監造是確保工程品質的重要角色，但在執行工作時面臨許多問題，例如監造契約規定的人力及成本不具彈性，監造的表現被以出勤率衡量，加上政府過多的監督規定，導致監造工作量過大，不確定施工品質是否提升。
本研究檢討監造品質檢驗數目與成效。首先設計15個相關問題，訪談八個案例之業主、監造及承包商24人，試圖找出監造常遇到之現象與問題。接著深入探討監造之查檢驗工作，查檢驗是監造工作之重點，也是花費時間最多之工作項目，蒐集並分析檢驗停留點訂定的數量、實際檢驗點數、查檢驗花費的時間及實施查檢驗之績效，最後使用相關性分析，找出監造工作中各變數之關係。
監造工作會因法規契約及監造過程，產生不同的結果。於法規契約，監造工作無法確實的原因是界面協調及契約規定不明確；於監造過程，監造工作重點為選取檢驗停留點，文件量多無助提升工程品質；對於施工結果，監造主要貢獻在於品質，而應賦予一定品質責任。監造在進度角色僅在檢討、預警等協助性質，而應增加在進度管理的功能。監造可提出監造方法，以提升專業性。
六個案例每月實際檢查的停留點，三類重要程度「覆蓋前與安全」、「重要」、「較不重要」分別占42%、44%、14%，平均有六成檢驗停留點並不是非常重要之項目。監造平均每月檢查253次。查檢驗工作每月花費255小時，占監造工作的29%，其中195小時為外業工作，60小時為內業。
相關性分析結果顯示：實際查檢驗次數、施工品質績效之間無顯著關係，但查檢驗花費時間多施工品質較高。監造費、監造人數、實際檢驗次數呈高度正相關，但檢驗停留點數量與監造費及檢查次數無關。覆蓋前與安全項目之施工績效與整體施工績效為正相關。檢驗停留點多不代表實際檢查次數多，檢查次數多不代表工程品質好，檢查覆蓋前與安全之項目即可維持相同之施工品質，表示業主評斷監造好壞不應依據停留點、檢查次數或花費時間多寡。監造可減量監督，抓重點品質以節省人力及時間。

Supervision is an important role to ensure construction quality, but it faces problems in execution, such as the inflexibility of manpower and cost of the supervision contract, supervision performance evaluated by appearance, too many requirements by the government. These problems make supervision workload excessive and construction quality improvement uncertain.
This research explored the numbers and effectiveness of construction quality inspections by supervision. First 15 questions were designed to interview the owners, supervisors and contractors of eight construction projects, trying to find out the phenomena and problems often encountered in supervision. Then the supervision inspection was focused to analyze its numbers of check points, the times taken and inspection performance. Correlation analysis was used to find out the relationships between these supervision variables.
Supervision results were affected by the regulations and contracts, and the supervision process. Supervision was not implemented well because the contract scope and work interface are not clear. Supervision process focused on inspection check points, and the paperwork will not improve construction quality. A supervisor’s contribution lies mainly in construction quality so the supervisor should be assigned certain quality responsibility.
From six case projects, the inspection check points can be categorized into three types: “before coverage and safety” items with 42%, “important” with 44%, and “less important” with 14%. The average supervision inspection checked for 253 times and spent 255 hours for inspection per month. It accounted for 29% of the supervision work, in which 195 hours for inspection, 60 hours for paperwork.
The correlation analysis showed that: the relationships did not exist between the number of check points, inspection time and construction quality performance. But the inspection time and construction quality was in positive relationship. The number of check points and supervision fee were not found related to inspection time. The construction performance of the “before coverage and safety” points was positively related to construction performance of total points. More inspections or more inspection time does not mean construction quality is good; check the items of “before coverage and safety” can have the same construction quality. The owners should not judge supervision by the number of check points, the times of inspection and the inspection time.

1.Arditi, D. and Gunaydin, H. M. (1998), “Factors That Affect Process Quality in the Life Cucle of Building Projects.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 3, pp. 194-203.
2.Betes, A. Jr. and Holt, L.T. (2011), “Large, Complex Construction Disputes: Dynamics of Multiparty Mediation.” Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction , ASCE , May, p.58-62
3.Chan, A. P. C., Scott, D., and Chan, P. L. (2004), “Factors affecting the success of a construction project.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 130 (1), 153-155.
4.Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research,” Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
5.El-Razek, A., Bassioni, H. A., and Mobarak, A. M. (2008), “Causes of delay in building construction projects in Egypt,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 134(11), 831-841.
6.Gharehbaghi, K. and McManus K. (2003), “Effective Construction Management.” Leadership and Management in Engineering, January, pp. 54-55.
7.Gransberg D. D. and Molenaar K. (2004), “Analysis of Owner’s Design and Construction Quality Management Approaches in Design/Build Projects.” Journal of Management in Engineering, ASCE, Volume 20, Issue 4, 162-169.
8.Josephson, P. E., Larsson, B. and Li, H. (2002), “Illustrative Benchmarking Rework and Rework Costs in Swedish Construction Industry.” Journal of Management in Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 76-83.
9.Kaliba C., Muya, M., and Mumba, K. (2009), “Cost escalation and schedule delays in road construction projects in Zambia,” International Journal of Project Management, 27, 522-531.
10.Leu, W. H., and Chang, A. S. (2009), “Quality comparison of traditional DBB and BOT construction projects.” Proceedings of CRIOCM 2009 International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate, Nanjing, China, October, 2146-2150.
11.Schoonmaker, S. J. (1997), ISO for Engineers and Designers, McGraw-Hill, NY.
12.Simons, R. (2000), Performance Measurement & Control Systems for Implementing Strategy Text & Cases. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
13.Thomas, H. R. and Flynn, C. J. (2011), “Fundamental Principles of Subcontractor Management” Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, ASCE, August, p.106-111
14.Wang, J., Liu, J.,Liao, Z., Tang, P. (2009), “Identification of key liability risks of supervision engineers in China.” Construction Management and Economics, 27, 1157–1173.
15.Wardani, M. A. E., Messner, J. I., and Horman, M. J. (2006), “Comparing procurement methods for design-build projects.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 132(3), 230-238.
16.Yasamis, F., Arditi, D. and Mohammadi, J. (2002), “Assessing Contractor Quality Performance.” Construction Management and Economics, 20(3), pp. 211-223.
17.Yates, J. K., and Lockley, E. E. (2002), “Documenting and analyzing construction failures,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 128(1), 8-17.
18.Yin, R. K. (2003), Applications of Case Study Research, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, Calif.
19.Zhang, X., and Kumaraswamy, M. M. (2001), “Hong Kong experience in managing BOT projects.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 127(2), 154-162.
20.公共工程施工品質管理作業要點，96年09月20日修正。
21.公共工程施工綱要規範實施要點，90年11月15日。
22.公共工程勞工安全衛生管理作業要點，98年11月2日。
23.公共工程監造計畫與品質計畫製作綱要，93年09月。
24.交通部工程施工查核小組，監造單位缺失，95年。
25.交通部台灣區國道高速公路局近年之調查，「國內公共工程監造制度之研究」委託研究案期末報告審查會議紀錄，95.11.27。
26.行政院公共工程委員會（民99），品質管理相關規定，工程會網站www.pcc.gov.tw。
27.行政院公共工程委員會，工程品質常見缺失說明，92年6月。
28.李建中、李得璋、周南山、蘇毓德、張世宏、龐孝珊、胡詩敏（民95），國內公共工程監造制度之研究，行政院公共工程委員會委託專案計畫研究報告。
29.李貞儀（2005），「專案監造人力指派最佳化決策模式研究」，國立中央大學土木研究所碩士論文。
30.沈芳瑩（2009），「建立營建工程協調模式與運作機制」，國立成功大學土木工程研究所博士論文。
31.房性中（2012），監造工程師正確認知暨應有作為探討，技師報NO.787，101.01.07。
32.林翔（2005），「公共工程品質制度檢討」，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文。
33.林進生（2005），「品質指標初次合格率在施工上的應用」，國立成功大學土木工程研究所碩士論文。
34.香港屋宇署（2009），地盤監督守則。
35.張行道等（2012），監造人力需求分析與調整機制之建立，計畫編號00940，台灣世曦工程顧問股份有限公司。
36.機關委託技術服務廠商評選及計費辦法，99年01月15日修正。
37.謝俊誼（2011），探討鋼筋工程施工品質管理及常見缺失，第19卷第1期，中工高雄會刊。