Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 10 results ...
Bridge, A J and Tisdell, C (2006) The determinants of the vertical boundaries of the construction firm: response. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 23-36.
Chang, C-Y (2006) Comment - The determinants of the vertical boundaries of the construction firm: comment. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 229-32.
El-Diraby, T A and Gill, S M (2006) A taxonomy for construction terms in privatized-infrastructure finance: supporting semantic exchange of project risk information. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 271-85.
Leiringer, R (2006) Technological innovation in PPPs: incentives, opportunities and actions. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 301-8.
Ogunsemi, D R and Jagboro, G O (2006) Time-cost model for building projects in Nigeria. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 253-8.
Peansupap, V and Walker, D H T (2006) Innovation diffusion at the implementation stage of a construction project: a case study of information communication technology. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 321-32.
Phua, F T T (2006) Predicting construction firm performance: an empirical assessment of the differential impact between industry- and firm-specific factors. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 309-20.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: Firm performance; performance heterogeneity; industry-specific factors; firm-specific factors; institutional environment; resource-based view
- ISBN/ISSN: 0144-6193
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190500435127
- Abstract:
It is obvious that the performance of firms hinges upon the dynamics of both industry- and firm-specific factors. A less obvious, and perhaps a more important, line of inquiry is that to the extent that they have a bearing on firm performance, how much do these two groups of factors respectively predict firm performance? To date, performance differences among construction firms that stem from industry- and firm-specific differential effect has remained largely unexplored. Using a dataset comprising 526 firms across various construction-related sectors, the sector-by-sector firm performance variation that is attributable to the heterogeneity of both industry- and firm-specific characteristics was empirically examined. That statistically significant results of different effect sizes are found indicates that although these factors are often assumed to be intertwined it is possible to study their respective impact on firm performance. Future studies could usefully replicate and extend this study to construction firms in other countries to further investigate what drives firm performance under different national, industry and firm contexts.
Price, A D F and Chahal, K (2006) A strategic framework for change management. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 237-51.
Tam, V W Y, Tam, C M, Shen, L Y, Zeng, S X and Ho, C M (2006) Environmental performance assessment: perceptions of project managers on the relationship between operational and environmental performance indicators. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 287-99.
Yu, W-D (2006) PIREM: a new model for conceptual cost estimation. Construction Management and Economics, 24(03), 259–70.