Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.emeraldinsight.com/1366-4387.htm
The impact
of management
capability
171
O.I. Aje
Department of Quantity Surveying, School of Environmental Technology,
Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria
K.T. Odusami
Department of Building, Faculty of Environmental Studies,
University of Lagos, Akoka, Nigeria, and
D.R. Ogunsemi
Department of Quantity Surveying, School of Environmental Technology,
Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria
Abstract
Purpose Management capability is one of the major criteria for evaluating construction contractors
during prequalification and tender evaluation This paper aims to investigate the impact of contractors
management capability as a prequalification criterion on cost and time performance of selected
building projects.
Design/methodology/approach Prequalification assessments of management capability of
wining contractors as well as cost data relating to 77 completed building projects executed between
2004 and 2007 are obtained. The data obtained from a questionnaire and archival data are analyzed
using one-way analysis of variance and multiple regression.
Findings The results reveal that contractors management capability has significant impact on cost
and time performance of building projects as evidenced by p-values of 0.042 and 0.039, respectively.
Practical implications The research could be of significant benefit at the research
implementation stage of public procurement practice especially in relation to the construction
industry in Nigeria. Construction practitioners involved in prequalification and tender evaluation
should continue to seek relevant information relating to management capability from the candidate
contractors during prequalification and tender evaluation.
Originality/value Models capable of predicting the final cost and duration of building projects are
eventually derived based on prequalification assessment of contractors on management capability,
proposed contract duration and the initial contract figure. The goodness of fit of the models as defined
by the value of R 2 is found to be 96.2 percent and 90.01 percent for cost and time, respectively; thus
signifying high predictive efficacy of the models.
Keywords Construction industry, Costs, Management skills, Time-based management, Nigeria
Paper type Research paper
The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments which
have helped to improve the quality of this paper.
JFMPC
14,2
172
1. Introduction
The construction industry embraces a wide range of closely integrated organizations
that collectively construct and repair different categories of building and civil
engineering structures. Osoba (1993) observes that construction industry has featured
prominently in the physical development of Nigeria since the British rule. However, a
very striking feature of the industry according to him is that for well over hundred
years, foreign companies and expatriates have played the dominant role in planning
and executing major projects in Nigeria. Although indigenous construction companies
have made some impacts in the construction industry, most especially in the building
sector within the last forty years, however it is obvious that foreign related
construction companies are still the main stay of the industry presently with over
90 percent of civil engineering and 65 percent of building projects being executed by
this group of contractors (Akande, 1993).
Ajanlekoko (1990) submits that the construction industry is a prime motivator of
any national economy. He further confirms that the industry represents 60 percent of
the capital investment in Nigeria, while it contributed over N4.53 billion to the nations
gross domestic product in the late 80 second. To corroborate this view, Piertroforte et al.
(2000) affirm that the construction industry globally has a strong linkage with many
economic activities, and whatever happens to the industry will directly or indirectly
influence other industries and ultimately the wealth of the country. This
interrelationship therefore strengthens the need to ensure that project planning and
project management are cost effective (Mansfield et al., 1994), because improving
construction efficiency by means of cost-effectiveness and timeliness would certainly
contribute to cost savings for the country as a whole (Kaming et al., 1997).
In the last two decades, there has been a steady increase in the range of methods used
for procurement of construction works. Despite this, there has been no commensurate
improvement in the success rate of construction projects; instead there have been
extensive delays in the planned schedule, cost overruns, serious problems in quality and
an increased number of claims and litigation (Hatush and Skitmore, 1998). Construction
project outcome is usually measured in terms of time, cost and quality achieved. Of
these, cost and time tend to be the most important and visible, always considered as very
critical because of their economic implications if they are unnecessarily exceeded
(Ogunsemi and Jagboro, 2006). Furthermore, in Nigeria construction projects are almost
synonymous with time and cost overruns; hence the need for a pragmatic approach to
provide early warning devices to reduce these problems considering the present
economic climate where prices of goods and services has remained unstable.
Therefore, the construction client decision most impacting the superlative value
criteria is that of selecting the appropriate contractor (Holt, 1998). The most commonly
used criteria for contractors selection according to Hatush and Skitmore (1997a) are
those pertaining to financial soundness, technical ability, management capability,
health and safety performance, and past performance of contractors. Out of these
criteria, contractors management capability is the only criterion directly concerned
with construction resources, which in turn are the most significant ingredients of
construction projects delivery. Management capability is the ability of contractors to
effectively utilize resources and expertise to deliver projects to time, within cost and to
the required quality (Ajibade, 2006). The Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligent Unit
(2005) identified and rated the criteria for contractors selection under the Due Process
The impact
of management
capability
173
JFMPC
14,2
174
control, the methods of procurement adopted and the experience of technical personnel
available.
Holt (1996) states that home office locations are important in terms of speed of
decision making between head office and site management of contractors. McCaffer
(1979) found that effective use of plant and equipment has a significant impact on
construction time performance. The suitability of the contractors equipment and plant
for proposed project is of vital importance in construction activities. The efficient
management of plant and equipment on the side of contractors enhances proper
execution of the project and helps in urgent delivery of project. Omole (2002) opines
that the aim of cost management is to ensure that resources are employed to the best
advantages to produce a maximum value for money. Odusami (1998) also evaluated
managerial ability of contractors in the pre-qualification and selection of contractor by
concluding that any contractor that lacks managerial capabilities is an incompetent
contractor.
Generally, resources are being managed by contractors to satisfy clients requirement,
therefore contractors management capability enhances project performance and
hence the need for contractors to improve their managerial capability to deliver
construction projects on schedule (Ajibade, 2006). The award of contract to a competent
contractor should also ensure effective delivery of construction project to time, cost and
quality standard. Chua et al. (1999) submit that it is generally accepted that the major
goals in any construction project are budget, schedule and quality. Corroborating this
view, Russell et al. (1997) opine that the overall success of a construction project includes
meeting goals related to cost, schedule, quality, and safety. Contractor performance is
critical to the success of any construction project as it is contractors who convert
designs into practical reality (Xiano and Proverbs, 2005). Improved contractor
performance leads to increased client satisfaction, an improvement in the reputation of
contractors and hence their competitiveness in the market. Therefore, the objective
of taking all the required precautions and due process in the selection of contractors to
execute any construction project is to ensure performance of the project in relation to
the above-mentioned variables. The engagement of a competent contractor with track
records of management capability should enable clients and the project team members
achieve the objective set for the project. Cheung et al. (2006) also note that selecting a
competent contractor is paramount to successful delivery of construction project.
Therefore, the competence of any contractor in terms of its managerial ability
reflects heavily on the performance of the project. Considering this fact it is important that
due care be taken in the selection of contractors for construction project so as to achieve
the expected performance of the project in terms of cost, time and quality.
Harris and McCaffer (1995) observe that effective use of plant and equipment
contributes significantly to construction time performance. Furthermore, Holt et al. (1995)
considered contractors reputation and image as effective measure of company stability,
reliability and experience. The more experience the contractor has, the more will be his
performance in terms of cost, time and quality. Improved contractor performance leads to
increased client satisfaction, an improvement in the reputation of contractors and hence
their competiveness in the market. Contractors of high repute and better past performance
will bring about improved client confidence and raise the possibility of future business.
Project management organization relates to the organizational structure of the
company and this usually has significant impact on construction project performance.
The impact
of management
capability
175
JFMPC
14,2
176
nl
1 n l =N
Category
Classification
No
Academic qualification
HND
B.Sc/B.Tech
PGD
M.Sc/M.Tech
Graduate member
Corporate member
Fellow
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
*Mean
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
Over 25
*Mean
N 1 m-N 50 m
N 51 m-N 100 m
N 101 m-N 500 m
N 501 m-N 1Billion
Over N 1Billion
27
98
13
56
37
138
19
43
85
51
15
13.9
50.5
6.7
29.9
19.1
71.1
9.8
22.2
43.8
26.3
7.7
48
61
29
24
13
9
24.7
31.4
20.1
12.4
6.8
4.6
82
41
31
31
9
42.3
21.1
16.0
16.0
4.6
Professional qualification
Construction experience (in years)
The impact
of management
capability
177
17.46
10.94
Note: The conversion rate for $ and is N145.00 and N250.00, respectively
Table I.
Summary of background
information
of respondents
Table II.
Respondents rankings
of the major criteria
for contractors
prequalification
1
2
3
5
4
6
5.52
4.59
4.22
3.11
3.85
2.81
Rank
Technical capability
Financial capability
Managerial capability
General information
Past performance
Health and safety
records
Clients
mean
2.11
5.30
4.86
4.69
3.29
3.03
Consultants
mean
1
2
3
4
5
Rank
1.64
5.19
4.57
4.86
3.10
2.48
Contractors
mean
1
3
2
4
5
Rank
2.10
5.31
4.76
4.66
3.29
3.03
Overall mean
score
1
2
3
4
5
4.790
1.130
1.056
2.895
0.410
7.544
Rank F-stat.
178
Criteria for
prequalification
0.009 *
0.325
0.350
0.058
0.664
0.001 * *
Level of sig.
( p-value)
JFMPC
14,2
25 percent of the contract sum may be given to the contractor as mobilization advance
coupled with the fact that public clients under this act usually ensure that money is
appropriated for any project prior to award and hence the era of contractors securing
fund to execute projects are over. Furthermore, the managerial ability of the contractor
is ranked next to the contractors financial capability because it takes a contractor with
good managerial skills in terms of experienced technical and managerial personnel to
be able to manage both the financial and technical resources to achieve a successful
project as opined by Holt et al. (1994). Moreover, some of the respondents personally
interviewed confirmed that once a contractor is able to satisfy the technical, financial,
and managerial ability criteria, the next step is to further investigate some general
information about the firm and also evaluate his past performance against his present
rating so as to determine their level of correlation. The assessment of the respondents
on health and safety records further corroborates the fact that actors in the
Nigerian construction industry do not attach importance to health and safety policy on
construction sites. This is why frequent accidents are being experienced on
construction sites in Nigeria (Aje et al., 2007).
5.3 Variables of management capability
The analysis of the respondents rating of the variables of management capability of
contractors is presented in Table III. It is evident from the table that the variables of
management capability in order of importance are:
.
past performance and quality achieved;
.
contractors experience;
.
management knowledge;
.
quality control programme; and
.
amount of own workforce.
However, respondents opinion regarding the first three variables are significantly
different ( p , 0.050), nonetheless it is obvious from the overall ranking that
respondents are more keen about the past performance of the contractor and quality
achieved, the management experience of the contractors and the management
knowledge. This also agrees with Ogunsemi et al. (2006), which according to them will
impact on the ability of the contractors to discharge their contractual responsibilities
effectively.
Also considered very important is the quality control programme put in place by
contractor. However, contractors quality control programme experimented on site and
assessed by the prequalifiers practically is more important because most Nigerian
contractors do not have adequate quality control programme on site even when they
are detailed or indicated in their prequalification documents Furthermore, the amount
of own workforce is also considered very important and it is ranked fifth among the
variables. This is because the amount of workforce possessed by the contractor is
significant to achieving effective project time performance. Unfortunately in Nigeria,
the mentality of contractors is to convince the prequalifiers with all reasonable
evidence that they have enough and genuine resources in terms of manpower to
execute and complete the job but when they eventually get to site, they do otherwise.
Moreover, contractors in a bid to maximize profits do not engage enough workmen on
The impact
of management
capability
179
Table III.
Respondents rating of the
variables of contractors
management capability
1
2
5
4
3
6
8
7
3.46
3.07
3.39
Rank
4.29
4.21
3.57
3.64
3.68
Clients
mean
3.44
3.59
3.50
4.87
4.55
4.43
3.98
3.59
5
7
1
2
3
4
5
3.38
3.31
3.64
4.36
4.36
3.93
3.83
3.76
8
6
2
1
3
4
5
3.42
3.51
3.47
4.67
4.46
4.20
3.90
3.64
6
7
1
2
3
4
5
0.443
0.115
0.959
0.042 *
0.000 *
0.053 *
0.000 *
0.163
0.550
Level of sig.
(p-value)
0.818
2.184
19.152
3.203
17.290
1.834
0.599
Consultants
Contractors
Overall mean
mean
Rank
mean
Rank
score
Rank F-stat.
180
Criteria
JFMPC
14,2
site and that is why timely delivery of projects procured through the Due Process is not
usually achieved (Aje, 2008). Possession of quality assurance certificates also ranked
sixth among variables of contractors management capability. Considering the
contractors ranking it is evident that majority of the Nigerian contractors do not
consider this as being important except only a few indigenous contractors who have
had construction experience with some organizations. Such organizations may want to
evaluate past performance of contractors in terms of quality through evidence of
possession of quality assurance certificate. On the other hand, respondents particularly
the clients did not consider the relationship between the main contractors and the
sub-contractors very important because of the arbitrary roles the contractors play in
the appointment of the sub-contractors in which case it is the main-contractor that
either execute the sub-contract work or award the sub-contract work to a domestic
sub-contractor.
The impact
of management
capability
181
5.4 The impact of contractors management capability on cost and time performance of
construction projects
The major aim of this study is to determine the impact of contractors management
capability on cost and time performance of construction projects. In achieving this aim
therefore, the study depended on archival data collected on prequalification
assessment of contractors on management capability, the planned contract duration,
actual contract duration, initial contract sum as well as the completion cost. ANOVA
was therefore carried out using the archival data and the results are presented in
Tables IV and V. From Table IV the observed value of F is 0.021 while the p-value is
0.042 and in Table V, the observed value of F is 0.955 with a corresponding p-value of
0.039. In summary, the p-values generally is less than 0.05 at 95 percent confidence
level. This therefore shows that contractors management capability has significant
impact on construction project performance in terms of cost and time. This also agrees
with Wong and Holt (2003) that good management skill of contractors together with
experience of technical personnel and management knowledge has potential for
achieving a successful project in terms of cost, time and quality.
Source
DF
SS
MS
F-ratio
Sig. (p-value)
Remarks
Between groups
Within groups
Total
2
74
76
2.607
4,539.918
4,542.525
1.303
61.350
0.021
0.042 *
SS
MS
F-ratio
Sig. (p-value)
Remarks
0.955
0.039 *
Source
Between groups
Within groups
Total
DF
2
74
76
846.659
32,791.191
33,637.850
423.329
443.129
Table IV.
One-way ANOVA on the
impact of contractors
management capability
on cost performance
Table V.
One-way ANOVA on the
impact of contractors
management capability
on time performance
JFMPC
14,2
182
particular model was found to be statistically significant at less than the 0.0001 level.
The regression analysis results are summarized in Tables VI and VII.
Moreover, the regression equation for the final contract duration from which the
project time performance can be determined is stated as:
The impact
of management
capability
183
where, Acd, actual contract duration; Mc, management capability; Ics, initial contract
sum; Pcd, planned contract duration; and E, error term.
The predictive efficacy of the model as defined by the R 2 value is 0.901 while the
adjusted R 2 is 0.896. The F-value of the model was also found to be statistically
significant at less than the 0.00001 level indicating a high degree of fitness of this
model. Also the p-value of the constant estimate of 0.686 implies that the constant value
do not contribute significantly to the model. Tables VIII and IX summarize the result of
the regression analysis.
6. Model validation
Tables X and XI show the results of the regression test on the cost and time
performance models, respectively. In Table X, the coefficient of determination as
defined by the R 2 value is 0.995 while the intercept and the slope are 2 2.61 102 7
and 1.00, respectively.
R
0.981
R2
Adjusted R 2
Sig.
0.962
0.959
19,249,569.35
487.910
0.0000
Note: Predictors: (constant); management capability; initial contract sum; planned contract duration
R
0.949
Standard error
b
22,599,787.87
13,26,027.04
0.987
15,318.82
Beta
t-stat.
Sig.
2 0.002
0.977
0.020
0.943
0.935
2.026
0.773
0.349
0.003
0.000
0.002
2.3 10
1.4 107
0.031
19,794.09
R2
Adjusted R 2
Sig.
0.901
0.896
1.58 105
175.668
0.000
Note: Predictors: constant; management capability (Mc); initial contract sum (Ics); planned contract
duration (Pcd)
Table VI.
Result of the multiple
regression analysis
of the cost performance
prediction model
Table VII.
Coefficients in the model
Table VIII.
Result of the multiple
regression analysis
of the time performance
prediction model
JFMPC
14,2
Also in Table XI, the R 2 value is 0.818, the intercept is 2 9.73 102 5 and the slope is
1.03. It thus follows that there is no significant difference between the observed and
predicted values of the cost and time performance models. Therefore, the models
developed in this study can accurately predict cost and time performance of
construction projects since the result of the regression test carried out agree with
Ogunsemi and Jagboro (2006).
184
7. Conclusion
The result of the statistical analysis indicates that contractors management capability
is an important criterion for evaluating potential performance of construction
contractors during prequalification and tender evaluation. Also the study identified
past performance and quality achieved, contractors experience, management
knowledge and quality control programme as the major variables for evaluating
contractors management capability. The study further revealed that contractors
management capability has significant impact on cost and time performance with a
p-value of 0.042 and 0.039, respectively. This therefore corroborates the reason why
management capability was considered so important among the main criteria for
contractors prequalification in Nigeria. The study also shows that construction project
cost and time performance is correlated with contractors management capability.
Based on this, predictive models for project completion cost and actual contract
duration of building projects was established and validated. This will enable
consultants and clients determine the cost and time performance of construction
projects based on prequalification assessment of contractors on management
capability, the contract duration and tender figure quoted. This therefore implies
that it is possible to forecast the actual contract period and completion cost of projects
right from the onset based on the aforementioned variables. This will therefore provide
early sign of contractors likelihood performance to clients and consultants before the
Table IX.
Coefficients in the model
Constant
Management capability
Tech I initial contract sum
ManaI planned contract duration
Table X.
Regression result
between the observed and
the predicted cost
Table XI.
Regression result
between the observed and
the predicted duration
0.997
0.904
R2
Standard error
Beta
t-stat.
Sig.
27.681
4.267
1.79 102 7
1.007
68.106
4.031
8.83 102 8
0.056
0.046
0.098
0.903
20.157
0.822
2.398
18.608
0.686
0.002
0.001
0.000
Adjusted R 2
Intercept
2 2.41 10
27
Slope
Sig.
1.00
Not sig.
0.995
0.994
R2
Adjusted R 2
Intercept
Slope
Sig.
0.818
0.804
2 9.73 102 5
1.03
Not sig.
final award decision. It is believed that the practical application of these models will
significantly enhance their improvement thereby ensuring the selection of the most
competent contractors for construction projects.
References
Abiola, R.O. (2000), Management implications of trends in the construction cost in Nigeria,
The Quantity Surveyor, Vol. 30 No. 11, pp. 35-40.
Adams, O.A. (1990), Improving indigenous construction capacity need of management training
and development, The Professional Builder, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 48-55.
Ajanlekoko, J.O. (1990), The rise in costs of building materials and the structural adjustment
programme how proportionate?, The Nigerian Quantity Surveyor, Vol. 9, pp. 44-52.
Aje, I.O. (2008), The impact of contractors prequalification and criteria of award on construction
project performance in Lagos and Abuja, Nigeria, unpublished PhD thesis, The School of
Postgraduate Studies Federal University of Technology, Akure.
Aje, I.O., Olatunji, O.A. and Odugbuye, O. (2007), Evaluating health and safety performance of
some major Nigerian construction sites, paper presented at CIB World Building Congress,
Cape Town, May 14-18.
Ajibade, A.O. (2006), The impact of contractors management capability on construction project
performance in Nigeria, unpublished B.Tech. dissertation, Federal University of
Technology, Akure.
Akande, C.S.O. (1993), Contract system in Nigeria: which way forward? a return to sanity,
Construction in Nigeria, Vol. 8, pp. 4-7.
Akintoye, A. and Fitzgerald, E. (2000), A survey of current cost estimating practices in the UK,
Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 161-72.
Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligent Unit (2005), The ABC of the Contract Due Process Policy.
A Manual on Public Procurement Reform Programme in Nigeria, 1st ed., Government
Press, Abuja.
Bureau of Public Procurement (2007), Public Procurement Act 2007, Bureau of Public
Procurement, Abuja.
Cheung, S.O., Wong, P.S.P., Fung, A.S.Y. and Coffey, W.V. (2006), Predicting project
performance through neural networks, International Journal of Project Management,
Vol. 24, pp. 204-15.
Chua, D.K.H., Kog, Y.C. and Loh, P.K. (1999), Critical success factors for different project
objectives, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 125 No. 3,
pp. 142-50.
Fellows, R. and Liu, A. (1997), Research Methods for Construction, Blackwell Science, London.
Harris, F.C. and McCaffer, R. (1995), Modern Construction Management, 4th ed., Blackwell
Scientific, Oxford.
Hatush, Z. and Skitmore, R.M. (1997a), Criteria for contractor selection, Construction
Management and Economics, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 19-38.
Hatush, Z. and Skitmore, R.M. (1997b), Evaluating contractor prequalification data: selection
criteria and project success factors, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 15
No. 2, pp. 129-47.
Hatush, Z. and Skitmore, R.M. (1998), Contractor selection using multiattribute utility theory: an
additive model, Building and Environment, Vol. 33 Nos 2/3, pp. 105-15.
The impact
of management
capability
185
JFMPC
14,2
186
Holt, G.D. (1996), Applying cluster analysis to construction contractors classification, Building
and Environment, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 557-68.
Holt, G.D. (1998), Which contractor selection methodology, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 153-64.
Holt, G.D., Olomolaiye, P.O. and Harris, F.C. (1994), Factors influencing UK construction clients
choice of contractors, Building and Environment, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 241-8.
Holt, G.D., Olomolaiye, P.O. and Harris, F.C. (1995), A review of contractor selection practice in
the UK construction industry, Building and Environment, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 553-61.
Jaselskis, J. and Russell, J.S. (1992), Risk analysis approach to selection of contractor evaluation
method, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 118 No. 4, pp. 814-21.
Kaming, P.F., Olomolaiye, P.O., Holt, G.D. and Harris, F.C. (1997), Factors influencing
construction time and cost overruns on high rise projects in Indonesia, Construction
Management and Economics, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 83-94.
McCaffer, R. (1979), Bidding behaviour, Quantity Surveying (New Zealand), August 12-15,
pp. 6-13.
Mansfield, N.R., Ugwu, O.O. and Doran, T. (1994), Causes of delay and cost overruns in Nigerian
construction projects, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 12 No. 4,
pp. 254-60.
Odusami, K.T. (1998), Pre-qualification and selection of contractors, Construction in Nigeria,
Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 26-32.
Ogunsemi, D.R. and Aje, I.O. (2006), A model for contractor selection in Nigeria, Journal of
Financial Management of Property and Construction, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 33-43.
Ogunsemi, D.R. and Jagboro, G.O. (2006), Time-cost model for building projects in Nigeria,
Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 24, January-March, pp. 258-353.
Ogunsemi, D.R., Aje, I.O., Awodele, O.A. and Abiola-Falemu, J.O. (2006), An assessment of
contractors prequalification criteria in Nigeria, Proceedings of the Quantity Surveying
National Convention, University of Sains, Penang Malaysia, September 4-5, pp. 34-45.
Omole, A.O. (2002), Case study of a life project bewildered by risks claims and disputes
(A Review of ICE Condition of Contract), paper presented at three-day workshop,
Managing Risks, Contractual Claims and Disputes in Engineering Projects, Nigeria
Society of Engineers, Lagos, July.
Osoba, E.B. (1993), Construction site management training, Construction in Nigeria, Vol. 10
No. 1, pp. 9-15.
Piertroforte, R., Bon, R. and Gregori, T. (2000), Regional development and construction in Italy:
an input output analysis; 1959-1992, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 18,
pp. 151-9.
Russell, J.S., Jaselskis, E.Y. and Lawrence, S.P. (1997), Continuous assessment of project
performance, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 123 No. 1,
pp. 64-71.
Shash, A.A. and Abdul-Hadi, N.H. (1993), The effect of contractor size on mark -up size decision
in Saudi Arabia, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 11, pp. 421-9.
Tarawneh, S.A. (2004), Evaluation of prequalification criteria- client perspective; Jordan case
study, Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 354-63.
Wong, C.H. and Holt, G.D. (2003), Developing a contractor classification model using a
multivariate discriminate analysis approach, RICS Foundation Research Paper Series,
Vol. 4 No. 20, pp. 1-23.
The impact
of management
capability
187