KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 465–477 | Cite as

An international competitiveness evaluation model in the global construction industry

  • Jae-goo Han
  • Hwan-pyo Park
  • Jong-ho Ock
  • Hyoun-seung Jang
Construction Management


Total volumes of construction orders and the domestic construction markets are predicted to continue shrinking. To compensate, Korean construction companies have been trying to make inroads into the global construction market. Companies must determine their competitiveness and establish strategies to expand into overseas construction markets. The General Electric/McKinsey Matrix, introduced in the early Seventies, is a specific framework for evaluating investment opportunities and is still widely used to analyze competitiveness scenarios. In this study, we analyze the construction industry in 22 countries. We describe the procedure for creating the matrix and present each country with details of various construction environments. The results are relative to the two typical matrix dimensions: the competitiveness of a construction business and the attractiveness of the construction industry. This model can be used to conduct a comprehensive analysis of global construction markets and policies, thereby providing policy-making recommendations to countries or companies. This study fills a gap and describes the state of the industry, enriches the literature on the subject, and creates new points of inquiry. The results, although based on a limited selection of countries, provide an accurate demonstration of the methodology and highlight the ranking of countries.


General Electric/McKinsey Matrix business strengths industry attractiveness competitiveness 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Blake, N., Croot, J., and Hastings, J. (2004). “Measuring the competitiveness of the UK construction industry.” Experian Business Strategies, Department of Trade and Industry (DTI): Construction Economics and Statistics, Vol. 2, London, pp. 1–61.Google Scholar
  2. Budiwibow, A., Trigunarsyah, B., Abidin, I. S., and Soeparto, H. G. (2009). “Competitiveness of the Indonesian construction industry.” Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 51–68.Google Scholar
  3. Compass International Consultants Inc. (2010). The 2010 global construction cost and reference yearbook, Compass International Consultants Inc. Yearbook, P.A., USA.Google Scholar
  4. Debus, M. (1988). A handbook for excellence in focus group research, HEALTHCOM Project Special Report Series, Porter/Novelli, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  5. Flanagan, R., Jewell, C., Ericsson, S., and Henricsson, P. (2005). Measuring construction competitiveness in selected countries, Final Report, 2005.Google Scholar
  6. IMD (2005). World competitiveness yearbook 2005.Google Scholar
  7. ISH Global Insight (2010). Global construction 2010.Google Scholar
  8. Ive, G., Crosthwaite, D., Gruneberg, S., and Meikle, J. (2004). Measuring the competitiveness of the UK construction industry — Volume 1 (industry economics and statistics), Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, UK.Google Scholar
  9. Kotler, P. and Caslione, J. A. (2009). Chaotics: The business of managing and marketing in the age of turbulence, Amacom, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Krueger, R. A. (1988). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research, Sage Publications, Inc., Newbury Park, California, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  11. McGraw-Hill Construction (2010). The top 225 international contractors & the top 225 global contractors, McGraw-Hill Construction, ENR.Google Scholar
  12. Momaya, K. and Selby, K. (1998). “International competitiveness of the Canadian construction industry: A comparison with Japan and the United States.” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 25, pp. 640–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Park, H. (2006). “Analysis of domestic construction firm’s competitiveness for international plant market.” Exim Overseas Economic Review, Korea Exim Bank, pp. 4–20.Google Scholar
  14. Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations, The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Prahalad, C. K. and Hamel, G. (1990). “The core competence of the corporation.” Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp. 3–17.Google Scholar
  16. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process, McGraw-Hill, New York NY.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Saaty, T. L. (2001). Decision making with independence and feedback: The analytic network process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  18. Saaty, T. L. (2005). Theory and applications of the analytic network process: Decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks, RWS Publications, Pittsburg, PA.Google Scholar
  19. WEF (2005). The Global Competitiveness Report 2005–2006.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Civil Engineers and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jae-goo Han
    • 1
  • Hwan-pyo Park
    • 1
  • Jong-ho Ock
    • 2
  • Hyoun-seung Jang
    • 2
  1. 1.Construction Management & Economy Research DivisionKorea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building TechnologyIlsanKorea
  2. 2.School of ArchitectureSeoul National University of Science & TechnologySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations