IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v18y2000i1p55-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking for construction: theory and practice

Author

Listed:
  • Naomi Garnett
  • Simone Pickrell

Abstract

The UK construction industry has identified benchmarking as one of a number of initiatives to assist in the drive for major improvements in efficiency and economy. At the outset, the industry struggled to see how a technique based upon comparison of similar goods and processes could be used effectively in a project based industry where products, processes and teams changed regularly. This paper discusses the development and testing of a benchmarking model and study methodology for use in construction. The model was derived from an extensive literature review which considered the underlying theoretical basis of benchmarking. The case is made that, to be successful, the benchmarking process is as important as the benchmarks themselves, and that it is based upon constructivist foundations, rather than positivist. As such, any methodology for undertaking benchmarking must take place in a similar vein, i.e. be interactive, team based and flexible but with an underlying rigour provided by the benchmarking model. The paper outlines two case studies to test the benchmarking model and study methodology, discusses the learning and benefits that accrued and introduces further developments.

Suggested Citation

  • Naomi Garnett & Simone Pickrell, 2000. "Benchmarking for construction: theory and practice," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 55-63.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:18:y:2000:i:1:p:55-63
    DOI: 10.1080/014461900370951
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014461900370951
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/014461900370951?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:18:y:2000:i:1:p:55-63. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.