Risk pricing practices in finance, insurance and construction

A review of current risk pricing practices in the financial, insurance and construction sectors is conducted through a comprehensive literature review. The purpose was to inform a study on risk and price in the tendering processes of contractors: specifically, how contractors take account of risk when they are calculating their bids for construction work. The reference to mainstream literature was in view of construction management research as a field of application rather than a fundamental academic discipline. Analytical models are used for risk pricing in the financial sector. Certain mathematical laws and principles of insurance are used to price risk in the insurance sector. construction contractors and practitioners are described to traditionally price allowances for project risk using mechanisms such as intuition and experience. Project risk analysis models have proliferated in recent years. However, they are rarely used because of problems practitioners face when confronted with them. A discussion of practices across the three sectors shows that the construction industry does not approach risk according to the sophisticated mechanisms of the two other sectors. This is not a poor situation in itself. However, knowledge transfer from finance and insurance can help construction practitioners. But also, formal risk models for contractors should be informed by the commercial exigencies and unique characteristics of the construction sector.

The price of risk in construction projects: contingency approximation model (CAM)

Little attention has been focussed on a precise definition and evaluation mechanism for project management risk specifically related to contractors. When bidding, contractors traditionally price risks using unsystematic approaches. The high business failure rate our industry records may indicate that the current unsystematic mechanisms contractors use for building up contingencies may be inadequate. The reluctance of some contractors to include a price for risk in their tenders when bidding for work competitively may also not be a useful approach. Here, instead, we first define the meaning of contractor contingency, and then we develop a facile quantitative technique that contractors can use to estimate a price for project risk. This model will help contractors analyse their exposure to project risks; and help them express the risk in monetary terms for management action. When bidding for work, they can decide how to allocate contingencies strategically in a way that balances risk and reward.

Understanding UK construction professional services exports: definitions and characteristics

Services are very important to the UK balance of trade; a surplus has been recorded for trade in services every year since 1966. Construction professional services exports (CPS), which cover architecture, engineering and surveying (AES), have also increased, contributing over £3bn to the UK trade balance in 2007. The changing environment of construction professional services exports complicates the validity of the characteristics and definitions of services as described in the research literature and official export statistics. Through semi-structured interviews undertaken with large consulting engineers and a round-table discussion with industry and government representatives, the research found that the impact of globalisation and the changes in the construction business environment, such as increasing foreign ownership and changing forms of procurement, are not fully reflected in the official statistics. There have also been rapid changes in technology, procurement and methods of delivery which have impacted exporting AES firms and a more appropriate set of characteristics is needed to better reflect the project-specific and knowledge-intensive nature of AES firms.

Codification vs personalisation: A study of the information evaluation practice between aerospace and construction industries

In the emerging digital economy, the management of information in aerospace and construction organisations is facing a particular challenge due to the ever-increasing volume of information and the extensive use of information and communication technologies (ICTs). This paper addresses the problems of information overload and the value of information in both industries by providing some cross-disciplinary insights. In particular it identifies major issues and challenges in the current information evaluation practice in these two industries. Interviews were conducted to get a spectrum of industrial perspectives (director/strategic, project management and ICT/document management) on these issues in particular to information storage and retrieval strategies and the contrasting approaches to knowledge and information management of personalisation and codification. Industry feedback was collected by a follow-up workshop to strengthen the findings of the research. An information-handling agenda is outlined for the development of a future Information Evaluation Methodology (IEM) which could facilitate the practice of the codification of high-value information in order to support through-life knowledge and information management (K&IM) practice.

SPICE: a business process diagnostic tool for construction projects

The construction sector is under growing pressure to increase productivity and improve quality, most notably in reports by Latham (1994, Constructing the Team, HMSO, London) and Egan (1998, Rethinking Construction, HMSO, London). A major problem for construction companies is the lack of project predictability. One method of increasing predictability and delivering increased customer value is through the systematic management of construction processes. However, the industry has no methodological mechanism to assess process capability and prioritise process improvements. Standardized Process Improvement for Construction Enterprises (SPICE) is a research project that is attempting to develop a stepwise process improvement framework for the construction industry, utilizing experience from the software industry, and in particular the Capability Maturity Model (CMM), which has resulted in significant productivity improvements in the software industry. This paper introduces SPICE concepts and presents the results from two case studies conducted on design and build projects. These studies have provided further in-sight into the relevance and accuracy of the framework, as well as its value for the construction sector.

Rethinking construction: the Generic Design and Construction Process Protocol

The complexity of construction projects and the fragmentation of the construction industry undertaking those projects has effectively resulted in linear, uncoordinated and highly variable project processes in the UK construction sector. Research undertaken at the University of Salford resulted in the development of an improved project process, the Process Protocol, which considers the whole lifecycle of a construction project whilst integrating its participants under a common framework. The Process Protocol identifies the various phases of a construction project with particular emphasis on what is described in the manufacturing industry as the ‘fuzzy front end’. The participants in the process are described in terms of the activities that need to be undertaken in order to achieve a successful project and process execution. In addition, the decision-making mechanisms, from a client perspective, are illustrated and the foundations for a learning organization/industry are facilitated within a consistent Process Protocol.

IT implementation in the construction organization

Organizational issues are inhibiting the implementation and strategic use of information technologies (IT) in the construction sector. This paper focuses on these issues and explores processes by which emerging technologies can be introduced into construction organizations. The paper is based on a case study, conducted in a major house building company that was implementing a virtual reality (VR) system for internal design review in the regional offices. Interviews were conducted with different members of the organization to explore the introduction process and the use of the system. The case study findings provide insight into the process of change, the constraints that inhibit IT implementation and the relationship between new technology and work patterns within construction organizations. They suggest that (1) user-developer communications are critical for the successful implementation of non-diffused innovations in the construction industry; and (2) successful uptake of IT requires both strategic decision-making by top management and decision-making by technical managers.

The organization of construction research in British universities

The paper provides details of the size and scope of construction research carried out in a number of architecture, civil engineering and building related departments in British universities. After considering the level of funding, the type of research projects undertaken and the resulting outputs, especially how these benefit industry, the paper focuses on the careers of academics and researchers and the way in which research is organized at university, departmental and team levels. Finally, the paper suggests that whilst the construction research community in universities has many strengths, there is a danger that in responding to recent opportunities it may overreach itself. The end result may be disappointing for all parties involved. Some of the factors which would contribute to an effective approach to the development of links between universities and industry are discussed.

The technocratic totalitarianism of construction process improvement: a critical perspective

The current research agenda for construction process improvement is heavily influenced by the rhetoric of business process re-engineering (BPR). In contrast to the wider literature on BPR, there is little evidence of critical thought within the construction management research community. A postmodernist interpretation is advocated whereby the reality of management practice is defined by the dominant management discourse. The persuasiveness of BPR rhetoric is analysed with particular reference to the way in which it plays on the insecurity of modern managers. Despite the lip service given to ‘empowerment’ and ‘teamwork’, the dominant theme of the re-engineering movement is that of technocratic totalitarianism. From a critical perspective, it is suggested that BPR is imposed on construction organizations to ensure continued control by the industry's dominant power groups. Whilst industry leaders are fond of calling for ‘attitudinal and cultural improvement’, the language of the accepted research agenda continually reinforces the industry's dominant culture of ‘control and command’. Therefore, current research directions in process improvement perpetuate existing attitudes rather than facilitating cultural change. The concept of lean construction is seen to be the latest manifestation of this phenomenon.

The future of lean construction: a brave new world

Lean construction is considered from a human resource management (HRM) perspective. It is contended that the UK construction sector is characterised by an institutionalised regressive approach to HRM. In the face of rapidly declining recruitment rates for built environment courses, the dominant HRM philosophy of utilitarian instrumentalism does little to attract the intelligent and creative young people that the industry so badly needs. Given this broader context, there is a danger that an uncritical acceptance of lean construction will exacerbate the industry's reputation for unrewarding jobs. Construction academics have strangely ignored the extensive literature that equates lean production to a HRM regime of control, exploitation and surveillance. The emphasis of lean thinking on eliminating waste and improving efficiency makes it easy to absorb into the best practice agenda because it conforms to the existing dominant way of thinking. 'Best practice' is seemingly judged by the extent to which it serves the interests of the industry's technocratic elite. Hence it acts as a conservative force in favour of maintaining the status quo. In this respect, lean construction is the latest manifestation of a long established trend. In common with countless other improvement initiatives, the rhetoric is heavy in the machine metaphor whilst exhorting others to be more efficient. If current trends in lean construction are extrapolated into the future the ultimate destination may be uncomfortably close to Aldous Huxley's apocalyptic vision of a Brave New World. In the face of these trends, the lean construction research community pleads neutrality whilst confining its attention to the rational high ground. The future of lean construction is not yet predetermined. Many choices remain to be made. The challenge for the research community is to improve practice whilst avoiding the dehumanising tendencies of high utilitarianism.

Re-thinking stakeholder management in construction: theory & research

From its roots in strategic management theory, stakeholder management has been adopted by the construction management academic community and applied as a valid paradigm around which research work has been generated aiming to improve project effi ciencies and effectiveness. However, academics have argued that stakeholder management should move away from purely theoretical discussions and engage more with the realities of construction project work. This paper re-appraises the stakeholder management concept for the construction domain by re-thinking some of the fundamental principles and ideals present within the more general stakeholder theory literature. It engages with issues which researchers have arguably failed to acknowledge and calls for a re-evaluation of construction stakeholder management research by presenting a review around four distinctive themes: the moral obligations of engaging with stakeholders against the business and efficiency driven imperatives of construction organisations; the contrast between theoretical abstractions and empirically grounded research; the tensions between theoretical convergence versus calls for multiple and divergent perspectives on stakeholder management and the practicalities of conducting stakeholder management in the construction domain. Such a critical re-appraisal of stakeholder management thinking both generates new lines of enquiry and promises to help inform and shape current and future industry practice.