KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 87–96 | Cite as

A risk-based entry decision model for international projects

  • Seung Heon Han
Construction Engineering


The world economy is becoming more global due to agreements such as the “Uruguay Round” in WTO (World Trade Organization). The globalization of the world construction industry provides tremendous opportunities for contractors to expand into new foreign markets. However, international construction markets are still dramatically different from domestic markets. International construction involves all of the uncertainties common to domestic construction projects as well as risks specific to international transactions. This paper discusses the current approaches related to entry decisions into intenational construction markets. It then develops a “risk-based Go/No-Go decision making model” for contractors who wish to expand into international construction markets. The entry decision model applies the Cross-Impact Analysis (CIA) method to assess the various uncertainties associated with international construction. This research draws significant findings regard ing the benefits of this Go/No-Go decision model from experimental studies by 56 participants.


international construction projects risk analysis risk-based entry decision model cross-impact analysis (CIA) experimental case studies 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ahmad. I. (1990). “Decision support system for modeling bid/no-bid decision problem,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management ASCE, Vol. 114, No. 4, New York.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alarcon, L.F. (1992).Project performance modeling: a methodology for evaluating project execution strategies. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, California.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ashley, D.B., and Bonner, J.J. (1987). “Political risks in international construction,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 113, Sep., New York.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burton, F.N. (1985). “Country risk evaluation,” Banker, Financial News, No. 133, London.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burton, F.N. and Inoue, H. (1983). “Country risk evaluation methods: a survey of system in use,” Banker, Financial News, London, pp. 41–43.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    CII (1991).Anatomy of construction industry competition in the year of 2000, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, Texas.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    CII (1993).Competing in the global market, Publication 30-1, Construction Industry Institute, Austin, Texas.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cooper, D. and Chapman, C. (1987).Risk analysis for large projects, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    DeGraaf, G. (1995). “Toward a more global government procurement market,” the International Lawyer.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Demacopoulos, A.C. (1989).Foreign exchange exposure in international construction, Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ENR (1997). “1997 international sourcebook,” McGraw-Hill Companies. New York, USA.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ENR (1995, 1996, 1997). “Top 225 international contractor,” McGraw-Hill Companies, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ENR (1987, 1992, 1998). “U.S. top 400 contractor,” McGraw-Hill Companies, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Enzer, S. (1972). “Cross-Impact techniques in technology assessment,” Futures, Institute for the Future, Vol. 4, No. 1.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Farabow, S.B. (1995). “Expanding U.S. and E.U. government procurement opportunities,” Construction Business Reviews, Vienna, Va, Sep/Oct, 1995.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Flanagan, R., and Norman, G. (1993).Risk management and construction, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Garziano, A.M., and Raulin, M.K. (1997).Research methods: a Process of inquiry, Addison-Wesley Educational Publishing Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gordon, T., and Hayward, H. (1968). “Initial experiments with the Cross-Impact Method of forecasting,” Futures, Institute for the Future, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 100–116.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gross, J.G. (1991). “Meeting the challenges of a global market,” Construction Business Reviews, Vienna, Va, pp. 31–34.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Han, S.H. (1999).Risk-based go/no-go decision making model for international construction projects: The Cross-Impact Approach, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hill International, Inc. (1995). “Seminar on international construction claims Avoiding and Resolving Disputes,” Seoul.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Honton, E.J., Stacey, G.S., and Millet, S.M. (1985). “Future scenarios: the BASICS computational method,” Battelle Technical, Columbus Division, Ohio.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kangari, R. and Boyer, L.T. (1981). “Project selection under risk,” Journal of the construction division, ASCE, 107(CO 4), pp. 597–608.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lee, J. and Walters, D. (1989).International trade in construction, design, and engineering services, Ballinger Publishing Co., Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Malhotra, N.K. (1993).Marketing research: an applied orientation, Prentice Hall, Eaglewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Martin, D.M. (1996).Doing psychology experiments (4th edition), Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Pacific Grove, California.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mattoo, A. (1996). “Government procurement agreement,” the World Economy, Basil Blackwell, London.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Melvin, M. (1995).International economics, Arizona State University, Arizona.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Messner, J.I. (1994).An information framework for evaluating international construction projects, Ph.D. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  30. 31.
    Michel, H. (1991). “How to succeed in the Pacific rim,” Construction Business Reviews, Vienna, Va, pp. 60–66.Google Scholar
  31. 32.
    Moavenzadeh, F. (1991). “Strategies response to changing engineering and cost market”, Construction Business Reviews, Vienna, Va, pp. 25–30.Google Scholar
  32. 33.
    Newman, C.M. (1981). “Managing and evaluating country risk,” Business International Corporation, New York.Google Scholar
  33. 34.
    Pouliquen, L.Y. (1970).Risk analysis in project appraisal, occasional paper No 11. World Bank, Washington.Google Scholar
  34. 35.
    Reutlinger, S. (1970).Techniques for project appraisal under uncertainty, occasional paper no 10, World Bank, Washington.Google Scholar
  35. 36.
    Shafer, G., and Pearl, J. (1990).Readings in uncertainty reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Mateo, California.Google Scholar
  36. 37.
    Stacey, G.S., Hart, J.C., Honton, E.J., Millett, S.M., Schubert, I., and Sfilogoj, A. (1988).Technology acquisition decisions: using scenarios for technology forecasting, Battelle Technical, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar
  37. 38.
    Takayuki, M. (1994).A Methodology for project risk control: a work packaged-based approach using historical cost control data, Ph.D. thesis, University of California. Berkeley, California, USA.Google Scholar
  38. 39.
    Takayuki, M. and Ashley, D. (1998). “Data-drive analysis of corporate risk using historical cost-control data,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, New York, Vol. 124, No. 1, pp. 42–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 40.
    Tanaka, K. (1984).Project financing and risk minimizing approaches for lending agencies, MS Thesis, Colorado School of Mines, Colorado.Google Scholar
  40. 41.
    UNESCO(1984).Project evaluation problems of methodology, Corvoisier, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Paris.Google Scholar
  41. 42.
    Vergara, A.J. and Boyer, L.T. (1977). “Portfolio theory: application in construction,” Journal of the Construction Division, ASCE, 103(CO 1), pp. 23–38.Google Scholar
  42. 43.
    WTO (1995).Trading into the future, World Trade Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
  43. 44.
    Yates, J.K. (1996). “International standards: the US construction industrys competitiveness,” Cost Engineering, AACE, Vol. 38, No. 7, pp. 32–37.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© KSCE and Springer jointly 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ministry of Construction & TransportationKwa-chen CityKorea

Personalised recommendations