Company acquisitions and business performance in the construction industry

Jones, D W and Harris, F C (1982) Company acquisitions and business performance in the construction industry. Construction Papers, 1(3), pp. 5-19. ISSN 0144-8587

Abstract

This report is an extension of the industry wide investigations into the effects of takeovers and mergers. The study was limited to public construction companies quoted on the London Stock Exchange, and was conducted as a statistical analysis of a large sample. The companies were classified into groups in accordance with the extent of their acquisition policy over the six-year period from 1972 to 1977. Four bodies were identified, i.e. managers, shareholders, employees and the economy, and for each several measures of financial data were selected to represent their interests. The analysis sought to identify whether relationships existed between individual measures and the extent of acquisition policy.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: investigation, London, public construction, construction industry, statistical analysis, acquisition, merger, business performance, manager
Subjects: Geography, building construction, practitioner, performance measurement, industry analysis, data collection methods, business, data science
Topics: Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions
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