Crosthwaite, D (2000) The international performance of British construction companies 1990-1996. Building Research & Information, 28(4), pp. 280-290. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Large construction companies are increasingly having to seek work on an international basis. A recent stated aim of some of the larger British construction companies has been to increase their overseas activities to counteract some of the problems within the domestic construction market. This paper examines the international performance of British construction firms during the period 1990-96. The principle findings indicate that British firms had increased their overseas activities during the study period. However despite theory to the contrary (Seymour, 1987) and contrary to the practice of some competitors, they had tended to conduct the major share of their overseas work in developed countries. This finding is put forward to suggest that the British companies' overseas operations have done little to offset the downturn in domestic workload, as developed countries historically suffer similar recessions to the UK.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | British construction companies; internationalization; location; performance |
| Index terms: | developed country, construction firm, construction company, workload, domestic construction, internationalization, recession |
| Subjects: | development economics, management, economic analysis, organization, construction type |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Human Resources, International Construction |
| 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