| Abstract: | Any product or company must prioritize quality, and applying the best quality management
techniques is crucial to implementing quality in any kind of good or service. The research aimed
to evaluate project quality management practices and their impact on project success at Kolfe
Agricultural Market Center. Using a mixed technique, it examined the implementation of
variables such as quality planning, assurance, control, and improvement. The study found that
project quality management had a positive impact on project performance, including budget
(3.77), stakeholder satisfaction (3.94), scope (3.81), and schedule (3.94). This indicates that
quality management has the least effect on project budget, indicating a less significant impact on
project success. In the case of implementing quality planning, quality assurance, quality control
and quality improvement, the result showed, with quality assurance effect on project schedule
(3.57) which is medium but to have the least effect on project success, Quality control was
implemented (4.11) which shows the other a highest implementation and effect on PS. The
analysis for project quality management practices revealed the following mean results for quality
plans are prepared before starting job (4.17), quality plan is communicated to all project team
(4.15), quality assurance activities are implemented regularly (4.17), quality control activities
are implemented regularly (4.09), quality improvement activities are implemented regularly
(4.11), system for quality control (4.04), system for quality improvement (4.02), for quality
planning procedures (4.09), quality improvement procedures (4.04), are all the means with high
perceptions from employees to indicate high level of implementation and, quality policies are
agreed upon by decision makers (3.98), the quality improvement coordinating body mean (4.00),
quality improvement tools and techniques (3.91), company practices and continuous
improvement(3.96), for system for quality planning (3.83), employees are well equipped and
required human resource are (4.00) and (3.87) respectively show there is a low and average level
of implementation and perception from the employees. The study revealed a weak quality
management framework, with people controlling the system. It suggested establishing
accountability in all sectors to regulate decision-making, as lower-quality production could
result. Additionally, weak communication from top management affected employee coordination,
suggesting more effective communication metrics could benefit project managers and success. |
