Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 34 results ...
Akin, S, Ergun, O, Surer, E and Gursel Dino, I (2021) An immersive performative architectural design tool with daylighting simulations: a building information modeling-based approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1319-44.
Aldossari, K M, Lines, B C, Smithwick, J B, Hurtado, K C and Sullivan, K T (2021) Best practices of organizational change for adopting alternative project delivery methods in the AEC industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1060-82.
Azman, M A, Hon, C K H, Xia, B, Lee, B L and Skitmore, M (2021) Product diversification and large construction firm productivity: the effect of institutional environments in Malaysia. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 994-1013.
Cattell, D W, Bowen, P A and Kaka, A P (2010) The risks of unbalanced bidding. Construction Management and Economics, 28(04), 333–44.
Chen, Q, Hall, D M, Adey, B T and Haas, C T (2021) Identifying enablers for coordination across construction supply chain processes: a systematic literature review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1083-113.
Crosthwaite, D (2000) The international performance of British construction companies 1990-1996. Building Research & Information, 28(04), 280–90.
Cui, Q, Hastak, M and Halpin, D (2010) Systems analysis of project cash flow management strategies. Construction Management and Economics, 28(04), 361–76.
Dainty, A R J, Bagilhole, B M and Neale, R H (2000) Computer aided analysis of qualitative data in construction management research. Building Research & Information, 28(04), 226–33.
Dulaimi, M F, Alhashemi, M, Ling, F Y Y and Kumaraswamy, M (2010) The execution of public-private partnership projects in the UAE. Construction Management and Economics, 28(04), 393–402.
Durdyev, S (2021) Review of construction journals on causes of project cost overruns. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1241-60.
Elghaish, F, Abrishami, S, Hosseini, M R and Abu-Samra, S (2021) Revolutionising cost structure for integrated project delivery: a BIM-based solution. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1214-40.
Gage, S A and Graham, J M R (2000) Static split duct roof ventilators. Building Research & Information, 28(04), 234–44.
Galbraith, G H, Guo, J S and McLean, R C (2000) The effect of temperature on the moisture permeability of building materials. Building Research & Information, 28(04), 245–59.
Hallowell, M (2010) Safety risk perception in construction companies in the Pacific Northwest of the USA. Construction Management and Economics, 28(04), 403–13.
Hammond, S F, Gajendran, T, Savage, D A and Maund, K (2021) Unpacking the problems behind the limited green construction adoption: towards a theoretical model. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 833-44.
Kalach, M, Abdul-Malak, M A and Srour, I (2021) Design information release under alternative design-construction modes. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 969-93.
Kern, A P, Postay, R, Schneck, E R, Mancio, M, González, M A S and Guerra, G (2021) Cost and environmental impacts reduction through building compactness. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1176-95.
Kim, S Y, Nguyen, M V and Dao, T T N (2021) Prioritizing complexity using fuzzy DANP: case study of international development projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1114-33.
Kumar, R, Iyer, K C and Singh, S P (2021) Understanding relationship between risks and claims for assessing risks with project data. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1014-37.
Lai, I K W and Lam, F K S (2010) Perception of various performance criteria by stakeholders in the construction sector in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 28(04), 377–91.
Lai, J H K (2010) Operation and maintenance budgeting for commercial buildings in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 28(04), 415–27.
Laryea, S and Watermeyer, R (2021) Structuring architectural competitions as a competitive procurement process. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 886-907.
Li, C Q (2000) A method for reliability-based economic design of building structures. Building Research & Information, 28(04), 260–7.
Liu, F, Wang, Y, Li, H and Zhou, X (2021) Influence of cooperative period of municipal PPPs on transaction cost – a case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1261-77.
Lyu, S, Hon, C K H, Chan, A P C, Javed, A A, Zhang, R P and Wong, F K W (2021) An exploratory study of safety communication networks of ethnic minority crews in the Hong Kong construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1156-75.
Newaz, M T, Jefferies, M, Davis, P R and Pillay, M (2021) Managerial implications for construction practices as a consequence of using a psychological contract of safety. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1134-55.
Nicholas, J, Holt, G D and Harris, P T (2000) Suppliers' debt collection and contractor creditworthiness evaluation. Building Research & Information, 28(04), 268–79.
Ofori-Boadu, A N, Owusu-Manu, D G, Edwards, D J and Asiseh, F (2021) A conceptual model of subcontractor development practices for LEED projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1196-213.
Raisbeck, P, Duffield, C and Xu, M (2010) Comparative performance of PPPs and traditional procurement in Australia. Construction Management and Economics, 28(04), 345–59.
Suresh, S, Renukappa, S, Abdul-Aziz, A R, Paloo, Y and Jallow, H (2021) Developments in the UK road transport from a smart cities perspective. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 845-62.
Udawatta, N, Zuo, J, Chiveralls, K and Zillante, G (2021) From green buildings to living buildings? Rating schemes and waste management practices in Australian educational buildings. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1278-94.
Vitorio Junior, P C and Kripka, M (2021) Fair wage potential as a tool for social assessment in building projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1295-318.
Wang, D, Wang, X, Liu, M, Liu, H and Liu, B (2021) Managing public–private partnerships: a transmission pattern of underlying dynamics determining project performance. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 1038-59.
Zhan, W, Pan, W and Chen, L (2021) Construction project productivity evaluation framework with expanded system boundaries. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(04), 863-85.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: construction project productivity; Hong Kong; productivity; productivity evaluation; system boundaries; systemic value
- ISBN/ISSN:
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-12-2019-0691
- Abstract:
Purpose: While the investment in construction projects has increased over the past few decades, low construction project productivity (CPP) appeared to be persistent, thereby reflecting an “investment-in-failure” paradox between the investment and CPP. Hence, this paper aims to develop a systematic and holistic CPP evaluation framework to explain the apparent paradox in the construction industry. Design/methodology/approach: The paper first reviews the literature about the theories of system, production, principal–agent and project success evaluation to re-conceptualise the CPP and proposes a two-stage CPP evaluation framework. The framework is subsequently explored through a sequential qualitative mixed-methods design within the context of the Hong Kong construction industry by combining 32 semi-structured interviews with senior industry experts and exploratory case studies, with three real-life construction projects. Findings: The paper identifies three system boundaries for CPP evaluation, that is, parameter, timeframe and stakeholder, and develops a two-stage CPP evaluation framework to indicate site efficiency and utilisation effectiveness, thereby accessing the productivity of both the construction and post-construction stages. The “investment-in-failure” paradox associated with current CPP evaluation approaches is primarily attributed to the narrowly defined CPP boundaries. Research limitations/implications: The qualitative exploration of the evaluation framework only focusses on the Hong Kong construction industry. Further case studies within other urban contexts could be used to improve the generalisability of the findings. Quantitative research is also necessary to advance theoretical development of the two-stage CPP evaluation. Practical implications: The systemic CPP conceptualisation and the two-stage CPP evaluation framework support the systems thinking of industry stakeholders and enable them to formulate holistic strategies for long-term CPP enhancement. Originality/value: The research demonstrates the needs to expand the system boundaries of CPP to reflect its systemic value and to shift the paradigm of CPP evaluation from being output-orientated and quantity-focussed to being outcome-orientated and value-focussed.