Prior to 1980s, project performance was narrowly defined as meeting the cost and time objectives and adhering to product specifications (Ikediashiet al.2012) and (Bryde 2003). But, research during 1980s and 1990s led to a general agreement that the project success is multidimensional and different people measure success or performance of their companies in different ways and at different times (Ugwu and Haupt 2007).
Egons(1998) challenge industries to measure its performance over a range of its activities and to meet a set of ambitious targets. He identifies a number of drivers for change and set some ambitious targets against which this improvement should be measured, which are recognized today as “Headline” performance measurement.
Despite the importance of performance measurement, relavant information on the performance of the construction company is relatively scarce. (Formoso and Lantelme 2000). Cox et al.(2003) conducted a survey in the United States “Management perception of key performance indicator for construction." Their study reveals that differences in KPIs exists among different level of management and the number of years of experience. However, their study did not attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of the performance measures. Thus, suggesting further research in the area. In his case study of Bauchi State, Idris (2008) identifies five indicators to be highly significant. He further indicates that these five indicators can be used for measuring and reporting performance in Nigerian construction companies.
In addition, Chan and Chan (2004) developed KPIs through literature review and subjected them to validity testing using three case studies and conclude that KPIs in general are good indicators of performance of a construction project. Ikediashi et al.(2012) analyzed the key performance indicators for Design and Build construction projects in Nigeria, Thus; He provides an unambiguous methodology for measuring performance of Design and Build project.
No comments:
Post a Comment