Sohail, M and Baldwin, A N (2004) Performance indicators for 'micro-projects' in developing countries. Construction Management and Economics, 22(1), pp. 11-23. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The majority of public works contracts undertaken in developing countries have a total cost of less than US $15 000. They include the provision of enhanced water and sanitation, access ways and pavements, small community buildings and solid-waste related construction. These are termed 'micro-projects' and there is a general lack of information for such projects. This paper describes the development and testing of 67 performance indicators for use on micro-projects. They include not only general performance indicators but also indicators for inter-organizational and socio-economic issues. These indicators are based on data from over 800 micro-projects undertaken in developing countries. For each indicator, a statement of why the indicator was selected, the key sources of information and how to determine the indicator is provided. Examples of the use of the indicators are also presented.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | developing countries; micro-contracts; performance indicators; urban infrastructure |
| Index terms: | developing country, performance indicator, public work, urban infrastructure, testing, water and sanitation |
| Subjects: | environmental health, professional practice, infrastructure and transport systems, development economics, performance management, infrastructure engineering |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Quality Management, Engineering Principles, International Construction, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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