768 CIB World Building Congress 2007

CIB2007-468

Selection Framework for Domestic

Subcontractors by Contractors in the
Construction Industry
Talukhaba AA and Mapatha M
School of Construction Economics and Management
Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment
University of the Witwatersrand,
P O Box, Private Bag 3, Wits 2050, South Africa

ABSTRACT

Subcontractor selection is part of the wider supply chain management in

the construction industry. Through procurement of subcontractors,
contractors are able to share risks and manage projects more effectively. If
subcontractors fail to perform, they become another risk in the process.
Inadequate consideration in procurement of subcontractors may lead to
adversarial relationships between contractors and subcontractors. More so
for domestic subcontractors who like formal nominated subcontractors
contribute significantly to the success of construction projects.
Contractors require domestic subcontractors that have adequate
skills and resources to execute work effectively at an agreed price and
quality. However, the procurement process should be fair to both parties as
a basis for successful teamwork to avoid future strained relations.
Observing best practices in domestic subcontractor selection contributes to
not only satisfaction of clients but also to harmonious and sustainable
construction.
The paper discusses factors necessary for domestic subcontractor
selection in the South African construction industry. The literature supports
the view that domestic subcontractor selection is unmethodical and
subjective. Based on the opinions of contractors and subcontractors,
measured on the rating scale, the paper highlights the key factors that are
important and which should be considered in the selection process. This
would contribute to teamwork and better working relationships in the
construction industry.
CIB World Building Congress 2007 769

Keywords: Contractors, Domestic subcontractors, Procurement,

Selection framework.

1. INTRODUCTION

An important component of the project life cycle is the supply chain

management function whose aim is the coordination of all parties to deliver
goods and services to meet the objectives of the project. Part of this
function is procurement process which is to identify goods and services
needed in the project and how best to obtain them. Critical considerations
are necessary on how the project will be managed, the contracts involved
and the risks allocated in the various contracts.
It is a characteristic of the construction industry that contractors
sublet portions of the project to subcontractors. Hence, up to 80% of the
gross work done in the construction industry involves procuring of materials
and services through subcontracting (Miller, et al, 2002; Dubois and
Gadde, 2000; Eccles, 1981). In this respect, subcontractors play an
important role in construction projects. Puttick (1978) and Brooks (1993)
have argued that sub-letting part of work to specialists is not only a useful
arrangement for contractors but also, some of the technical and financial
risks are shared between parties. On the other hand, subcontractors
benefit by obtaining work to sustain their businesses. More importantly, the
preferential procurement policies in South Africa allow joint ventures which
enable emerging contractors to participate in the construction industry.
However, although the performance of subcontractors is significant on the
overall performance of the project, there are widespread poor relationships
between contractors and subcontractors in the construction industry,
brought about by mistrust, risk and conflicts (Dainty, et al, 2001; Pietroforte,
1997; Hinze and Tracey, 1994). This inevitably impacts on issues of
management, contracts and risk allocation.
It has been established that a large percentage of projects in the
South African construction industry have not performed well (Massyn,
2003). Some of the causes of poor performance emanate from the
procurement process. Inadequate consideration of procurement process
leads to deployment of incompetent subcontractors who may cause delays,
perform poor work and attract adversarial relationships (Miller, et al, 2002).
The selection process appears to be a contentious issue whereby price
seems to be an overriding feature in the selection process. Haksever et al,
(1995) and Kerfoot (1994) emphasize that the selection process that is
based on lower price could lead to the selection of incompetent
subcontractors. Consequently, the contractual relationships may begin on
the wrong footing, with problems such as reliability, performance, poor
working conditions, payments and scheduling (Alman, 1989). These
however, could be “red herrings” when the real culprit is cash flow
difficulties due to low price. The ultimate receiver of the brunt in these
770 CIB World Building Congress 2007
Industry

circumstances is the client, who feels dissatisfied and ends up with

unsatisfactory facility and gets discouraged and reluctant to invest in future
projects (Mbachu et al, 2003, Kerfoot, 1994).
Latham (1994) suggested that if procedures relating to
procurement and tendering were to be improved, the causes of conflicts
could be reduced and projects could perform better. This is true in South
African where better performance is desired at a time when many projects
are linked to the soccer World Cup in 2010. The purpose of this paper is to
highlight the factors that are important for domestic subcontractor selection
and thereby assist contractors select competent domestic subcontractors.

2. CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CONTRACTORS AND

SUBCONTRACTORS

Standard contracts allow contractors to sublet portions of the work to firms

of their own choice provided that contractual conditions are met (Smith,
1995). This is the opportunity for contractors and subcontractors to
negotiate risks in the project. There are elaborate procedures for selection
of nominated subcontractors. However, the selection of domestic
subcontractors is shrouded with secrecy and this may lead to mistrust.
Under normal circumstances, all subcontractors should be selected using
some criteria which should emphasize equality, expertise and commitment
to perform. If this were the case, risks would be shared objectively with the
consequence of better project performance (Gray and Flanagan, 1989).
Contractually, the contractor has the ultimate responsibility for the
project. However, this does not mean that domestic subcontractors be
disregarded and mistreated in contractual relationships. Smith (1995) has
observed that contract agreements between the contractor and domestic
subcontract conditions in many cases, are a matter of total privacy. There
are no well developed procedures for selecting domestic subcontracts. For
instance, in labour-only subcontracts, the contract may not even be in
writing. Important aspects of the contract such as workmanship standards,
co-ordination and payment would be undermined if not based on strong
contractual foundations and may inevitably breed conflicts (Puttick, 1978).
Cook and Williams (1998) have argued that contractors do use some
form of a selection criteria when selecting subcontractors. However, these
procedures are not known to the outside world and there is no way of
knowing what is good or bad. CIB (1997) suggests that subcontractors
should be selected through a formal process such as competition,
negotiation or through partnering and/or joint ventures. It further suggests
that principles of good practice be observed, to include among others:
CIB World Building Congress 2007 771

• clear procedures that ensure fair and transparent competition

among all subcontractors.
• the tendering process that shortlists systematically from a number
of qualified candidates.
• the same conditions for the contract be used, to avoid or
discourage collusion.
• formal and recognizable contracts bodies should be used where
they are available and
• there should be a commitment to team work from all parties.

If these recommendations are followed, relationships between contractors

and domestic subcontractors could be improved for the benefit of the
construction industry.

3. SUBCONTRACTOR SELECTION FRAMEWORK

Massyn (2003) and Haksever et al, (1995) have reinforced the view that the
selection process of subcontractors is important because the nature of the
contractor-subcontractor relationship is project-based and therefore a
proper selection and management of subcontractors should be one of the
key issues for contractors who want to maintain good performance and
reputation. It is equally important for contractors to support and provide an
enabling environment for subcontractors in order to succeed in their work.
However, the commitment to support subcontractors and hence improve
their performance is quite limited in the construction industry. For instance,
Teo (2002) ranked the support of contractors to subcontractors and found
that it is quite limited.
On the other hand, a selection process which emphasises price can
easily ignore competent subcontractors in the selection process. A lower
tender price does not equate to competency nor does it guarantee good
performance and therefore other factors should be taken into consideration
(Haksever et al, 1995; Kerfoot, 1994; Latham, 1994). Oluwoye et al. (1996)
recommend that when the contractor is rating subcontractors, account
should be made for the ability of the subcontractor to meet the following
criteria:

• produce project schedules;

• produce quality work;
• employ skilled trades people;
• cultivate goodwill between parties and
• ability to allocate resources.

However, if the contractor’s part of the work is not well managed, for
instance, the contract is not properly coordinated, project interfaces not well
interlinked, contractual obligations not well defined and the use
inappropriate specifications, project performance would still be undermined.
772 CIB World Building Congress 2007
Industry

It has been observed that unmethodical selection of subcontractors is

widespread, leading to client dissatisfaction, causing delays and disputes
(Mbachu, 2003; Bowen et al, 1997; Kerfoot, 1994; Kometa et al, 1994;). It
is therefore imperative that a subcontractor selection framework be
developed in the interest of the construction industry. The suggestion by
Kerfoot (1994) that a performance based factors be developed for the
selection of subcontractors other than price should be explored. This may
not only improve the selection process but also relationships between
parties.

4. STUDY METHODOLOGY

A study was carried out to investigate the factors that would be suitable for
inclusion in the framework for selecting subcontractors. These factors were
identified at different stages of the construction process, such as pricing,
financial, technical and managerial ability. The target population was
contractors and subcontractors who are members of the Gauteng Master
Builders Association (GMBA). The fieldwork was carried out in July 2006 at
which time there were 240 contractors and 300 subcontractors. Twenty five
contractors and 30 subcontractors were selected randomly to which
questionnaires were sent, to elucidate opinions on what they perceive as
influential factors necessary for subcontractor selection. However, 26
responses were received, 15 from contractors and 11 from subcontractors -
a 47% response. The questions asked were related to the criteria that
contractors use in selecting subcontractors at various stages of the
procurement process. Respondents were asked to rate the importance of
identified factors on an ordinal scale of 1 to 5, where 1 represented not
influential and 5 very influential. The total number of rating per factor (TR)
was divided by the total number of responses to obtain the mean rate(MR).
The MR was then used to rank the factors. The results are shown in tables
1 to 5.

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of the rating are discussed in the various stages of the
construction process as follows:

5.1 PRE-QUALIFICATION STAGE

This is the starting point of the process to evaluate whether the

subcontractor may be short listed. Contractors were asked to rate eleven
factors which are influential at the pre-qualification stage. It can be seen
 CIB World Building Congress 2007 773

that most of the factors were highly rated as shown in table 1. Technical
and managerial competency, workforce skills, mobilization on site,
competitive rates, past records, work and financial capacity stand out
strongly. It can be seen that at this point the contractor is focusing on the
capacity of the subcontractor. A demonstration by subcontractors that they
have adequate capacity may land them on the shortlist. The factors should
be adequately met by domestic subcontractor to ensure selection and
could be used in the framework to eliminate unsuitable domestic
subcontractors.

Table 1: Selection criteria at pre-qualification stage

Levels of Influence: Very Influential=VI(5), Influential = I (4), Somewhat Influential= SI(3), Less Influential=
LI(2) and Not Influential=NI(1), TR= Total Response, MR= Mean Rate
Contractors needs from Subcontractors at Level of influence in the selection TR MR Rank
the pre-qualification stage process
VI I SI LI NI
5 4 3 2 1
% % % % %
Technical and managerial competence and 69.6 21.7 8.7 0.0 0.0 23 4.61 1
experience in the job at hand
Size and resources: skills, experience and 47.8 39.1 8.7 0.0 4.3 23 4.26 2
strength of own workforce
Current workload, commitment and ability 47.8 39.1 4.3 4.3 4.3 23 4.22 3
to mobilize on site when needed
Competitive rates and lowest tender overall 34.8 31.8 9.1 13.6 4.5 23 4.17 4
Past records of working relationship with 34.8 43.5 21.7 0.0 0.0 23 4.13 5
current contractor and/ or reference from
previous employers and financiers
Ability to provide own attendance needs; 43.5 30.4 21.7 0.0 4.3 23 4.09 6
possession of special tools and equipment
that could reduce main contractor's P&G
costs
Financial capacity to undertake the job 43.5 34.8 13.0 0.0 8.7 23 4.04 7
successfully
Compliance with statutory regulations: 40.9 31.8 9.1 13.6 4.5 22 3.91 8
Black Economic Empowerment, Gender
Equality, Workman’s Compensation Act,
tax regulations, etc
Health and safety record 33.3 29.2 12.5 16.7 8.3 24 3.63 9
Location of the subcontractor and 22.7 31.8 22.7 18.2 4.5 22 3.5 10
knowledge of the project environment: local
labour laws, site conditions, material
supplies, etc
Experience with the present contract form, 14.3 23.8 38.1 19.0 4.8 21 3.24 11
terms and conditions
 774 CIB World Building Congress 2007
Industry

Table 2: Selection criteria at pre-Contract stage

Levels of Influence: Very Influential=VI(5), Influential = I (4), Somewhat Influential= SI(3), Less Influential=
LI(2) and Not Influential=NI(1), TR= Total Response, MR= Mean Rate
Contractors needs from Subcontractors at Level of influence in the selection TR MR Rank
the pre contract stage process
VI I SI LI NI
5 4 3 2 1
% % % % %
Efficient programming of subcontract 58.3 25.0 8.3 4.2 4.2 24 4.29 1
work and proper fit with main contractor's
master programme for efficient
coordination purpose
Readiness to mobilize on site on 43.5 43.5 8.7 0.0 4.3 23 4.22 2
schedule
Ability to submit error and omission free 33.3 29.2 29.2 8.3 0.0 24 3.88 3
bids that are reasonable and comparable
with others
Well articulated health and safety plan 25.0 25.0 29.2 12.5 8.3 24 3.46 4
Provision of necessary bonds or specific 21.7 13.0 43.5 13.0 8.7 23 3.26 5
insurance requirements
Reasonable discounts 4.5 13.6 50.0 22.7 9.1 22 2.82 6

Table 3: Selection criteria at construction stage

Levels of Influence: Very Influential=VI(5), Influential = I (4), Somewhat Influential= SI(3), Less Influential=
LI(2) and Not Influential=NI(1), TR= Total Response, MR= Mean Rate
Contractors needs from Level of influence in the selection TR MR Rank
Subcontractors at the construction process
stage VI I SI LI NI
5 4 3 2 1
% % % % %
Good quality of work consistent with 88.5 11.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 26 4.88 1
the general quality level of the main job
Time performance 57.7 34.6 7.7 0.0 0.0 26 4.5 2
High productivity level 60.0 32.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 25 4.48 3
Good control of own workforce 53.8 42.3 0.0 3.8 0.0 26 4.46 4
Good working relations with main 50.0 46.2 0.0 3.8 0.0 26 4.42 5
contractor's team; good tolerance,
loyalty and minimal adversarial relation
Efficient management of own 53.8 34.6 7.7 3.8 0.0 26 4.38 6
workforce
Scope management: ability to manage 44.0 48.8 8.0 0.0 0.0 25 4.36 7
changes without unnecessary claims
Zero or minimal defects and rework 50.0 34.6 15.4 0.0 0.0 26 4.35 8

Compliance with specifications for 46.2 42.3 3.8 7.7 0.0 26 4.27 9
materials and methods
 CIB World Building Congress 2007 775

Compliance with contract terms and 53.8 26.9 15.4 0.0 3.8 26 4.27 10
conditions, labour acts, building
regulations etc
Cost control/ wastage minimization 50.0 30.8 11.5 7.7 0.0 26 4.23 11
Good communication network 38.5 38.5 15.4 7.7 0.0 26 4.08 12
Fair and minimal claims 34.6 46.2 7.7 11.5 0.0 26 4.04 13
Ability to manage the financial and 28.0 48.0 20.0 4.0 0.0 25 4.00 14
contractual risks in the subcontract
On site health and safety practice 36.0 24.0 32.0 4.0 4.0 25 3.84 15

5.2 PRE-CONTRACT STAGE

Before the contract is signed, the contractor needs to be sure of certain

requirements. At pre-contract stage, it can be seen that the efficiency of
the domestic subcontractor’s programming and readiness to mobilize on
site are influential. However, bond provisions and discounts are relatively
not viewed as influential. It can be seen from table 2 that at this stage, the
contractor is focusing more on how the subcontractor would be able to be
in congruent with the overall objectives as set by contractor and reflected in
project master plan.

5.3 THE CONSTRUCTION STAGE

The construction stage is the stage at which the contractor and

subcontractor interact the most. At this point they have already entered
into an agreement and are carrying out work. and if any party is doing the
contrary, consequences might lead to conflicts. Thus, for both contractors
and subcontractors the stage of the actual carrying out of the project is
every influential. It is not a surprise that all the requirements in this stage
are viewed as very influential, notably quality, time, and productivity as
shown in table 3.

Table 4: Selection criteria at post construction stage

Levels of Influence: Very Influential=VI(5), Influential = I (4), Somewhat Influential= SI(3), Less Influential=
LI(2) and Not Influential=NI(1), TR= Total Response, MR= Mean Rate
Contractors needs from Level of influence in the selection TR MR Rank
Subcontractors at the post process
construction stage VI I SI LI NI
5 4 3 2 1
% % % % %
Efficient and quick completion of snag 57.7 38.5 3.8 0.0 0.0 26 4.54 1
items
Maintenance of good 'after-sales' 50.0 34.6 15.4 0.0 0.0 26 4.35 2
 776 CIB World Building Congress 2007
Industry

service within defects liability period

Zero defects within and beyond 50.0 26.9 19.2 3.8 0.0 26 4.23 3
defects liability period
Keeping site neat and tidy 38.5 42.3 23.1 7.7 0.0 26 4.15 4
Readiness to partner with main 26.9 42.3 23.1 7.7 0.0 26 3.88 5
contractor on future jobs
Ability to be patient to be paid when 30.8 34.6 23.1 11.5 0.0 26 3.85 6
the main contractor is paid
Provision of maintenance manual 'as- 30.8 34.6 23.1 7.7 3.8 26 3.81 7
built' drawings if needed
Quick disbandment from site on 30.8 38.5 11.5 15.4 3.8 26 3.77 8
practical completion

5.4 POST CONSTRUCTION STAGE

The domestic subcontractor’s ability to complete snag items quickly, the

offer of services within the defects liability period and keeping the site tidy
are influential as shown in table 4. This means that what domestic
subcontractors would do even after they have carried out the actual
construction work in terms of the agreement with the contractor has
influence on subsequent selection of the subcontractor for subsequent
projects.

Table 5: Benefits of a standardized Framework for selection of

domestic subcontractors
Levels of Influence: Strongly Agree=SA(5),Agree = A (4), Neither Agree nor Disagree= NA(3), Disagree=
D(2) and Strongly Disagree= SD(1), TR= Total Response, MR= Mean Rate
Benefits of Subcontractors selection Level of influence in the selection TR MR Rank
process
SA A NA D SD
5 4 3 2 1
% % % % %
Overall it could help to select suitable 81.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21 4.81 1
subcontractors who can deliver
It provides a uniform basis for comparing 72.7 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 22 4.73 2
the suitability of the subcontractors and
ensures fairness in the selection process
It helps the contractor to prioritize his 63.6 27.3 9.1 0.0 0.0 22 4.55 3
requirements from the subcontractors,
and provides a rational basis
It ensures that the key performance 63.6 22.7 13.6 0.0 0.0 22 4.50 4
variables are considered Gin the
selection process
It ensures a methodical approach and a 52.4 42.9 4.8 0.0 0.0 21 4.48 5
justifiable basis for selection, and
discourages subjective judgments
 CIB World Building Congress 2007 777

Table 6: Best Practice for Domestic Subcontractor Selection

Levels of Influence: Very Important=VI(5), Important = I (4), Somewhat Important= SI(3), Less Important=
LI(2) and Not Important=NI(1), TR= Total Response, MR= Mean Rate
Best Practice in domestic subcontractor Level of influence in the selection TR MR Rank
selection process
VI I SI LI NI
5 4 3 2 1
% % % % %
Tenders should be assessed and 80.8 11.5 7.7 0.0 0.0 26 4.73 1
accepted not only on the basis of price
Practices that avoid collusion 69.2 23.1 3.8 3.8 0.0 26 4.58 2
Conditions for all tenders to be the same 69.2 19.2 7.7 3.8 0.0 26 4.54 3
Inviting tenders with relevant skills and 57.7 38.5 3.8 0.0 0.0 26 4.54 4
experience to the type of work
Inviting only subcontractors who have 53.8 34.6 7.7 3.8 0.0 26 4.38 5
the ability to submit bona fide bid
Proposed subcontracts to be compatible 50.0 38.5 7.7 0.0 3.8 26 4.31 6
and consistent with the main contract
Sufficient time and information to be 42.3 30.8 23.1 3.8 0.0 26 4.12 7
provided for preparation of tenders
Contracts from recognised bodies to be 23.1 38.5 26.9 7.7 3.8 26 3.69 8
used where they are available
Inviting only subcontractors who have 23.1 30.8 30.8 7.7 7.7 26 3.54 9
the ability to innovate

5.5 STANDARDIZED FRAMEWORK FOR SUBCONTRACTOR

SELECTION

As part of the study, it was necessary to find out from contractors and
subcontractors whether it is necessary for the establishment of a standard
framework for subcontractor selection and the best practices for this
process. The following factors were rated by contractors and
subcontractors. It can be seen that a standardized framework for selection
of domestic subcontractors in the construction industry as shown in table 5.
To enhance this process, and to achieve best practices in the selection
process, other factors should be considered other than price as shown in
table 6.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The opinions expressed by both contractors and subcontractors regarding

subcontractor selection will improve the supply chain management process
in the construction industry. It is clear that both are keen on supporting a
778 CIB World Building Congress 2007
Industry

selection framework that would contribute to better practices in procuring

the services of subcontractors. Subcontractors should demonstrate that
they possess the skills and experience required by contractors at various
stages of the project. The following factors would be useful in decision
making for domestic subcontractor selection.

• Price should be not a major selection factor. Experienced and

financially stable subcontractors should have good chances of
winning tenders more than those who attract contractors’ attention
by lowering tender prices or giving discounts.
• Past performance of subcontractors through delivery of good
quality work, should secure subcontractors a place in the selection
process.
• Efficient management practices and meticulous scheduling of work
can improve productivity for the benefit of the project and the
contractor.
• Subcontractors need to manage and organize their resources and
skills at all times, allowing themselves to be flexible. This helps
them fit quickly with the requirements of current projects and move
quickly to other project sites.
• The construction stage is viewed by contractors and subcontractors
to be important. Both the contractor and subcontractor share the
same understanding of the key requirements that should be
included in a selection framework from the construction stage.
• Subcontractors who cultivate good working relationships between
their workers as well as other subcontractors and the contractor
could encourage a conflict free relationship.
• Contractors are more willing to work with subcontractors who can
carry their work professionally and confidently and by providing
good after sales services.

An elaborate and systematic system of selecting domestic

subcontractors would contribute to better relationships between
contractors and subcontractors for the benefit of the parties and the
industry as a whole.

7. REFERENCES

Alman, M.G., 1997, Barriers to quality in the South African Building

Industry, Unpublished MBA research report, University of Cape Town.
Bowen PA. Pearl RG, Nkado RN, and Edwards PJ 1997, The effectiveness
of the briefing process in the attainment of client objectives for
construction projects in South Africa, proceedings of the RICS COBRA
conference , September , UK, pp.1-10.
CIB World Building Congress 2007 779

Brook M.,1993,.Estimating and Tendering for Construction Work, (Oxford:

Butterworth Heinemann).
Canter, M.R., 1993, Resource Management for Construction: An integrated
approach, (London:Macmillan Press).
Cook, B. and Williams, P., 1998, Construction Planning, Programming and
Control, (New York: Palgrave).
Construction Industry Board.(CID), 1997, Code of Practice for the selection
Of Subcontractors, (London: Thomas Telford Publishing).
Dainty, A., Briscoe, G., Millet, S., 2001, Subcontractor perspective on
supply chain alliances, Construction Management and Economics, Vol.
19 No. 8, pp. 841-848.
Dubois, A., Gadde, L.E., 2000, Supply strategy and network effects –
purchasing behaviour in the construction industry, European Journal of
Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 6 No.3-4, pp.207-15.
Eccles, R., 1981, Bureaucratic versus craft administration: the relationships
of market structure to the construction firm, Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol.26 No.3, pp. 449-469.
Gray, C. and Flanagan, R., 1989, The changing role of specialist and trade
contractors, Chartered Institute of Building, Ascot, UK.
Haksever, A.M, Kim H.S and Pickering, G., 1995, Collaborative long-term
relationships in UK construction industry: A lost opportunity? in
Proceeding of the 11th ARCOM Conference, University of York, and
York, UK.
Hinze, J., Tracey, A., 1994, The contractor – subcontractor relationship: the
subcontractors view, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, Vol.120 No.2, pp.274-87.
Kerfoot, A., 1994, Problems affecting subcontractor performance in the
South African Building Industry, Unpublished dissertation ,University of
the Witwatersrand.
Kometa, S.T., Olomolaiye, .PA. and Harris F.C., 1994, Attributes of UK
construction clients influencing project consultants’ performance,
Construction Management and Economics, Vol.12, pp 433-443.
Latham, M., 1994, Constructing the team, (London: Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office), p130.
Massyn, M.W., 2003, The role of the subcontracting organization on the
business process of contractors - A South African Perspective. In
st
Proceedings of 1 Postgraduate Conference of the CIDB on
Construction Industry Development, Port Elizabeth, pp.237-240.
Mbachu, J.I.C.,2003, A Critical Study of Client Needs and Satisfaction in
the South African Building Industry. Unpublished PhD thesis, University
of Port Elizabeth.
Miller, C., Packlam, G., Thomas, B., 2002, Harmonization between main
contractors and subcontractors: prerequisite for lean construction,
Journal of Construction Research, Vol.3, No.1, pp.67-82.
Oluwoye, J.O, Macleannan H.M and Caolan C.G., 1996, Modeling building
subcontractor performance: a case study of the NSW construction
780 CIB World Building Congress 2007
Industry

industry. In Proceedings of CIB Working commission 55 International

symposium, Zagreb, Croatia, September.
Pietroforte, R., 1997, Communication and governance in the building
process, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 15 No.1, pp.71-
82.
Puttick.R.J., 1978, The implications of employing subcontractors,
Unpublished dissertation , University of Witwatersrand.
Smith, A. J., 1995, Estimating, tendering and bidding for construction:
Theory and practice, (Basingstoke: Mcmillan), p.256.
Teo, A.L., 2002, Strategic marking positioning in the construction industry:
Importance of organization flexibility for diversification. In
Proceeding of the CIB W107 Conference: Creating a Sustainable
Construction Industry in Developing Countries, South Africa, November.