviours, safety knowledge, effective communication and safety performance. Currently there are no standard national or international safety effectiveness indicators (SEIs) that are accepted by the construction industry. The challenge is that quantitative survey instruments developed for measuring safety culture and/ or safety climate are inherently flawed methodologically and do not produce reliable and representative data concerning attitudes to safety. Measures that combine quantitative and qualitative components are needed to provide a clear utility for safety effectiveness indicators.

Innovation in construction : a case study of the Australian context

The dominant economic paradigm currently guiding industry policy making in Australia and much of the rest of the world is the neoclassical approach. Although neoclassical theories acknowledge that growth is driven by innovation, such innovation is exogenous to their standard models and hence often not explored. Instead the focus is on the allocation of scarce resources, where innovation is perceived as an external shock to the system. Indeed, analysis of innovation is largely undertaken by other disciplines, such as evolutionary economics and institutional economics. As more has become known about innovation processes, linear models, based on research and development or market demand, have been replaced by more complex interactive models which emphasise the existence of feedback loops between the actors and activities involved in the commercialisation of ideas (Manley 2003). Currently dominant among these approaches is the national or sectoral innovation system model (Breschi and Malerba 2000; Nelson 1993), which is based on the notion of increasingly open innovation systems (Chesbrough, Vanhaverbeke, and West 2008). This chapter reports on the ‘BRITE Survey’ funded by the Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation which investigated the open sectoral innovation system operating in the Australian construction industry. The BRITE Survey was undertaken in 2004 and it is the largest construction innovation survey ever conducted in Australia. The results reported here give an indication of how construction innovation processes operate, as an example that should be of interest to international audiences interested in construction economics. The questionnaire was based on a broad range of indicators recommended in the OECD’s Community Innovation Survey guidelines (OECD/Eurostat 2005). Although the ABS has recently begun to undertake regular innovation surveys that include the construction industry (2006), they employ a very narrow definition of the industry and only collect very basic data compared to that provided by the BRITE Survey, which is presented in this chapter. The term ‘innovation’ is defined here as a new or significantly improved technology or organisational practice, based broadly on OECD definitions (OECD/Eurostat 2005). Innovation may be technological or organisational in nature and it may be new to the world, or just new to the industry or the business concerned. The definition thus includes the simple adoption of existing technological and organisational advancements. The survey collected information about respondents’ perceptions of innovation determinants in the industry, comprising various aspects of business strategy and business environment. It builds on a pilot innovation survey undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) for the Australian Construction Industry Forum on behalf of the Australian Commonwealth Department of Industry Tourism and Resources, in 2001 (PWC 2002). The survey responds to an identified need within the Australian construction industry to have accurate and timely innovation data upon which to base effective management strategies and public policies (Focus Group 2004).

Sustainability performance of construction : conceptual models of satisfaction levels in construction projects

In general, the performance of construction projects, including their sustainability performance, does not meet optimal expectations. One aspect of this is the performance of the participants who are independent and make a significance impact on overall project outcomes. Of these participants, the client is traditionally the owner of the project, the architect or engineer is engaged as the lead designer and a contractor is selected to construct the facilities. Generally, the performance of the participants is gauged by considering three main factors, namely, time, cost and quality. As the level of satisfaction is a subjective issue, it is rarely used in the performance evaluation of construction work. Recently, various approaches to the measurement of satisfaction have been made in an attempt to determine the performance of construction project outcomes - for instance, client satisfaction, customer satisfaction, contractor satisfaction, occupant satisfaction and home buyer satisfaction. These not only identify the performance of the construction project but are also used to improve and maintain relationships. In addition, these assessments are necessary for the continuous improvement and enhanced cooperation of participants. The measurement of satisfaction levels primarily involves expectations and perceptions. An expectation can be regarded as a comparative standard of different needs, motives and beliefs, while a perception is a subjective interpretation that is influenced by moods, experiences and values. This suggests that the disparity between perceptions and expectations may possibly be used to represent different levels of satisfaction. However, this concept is rather new and in need of further investigation. This chapter examines the methods commonly practised in measuring satisfaction levels today and the advantages of promoting these methods. The results provide a preliminary review of the advantages of satisfaction measurement in the construction industry and recommendations are made concerning the most appropriate methods to use in identifying the performance of project outcomes.