Using Satisfaction Ratings to Minimize Risk

Dhaval Gajjar, Dean Kashiwagi, Kenneth Sullivan, Jacob Kashiwagi


Warranties in the construction industry have become more prevalent in the last couple of decades. Moreover buyers in the construction industry rely heavily on the length of the warranties for the purchase of any product or service. The warranty is an agreement between the buyer and the manufacturer and has inclusions that if altered voids the warranty. Hence the length of the warranty has no correlation to the actual performance of the product or service being purchased. One of the manufacturers in the construction industry, in order to differentiate themselves from other manufacturers, approached the researchers to implement a system that can better assist and serve their end users beyond just providing a warranty. The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyse the warranty tracking program that tracks the installed roofing projects for the manufacturers providing an overall snapshot of the performance of all the installed projects. The warranty tracking program provides the manufacturer the risky projects (leaks, blisters, end-user dissatisfied) with the use of end-user customer satisfaction every year. The researchers also implemented the high performance roofing program and a performance-based licensure process to attract high performing applicators. Since the inception of the warranty tracking program the manufacturer has been able to resolve 69 out of 70 (98%) risky projects. In conclusion, the warranty tracking program provided the manufacturer a better way to assist and serve their end users through proactive resolution of risky projects.


Agrawal, J., Richardson, P. S., & Grimm, P. E. (1996). The relationship between warranty and product reliability. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 30(2), 421-443.

Cahill, D. and Puybaraud, M. (1994). Constructing the team: The latham report. Construction Reports 1944-98. Blackwell Science ltd, pgs. 145-160.

CFMA’s. (2006). Construction Industry Annual Financial Survey, Moss-Adams, LLP, Eighteenth edition.

Christozov, D., Chukova, S., & Mateev, P. (2009). On Two Types of Warranties: Warranty of Malfunctioning and Warranty of Misinforming. Asia-Pacific Journal f Operational Research, 26(3), 399-420.

Construction Industry Institute (CII). (1995). Pre-project planning handbook, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, TX, Special Publication 39-2.

Davis, B., and Sebastian, R. (2009a). The relationship between contract administration problems and contract type, Journal of Public Procurement, 9(2), 262-282.

Egan, S.J. (1998). Rethinking construction: The report of the construction task force to the deputy prime minister, John Prescott, on the scope for improving the quality and efficiency of UK construction, The Department of Trade and Industry,1 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0ET.

Flores, V. and Chase, G. (2005). Project controls from the front end, Cost Engineering, April 2005, Vol. 47, No. 4; pgs 22-24.

Gibson, G. E., Wang, Y., Cho, C. and Pappas, M. (2006). What is preproject planning, anyway? Journal of Management in Engineering, 22 (1).

Hamilton, M.R. & Gibson, G.E. (1996). Benchmarking preproject planning effort, Journal of Management in Engineering, 12(2), 25-33.

Hillson, D. A. (1997).Towards a maturity model, International Journal of Project & Business Risk Management, 1(1), 35–46.

Kashiwagi, D. (1996). Performance issues of sprayed polyurethane foam roof systems. Professional Roofing, 18-22.

Kashiwagi, D. (2011) PIPS / PIRMS: The Best Value Standard. 11th ed. Tempe: KSM.

Kashiwagi, D. (2012). The Best Value Standard, Performance Based Studies Research Group, Tempe, AZ, Publisher KSM Inc.

Kashiwagi, D., Smithwick, J., Kashiwagi, J., and Sullivan, K. (2010). A Case Study of a Best Value Manufacturer, Journal for the Advancement of Performance Information and Value, Performance Based Studies Research Group & CIB W117, 2 (1) pp. 23-32.

Murthy, D. N. P., & Djamaludin, I. (2002). New product warranty: A literature review. International Journal of Production Economics, 79(3), 231-260.

PBSRG. (2012). Performance Based Studies Research Group Internal Research Documentation, Arizona State University, Unpublished Raw Data.

Sullivan, K., Kashiwagi, D., Chong, N. (2010). The influence of an information environment on a construction organization’s culture: A case study. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2009, Article 387608, (10).

Sweet, J. (2011). Standard construction contracts: Academic orphan. The Construction Lawyer, 31(1), 38-42.

Full Text: PDF


  • There are currently no refbacks.