IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i3p1155-d1581050.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Fuzzy Approach to Developing Scales for Performance Levels of Healthcare Construction Projects in Hong Kong

Author

Listed:
  • Goodenough D. Oppong

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong)

  • Albert P. C. Chan

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong)

  • Man Wai Chan

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong)

  • Amos Darko

    (Department of Construction Management, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA)

  • Michael A. Adabre

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong)

  • Lekan D. Ojo

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 11 Yuk Choi Road, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong)

Abstract

The determinants of hospital project or healthcare project (HP) success are divergent and difficult to generalize because of the heterogeneous perceptions of various stakeholders. There is also a paucity of HP life cycle success evaluations from planning to post-construction phases. Meanwhile, the successful delivery and continual functionality of HPs are pivotal for sustainable development, as evident in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 3 about ensuring healthy lives and promoting wellbeing for all people. To contribute to sustainable development, a novel evaluation framework is essential to define robust metrics of selected key performance indicators (KPIs) for monitoring and controlling HPs at the life cycle phases thereof. Fuzzy set theory, namely the bisector error method (BEM), was applied to questionnaire survey outputs of an expert panel to establish performance metrics of HPs within five grades, namely, poor, average, good, very good and excellent. The novel evaluation framework comprising indexes, indicators and grades are demonstrated on hypothetical HPs to provide objective, reliable and practical outcomes for performance comparison, benchmarking and improvement purposes. The findings show that a high standard is required for excellent planning, execution, and performance in HPs. The life cycle success evaluation framework is foundational in policymaking. Thus, policymakers can track the success of HPs by linking the performance metrics to goals and policy priorities in benchmarking and strategic planning for sustainable development in HPs.

Suggested Citation

  • Goodenough D. Oppong & Albert P. C. Chan & Man Wai Chan & Amos Darko & Michael A. Adabre & Lekan D. Ojo, 2025. "A Fuzzy Approach to Developing Scales for Performance Levels of Healthcare Construction Projects in Hong Kong," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-30, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:3:p:1155-:d:1581050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/3/1155/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/3/1155/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Minjung Cho, 2023. "Evaluating Therapeutic Healthcare Environmental Criteria: Architectural Designers’ Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-34, January.
    2. S. Thomas Ng & Duc Thanh Luu & Swee Eng Chen & Ka Chi Lam, 2002. "Fuzzy membership functions of procurement selection criteria," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 285-296.
    3. Che khairil Izam Che Ibrahim & Seosamh B. Costello & Suzanne Wilkinson, 2013. "Development of a conceptual team integration performance index for alliance projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(11), pages 1128-1143, November.
    4. Michael Atafo Adabre & Albert P. C. Chan & Amos Darko & David J. Edwards & Yang Yang & Sherif Issahaque, 2024. "No Stakeholder Is an Island in the Drive to This Transition: Circular Economy in the Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-23, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nan Zhao & Fei J Ying & John Tookey, 2022. "Construction Procurement Selection Criteria: A Review and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Xiaowei An & Zhuofu Wang & Huimin Li & Jiyong Ding, 2018. "Project Delivery System Selection with Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set Group Decision-Making Method," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 689-707, August.
    3. Heikki Halttula & Harri Haapasalo & Aki Aapaoja & Samuli Manninen, 2017. "Early Involvement and Integration in Construction Projects: The Benefits of DfX in Elimination of Wastes," International Journal of Management, Knowledge and Learning, International School for Social and Business Studies, Celje, Slovenia, vol. 6(2), pages 215-237.
    4. Deep Shumank & Simon Laura & Asim Mohd & Rahimzadeh Ali & Al-Hamdani Sulala, 2018. "An Analytical Study of Critical Factors Affecting Contractor Efficiency in Construction Projects in Indian Scenario," Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, Sciendo, vol. 10(1), pages 1794-1802, October.
    5. Ehsan Eshtehardian & Abbas Afshar & Reza Abbasnia, 2008. "Time-cost optimization: using GA and fuzzy sets theory for uncertainties in cost," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(7), pages 679-691.
    6. Laura Migliorini & Nicoletta Setola & Eletta Naldi & Maria Chiara Rompianesi & Laura Iannuzzi & Paola Cardinali, 2023. "Exploring the Role of Birth Environment on Italian Mothers’ Emotional Experience during Childbirth," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(15), pages 1-16, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:3:p:1155-:d:1581050. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.