Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R. Navon (1995)
Resource-based model for automatic cash-flow forecastingConstruction Management and Economics, 13
S. Brownlie, F. Harris (1987)
A review of finance for large-scale constructionConstruction Management and Economics, 5
R. Hamilton, M. Fox (1998)
The financing preferences of small firm ownersInternational Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 4
A. Kaka, N. Dawood (2000)
Assessing the Need to Consider Cash Flow as a Factor in Deciding What type of Procurement System the Client Should Implement
J. Murdoch, W. Hughes (2000)
Construction contracts: law and management (3rd edition)
W. Hughes, P. Hillebrandt, J. Murdoch (2000)
The impact of contract duration on the cost of cash retentionConstruction Management and Economics, 18
Peer S. (1982)
10.1061/JCCEAZ.0001036Journal of the Construction Division ASCE, 108, (CO2)
A. Akintoye, Eamon Fitzgerald (2000)
A survey of current cost estimating practices in the UKConstruction Management and Economics, 18
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.
Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction – Emerald Publishing
Published: Dec 1, 2005
Keywords: Cash flow; Design and build contract; Payment term; Traditional procurement
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.