Winch, G (1998) The growth of self-employment in British construction. Construction Management and Economics, 16(5), pp. 531-542. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper explores the issues around the remarkable growth in labour-only subcontracting on a self-employment basis in the British construction industry over the last 30 years. Following a presentation of the available data from the Department of Employment, the paper explores the reasons behind this remarkable development, and concludes that the main reason for the growth of self-employment since 1977 is the strategic choice of construction companies to emphasize flexibility over productivity as sources of competitive advantage. The paper also explores the implications of this strategic choice, and concludes that, as a result, the ability of the industry to increase productivity and quality is compromised due to the ways in which labour-only subcontracting and self-employment hinder training and innovation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | labour-only subcontracting; productivity; safety; self-employment; training; UK |
| Index terms: | construction industry, competitive advantage, employment, productivity, subcontracting, self-employment, construction company |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, market analysis, business economics, management, organization |
| Topics: | Supply Chain Management, Human Resources, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| 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