Hwang, B G and Zhao, X (2015) Review of global performance measurement and benchmarking initiatives. International Journal of Construction Management, 15(4), pp. 265-275. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Recently, construction industry groups in several countries have initiated performance measurement and benchmarking programmes as business strategies to improve performance through comparisons to the best practices, and have been enjoying benefits from them. To draw implications for the Singaporean construction industry, this paper reviews seven global performance measurement and benchmarking initiatives, and two company initiatives, with cross-initiative comparisons. In addition, based on the discussions, an iterative framework is proposed for the performance measurement and benchmarking initiative in the Singaporean construction industry. Although the results are interpreted in the context of Singapore, the review provides an understanding of the existing performance measurement and benchmarking initiatives for students, practitioners and academics in other countries.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | benchmarking; performance measurement; Singapore |
| Index terms: | Singapore, performance measurement, construction industry, best practice, programme, business strategy, benchmarking, practitioner |
| Subjects: | business, practitioner, project controls, industry analysis, performance measurement, Geography |
| Topics: | Time Control, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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