Xiao, H and Proverbs, D (2001) A comparison of contractor performance in Japan, the UK and the USA: Some preliminary findings from a new approach. In: Akintoye, A (ed.) Proceedings of 17th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2001, Salford, UK.
Abstract
International comparisons of contractor performance can provide effective performance benchmarks for those companies looking to succeed in the global market place. Methods previously employed for this purpose have been categorized into pricing studies, macroeconomic studies and case studies. Each of these methods has limitations in terms of two important aspects, that is their comparability and/or their representativeness of a particular country. With the aim being to address those limitations a new approach has been developed utilizing characteristics of both pricing studies and case studies. Data collection was conducted through a semi-structured project-based questionnaire survey conducted simultaneously in Japan, the UK and the US. Results suggest this new approach to be reliable and appropriate for the international comparison of contractor performance. Preliminary statistical analysis of the response suggests there are some important differences in practice and performance among contractors in Japan, the UK and the US.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analysis of variance; contractor performance; international comparison; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, case study, pricing, international comparison, variance, survey, statistical analysis, contractor performance, Japan |
| Subjects: | measurement and scaling, contract management, Geography, economic analysis, data analysis and analytics, data science, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PEA |
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