Öz, Ö (2001) Sources of competitive advantage of Turkish construction companies in international markets. Construction Management and Economics, 19(2), pp. 135-144. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Michael Porter's diamond framework, a relatively recent attempt to improve our existing knowledge on the sources of competitive advantage, is applied to the Turkish construction industry. The results of this undertaking challenge a common approach that attributes Turkish contractors' success in international markets to labour cost advantages and geographic and cultural proximity to several promising markets. In the light of the diamond framework, Turkish contractors' advantages are found not to be limited to these 'factor conditions' and 'chance' events. There are other important advantages behind their success, such as the existence of a dynamic home market, favourable entrepreneurial variables, and pressures to upgrade stemming from intense domestic rivalry. The analysis also points to the areas in which they face troubles, including problems induced by the government, financing difficulties and the weak international position of the Turkish design engineering and consultancy services industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | competitive advantage; diamond framework; international competitiveness; Turkish construction industry |
| Index terms: | markets, construction industry, international market, competitiveness, labour cost, design engineering, competitive advantage, consultancy, financing, construction company, face |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, psychology, organization, industry analysis, cost management, market analysis, development economics, structural engineering |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, International Construction, Procurement, Engineering Principles, 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