Sezer, A A (2015) Contractor use of productivity and sustainability indicators for building refurbishment. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 5(2), pp. 141-153. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyse the use of building refurbishment productivity and sustainability indicators among construction contractors. Design/methodology/approach - Theories of organisational culture and incentives predict that contractor size affects dependency on routines and the implementation of company policies on site. Eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with three general or site managers of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and five site managers of large contractors involved in housing and office refurbishment projects in Sweden. Findings - Both SMEs and large contractors track resource use on refurbishment sites. Resource use is measured through cost recording systems and a few area-based key indicators. SMEs may have sustainability policies, but routines derived from such policies were weak on site. However, for SMEs, refurbishment technology choices are often made by the client’s designer, and sustainability requirements are included in the contract specifications. For large contractors, sustainability policies are more developed and are reflected in site routines. Large contractors are usually public companies with stakeholders who expect such routines. Practical implications - Contractors that develop strategies for increasing productivity and sustainability can benefit from a deeper understanding of implementation issues. The outcome of this paper is useful while designing new indicators and building certification schemes. Originality/value - Much has been written about key performance indicators for construction, but little attention has been paid to indicators for building refurbishment, or the use of measurement routines.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | sustainability; Sweden; productivity; performance management; performance measures; indicators; building refurbishment |
| Index terms: | sustainability indicator, specification, routine, certification, key performance indicator, interview, performance management, designer, Sweden, strategy, performance measure, productivity, building refurbishment, site manager, methodology, organizational culture, housing, construction contractor, key indicator, refurbishment project, implementation |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, project delivery, data collection methods, construction type, profession, practitioner, sociology, asset management, administrative processes, sustainability assessment, management, performance measurement, research methods, contractual condition, Geography, infrastructure engineering |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Procurement, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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