Davies, R J (2003) Formulating competitive strategy in the UK housebuilding industry: Executive summary. EngD thesis, University of Warwick, UK.
Abstract
The UK housebuilding industry faces the challenge of meeting demands for higher quality and greater choice with a construction process that has not changed for many years and a diminishing pool of skilled labour. The situation is exacerbated by the difficulties of finding sufficient land for development. This has led to a strategic bias amongst housebuilding companies towards land acquisition and asset turnover which results in a lack of customer focus. The sector is therefore vulnerable to new entrants with new technologies and more professional customer care practices. These circumstances present an opportunity for a UK housebuilder to develop competitive advantage by pursuing a strategy of innovation leadership. Such a strategy has proved successful in other sectors such as the automotive industry. This thesis analyses industry trends and lessons from best practice to shape a new competition framework for the UK housebuilding industry of the future. This suggests that research and development, product design, process and project management, relationships with customers, quality and innovation will be of growing strategic importance. Techniques such as the Balanced Scorecard, Strategy Mapping and Technology Roadmapping can help firms to explore options and formulate strategies to compete effectively in changing competitive environments. These tools have been employed to create a strategy for a major UK housebuilding company, balanced across four perspectives: financial; customer; internal business processes; learning and growth. This strategy has been implemented principally through the launch of three new businesses that have stimulated change within the core housebuilding business. Progress has been made in enhancing the company's value proposition downstream of its core business and in improving quality and efficiency through the introduction of off-site manufacturing into upstream operations. Early results suggest that innovation leadership can be an effective strategy for a UK housebuilder but progressive culture change across the industry is a key driver for long-term success.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | best practice; building industry; competition; competitive advantage; housebuilder; housebuilding; innovation; leadership; learning; manufacturing; off-site; project management; UK |
| Index terms: | strategy, face, turnover, off-site manufacturing, skilled labour, product design, competitive strategy, research and development, mapping, bias, land acquisition, construction process, competition, automotive industry, housebuilder, balanced scorecard, competitive advantage, core busines, efficiency, new technology, land, project management, housebuilding, option, best practice, building industry, executive |
| Subjects: | business, practitioner, psychology, real estate economics, innovation and technology management, business management, economic analysis, manufacturing engineering, management, performance measurement, spatial and geospatial analysis, construction integration, performance management, probability and distributions, project management theory and practice, market analysis, building construction, research management, decision analysis, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Urban Studies, Organizational Design, Site Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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