Lahdenperä, P (1999) Restructuring the building industry for improved performance. Journal of Construction Procurement, 5(2), pp. 118-128. ISSN 1358-9180
Abstract
A fundamental restructuring of the building industry is needed. This is due, firstly, to the observed problems in the present practice. Secondly, it seems that the future business environment will present such challenges that the prevailing organization will not be able to rise to them. This paper suggests some changes to the industry's organization and operational modes, and argues why they need to be made. The suggested changes are based not only on the problems of present practice but also on different general development trends and phenomena of the market and society in general. The main motivation for the change is to accelerate development in the building industry. The solution was arrived at by the gathering, analysis and synthesis of various actual ongoing development programmes in the building industry worldwide. It offers the best potential for improving the quality, productivity and innovativeness of construction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building process, development, future, innovation, organizing, project |
| Index terms: | productivity, building industry, society, programme, motivation, building process |
| Subjects: | psychology, building construction, communities and social development, management, project controls, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Human Resources, Site Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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