Takim, R; Akintoye, A and Kelly, J (2003) Performance measurement systems in construction. In: Greenwood, D J (ed.) Proceedings of 19th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2003, Brighton, UK.
Abstract
In the manufacturing and construction industries, performance measurement is used as a systematic way of judging project performance by evaluating the inputs, outputs and the final project outcomes. However, very few companies systematically measure their performance in a holistic way. Moreover, the existing systems tend to focus more on product and less on process and design. This can lead to the sub-optimal quality of the performance measurement system, the misjudging of relative performance, and to complacency and the denying of appropriate rewards to the deserving. Previous studies have revealed that performance measurements can be measured in terms of financial and non-financial measures, or the combination of both. When measurements are being implemented, contractors, consultants and the management team’s performances are blamed as the major reasons for the failure of a particular project. The other project stakeholders, such as client, suppliers, trade contractors and the community at large, are neglected. This paper reviews and synthesises some models for measuring construction performance that have been developed in the United Kingdom, USA, France, India, Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia and Malaysia. Based on this review and synthesis, the paper proposes the use of an 'amalgamated- model' of measurement approach that includes financial and non-financial indicators across project phases as a framework for measuring construction project performance.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | financial and non-financial measures; performance measurements systems; project stakeholders |
| Index terms: | construction industry, India, trade contractor, construction project, project stakeholder, project performance, United Kingdom, construction performance, project outcome, Hong Kong, France, Malaysia, performance measurement, Saudi Arabia |
| Subjects: | practitioner, project completion, performance assessment, project management theory and practice, Geography, production management, performance measurement, industry analysis, sociology |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Site Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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