Key process area mapping in the production of an e-capability maturity model for UK construction organisations

Wood, G; Davis, P; Eadie, R; Perera, S and Heaney, G (2011) Key process area mapping in the production of an e-capability maturity model for UK construction organisations. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 16(3), pp. 197-210. ISSN 1366-4387

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to report the production of the key process areas (KPAs) for an e-capability maturity model for construction organisations, based on drivers and barriers to e-procurement. Design/methodology/approach Previous researchers have recognised the positive consequences of possessing a model to sustain the embedment of any business process within an organisation. The capability maturity model progressed into one of the most internationally recognised since the release of the Software Capability Maturity Model (CMM) in 1991. Since then, many CMMs have been developed. This paper reports on how a CMM based on drivers and barriers to e-procurement identified in Eadie et al. can be developed to form the KPAs in the formation of a model to gauge the maturity of an organisation in relation to e-procurement. Findings It was found that factor analysis could be used as a data reduction technique to reduce the 20 drivers and 32 barriers identified as being applicable to e-procurement in construction, to 12 KPAs: Quality management system; Cost management system; Intergroup coordination; Time management system; Operational analysis; Organisational change management system; Integrated teaming; Governance management system; Requirements development; Knowledge management system; Integration management system; and Organisational environment. Originality/value This paper provides particulars of a research project which uses factor analysis to produce a set of KPAs from the drivers and barriers identified in Eadie et al. These KPAs are then subjected to a mapping process linking them to maturity levels to develop a CMM to analyse the e-procurement capability of construction organisations. This mapping will be reported in a later paper. This e-readiness of organisations will indicate the current state of a construction organisation in terms of its readiness to carry out e-procurement. The paper describes in detail the identification of the KPAs.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: capability maturity model; e-procurement; e-readiness; maturity model; process analysis; process management; United Kingdom
Index terms: cost management, knowledge management system, construction organization, time management, maturity model, governance, maturity level, coordination, process analysis, quality management system, factor analysis, United Kingdom, organizational change, management system, capability maturity model, organizational environment, methodology, integration, mapping, process management
Subjects: business, organization, project delivery, Geography, evaluation, management, spatial and geospatial analysis, research methods, accounting and finance, information systems, statistical analysis, organizational analysis, project controls, sociology
Topics: Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Governance, Digital Applications, Quality Management, Time Control, Organizational Design
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