Abstract:
This study “an investigation into the quality performance of road projects in Kigali, Rwanda” focused on determining the factors influencing road quality, examining critical criteria for road quality performance measurement, and recommending effective strategies for improving road project quality. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining quantitative data from structured questionnaires with qualitative insights from field observations, interviews, and document reviews. The study involved 94 respondents, including engineers, contractors, consultants, project managers, and road users, and covered four strategically selected road projects across Kigali’s districts. Regarding findings the study has revealed that there was a strong consensus among Project Managers, Road Engineers/Contractors/Consultants, and Government officials in Kigali regarding both the factors influencing road quality performance and the critical criteria for its measurement, as well as effective improvement strategies. Across all project phases (initiation, procurement, execution, monitoring, closure), factors such as project design quality, contractor qualification and experience, skilled labor, compliance with specifications, and regulatory enforcement were consistently rated as highly influential. Similarly, road geometry, pavement integrity, drainage, and smoothness were universally prioritized as key measurement criteria. For improvement strategies, use qualified and skilled contractors, comply with design specifications and standards, use certified materials, and strengthen project planning and design were top-ranked. Crucially, ANOVA results consistently showed no statistically significant differences in perception among the professional groups for nearly all factors, criteria, and strategies (all p-values ≥ 0.05). This indicates a remarkable, shared understanding and alignment among stakeholders on road quality aspects in Kigali, providing a solid foundation for collaborative initiatives. Minor, nonsignificant variations in mean scores suggest subtle differences in emphasis, but overall agreement is high.
