IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v19y2001i6p577-590.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking on-site productivity in France and the UK: a CALIBRE approach

Author

Listed:
  • Graham Winch
  • Brid Carr

Abstract

Construction is an increasingly global industry, and benchmarking initiatives that are restricted to a single country run the risk of complacency, as national best practice falls out of line with international best practice. The aim of this article is to report the results of a detailed comparative analysis of the on-site performance of the UK and French divisions of a major UK construction corporation. It focuses on structural concrete because this is potentially a major element in the budget and programme of any construction project, and an area of known French strength. It deploys an innovative computerized productivity measurement tool based on activity sampling, 'CALIBRE', in order to provide detailed comparative data. The results show that the UK productivity performance is poorer than in France, and that the poor UK performance compared with the French is explained by elaborate divisions of labour, lack of investment in plant, and less effective work organization. However, as will be argued in the conclusions, these differences cannot be understood without reference to the overall contracting system and the constraints upon action that it imposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Graham Winch & Brid Carr, 2001. "Benchmarking on-site productivity in France and the UK: a CALIBRE approach," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 577-590.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:19:y:2001:i:6:p:577-590
    DOI: 10.1080/01446190110062465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01446190110062465
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446190110062465?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:19:y:2001:i:6:p:577-590. 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.