Stumpf, I (2000) Competitive pressures on middle-market contractors in the UK. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 7(2), pp. 159-168. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Medium-sized regional building contractors in the UK are exhibiting poorer performance in the 1980s and the 1990s and are less likely to survive than their larger or smaller counterparts. The market structure of contracting appears to be changing, putting pressure on these intermediate firms. Evidence drawn from the Department of the Environment (DoE) statistical series shows industry composition is changing, in particular the gradual decline over time of the middle market. An analysis of company accounts for a sample of approximately 200 contractors shows that medium-sized firms are also displaying inferior business ratios. Possible explanations are offered, including barriers to entry, such as capitalization, economies of scale (pecuniary and market), along with changes in construction demand.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | business ratios; competitive advantage; construction majors; contracting; market structure; middle market |
| Index terms: | construction demand, building contractor, competitive advantage, evidence, medium-sized firm |
| Subjects: | practitioner, evaluation and assessment methods, economic analysis, market analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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