Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Performance and practice use comparisons: Public vs. Private owner projects|
|Authors:||Hwang, B.-G. |
|Source:||Hwang, B.-G., Liao, P.-C., Leonard, M.P. (2011). Performance and practice use comparisons: Public vs. Private owner projects. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 15 (6) : 957-963. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-011-1115-y|
|Abstract:||Does the source of project ownership, public vs. private sectors make a difference in project performance? Do public agencies implement to some degree of management practices as private companies when executing capital facility projects? Using the data from 341 projects submitted to the Construction Industry Institute (CII) for benchmarking, this study aims to identify differences in project cost, schedule, and change performance under different delivery systems. Furthermore, utilization of best practices is analyzed in search of plausible explanation of differences in management approach, ultimately bridging the gap in that if ownerships differentiate use of best practices and their performance. The results of the analyses establish that in general, projects of private industry companies outperform those of public agencies with statistical significance in most cases. Derived from this study, significant difference of use of best practices between both sectors may be the important indicators affecting project performance. Lastly, according to analysis results, recommendations are made for both sectors for potential improvement in performance. © 2011 Korean Society of Civil Engineers and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.|
|Source Title:||KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering|
|Appears in Collections:||Staff Publications|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
checked on Dec 6, 2017
WEB OF SCIENCETM
checked on Nov 19, 2017
checked on Dec 10, 2017
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.