by Ian Scott and Stuart Gronow
Quality assurance (QA) has been used in manufacturing and other industries for several years. The Department of Trade and Industry Quality Assurance Register lists thousands of companies whose quality systems have been independently assessed against the international ISO 9000 standard or the British equivalent, BS 5750.
As to the property professions, the concept of QA first appeared in the construction industry, and has recently begun to impinge on the surveying profession through quantity surveying. QA has now been formally recognised by the RICS, which has produced guidelines for practices wishing to adopt the methodology.
Quality assurance is a systematic way of ensuring that organised activities are carried through in the way in which they are planned. It is a management discipline concerned with creating attitudes and controls which are designed to prevent problems arising.
QA thus formalises methods of management. It ensures that all aspects of work that affect the quality of service provided adhere to procedures which, once established, are regularly reviewed and subjected to outside assessment. Its main purposes are:
(1) to meet the client requirements;
(2) to meet industry needs;
(3) to improve management control with regard to the quality of service;
(4) to increase efficiency; and
(5) to gain marketing advantage1.
QA is designed to ensure a rigorous approach to managing the quality of a project, and so ensure that a client gets exactly what is required.
It costs money to set up and run, but against this must be set the savings which result from more effective management, improved methods of working, and an enhanced level of performance. The result could well be an expanded client base, leading to an increase in income that will offset the cost of instituting and maintaining the system.
QA is not mandatory in the construction industry, but it is increasingly being used as a prerequisite for tender purposes: it may indeed be considered a necessary adjunct to doing business in the future.
Few developers currently insist on contractors who are assessed against BS 5750, although most inquire about a tenderer’s quality-control plans. Large industrial concerns such as Shell and ICI do make compliance compulsory, and many public sector, hi-tech and foreign clients are moving in this direction2.
However, QA is not without its critics, and Stanhope has removed compulsory compliance with BS 5750 for its contractors, claiming that quality on site is being reduced rather than raised. Similarly, concern has been expressed at “charges of £3,000 for an initial (QA) assessment and then £1,500 a year — presumably for the privilege of being told how to write down (what has been called) this ‘common sense’”3.
Many companies operate quality systems of some kind, usually informal, solving problems as they arise based on past experience. However, these systems are often dependent on individuals in the firm and their own personal operating methodologies.
Such “control” systems are rarely explicit or thoroughly documented, and may be difficult for others to fathom should that individual be absent for any period or, worse still, leave the company. When staff turnover was low such a system was tolerable: in today’s property industry, however, staff come and go with some rapidity.
A common documented methodology within a company thus enables a newcomer to pick up a job more quickly, minimising unproductive time in correcting procedural errors, and steepening the newcomer’s learning curve.
QA in general practice
Many companies and organisations already have internal manuals setting out procedures to be followed in certain circumstances. QA could be seen as an extension of this policy of formalisation. The Inland Revenue’s Chapters, for example, could form the basis for introducing QA status to the Valuation Office.
It should be emphasised that it is not merely the construction industry and those closely connected with it who are envisaged as requiring or benefiting from QA. The Introductory Guidance issued by the RICS is intended for all its divisions. Already some general practice surveyors foresee the day “… when major work, particularly from Japan and America, will not be given to us unless we have quality management in place”4. The race is already on to be the first general practice surveying company to gain a BSI kitemark for its operation.
The deal-driven world of agency surveyors is perhaps the least structured and formalised of the professional practice sectors. It could be argued, therefore, that it may benefit disproportionately by the introduction of a QA programme.
Agents would no doubt disagree, arguing that in their high-pressure wheeling and dealing there is no time for following a structured set of procedures. However, for them to achieve any sort of consistent performance in their work there must be some methodology behind their day-to-day activities. For example, most agents would recognise the following as good practice:
(1) confirm instruction and fee arrangement in writing;
(2) consider marketing programme;
(3) agree marketing programme with client;
(4) implement marketing programme;
(5) let building; and
(6) collect fee.
Clearly this is an oversimplication, and each of the above steps would involve several discreet ones which in turn may be documented. However, by accepting that this methodology may be made explicit we imply that there is, in the first place, a methodology and that, second, it may be examined. A major advantage of any such examination is that improvements may be made based upon the results elicited.
In addition, the QA system can ensure that cases are individually monitored to make sure they comply with the requirements of the client and any necessary legislation.
Valuation and investment services are inherently more structured than agency functions and may thus lend themselves more easily to formalisation of the procedures involved. A checklist may be appropriate for a property investment acquisition based on the standard “textbook” approach5, for example. Again, valuation and inspection may conform to institutional guidelines such as those for asset6, or mortgage valuations7. The QA programme may also assist in clarifying the line between “normal” investment advice and work requiring TSA authorisation under the Financial Services Act 1986.
Automating QA
Potentially, one of QA’s most useful functions is in recording the procedures which go to make “good practice”. The rigorous approach required forces a fundamental appraisal of the applicability and efficiency of working practices. QA may thus reveal areas of poor practice, enabling the weakness of the procedures used to be identified and remedial action taken. Without a QA audit such weaknesses may never come to light, and the process may therefore improve efficiency even before its implementation.
This documentation of procedure has an interesting parallel with the development of knowledge-based systems, which automate specialist knowledge in a particular area of expertise. That knowledge must be made explicit in order to develop the computer program in the same manner as under a QA audit. Thus, a knowledge-based system could be used to automate the good practice developed through QA, and the programme would therefore be introduced to staff members in a user-friendly form.
QA and CPD
QA could also be considered an integral part of the surveyor’s future, further certification of his fitness to practise and an additional defence should there be litigation.
The surveyor’s academic merit could thus be assured by a degree or equivalent; technical competence through professional qualification via the RICS TPC or ISVA Professional Assessment; his/her continuing awareness in the field through CPD; and the adequacy of his/her day-to-day practices and procedures in applying that knowledge, documented, certified and monitored through QA.
Thus, what QA can ensure is that the day-to-day practice and procedure based on that expensively acquired knowledge is being efficiently and adequately applied to the task in hand. This demonstrates to clients that the company’s management is monitored at a fundamental level and affords senior mangement more complete control of the professional process by setting down clear guidelines for staff to follow.
Conclusion
A recent paper noted that “where firms are in close competition, invariably the deciding factor in choosing one firm over another is the quality of service delivered. Without a clear, objective view of their current services, surveyors will find it difficult to improve those services…”8.
QA can assist in formulating that clear objective view by providing the framework in which to assess the services offered.
It has also recently been indicated that many occupiers feel that they are poorly served by their professional property advisers9. Even more surprisingly they considered that their agents were uninterested in the post-occupation performance of the buildings which they had acquired.
If quality assurance can be considered to be planning what you do, doing what you plan, and recording what you have done, surveyors should add a fourth function — that of “recording client satisfaction”. By monitoring this crucial element a general practice surveying firm can improve its own, as well as its clients’, service — in what is, after all, a service industry.
References
(1) RICS (1989) Quality Assurance, The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.
(2) McLellan, A (1990) BS 5750 Code Reducers Quality Claims Developer. New Builder. February 8 1990.
(3) Butler, E R (1990) “Quality assurance: cause for concern”. Chartered Surveyor Weekly (letter) January 25 1990.
(4) Reeve, I (1990) “Profile: Grimley J R Eve” Estates Times October 12 1990.
(5) Darlow, C (1983) “Valuation and investment appraisal”, pp. 192-193 and 206-209. Estates Gazette.
(6) RICS Asset Valuation Procedure and Guidance Notes.
(7) RICS/ISVA Mortgage Valuation Guide.
(8) Spicers Consulting Group (1990) Strategic issues for chartered surveyors — an industry on the move. Spicer & Oppenheim International.
(9) Vail Williams (1990). The occupier’s view — business space in the ’90s.
