8.3.1 Conclusions
In conclusion, to what extent do maintenance specifications cover those ser- vice aspects that tenants consider to be important? One should first note that the extent to which the occurrence of service aspects is deemed to be ‘sat- isfactory’ or ‘unsatisfactory’ is a matter of opinion, and therefore subjective. However, we aimed for ‘sufficient’ intersubjectivity by using three assessors. Another significant point to note is that there was no assessment of cover in a legal sense.
For many housing associations, the first step for improving service delivery to tenants would simply be to arrange the maintenance needed. In particular, contracts for cleaning shared building elements and ventilation system main- tenance have yet to be developed in many cases.
Overall, many service aspects are mentioned in the general conditions. These general conditions usually apply to multiple, if not all, maintenance services put out to tender. Response time is not mentioned in general condi- tions, but is mentioned in the applicable individual contracts (in other words,
for maintenance in response to requested repairs). This is probably due to the variability of the desired level of service per type of maintenance. Service as- pects that may vary in presence or level of service per maintenance service might indeed be better recorded per maintenance service, and therefore per contract. It is preferable to record service aspects that have, or should have, the same service level in general conditions, however, in view of the greater transparency achieved (as opposed to a variety of different clauses in mul- tiple contracts).
It is particularly clear from the analyses that ‘completing maintenance in a single visit’ is insufficiently documented in maintenance specifications, in light of the importance attached to it by tenants. Although it should be pos- sible to take this aspect for granted, it being only sensible that work should be completed in a single visit, tenants’ dissatisfaction on this point suggests the need for further specification. If specified and included in agreements, then compliance with this aspect could be measured using output evaluations. Moreover, non-compliance is equal to default, as is the case for all aspects included in agreements.
The regression analyses that were conducted using satisfaction with planned maintenance as the dependent variable, and satisfaction figures for service aspects as independent variables (see Chapter 6), show that provid- ing maintenance options for planned maintenance substantially contributes to satisfaction. However, this factor is not included in the specifications used in maintenance purchasing. If addressed at all, then this apparently occurs through the housing association in consultation with its residents, possibly represented by a residents’ committee. Provisionally, the maintenance com- pany plays no role in responding to individual or group differences concern- ing end-customer preferences. If the maintenance company were to have some capacity in this regard, however, in future steps could be taken to give companies more responsibility and control.
Comparable regression analyses were performed (see Chapter 6), with satis- faction with maintenance in response to requests and repairs in the home as the dependent variable. The importance of aspects such as ‘being available to answer questions and receive complaints’ and ‘flexibility in making appoint- ments’ is reflected in the attention that maintenance specifications give to them. To a much lesser extent, this also applies to ‘sticking to execution plan- ning agreements with tenants’ and ‘limiting the time taken by work’, along- side ‘completing maintenance work in a single visit’. If more attention were to be given to these aspects in specifications, then this might result in a more satisfactory assurance of service. However, there would be little point in speci- fying such factors without measuring output, and tenants could be periodical- ly questioned about the extent to which the requirements had been met.
Service quality determinants find their way to maintenance companies along a variety of paths. The current system of specifications has a number
of roots: contracts are copied from earlier projects and modified, derived from consultants or fellow housing associations, or are based on older documents from the same housing association. This means that contractual documents tend to acquire different structures for each maintenance type, and moreover, these structures are not particularly transparent.
8.3.2 Recommendations
The fact that housing associations record various service aspects (and thus specification components) across many different documents appears to be detrimental to the transparency of the specifications, and the likelihood that they will be observed. There would appear to be much in favour, where pos- sible, of distinguishing between technical documents and separate service (or interaction-related) documents (possibly bundled together). A distinction could be made between the various service aspects that can differ per main- tenance service and would therefore be recorded at contract level, and ‘fixed’ service aspects that are standard for all activities and could be recorded in the general conditions (see Figure 8.1).
Finally, despite the important contribution that these specifications make to service quality, agreements should not be so detailed and extensive as to make fulfilling them impossible.
An adapted version of this chapter is also included in the Habiforum report Inkoop van onderhoud en goede dienstverlening (Van Mossel and Straub, 2007).
<_]kh[.$'=[d[hWbYedZ_j_edi"YedjhWYj"WdZj^[Z_l_i_ed_djeYecfed[dji
9edjhWYj =[d[hWbYedZ_j_edi 7if[Yjim_j^Wd_cfWYjedj^[ j[dWdj"i_jkWj_ed#if[Y_\_Y J[Y^d_YWbWif[Yji" i_jkWj_ed#if[Y_\_Y Ej^[hWif[Yji" i_jkWj_ed#if[Y_\_Y 7if[Yjim_j^Wd_cfWYjedj^[ j[dWdj"kd_l[hiWbboWffb_YWXb[ J[Y^d_YWbWif[Yji" kd_l[hiWbboWffb_YWXb[ Ej^[hWif[Yji" kd_l[hiWbboWffb_YWXb[References
Bubshait, A.A. & S.A. Almohawis, 1994, Evaluating the general conditions of a construction contract, in: International Journal of Project Management, 12 (3),
pp. 133-136.
Clough, R., 1988, Construction Contracting (5th ed.), USA (John Wiley).
Gilberth, R., 1983, Managing Construction Contract, USA (John Wiley).
Nellore, R., K. Söderquist, G. Siddall & J. Motwani, 1999, Specifications - Do we really understand what they mean? in: Business Horizons, 42 (6), pp. 63-69.
Swan, J.E., M.R. Bowers & R. Grover, 2002, Customer involvement in the selec- tion of service specifications, in: Journal of Services Marketing, 16 (1), pp.
88-103.
Van Mossel, J.H., A. Straub & S.J.T. Jansen, 2006, Onderhoud en de huurder,
Gouda (Habiforum).
Van Raaij, W.F. & A.T.H. Pruyn, 1998, Customer Control and Evaluation of Ser- vice Validity and Reliability, in: Psychology & Marketing, 15 (8), pp. 811-832.