Sillars, D N and Kangari, R (1997) Japanese construction alliances. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 123(2), pp. 146-152. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
As a result of increased globalization, characterized by freely accessible communications and transportation systems, the traditionally geographically dependent construction industry finds itself in the midst of industry changes in which the borders between competitors are being removed. As a result, construction industry organizations need to react to change and increased competition. One method for doing so is formation of construction alliances to provide for the resource, geography specific, and technological needs of project owners. The objective of this paper is to present the results of interviews with leaders in the Japanese construction industry, with a perspective on perceptions of change in the international and domestic market, and the use of alliances to react to those changes. The results indicate an increasing need to form alliances to remain competitive across and within traditional market borders. Additionally, the impact of the spread of the free market economy is noted as a significant factor in the rise of increasing competitiveness. The importance of alliance success is stressed, and the means to that success is careful integration of cultures and technology during alliance formation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | interview, integration, globalization, competition, owner, competitiveness, construction industry |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, market analysis, organizational analysis, sociology, industry analysis, economic factors |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, International Construction, Stakeholder Management, 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