Winch, G M (2003) How innovative is construction? Comparing aggregated data on construction innovation and other sectors: a case of apples and pears. Construction Management and Economics, 21(6), pp. 651-654. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This research note addresses the widespread perception that construction performs badly compared to other industrial sectors. The evidence for this perception is usually based on comparative industrial performance data. However, due to technical problems with the Standard Industrial Classifications used, like is not compared with like in these analyses, to the systematic disadvantage of the construction industry's comparative performance. In an effort to improve the performance of the industry, the auto industry is often held up as an exemplar. However, when that industry is compared on a like-for-like basis with construction, it proves to have a poor record of performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | auto industry performance; construction industry performance; construction innovation; standard industrial classification |
| Index terms: | construction industry, industry performance, construction industry performance, construction innovation, evidence |
| Subjects: | building construction, financial analysis, industry analysis, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| 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