Baroudi, B M and Metcalfe, M (2011) A human perspective of contractor prequalification. Construction Economics and Building, 11(2), pp. 60-70. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
The contractor prequalification topic has had much written on it over the last two decades. In the past it has been primarily viewed in terms of the appropriate selection of contractors for construction projects. There has been extensive research interest into the functional and process driven aspects of contractor prequalification. However, there has been little research taking a more holistic view of contractor prequalification in terms of the human aspects that surround it. Hence, gaining a wider appreciation on how prequalification systems affect the major stakeholders seems warranted. The use of soft systems thinking allowed for an in- depth and contextual analysis of prequalification issues. This necessitated unstructured in- depth interviews to be carried out with senior industry practitioners. Sifting through their respective experiences allowed for an alternative view of contractor prequalification systems, a very human perspective to emerge. The research suggests that viewing prequalification systems from a human perspective provides a fuller picture of their true benefits and limitations. This could then translate into better prequalification design.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | human aspects; prequalification; soft systems |
| Index terms: | interview, construction project, systems thinking, practitioner |
| Subjects: | production management, practitioner, data collection methods, analytical methods |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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