Emergent discourses of construction competitiveness: localized learning and embeddedness

Research is described that sought to understand how senior managers within regional contracting firms conceptualize and enact competitiveness. Existing formal discourses of construction competitiveness include the discourse of 'best practice' and the various theories of competitiveness as routinely mobilized within the academic literature. Such discourses consistently underplay the influence of contextual factors in shaping how competitiveness is enacted. An alternative discourse of competitiveness is outlined based on the concepts of localized learning and embeddedness. Two case studies of regional construction firms provide new insights into the emergent discourses of construction competitiveness. The empirical findings resonate strongly with the concepts of localized learning and embeddedness. The case studies illustrate the importance of de-centralized structures which enable multiple business units to become embedded within localized markets. A significant degree of autonomy is essential to facilitate localized entrepreneurial behaviour. In essence, sustained competitiveness was found to depend upon the extent to which de-centralized business units enact ongoing processes of localized learning. Once local business units have become embedded within localized markets the essential challenge is how to encourage continued entrepreneurial behaviour while maintaining a degree of centralized control and coordination. Of key importance is the recognition that the capabilities that make companies competitive transcend organizational boundaries such that they become situated within complex networks of relational ties.

Geographical concentration in the institutional market for office property in England and Wales

This paper examines the regional investment practices of institutional investors in the commercial real estate office market in 1998 and 2003 in England and Wales. Consistent with previous studies in the US the findings show that investors concentrate their holdings in a few (urban) areas and that this concentration has become more pronounced as investors have rationalised their portfolio holdings. The findings also indicate that office investment does not fully correlate with the UK urban hierarchy, as measured by population, but is focused on urban areas with high service sector employment. Finally, the pre-eminence of the City of London and and West End office markets as the key focus of institutional investment is confirmed.

Spatial concentration in institutional investment in the UK: some comparisons between the retail and office sectors

Geographic diversity is a fundamental tenet in portfolio management. Yet there is evidence from the US that institutional investors prefer to concentrate their real estate investments in favoured and specific areas as primary locations for the properties that occupy their portfolios. The little work done in the UK draws similar conclusions, but has so far focused only on the office sector; no work has examined this issue for the retail sector. This paper therefore examines the extent of real estate investment concentration in institutional Retail portfolios in the UK at two points in time; 1998 and 2003, and presents some comparisons with equivalent concentrations in the office sector. The findings indicate that retail investment correlates more closely with the UK urban hierarchy than that for offices when measured against employment, and is focused on urban areas with high populations and large population densities which have larger numbers of retail units in which to invest.