Betts, M and Ofori, G (1992) Strategic planning for competitive advantage in construction. Construction Management and Economics, 10(6), pp. 511-532. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper outlines the developments in strategic planning exemplified by the works of Porter (1979, 1985, 1990) and others. After describing the emerging concepts and techniques, it is observed that these have been applied by enterprises in other sectors of the economy in pursuit of competitive advantage. Such applications are taking place at the level of parts of an enterprise’s operations and at the overall corporate level. This is contrasted with the situation in construction where strategic planning at any level is Iess widespread, although it is becoming more common. Several reasons are identified as hindrances to strategic planning in construction. The current and historical situation with regard to planning in construction is described. The ways in which strategic planning can be applied by construction enterprises are outlined. In conclusion, it is observed that Porter’s new concepts of strategic planning have relevance to, and considerable scope for application in, construction enterprises. It is suggested that the changing nature of the task of the construction industry and the dynamism of its operating environment imply that the strategic planning techniques put forward by Porter are vital for the survival and progress of construction enterprises of all types.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | competitive advantage; construction enterprises; strategic planning |
| Index terms: | construction industry, survival, strategic planning, competitive advantage, becoming |
| Subjects: | environmental science, management, industry analysis, philosophical process, market analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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