GREEN AND GRACIOUS BUILDER AWARD: A STRATEGIC ANALYSIS

Abstract

Construction has been seen, historically, as 3D (Dangerous, Dirty, and Demanding) and been embedded as a received idea. To strive for national improvement, Green and Gracious Builder Award (GGBA) was formulated. It is designed to stimulate construction industry for improvement including alleviating public’s stereotype towards construction site. However, the formulation has been heavily based on the industry perspective while its direct impact towards public is still questionable. Treating construction site as facility with its management necessity, a strategic analysis is conducted to find its good fit for public. A thorough study with one builder that obtained Excellent Award was organized in its two sites to find out the public’s opinion about construction sites. Interviews with the company and Building and Construction Authority (BCA), survey with passers by, and site observation were conducted. Sixty-four responses were observed through their satisfaction, importance and tolerance level, also their feedback for improvement towards 7 criteria in gracious practices (signage, hoarding design, hoarding safety, temporary access, noise, info poster/banner, and feedback guideline). From the study, it can be seen that the company has been performing good care of public’s interest with the additional construction alternative methods and individual approach to the affected shops. People gave positive feedback towards the performance where noise and hoarding safety are satisfactory while info banner and guideline for feedback have been disappointing. One-way ANOVA examination shows that noise and hoarding safety have been performing as expected while hoarding design, temporary access, and signage need to be improved, as major feedback of improvement from users is signage and noise. Through these data, it is proven that GGBA slightly changes users’ perspective in construction industry. The short study was a good snippet of what people are thinking but it cannot be treated as a general response in Singapore, due to timeline and site sensitivity. A further study in wider timeline and various participating companies are suggested to further map the users judgment and strategically improve GGBA.