IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v18y2000i5p599-605.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are competitive fee tendering and construction professional service quality mutually exclusive?

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Hoxley

Abstract

It is a little more than 15 years since the associations representing construction professionals in the UK surrendered to government pressure and abolished mandatory fee scales, predicting as they did so that inevitably abolition would lead to a decline in the standard of service provided to clients. Initially the abolition of fee scales had little impact on fee levels - in the UK economic and property boom of the late 1980s demand from clients in all sectors was high and fee levels remained at, or close to, pre-abolition levels. However, in the recession that followed, fee levels fell to unprecedentedly low levels, causing many commentators to be concerned that the quality of service provided to clients would fall. The main aim of this research is to establish whether clients' perceptions of service quality have declined as a result of lower fee scales. Following a literature search five hypotheses are presented namely, that clients' perceptions of service quality are: lower for fee tendered commissions; lower when the fee bid is particularly competitive; higher when the service is adequately specified by the client; higher when care has been taken with preselection of tenderers; and higher when adequate weighting to ability is given in the final selection process. The hypotheses have been tested by collecting data from 244 clients who anonymously assessed consultants, 60% of whom were chartered surveyors (just over half of these were quantity surveyors). Over half of the consultants were appointed by competitive fee tender, and although the service quality scores were lower for these consultants this result was not statistically significant. Therefore, the main hypothesis is not supported by the data but the fourth and fifth hypotheses are both supported by the study.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Hoxley, 2000. "Are competitive fee tendering and construction professional service quality mutually exclusive?," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 599-605.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:18:y:2000:i:5:p:599-605
    DOI: 10.1080/014461900407400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/014461900407400
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/014461900407400?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Derek Drew & Po Yin Lai & Heng Li & H. P. Lo, 2002. "Correcting the fee-technical score variability imbalance in two-envelope fee tendering," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 157-166.
    2. Kang-Wook Lee, 2023. "Market Structure Analysis of Revenue of International Construction Professional Service (I-CPS): A Country-Level Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Giao, Ha Nam Khanh, 2018. "Measuring service quality in construction project management service at AIC Management Co., Ltd.- A dimension-by-dimension analysis," OSF Preprints bf5ke, Center for Open Science.

    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:5:p:599-605. 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.