IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Exploration of an agenda for transparency in the construction industry

  • Nijhof, A.
  • Graafland, J.J.
  • Kuijer de, O.

Purpose In enhancing the market operation of the building sector, transparency is of great importance. The objective of this article is to propose an inventory of aspects of the relationships between public clients and executing parties that have the most urgent need for greater transparency. Methodology / approach The main methods used include a conceptual analysis and twenty interviews with managers of various organisations in the construction industry. Findings Based on this study, four essential points for transparency have been determined: openness about risks and costs, measuring of quality-price ratios, reasons for award or rejection and enhancement of the reputation mechanism. Research limitations / implications This study takes the Dutch context as a reference point for the analysis. When the findings are used also in other settings, it is necessary to address the differences in characteristics of the building sector. Practical implications The essential points for transparency addressed in this paper have consequences for especially the interaction between public clients and executing parties. Furthermore, conditions for transparency - like possibilities to judge quality in a more robust and transparent manner and methods for enhancing the reputation mechanism - point at necessary future research for improving transparency in the construction industry. Originality / value of the paper The Dutch construction industry is working through a transition process focused on improving its market operation, integral processes and societal added value. In this transition, transparency between clients and executing parties is of great importance.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/20274/1/MPRA_paper_20274.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 20274.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Construction Innovation 9.3(2009): pp. 250-267
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:20274
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Graafland, J.J., 2004. "Collusion, reputation damage and interest in code of conduct: The case of a Dutch construction company," MPRA Paper 20281, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  2. Graafland, J.J. & Smid, H., 2004. "Reputation, corporate social responsibility and market regulation," MPRA Paper 20772, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  3. Johan Graafland & Andre Nijhof, 2007. "Transparency, market operation and trust in the Dutch construction industry: an exploratory study," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 195-205.
  4. Graafland, J.J., 2002. "Sourcing ethics in the textile sector: The case of C&A," MPRA Paper 20769, University Library of Munich, Germany.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:20274. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.