Willis, C J and Rankin, J H (2010) Measuring the maturity of Guyana's construction industry using the construction industry macro maturity model. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 15(2), pp. 87-116. ISSN 1823-6499
Abstract
The newly developed Construction Industry Macro Maturity Model (CIM3) was used to measure the maturity of Guyana's construction industry. The CIM3's assessment provides a leading indication of performance by relating the maturity of a set of management and operation key practices in the construction industry to the achievement of various performance objectives that lead to the realisation of the construction industry's performance goals. The implementation of the CIM3 in Guyana relied upon the use of an expert group of construction industry professionals who were elicited to provide the input information for the model. It was found that Guyana's construction industry is least mature with respect to health and safety management and most mature with respect to cost management. Overall, Guyana's construction industry is immature, and a translation of its maturity to represent the level of realisation of its combined performance goals indicates that its lagging or after-the-fact performance indicators are likely to be poor.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry macro maturity model; Guyana; maturity; performance |
| Index terms: | performance indicator, health and safety management, construction industry, implementation, cost management, maturity model, Guyana |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, evaluation, health safety and environment, Geography, performance management, accounting and finance, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Procurement, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Cost Management |
| 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