Ahmed, S M; Ahmad, R and Darshi De Saram, D (1999) Risk management trends in the Hong Kong construction industry: A comparison of contractors and owners perceptions. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 6(3), pp. 225-234. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
This paper reports a study carried out to compare the attitudes and perceptions of Hong Kong construction contractors and owners on the importance of various construction risks and also how the risks should be allocated between the parties to the contract. Data were collected by a questionnaire survey on industry professionals representing contractors and owners. Both the owners and the contractors have attached high importance to risk factors such as safety, quality and financial failures. Results also indicate a readiness on the part of the contractors to allocate a greater portion of risks to themselves.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | allocation; Hong Kong; importance; risk management |
| Index terms: | owner, Hong Kong, construction industry, risk factor, risk management, survey, financial failure, construction contractor, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | sociology, environmental hazards, industry analysis, Geography, business management, risk assessment, data collection methods, practitioner |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management |
| 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