Challenges of Quality Assessment System (QLASSIC) In Malaysia’s Construction Industry

The Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC) is an independent framework based on the Construction Industry Standard (CIS 7:2021), designed to evaluate workmanship quality in the Malaysian construction industry. This research investigates the advantages, challenges, and strategies associated with QLASSIC implementation. Utilizing a quantitative approach, data was collected from a total of 122 respondents in Kuala Langat, Selangor. The findings reveal that the primary advantage of QLASSIC is its capacity to reduce major defects and building failures, thereby enhancing structural longevity. Conversely, the extended duration required to produce assessment reports was identified as the main challenge in implementing the QLASSIC system. To address these issues, the study suggests that the most effective strategy is to enhance stakeholders' technical knowledge and proficiency with the QLASSIC system.

QLASSIC, CIS 7:2021, Workmanship Quality, Construction Industry

1. Akintoye, A. (2000). Analysis of factors influencing project cost estimating practice. Construction Management and Economics, 18(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/014461900370979 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ali, A. S. (2014). Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC): A Malaysian experience. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 5(6). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Azir, K. M. A. K., Muhammad, W. M. N., Othman, M. N. F., & Daeng, D. H. (2018). The insight on Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC) implementation in Sarawak. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 429(1), 012103. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/429/1/012103 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Azahari, A. A., Ismail, R., & Said, I. (2025). Integrating QLASSIC and ISO 9001 for enhanced construction quality assessment: A comparative analysis. Journal of Building Performance, 15(2). https://spaj.ukm.my/jsb/index.php/jbp/article/view/ 707 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Basri, M. N., Yusof, A. M., & Arshad, H. (2025). Deterrents for QLASSIC adoption among G7 contractors: A prestige project perspective. Malaysian Construction Research Journal (MCRJ), 20(1), 88–104. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Chung, X. Y., Wong, C. F., & Gan, C. H. (2025). Study on the implementation of Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC) in Malaysia. IEM Journal, 86(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.54552/v86i1.267 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Construction Industry Development Board. (2017). QLASSIC: Quality Assessment System in Construction. CIDB Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Construction Industry Development Board [CIDB]. (2019). Construction industry review and outlook 2018/2019. CIDB Malaysia. https://www. cidb.gov.my/publications/construction-industry-review-and-outlook/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Construction Industry Development Board. (2021). Construction Industry Standard (CIS 7:2021): Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC). CIDB Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Chung, X. Y., Wong, C. F., & Gan, C. H. (2025). Study on the implementation of Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC) in Malaysia. IEM Journal, 86(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.54552/v86i1.267 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fateh, M. A. M., & Sulaiman, S. (2022). Improving implementation of QLASSIC in Malaysia. 3rd International Conference on the Built Environment and Engineering, 304–312. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Harun, S. N., & Ahzahar, N. (2018). Constraints in implementing QLASSIC for stratified housing. In 3rd Undergraduate Seminar on Built Environment and Technology 2018 (USBET2018) (pp. 172–177). Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak Branch. https://ir.uitm.edu.my/47579/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hamid, Z. A., Zakaria, R., & Rashid, K. (2024). The "rectify-before-score" cycle: Analyzing artificial delays in QLASSIC-rated projects. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Built Environment and Engineering 2024 (IConBEE2024). Construction Research Institute of Malaysia (CREAM). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Ismail, A., Ali, K. N., & Choong, W. W. (2025). Digitalization of quality assessment: Aligning QLASSIC with BIM-based environments for real-time monitoring. Construction Management and Economics, 43(1), 15–29. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Jasni, M. D., Zulkifli, M. Z. A., Mahat, N., & Khamaksorn, A. (2023). QLASSIC adoption amongst Sabah construction industry players and stakeholders. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2881(070002). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0163354 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kam, K. J., Hilmy, M. Z., & Hamid, Z. A. (2016). Evolution of quality assessment system in construction (QLASSIC) in Malaysia. Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 11(11), 2413–2418. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Khalid, Z., & Tamjehi, S. D. (2020). Contractor's understanding towards the implementation of quality assessment system in construction (QLASSIC) in construction industry. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 849(1), 012052. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/849/1/012052 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Mahat, N., Zulkifli, M. Z. A., & Jasni, M. D. (2024). Trust and subjectivity in external quality assessments: A study of CIDB accredited assessors. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Infrastructure, 12(2), 45–59. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Norizam, A., & Malek, M. A. (2013). Perception on Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC) implementation in Malaysia. Malaysian Construction Research Journal (MCRJ), 13(2), 69–77. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Nasir, N. M., Haron, N. A., & Ibrahim, R. (2024). Investigating administrative bottlenecks: The impact of report delays on QLASSIC adoption. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (JESTEC), 19(4), 1542–1558. https://jestec.taylors.edu.my/Vol%2019%20Issue%204.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Polaris Learning. (2019). Do Assessors and Verifiers Need Refresher Training? Polaris Learning. Retrieved October 5, 2021, from Polaris website:https://polaris-learning.com/do-assessors-and-verifiers-need-refresher-training/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Rahman, I. A., Memon, A. H., & Zulkiffli, N. A. A. (2018). Employee training and competency development as a critical success factor for construction quality. International Journal of Construction Management, 18(4), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2017.1354502 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Roslan, N. H., Ahmad, S., & Mohamad, S. F. (2023). Public perception vs. technical reality: Why QLASSIC scores struggle to influence Malaysian homebuyers. Journal of Surveying, Construction & Property, 14(1), 12–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Seman, M. S., Esa, M. R., & Yusof, M. R. (2021). The roles of contractors in implementing Quality Assessment System in Construction (QLASSIC) in construction projects. International Journal of Real Estate Studies, 15(S1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.11113/intrest.v15nS1.117 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Subramaniam, N., Omar, R., Sarpin, N., Nasrun, M., & Nawi, M. (2019). Effectiveness of quality assessment in construction project. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(3), 541–547. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Yong, Y. C., & Mustaffa, N. E. (2011). Clients, consultants and contractors' perception of critical success factors for construction projects in Malaysia. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ARCOM Conference (pp. 735–744). Association of Researchers in Construction Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Yvone, K. (2014, November 22). Educating the public on QLASSIC. The Star Online. https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/ 2014/ 11/22/ educating-the-public-on-qlassic/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Zahrizan, Z., Zakaria, R., & Omardin, M. A. (2023). Exploring the barriers in implementation of QLASSIC in Malaysian construction industry from the perspective of contractors. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1140(012013). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1140/1/012013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Zulkifli, M. Z. A., Mahat, N., Jasni, M. D., & Khamaksorn, A. (2023). Quality management in fast-track projects: The conflict between speed and QLASSIC compliance. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2881(070005). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0163358 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria