Management Performance Evaluation Model of Korean Construction Firms

Corporate management performance evaluation currently focuses on financial aspects; however, it is necessary to identify and manage elements that contribute to increased economic values in the long run. When it comes to construction firms, most previous research did not cover weighting and estimation approaches for non-financial elements that ultimately influence financial status. In this research, the objective is to develop a management performance evaluation model for Korean construction firms. The model includes financial factors and non-financial factors. This research investigated actual data from Korean construction firmsandclassifiedtheir characteristics. This study is performed in two steps. First, this study derives KPIs for performance measurement techniques and weights the KPIs. And then, it applies the performance data of construction firms to the technique. The findings of this study show that Korean construction firms consider customers to be the foremost priority, converse to previous research which argued that the internal business process was the top priority. The performance measurement results can be fed back into strategies and plans to shed light on issues, reflect on management plans for subsequent years and modify mid to long-term strategies. Therefore, the developed model can help decision-makers effectively revise their management plans.

[1]  Sherif Ali Mohtady Mohamed,et al.  Utilizing the balanced scorecard for IT/IS performance evaluation in construction , 2001 .

[2]  Roger Atkinson,et al.  Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria , 1999 .

[3]  Sunkuk Kim,et al.  A Correlation Analysis between the Change of Managerial Environment and the Business Performance of Domestic Construction Firms , 2009 .

[4]  F. Peter,et al.  THE INFORMATION EXECUTIVES TRULY NEED , 1992 .

[5]  Young Dai Lee,et al.  Critical construction conflicting factors identification using analytical hierarchy process , 2006 .

[6]  D. Larcker,et al.  Innovations in Performance Measurement: Trends and Research Implications , 1998 .

[7]  Peter F. Drucker,et al.  The Information That Executives Truly Need , 1995 .

[8]  Heng Li,et al.  System Dynamics Approach to Exploring Performance Enhancement in a Construction Organization , 2003 .

[9]  Sangyoon Chin,et al.  Analysis of Quantified Characteristics of the Performance Indicators for Construction Companies , 2006 .

[10]  D. Wood.  Corporate Social Performance Revisited , 1991 .

[11]  Andrew William Brown,et al.  Measuring the effect of project management on construction outputs: a new approach , 2000 .

[12]  Chaochang Chiu,et al.  A case-based customer classification approach for direct marketing , 2002, Expert Syst. Appl..

[13]  Van Truong Luu,et al.  Improving project management performance of large contractors using benchmarking approach , 2008 .

[14]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  Risk assessment of construction projects , 2010 .

[15]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance. , 2015, Harvard business review.

[16]  Raja R. A. Issa,et al.  Management’s Perception of Key Performance Indicators for Construction , 2003 .

[17]  Andrew D.F. Price,et al.  Building a conceptual framework for measuring business performance in construction: an empirical evaluation , 2005 .

[18]  Hee Sung Cha,et al.  Developing Measurement System for Key Performance Indicators on Building Construction Projects , 2008 .

[19]  C. S Lim,et al.  Criteria of project success: an exploratory re-examination , 1999 .

[20]  Hong-Tau Lee,et al.  Performance evaluation model for project managers using managerial practices , 2007 .

[21]  Ghassan Aouad,et al.  Performance management in construction: a conceptual framework , 2001 .