Pongpeng, J and Liston, J (2003) Constractor ability criteria: A view from the Thai construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 21(3), pp. 267-282. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Realizing that there is a lack of commonality in selecting criteria to evaluate contractor ability, the study aim was to develop a common set of contractor ability criteria for both government and private sectors. This included a standardized set of physical characteristics (hierarchical organizational units) of contractors. The Thai construction industry was surveyed as to the degrees of importance placed on a range of criteria and measures. Similarities and differences between the government and private sectors in selecting contractor ability criteria have been analysed by comparing the importance index and ranking order and comparing mean importance placed on criteria and measures. Relationships between all criteria and measures have also been explored by using correlation coefficients. Factor analysis has been applied to group all highly correlated measures together so as to develop a common set of contractor ability criteria. The result of analysing similarities and differences indicated only slight differences in the mean importance of criteria and measures between the government and private sectors. Thus, a common set of contractor ability criteria has been developed by applying factor analysis, namely, 'engineering/construction', 'procurement/contract', 'project managers', 'human resources', 'quality management systems', 'health and safety', 'plant/equipment', 'financial strength' and 'public relations'.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contractor ability; contractor ability criteria; factor analysis; prequalification; Thai construction industry |
| Index terms: | private sector, project manager, construction industry, factor analysis, quality management system, health and safety, public relation, physical characteristic, human resource |
| Subjects: | profession, participation process, project delivery, management, health safety and environment, material properties and characteristics, industry analysis, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Human Resources |
| 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