D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment Lesson Four: The Strategic Management Process Michael Porter & His Strategies sl/BMBE/2017

MICHAEL PORTER: Guru of Strategic Management D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment MICHAEL PORTER: Guru of Strategic Management His theories include: Diamond Model 5 - Forces Model Value Chain Analysis Generic Business strategies sl/BMBE/2017

Porter’s diamond diagram D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment Porter’s diamond diagram Strategy, structure & rivalry Govt Factor conditions Demand conditions Related & supporting industries chance sl/BMBE/2017

D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment According to Porter…. Factor conditions – highly specialised resources developed in different countries where there is a large pool of skilled manpower or labour Related and supporting industries which help to expedite the process for production of goods and services Demand conditions where consumers force companies to innovate and shape their market orientation in such a way that caters to their needs and wants Strategy, structure and rivalry which will be highlighted in the study of 5-forces theory sl/BMBE/2017

D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF INDUSTRIES or competitive analysis of the industry 5 FORCES AFFECTING ANY ORGANISATION ARE : THREAT OF NEW ENTRANTS THREAT OF SUBSTITUTES SUPPLIERS’ BARGAINING POWER BUYERS’ BARGAINING POWER INDUSTRY COMPETITIVE RIVALRY sl/BMBE/2017

MICHAEL PORTER’S 5 FORCES MODEL /THEORY D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment MICHAEL PORTER’S 5 FORCES MODEL /THEORY sl/BMBE/2017

Implications of michael porter’s 5 forces’ model : D39BU – Business Management in the Built Environment Implications of michael porter’s 5 forces’ model : The economic model of the market structure demonstrates that the degree of competition in an industry is the result of structural factors over which individual companies have little control. A firm in a highly competitive market has no option but to be a price taker while the other side the monopoly has limited competition through restraining strategies adopted. His model also shows that every firm has to make decisions with regard to competitive forces and its own resources to maintain its market share and sustain growth, otherwise, the firm may be thrown out of the market due to competition and inability to read the trends in the industry   sl/BMBE/2017

Business Management in the Built Environment DISCUSSION AND ASSIGNMENT Examination Questions pertaining to Michael Porter’s models… 1. Michael Porter’s contributions have been highly influential within the field of strategy. Provide a detailed explanation of any of his strategic analysis models and explain which dominant school of thought in strategy the models belonged to. 2. The five forces model is frequently used to help develop strategy. In the context of a built environment organisation, fully explore and explain what is meant by the “five forces model” and specifically how built environment organisations can draw upon and use the model.. additionally provide an explanation of which “school of thought” the model belongs. sl/BMBE/2017

Business Management in the Built Environment VALUE CHAIN ANALYSIS Conducting a value chain analysis to link resources to strategic performance Value chain analysis consists of identifying key value activities and resources required for each activity. Pg 12-14 of unit 5 sl/BMBE/2017

Checklist of resources and activities Business Management in the Built Environment Checklist of resources and activities Support activities Corporate structure Human resources margin Technological development purchasing services Outbound logistics Inbound logistics Mktg & sales mfg margin Primary activities sl/BMBE/2017

Business Management in the Built Environment Value system Much of the value creation is dependent on 3 further steps: A identify external linkages B analyse the extent to which sub-optimisation occurs and then rectify the problem C passing a problem to another organisation does not help value creation See figure 11 of pg 14 sl/BMBE/2017

Business Management in the Built Environment the relevant competitors Porter’s Generic Strategies Competitive Position demand in the market market leadership Strategic Choice the relevant competitors RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. DIFFERENTIATION COST FOCUS sl/BMBE/2017 12

Business Management in the Built Environment Porter’s Generic Strategies: Competitive Forces: Drive down costs while maintaining average quality Cost Leadership / Cost Focus Differentiate product or service in ways that are valued by the customer Broad Differentiation / Differentiation Focus RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. sl/BMBE/2017 13

Competitive Advantage Competitive scope Business Management in the Built Environment Selection of options : Porter’s Generic Strategies Unit 6 Pg 1-3 Competitive Advantage Lower cost Differentiation Competitive scope Broad target Cost Leadership Broad Differentiation RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. Narrow target Cost Focus Differentiation Focus sl/BMBE/2017 14

Business Management in the Built Environment Porter’s Generic Strategies Average Price PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. COST COST COST Average Player Cost Leader Differentiator Player sl/BMBE/2017 15

Business Management in the Built Environment Porter’s Generic Strategies (alternatively) THE ‘SQUEEZE’ Average Price PROFIT PROFIT RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. PROFIT COST COST COST Average Player Cost Leader Cost Cutter sl/BMBE/2017 16

Business Management in the Built Environment Porter’s Generic Strategies (alternatively) SHORT-TERM STRATEGY Average Price PROFIT PROFIT RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. COST COST COST Average Player Cost Leader Cost Price sl/BMBE/2017 17

Business Management in the Built Environment Porter’s Generic Strategies Drive down costs the experience curve Unit cost RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. Organisational Learning Cumulative volume sl/BMBE/2017 18

Business Management in the Built Environment Porter’s Generic Strategies Drive down costs Economies of scale (X) Unit cost RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. Manufacturing Process (Y) Scale of production sl/BMBE/2017 19

Business Management in the Built Environment Selection of options : Porter’s Generic Strategies Pg 2-unit 6 3. Hybrid 4.Differentiation 5. Focused Differentiation Strategic Choice/options 2. Low Price 6. Increased Price / Standard Value What is of value to the user of the product / service? RATIONALE: THE BASIC PREMISE FOR THIS STUDY WAS TO FIRST ESTABLISH EVIDENCE THAT TEAMS REALLY DO INFLUENCE PERFORMANCE AND IN THIS CASE AT A PROJECT LEVEL WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT. SECONDLY, PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK THAT PERMITS ANALYSIS WHILST AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDES INSIGHT, IDENTIFING STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES WITHIN THE TEAM DYNAMIC THAT ALLOWS MANAGEMENT TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO ENHANCING THE PERFORMANCE OF CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORKING (HPXfT). TEAM WORKING: IS A RESILIENT MANAGEMENT THEME WITH A LONG HISTORY OF RESEARCH. THE VOLUME OF TEAM WORKING MATERIAL IS TESTIMONY TO THE ENDURING APPEAL OF TEAM WORKING PHILOSOPHIES. IN RECENT YEARS THE TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVE WHICH WAS IN SOMEPART BENEVOLENT IN NATURE HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A MORE BUSINESS ORIENTATED FOCUS. IN OTHER WORDS ‘TODAY, THE OBJECTIVE IS STRATEGIC RATHER THAN OPERATIONAL’. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: ALONG WITH THE CHANGE IN TEAM IDEALS, PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS DEVELOPED AS A SPECIFIC CORPORATE DISCIPLINE. HISTORICALLY PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT HAS FOCUSED ON THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF BUSINESS. IN 1992 KAPLAN & NORTON DEVELOPED THE ‘BALANCED SCORECARD’ CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC MEASUREMENT OF CORPORATE WELL-BEING. IDENTIFYING FOUR DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES THAT DRIVE PERFORMANCE. TEAM & PERFORMANCE: AT PRESENT THERE ARE SOME CONTRADICTIONS IN BUSINESS PRACTICE FOR EXAMPLE TEAMWORKING STRUCTURES (AT A PROJECT LEVEL) MATCHED WITH INDIVIDUAL APPRAISAL AND REWARDS AT A COMPANY LEVEL. 1. Low Price / Added Value 7. Increased Price / Low Value 8. Low Value / Standard Price sl/BMBE/2017 20