Al-Otaibi, M (2011) Evaluation of contractor performance for pre-selection in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. PhD thesis, Loughborough University, UK.
Abstract
The construction industry in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is experiencing rapid development and sharp expansion due to recent changes in socio-economic development policies. The performance of construction contractors is an essential and critical part of project success; however, there is a lack of skilled manpower and lack of experience in managing major projects within KSA. Appropriate tools to evaluate, measure and monitor construction contractor performance are also required. As a result of the changes in the KSA construction market needs, the nature of the competition, the cost of failing public construction projects and the importance of the quality of product in the final project, awareness of the need to select an appropriate though effective contractor performance selection framework has been highlighted. This doctoral research project analyzes and evaluates current techniques for monitoring contractor performance, and identifies the most appropriate techniques that could be adopted in KSA. This was achieved by performing critical analyses of literature and conducting preliminary interviews with practitioners in KSA. The main outcome of the literature review and preliminary interviews was used to articulate a number of questions which were subsequently posed in a questionnaire and in interviews with a number of Saudi professionals working within the public sector. The findings of this initial research have been used to establish a novel framework to help in measuring contractor performance prior to selection. The framework was tested through focus group workshops resulting in positive feedback and some alterations. The main findings of the study include the lack of an appropriate construction contractor performance evaluation framework in SA, and the identification and exploration of criteria and sub-criteria for a selection framework. The research provides recommendations for best practices in the construction industry, as well as for further research in the field.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | best practice; competition; construction project; contractor performance; economic development; evaluation; feedback; focus group; interview; major projects; manpower; performance evaluation; professional; project success; public sector; Saudi Arabia |
| Index terms: | major project, contractor performance, public sector, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia, project success, workshop, construction industry, construction market, best practice, monitoring, public construction, literature review, economic development, interview, focus group, construction contractor, performance evaluation, exploration, construction project, practitioner, questionnaire, competition |
| Subjects: | construction type, data collection methods, business, control systems, practitioner, environmental resource management, data analysis and analytics, strategic project management, performance measurement, economic development, Geography, production management, project management theory and practice, contract management, market analysis, building construction, industry analysis, administrative law |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Contract Administration, Site Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management, Legal Issues, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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