An evaluation of contractors’ satisfaction with payment terms influencing construction cash flow

Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction - Tập 10 Số 3 - Trang 171-180 - 2005
Henry A.Odeyinka1, AmmarKaka2
1Department of Quantity Surveying, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile‐Ife, Osun State, Nigeria
2School of the Built Environment, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, UK

Tóm tắt

Construction cash flow models developed in previous researches demonstrated that cash flow profiles vary for differing procurement methods. However, the issue of whether contractors are satisfied or dissatisfied with payment terms impacting cash flows in differing procurement methods is yet to be investigated. This is the concern of this study. The study identified from literature, payment terms potentially thought to impact construction cash flow. Using a 6‐point Likert‐type scale, a questionnaire survey was administered to UK construction contractors in order to assess their level of satisfaction with identified payment terms influencing construction cash flow. Responses from the survey, which focused on traditional and design and build procurement methods were analysed using mean response analysis and one‐way analysis of variance. Results showed that while contractors were satisfied with most of the contractual factors investigated under both procurement systems, they were dissatisfied with two of the factors, namely, time lag between entitlement to receive and actually receiving cash payment and percentage of contract sum retained. This dissatisfaction calls for action to consider devising alternative means of dealing with retention and delay payments.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Abeysekera V., Re-Engineering Construction: Enabling and Motivating Excellence. International Conference on Re-Engineering Construction

10.1080/014461900370799

Banwell H., 1964, The placing and management of contracts for building and civil engineering work: report of the committee

10.1080/01446198700000011

Construction News, 1997, Construction News., 6506, 3

Chappell D., 1999, The JCT Design and Build Contract, 2

Cook A., 1997, Building., 262, 1997

Egan J., 1998, Rethinking Construction

10.1108/13552559810235529

10.1080/014461900370906

Huxtable J., 1992, Surviving main contractor's insolvency: a practical guide

Institute for Construction Training and Development, 1992, Sri Lanka, 3-242

Joint Contracts Tribunal, 2003, The JCT standard form of building contract

Joint Contracts Tribunal C, 2003, The JCT standard form of building contract, nominated sub-contract conditions

Joint Contracts Tribunal WCD, 2003, The JCT standard form of building contract with contractor's design

Kaka A.P., 2000, Proceeding of the CIB W92 Procurement System Symposium on Information and Communication in Construction Procurement, 657

10.4324/9780203467398

Khosrowshahi F., Proceedings of the 16th Annual ARCOM Conference, 547

Klein R., 1997, Building., 262, 38

Latham M., 1994, Constructing the team: final report of the government/industry review of procurement and contractual arrangements in the UK construction industry. HMSO: London

Latham M., 1997, Building., 262, 1997

McCartney P., 1992, Construction Law Journal, 8, 360

McLaughlin D., 2000, North and South, 171, 60

Murdoch J., 2000, Construction Contracts: Law and Management, 3

National Specialist Contractors Council, 2003, NSCC State of Trade Survey Quarter 1 2003 [Online] Available on http://www.nscc.org.uk [Accessed on

10.1080/01446199500000058

Odeyinka H.A, 2003, Proceedings of 19th Annual ARCOM Conference

Peer S., 1982, Journal of the Construction Division ASCE, 108, (CO2), 226, 10.1061/JCCEAZ.0001036

Singh S., 1992, Proceedings of the 36th AnnualTtransactions of the American Association of Cost Engineers - AACE, AACE, WV, USA, No. R.5.1-R.5.14

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction

Tập 10 Số 3

171-180

Thông tin tác giả