Proverbs, D G; Holt, G D and Olomolaiye, P O (1999) European construction contractors: A productivity appraisal of in situ concrete operations. Construction Management and Economics, 17(2), pp. 221-230. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Site productivity levels for high rise, in situ concrete operations are compared among three groups of European construction contractors. Results confirm significant differences between the contractor's productivity rates for each of the three countries investigated (Germany, France and the UK). German firms are the most efficient at reinforcement and concrete placing operations, whereas French firms are most productive at formwork. UK firms are the least productive for two operations, namely formwork and concrete. French firms are least productive at fixing reinforcement. Based on a specific model project, it is determined that French and German firms require significantly fewer man-hours to carry out the said concrete operations than do UK firms. UK contractors achieve the lowest levels of labour productivity for the operations involved. The UK also exhibited greater productivity variation, i.e. providing evidence of extreme (most and least efficient) levels of labour output for several concrete operations. Leading on from these analyses, a construction (labour) cost comparison indicates that French contractors are the least expensive. Furthermore, the ideal solution for clients would be to have French firms build their projects in the UK, since this combination provides the most economic solution to the model building overall.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analysis of variance; european comparison; in situ concrete operations; labour costs; productivity rates |
| Index terms: | appraisal, labour productivity, reinforcement, variation, Germany, variance, high rise, labour cost, evidence, productivity, construction contractor, formwork, placing, in-situ, France |
| Subjects: | factor and component analysis, evaluation and assessment methods, concrete and cementitious materials, management, building materials, Geography, practitioner, contractual condition, measurement and scaling, building construction, construction type, cost management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Business Strategy, Contract Administration, Site Management, Geographical Context, Construction Technology, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Construction Materials, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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