McNamara, E T; Howarth, T A P; Hill, C J and Stoneman, G R W (1998) Quality issues in marketing construction related products and services in China. In: Hughes, W (ed.) Proceedings of 14th Annual ARCOM Conference, 9-11 September 1998, Reading, UK.
Abstract
The economy of China is changing fundamentally and rapidly. This in turn has resulted in a major investment in construction projects. UK suppliers of construction-related products and services recognize that China represents a significant potential market. However, there are widespread reservations about the feasibility of UK suppliers trading profitably in China, since it is perceived as a relatively impenetrable market. This paper reports on the outcomes of a series of interviews, undertaken in China, with influential construction-related decision-makers. The outcome of these interviews is expressed as a series key proposals, which, it is recommended, should form the basis of cost-effective marketing of UK-supplied construction-related products and services in China.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | China; marketing; qualitative research; quality; ISO series |
| Index terms: | China, marketing, quality issue, qualitative research, construction project, proposal, ISO, interview |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, business, research design and methodology, project planning, standards development, production management, Geography, quality assurance |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here