Sommerville, et al., (2004) conducted an explorative research paperexamining various investigations about construction procedures within a numberof organisations.
They highlighted that the documentation and informationneeded to maintain quality in increasingly larger construction projects needsto be more complex. Traditionally, most information is communicated usingtraditional data transference methods such as verbal and paper. It is difficultto evidence that information has actually been passed on and the flow is oftenhindered as it is hard to access, store and transfer details. Sommerville, et al., (2004) collated a database of existing paper-basedsnagging processes from Scottish based construction enterprises. The studyanalysed these forms and conducted 10 semi structured interviews with managersto produce their findings.
The study demonstrated there was a lack ofstandardisation in the snagging process and that each organisation used theirown methods to collect snagging data. Generally, basic paper recording processes were used to collect snaggingdata highlighting problems that the information has to be copied and can easilyget lost. Papercopies often did not record the inspectors’ details making accountability difficult.
Furthermore, the dates for identification and completion of the snags were oftennot recorded. However, only 10 organisations from 150 enterprises providedexamples of existing paper-based snagging forms. Perhaps this smaller samplesize was a trade-off for the rich data collected through semi structuredinterviews. Further research suggeststhat paper-based construction processes cannot deliver easily accessibleinformation in a timely delivery highlighting the need for a standardisedelectronic format (De La Gurze and Howitt (1998) cited in Sommerville, et al., (2004).
One proposed solution is to use penand paper for snagging data collection and then convert this into an electronicformat using digital paper. Although this combats the problems regarding real-timeinformation delivery, it is still possible that certain information may stillbe omitted ( Sommerville, et al., 2004).