Chau, K W; Poon, S W; Wang, Y S and Lu, L L (2005) Technological progress and the productive efficiency of construction firms in Hong Kong, 1981-2001. Journal of Construction Research, 6(2), pp. 195-207. ISSN 1609-9451
Abstract
This study investigates the factors that affect the productive efficiency of construction firms in Hong Kong. Productive efficiency refers to a comparison of the volume of output to that of the resources used to produce the output. This comparison reflects the technological capability of the firm. Not only does such a capability vary across different firms at any point in time, it also changes over time due to technological progress. This study measures the productive efficiency of construction firms using a non-parametric technique — Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). The results of this study suggest that: (1) economies of scale exist at the firm level; (2) firms that subcontract out more of their work have lower productive efficiency; and (3) more capital intensive firms tend to have lower productive efficiency, although these firms also have higher growth rates in productive efficiency over time. Over the period of observation, the average productive efficiency of all construction firms has increased at a noticeably decreasing rate, thereby confirming the catching-up hypothesis. The results of the study have important implications for practitioners and policymakers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | catching-up process; construction firms; data envelopment analysis; productive efficiency; Hong Kong; subcontracting |
| Index terms: | construction firm, subcontract, technological capability, practitioner, subcontracting, Hong Kong, efficiency, data envelopment analysis |
| Subjects: | performance management, data analysis and analytics, Geography, innovation and technology management, contract type, organization, practitioner |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Contract Administration, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Supply Chain Management, Quality 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