Wang, D; Hadavi, A and Krizek, R J (2006) Chinese construction firms in reform. Construction Management and Economics, 24(5), pp. 509-519. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Since the economic reforms that began 20 years ago, and especially with the enterprise reforms in recent years, ownership of Chinese construction firms has evolved from traditional state and collective ownership towards a mixed economy characterised by diversified ownership forms. Based on a questionnaire survey and personal interviews with individuals from firms representing four types of ownership, it has been determined that the majority of Chinese construction firms have already embraced commercial objectives and behaviour patterns similar to those of typical firms in developed market economies. Nevertheless, despite the important progress that the reforms have made, this study indicated that various construction firms during this transition are suffering serious difficulties caused by the former planned system and underdeveloped market mechanisms. Unfair practices were found to be quite serious in the construction market. Major problems stem from clients' abnormal behaviour in forcing the price down, asking contractors to finance a project wholly or partially during its construction, and delays in payment; these actions have caused severe financial difficulties to Chinese firms and seriously disrupted the normal order of market stability.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | China; Chinese construction firms; firm behaviour; firm objective; ownership form; reform |
| Index terms: | construction market, ownership, market mechanisms, construction firm, survey, stability, interview, China, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, data collection methods, organization, market analysis, structural engineering, economics, Geography |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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