Achieving whole-life value: The challenges of service-led construction

Major construction clients are increasingly looking to procure built facilities on the basis of added value, rather than capital cost. Recent advances in the procurement of construction projects have emphasised a whole-life value approach to meeting the client’s objectives, with strategies put in place to encourage long-term commitment and through-life service provision. Construction firms are therefore increasingly required to take on responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the construction project on the client’s behalf - with the emphasis on value and service. This inevitably throws up a host of challenges, not the least of which is the need for construction firms to manage and accommodate the new emphasis on service. Indeed, these ‘service-led’ projects represent a new realm of construction projects where the rationale for the project is driven by client’s objectives with some aspect of service provision. This vision of downstream service delivery increases the number of stakeholders, adds to project complexity and challenges deeply-ingrained working practices. Ultimately it presents a major challenge for the construction sector. This paper sets out to unravel some of the many implications that this change brings with it. It draws upon ongoing research investigating how construction firms can adapt to a more service-orientated built environment and add value in project-based environments. The conclusions lay bare the challenges that firms face when trying to compete on the basis of added-value and service delivery. In particular, how it affects deeply-ingrained working practices and established relationships in the sector.

The value premium and time-varying volatility

Numerous studies have documented the failure of the static and conditional capital asset pricing models to explain the difference in returns between value and growth stocks. This paper examines the post-1963 value premium by employing a model that captures the time-varying total risk of the value-minus-growth portfolios. Our results show that the time-series of value premia is strongly and positively correlated with its volatility. This conclusion is robust to the criterion used to sort stocks into value and growth portfolios and to the country under review (the US and the UK). Our paper is consistent with evidence on the possible role of idiosyncratic risk in explaining equity returns, and also with a separate strand of literature concerning the relative lack of reversibility of value firms' investment decisions.