Technical Papers
Oct 3, 2024

Dissatisfaction Levels in Turkish Residential Buildings and Recommendations for Improving Quality

Publication: Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
Volume 38, Issue 6

Abstract

It is well known that many residential construction projects suffer from low quality due to a variety of factors; therefore, to find out the level of dissatisfaction among stakeholders, the underlying causes, and the recommendations, this study uses a survey. Owners, controllers, and contractors were asked to complete questionnaires online. To rank dissatisfaction levels, incomplete or defective works, and suggestions for improving construction quality, data from the survey were analyzed by frequency indexes (FIs), and project stakeholders’ perceptions were aggregated by “probabilistic or.” The study reveals that 52% of flat owners are somewhat satisfied with the building inspection company’s inspections, but most owners agreed (4.13±0.98) that consultants should inspect the construction, whereas the lowest dissatisfaction (1.71±1.30) is “getting smaller apartments than promised.” Construction dissatisfaction can be attributed primarily to “high-profit expectations by building contractors,” whereas “the lack of sufficient qualified workers,” “the lack of competence of building contractors,” and “incompetence and ineffectiveness of site chiefs/managers” are also prominent. From the perspective of controllers and contractors, the highest consensus (4.43±0.92; 4.24±0.85) is “needing to work with experienced construction site managers,” whereas the lowest dissatisfaction (2.57±0.72; 2.45±1.02) is “the overall quality of constructed residential buildings.” It appears that contractors’ dissatisfaction is lowest (2.42±0.95) when it comes to “contract-conforming construction quality.” A general dissatisfaction rate of close to average is reported by the owners, whereas the dissatisfaction rates of the controllers and contractors are close to “above average.” Based on the findings, this study provides valuable information and recommendations for improving the quality of construction for the successful completion of building projects.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear in the published article.

References

Alptekin, O., and N. Alptekin. 2017. “Analysis of criteria influencing contractor selection using TOPSIS method.” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 245 (6): 062003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/245/6/062003.
Artan Ilter, D., and G. Bakioglu. 2018. “Modeling the relationship between risk and dispute in subcontractor contracts.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 10 (1): 04517022. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000246.
Bhangal, P. 2019. “Why is it so important to use construction consultants?” Accessed November 28, 2019. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-so-important-use-construction-consultants-parm-bhangal.
Bhattacharyya, S., R. Kaur, S. Kaur, and S. Amaan Ali. 2017. “Validity and reliability of a questionnaire: A literature review.” Chronicles Dental Res. 6 (2): 17–24.
Bilgin, G., P. Bilgin, İ. Dikmen Toker, and M. T. Birgönül. 2019. “Innovation vision of the Turkish construction industry: A comparative qualitative content analysis of strategic roadmaps.” In Vol. 3 of Proc., Int. Conf. on Innovation, Technology, Enterprise and Entrepreneurship (November 26–27, 2019). Ankara, Turkey: OpenMETU.
Cevikbas, M., O. Okudan, and Z. Işik. 2023. “Severity assessment of problems in Turkish building audit system: A fuzzy AHP approach.” Turk. J. Civ. Eng. 34 (1): 79–104. https://doi.org/10.18400/tjce.1209174.
Çevikbaş, M., and A. Köksal. 2018. “An investigation of litigation process in construction industry in Turkey.” Teknik Dergi 29 (6): 8715–8729. https://doi.org/10.18400/tekderg.389757.
Chao, L., and C. Liou. 2007. “Risk-minimizing approach to bid-cutting limit determination.” Construct. Manage. Econ. 25 (8): 835–843. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190701393018.
Cogurcu, M. T. 2015. “Construction and design defects in the residential buildings and observed earthquake damage types in Turkey.” Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 15 (4): 931–945. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-931-2015.
Doğan, N. B., B. U. Ayhan, G. Kazar, M. Saygili, Y. E. Ayözen, and O. B. Tokdemir. 2022. “Predicting the cost outcome of construction quality problems using case-based reasoning (CBR).” Buildings 12 (11): 1946. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12111946.
Egemen, M. 2022. “Building construction owners’ design consultant and contractor selection criteria versus post-occupancy satisfaction levels.” SAGE Open 12 (2): 215824402210899. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221089968.
Faridi, A. S., and S. M. El-Sayegh. 2006. “Significant factors causing delay in the UAE construction industry.” Construct. Manage. Econ. 24 (11): 1167–1176. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190600827033.
FIEC (European Construction Industry Federation). n.d. “Construction is the solution industry.” Accessed April 2, 2023. https://www.fiec.eu/construction-industry/solution-industry.
FIEC (European Construction Industry Federation). 2021. FIEC 2021 statistical report. Brussels, Belgium: FIEC.
Fink, A. 2002. How to ask survey questions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Forcada, N., M. Macarulla, M. Gangolells, and M. Casals. 2014. “Assessment of construction defects in residential buildings in Spain.” Build. Res. Inf. 42 (5): 629–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.922266.
Ghauri, P. N., and K. Grønhaug. 2005. Research methods in business studies: A practical guide. London: Pearson.
Islam, M. S., M. Islam, S. R. Shihab, M. Skitmore, and M. P. Nepal. 2023. “Nonconformity assessment in building construction projects: A fuzzy group decision-making approach.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 37 (1): 04022075. https://doi.org/10.1061/jpcfev.cfeng-4208.
Kashiwagi, D., and D. Parmar. 2004. “Past performance information in the construction industry.” In Proc., ASC 40th Annual Conf. Loveland, CO: Associated Schools of Construction.
Kazaz, A., and M. T. Birgonul. 2005. “The evidence of poor-quality in high rise and medium rise housing units: A case study of mass housing projects in Turkey.” Build. Environ. 40 (11): 1548–1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.11.023.
Konno, Y. 2018. “Relationship between construction performance evaluation and contractor characteristics in Japan.” Cogent Bus. Manage. 5 (1): 1486169. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1486169.
Love, P. E. D., P. Teo, and J. Morrison. 2018. “Revisiting quality failure costs in construction.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 144 (2): 05017020. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)co.1943-7862.0001427.
McCombes, S. 2022. “Sampling methods: Types, techniques & examples.” Accessed December 1, 2022. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/sampling-methods/.
Olaniran, O. J. 2015. “The effects of cost-based contractor selection on construction project performance.” J. Financ. Manage. Property Constr. 20 (3): 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfmpc-06-2014-0008.
Olanrewaju, A., and H. J. A. Lee. 2022. “Analysis of the poor-quality in building elements: Providers’ perspectives.” Front. Eng. Built Environ. 2 (2): 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/febe-10-2021-0048.
Olanrewaju, A. L., and A.-R. Abdul-Aziz. 2014. “Building maintenance processes, principles, procedures, practices and strategies.” In Building maintenance processes and practices, 79–129. Berlin: Springer.
Pinsent Masons. 2011. “Limitation periods under English law.” Accessed August 2, 2011. https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/guides/limitation-periods-under-english-law.
Soni, S., M. Pandey, and S. Agrawal. 2017. “Conflicts and disputes in construction projects: An overview.” Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 7 (6): 40–42. https://doi.org/10.9790/9622-0706074042.
Soylu, O. 2022. “Construction contract in return for flat in Turkey.” Accessed October 8, 2022. https://ozansoylu.av.tr/en/construction-contract-in-return-for-flat-in-turkish-law/.
Taber, K. S. 2017. “The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education.” Res. Sci. Educ. 48 (6): 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2.
Tafesse, S. 2021. “A review on the critical factors causing delay of delivery time in construction projects.” Int. J. Eng. Technol. 6 (4): 69–81. https://doi.org/10.19072/ijet.815025.
Taherdoost, H. 2016. “Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research.” Int. J. Acad. Res. Manage. 5 (3): 28–36. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205040.
Turner, D. P. 2020. “Sampling methods in research design.” Headache: J. Head Face Pain 60 (1): 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/head.13707.
Ward, K., and P. A. Smith. 2017. “The importance of construction contracts and items to consider when preparing construction contracts.” Accessed January 31, 2017. https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/the-importance-of-construction-35239/.
Wilson, J. 2010. Essentials of business research: A guide to doing your research project. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Yildizel, S. A., E. Dogan, G. Kaplan, and A. Ergut. 2016. “Major constructional dispute causes in Turkey.” Arch. Civ. Eng. 62 (4): 193–204. https://doi.org/10.1515/ace-2015-0116.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
Volume 38Issue 6December 2024

History

Received: Jun 13, 2023
Accepted: Jul 15, 2024
Published online: Oct 3, 2024
Published in print: Dec 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Mar 3, 2025

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Dept. of Civil Engineering, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit Univ., Zonguldak 67100, Türkiye. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0686-1410. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share