Abidali, A F and Harris, F (1995) A methodology for predicting company failure in the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 13(3), pp. 189-196. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper describes research directed towards the development of an operational system for identifying construction companies in danger of failure. The major component of the system combines financial ratio analysis and the statistical technique known as multivariate discriminant analysis, to produce a predictive model made up of seven variables, measuring distinct aspects of company financial structure, all transformed into a single value called the Z score. Good distinction between the scores of solvent and failed companies was provided. This technique is widely employed in the commercial sector with much of the work concentrated on failed and healthy companies. A secondary method was developed to reinforce the financial approach, whereby managerial performance aspects are weighted, combined and a cut-off, known as the A score value, determined to separate the two groups. The concept behind the A score is based on the belief that if a company is in financial difficulty the reason generally relates to inadequate management ability and errors perpetrated earlier. The A score is designed to address this aspect of failure prediction. By operating these two principal methods in conjunction, it is possible to predict with confidence who could be next to fail.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | a score; company failure; multivariate discriminant analysis; z score |
| Index terms: | discriminant analysis, Z-score, construction industry, company failure, construction company, methodology, financial ratio |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, statistical analysis, research methods, economic analysis, risk assessment, organization |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| 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