Wang, J; Liu, J; Liao, Z and Tang, P (2009) Identification of key liability risks of supervision engineers in China. Construction Management and Economics, 27(12), pp. 1157-1173. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Until the present, the supervision engineer's liability risks in China have mostly been analysed by means of a qualitative approach by which it is difficult to identify the key liability risks of the Chinese supervision profession. Two questionnaire surveys were conducted to find out the supervision liability risks. The causes of those risks were analysed by reference to Chinese laws, regulations and questionnaire survey results. The score of the relative importance was creatively used to quantify the liability risks. Eleven key liability risks with higher scores of relative importance were identified. The risks have important influences on project quality, safety production and supervision profession development. The research results provide valuable information not only to government departments, professional associations, Chinese supervision engineers and supervision firms, but also to the foreign companies that offer services in China. The quantitative research method can be employed for other questionnaire surveys such as construction project quality and safety accidents.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | liability risks; risk management; supervision; supervision engineer |
| Index terms: | China, questionnaire, regulation, construction project, survey, liability, relative importance, supervision, risk management, profession, engineer, qualitative approach, quantitative research |
| Subjects: | profession, risk assessment, data collection methods, institututions, control systems, data analysis and analytics, research methods, Geography, production management, political science, liability law |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Governance, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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