Determining the Most Appropriate Performance Indicators for Improving the Performance of Construction in Syria

Economic growth and high competition have put a strong pressure on construction companies to improve their productivity and performance. Many studies on performance measurement have been carried out at the project level. Recently, the demand for performance evaluation at the company level has increased. This paper aims to identify a set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). A List of 20 potential performance indicators has been identified according to Balance Score Card (BSC) through a quantitative and qualitative analysis. We have obtained the required information about the relative importance of the indicators through interviews with six experts in the construction industry to determine the size of the relative importance of each indicator, on the grounds that a large number of performance indicators are difficult to measure and control. We have adopted the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to identify fewer and more effective performance indicators. And we have used Expert Choice software to analyze expert answers. As a result, we have obtained 9 important indicators which can be directly used as indicators to measure and identify performance projects or as indicators within an integrated system, for performance measurement and tracking helps in improving the performance of construction projects in Syria.

Defining the Areas and Priorities of Performance Improvement in Construction Companies Case Study for General Company for Construction and Building

Performance improvement in Construction companies is a complex task, which requires great effort and care. The research aims to analyze the status of work at the general company for building and construction, in order to determine the available management problems and then determine the priorities that will be areas of possible improvement of the performance of the company. There used three tools to asses inputs ,processes and outputs , The result of evaluating the maturity (inputs) of project management showed weakness in performance as The rate of project management maturity reached 2.3 out of 5. Quality indicators (outputs) , where rates were less than the average, were identified, as it was the results of questionnaire of measuring customer satisfaction for a sample of projects implemented by the company and the mean of customer satisfaction was 2.73 out of 5. Finally main processes of the company were drown and then the “FMEA " was used to identify the processes which face trouble which were 41 process. As a result of this comprehensive analysis the priority areas and procedures for the performance improvement were proposed.