Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Respondents’ function in enterprises_
| Function | F | % |
|---|---|---|
| Senior management | 77 | 62.6 |
| Middle level management | 32 | 26.0 |
| Lower level management | 14 | 11.4 |
| Σ | 123 | 100.0 |
Sample structure by the status of the contractor in the value chain_
| Status of the contractor in the value chain | F | % |
|---|---|---|
| Main contractor | 84 | 68.3 |
| Subcontractor | 39 | 31.7 |
| Σ | 123 | 100.0 |
Sample structure by the type of construction projects in which enterprises participate_
| Project type | F | % |
|---|---|---|
| Building | 35 | 28.5 |
| Infrastructure facilities | 86 | 70.9 |
| Others | 2 | 1.6 |
| Σ | 123 | 100.0 |
Statistical significance of affirmation of motives and obstacles in collaborative relations (sorted by size)_
| μ | p | |
|---|---|---|
| MOTIVES | ||
| Operational flexibility | 4.36 | 0.000 |
| Lack of own capacities | 4.15 | 0.000 |
| Achieving lower costs with increased workload | 4.15 | 0.000 |
| Complementarity of resources and synergy | 4.11 | 0.000 |
| Competitive advantage | 4.05 | 0.000 |
| Access to new technologies | 3.93 | 0.000 |
| Risk reduction | 3.92 | 0.000 |
| Reputation | 3.89 | 0.000 |
| Cost-sharing | 3.82 | 0.000 |
| OBSTACLES | ||
| Satisfaction with market relations based on price | 3.46 | 0.000 |
| Information leakage | 3.03 | 0.747 |
| Loss of discretion in decision-making | 3.02 | 0.869 |
| Legal uncertainty | 3.00 | 1.000 |
| Subcontractor dependence | 2.98 | 0.799 |
| Risk of subcontractors taking over customers and becoming competitors | 2.88 | 0.282 |
Differences in RG, LIS, SND, Operational flexibility and Enterprise performance with regard to legal form, company size and contractor status (aggregate)_
| Legal form | Company size | Contractor status | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ltd. | JSC | p | MP | SP | VP | p | GI | PI | P | |
| RG | 3.91 | 3.91 | 0.97 | 3.96 | 3.91 | 3.88 | 0.83 | 3.95 | 3.86 | 0.42 |
| LIS | 3.82 | 3.77 | 0.75 | 3.87 | 3.70 | 3.89 | 0.40 | 3.83 | 3.78 | 0.69 |
| SND | 3.97 | 4.00 | 0.83 | 4.01 | 3.96 | 4.01 | 0.90 | 4.06 | 3.86 | 0.07 |
Distribution of enterprises by headquarters_
| Headquarters | F | % |
|---|---|---|
| Zagreb | 32 | 26.0 |
| Karlovac County | 24 | 19.5 |
| Primorje-Gorski Kotar County | 9 | 7.3 |
| Split-Dalmatia County | 8 | 6.5 |
| Osijek-Baranja County | 8 | 6.5 |
| Zagreb County | 7 | 5.7 |
| Istria County | 6 | 4.9 |
| Brod-Posavina County | 5 | 4.0 |
| Bjelovar-Bilogora County | 4 | 3.2 |
| Vukovar-Syrmia County | 4 | 3.2 |
| Zadar County | 4 | 3.2 |
| Požega-Slavonia County | 3 | 2.4 |
| Varaždin County | 3 | 2.4 |
| Šibenik-Knin County | 2 | 1.6 |
| Dubrovnik-Neretva County | 1 | 0.8 |
| Koprivnica-Križevca County | 1 | 0.8 |
| Krapina-Zagorje County | 1 | 0.8 |
| Sisak-Moslavina County | 1 | 0.8 |
| Σ | 123 | 100.0 |
Sample structure by the location of construction projects in which enterprises participate_
| Location of projects | F | % |
|---|---|---|
| Locally | 60 | 48.8 |
| The Republic of Croatia | 53 | 43.1 |
| Croatia and other countries | 10 | 8.1 |
| Σ | 123 | 100.0 |
Differences in the importance of obstacles in collaboration with subcontractors regarding the legal form, company size and the contractor status_
| Legal form | Company size | Contractor size | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ltd | R | JSC | R | p | MP | R | SP | R | VP | R | p | GI | R | PI | R | p | |
| Satisfaction with market relations based on price | 3.4 | 1 | 3.61 | 1 | 0.371 | 3.33 | 1 | 3.43 | 1 | 3.63 | 1 | 0.383 | 3.46 | 1 | 3.46 | 1 | 0.985 |
| Subcontractor dependence | 2.87 | 5 | 3.21 | 4 | 0.165 | 3 | 4 | 2.93 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 0.94 | 3 | 3 | 2.92 | 6 | 0.710 |
| Loss of discretion in decision-making | 2.98 | 2 | 3.13 | 5 | 0.557 | 3.13 | 2 | 2.93 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 0.717 | 2.98 | 4 | 3.1 | 2 | 0.553 |
| Risk of subcontractors taking over customers and becoming competitors | 2.81 | 6 | 3.23 | 3 | 0.134 | 2.88 | 5 | 2.9 | 6 | 2.87 | 6 | 0.99 | 2.85 | 6 | 2.95 | 5 | 0.680 |
| Information leakage | 2.95 | 3 | 3.39 | 2 | 0.091 | 3.1 | 3 | 2.98 | 3 | 3.03 | 3 | 0.885 | 3.01 | 2 | 3.08 | 3 | 0.771 |
| Legal uncertainty | 2.93 | 4 | 3.13 | 6 | 0.458 | 2.88 | 6 | 3.05 | 2 | 3.07 | 2 | 0.711 | 2.98 | 5 | 3.05 | 4 | 0.741 |
Importance of RG, LIS and SND with regard to legal form, company size and contractor status_
| Legal form | Company size | Contractor status | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ltd | P | JSC | p | MP | p | SP | p | VP | p | GI | p | PI | p | ||
| RELATIONAL GOVERNANCE | We can count on our subcontractor to keep their promises | 3.78 | 0.000 | 3.58 | 0.001 | 3.88 | 0.000 | 3.60 | 0.000 | 3.76 | 0.000 | 3.71 | 0.000 | 3.79 | 0.000 |
| We can count on the honesty of our subcontractor in doing business with our company | 3.77 | 0.000 | 3.67 | 0.000 | 4.03 | 0.000 | 3.64 | 0.000 | 3.65 | 0.000 | 3.73 | 0.000 | 3.87 | 0.000 | |
| Our subcontractor is a company that keeps its word | 3.89 | 0.000 | 3.52 | 0.007 | 4.08 | 0.000 | 3.67 | 0.000 | 3.75 | 0.000 | 3.76 | 0.000 | 3.97 | 0.000 | |
| We have full confidence in the motives of the subcontractors | 3.86 | 0.000 | 3.79 | 0.000 | 4.15 | 0.000 | 3.60 | 0.000 | 3.78 | 0.000 | 3.79 | 0.000 | 3.95 | 0.000 | |
| Subcontractors are open to us | 3.81 | 0.000 | 3.70 | 0.001 | 4.08 | 0.000 | 3.62 | 0.000 | 3.73 | 0.000 | 3.78 | 0.000 | 3.85 | 0.000 | |
| The relationship built with subcontractors is based on a fair relationship | 4.20 | 0.000 | 4.17 | 0.000 | 4.40 | 0.000 | 4.12 | 0.000 | 4.07 | 0.000 | 4.13 | 0.000 | 4.33 | 0.000 | |
| We stayed with our subcontractor because we feel like we are part of his family | 3.28 | 0.012 | 2.92 | 0.732 | 3.50 | 0.002 | 3.12 | 0.472 | 3.07 | 0.680 | 3.06 | 0.595 | 3.59 | 0.001 | |
| We stayed with our subcontractor because we were attracted to the issues they supported as a company | 3.63 | 0.000 | 3.58 | 0.010 | 3.95 | 0.000 | 3.44 | 0.008 | 3.51 | 0.002 | 3.50 | 0.000 | 3.92 | 0.000 | |
| We expect that the relationship and cooperation with the subcontractor will last for several projects | 4.37 | 0.000 | 3.96 | 0.000 | 4.50 | 0.000 | 4.19 | 0.000 | 4.24 | 0.000 | 4.27 | 0.000 | 4.38 | 0.000 | |
| Subcontractors are committed to our cooperation | 3.89 | 0.000 | 3.67 | 0.001 | 4.18 | 0.000 | 3.67 | 0.000 | 3.73 | 0.000 | 3.80 | 0.000 | 3.97 | 0.000 | |
| Subcontractors have sacrificed for us on past projects | 3.27 | 0.019 | 3.13 | 0.524 | 3.38 | 0.045 | 3.17 | 0.313 | 3.22 | 0.152 | 3.20 | 0.043 | 3.36 | 0.099 | |
| The various jobs and work activities between our company and subcontractors fit together very well | 3.94 | 0.000 | 3.63 | 0.002 | 4.05 | 0.000 | 3.83 | 0.000 | 3.76 | 0.000 | 3.80 | 0.000 | 4.05 | 0.000 | |
| Employees of our company and subcontractors who had to work together did the job properly and efficiently | 4.31 | 0.000 | 3.88 | 0.015 | 4.38 | 0.000 | 4.12 | 0.000 | 4.17 | 0.000 | 4.17 | 0.000 | 4.34 | 0.000 | |
| Routines between our company and subcontractors are well-established | 4.11 | 0.000 | 3.42 | 0.000 | 4.05 | 0.000 | 3.93 | 0.000 | 3.85 | 0.000 | 3.92 | 0.000 | 4.00 | 0.000 | |
| Activities with subcontractors are well-coordinated | 4.12 | 0.000 | 3.71 | 0.000 | 4.10 | 0.000 | 4.05 | 0.000 | 3.98 | 0.000 | 4.01 | 0.000 | 4.10 | 0.000 | |
| Our subcontractors’ enterprises and our enterprise complement each other very well | 4.15 | 0.000 | 3.88 | 0.000 | 4.28 | 0.000 | 4.07 | 0.000 | 4.00 | 0.000 | 4.06 | 0.000 | 4.23 | 0.000 | |
| When conflicts arise. our company and subcontractor would jointly find an appropriate solution | 4.19 | 0.000 | 3.79 | 0.000 | 4.33 | 0.000 | 4.07 | 0.000 | 3.95 | 0.000 | 4.06 | 0.000 | 4.23 | 0.000 | |
| If the subcontractor’s execution was not in line with our expectations. we would help him or make a proposal | 4.40 | 0.000 | 4.33 | 0.000 | 4.62 | 0.000 | 4.36 | 0.000 | 4.17 | 0.000 | 4.33 | 0.000 | 4.47 | 0.000 | |
| When our company encountered construction problems, the subcontractor gave us helpful opinions | 3.88 | 0.000 | 3.70 | 0.000 | 4.08 | 0.000 | 3.80 | 0.000 | 3.63 | 0.000 | 3.77 | 0.000 | 3.97 | 0.000 | |
| We openly exchange ideas with a subcontractor in order to solve problems | 4.22 | 0.000 | 4.04 | 0.000 | 4.58 | 0.000 | 4.05 | 0.000 | 3.95 | 0.000 | 4.12 | 0.000 | 4.34 | 0.000 | |
| Divergent opinions are resolved to a mutual satisfaction | 4.15 | 0.000 | 3.92 | 0.110 | 4.30 | 0.000 | 4.00 | 0.000 | 4.00 | 0.000 | 4.02 | 0.000 | 4.26 | 0.000 | |
| LEVEL OF INFORMATION SHARING | We inform subcontractors in advance about changes in our needs | 4.10 | 0.000 | 3.92 | 0.032 | 4.28 | 0.000 | 3.98 | 0.000 | 3.90 | 0.000 | 4.01 | 0.000 | 4.13 | 0.000 |
| Our subcontractors share business knowledge with us about core business processes | 3.86 | 0.000 | 3.29 | 0.001 | 4.03 | 0.000 | 3.64 | 0.000 | 3.56 | 0.000 | 3.60 | 0.000 | 4.05 | 0.000 | |
| Our subcontractors inform us fully on issues that affect our business | 3.61 | 0.000 | 3.29 | 0.000 | 3.79 | 0.000 | 3.52 | 0.000 | 3.41 | 0.001 | 3.49 | 0.000 | 3.74 | 0.000 | |
| We share information with our subcontractors to help establish business planning | 3.80 | 0.000 | 3.67 | 0.000 | 4.00 | 0.000 | 3.79 | 0.000 | 3.61 | 0.000 | 3.74 | 0.000 | 3.92 | 0.000 | |
| We inform each other about events and changes that may have an impact on other partners | 3.84 | 0.000 | 4.04 | 0.266 | 3.98 | 0.000 | 3.88 | 0.000 | 3.85 | 0.000 | 3.94 | 0.000 | 3.82 | 0.000 | |
| SUBCONTRACTOR NETWORK DESIGN | Direct contact with our subcontractors is important for our company | 4.53 | 0.000 | 4.33 | 0.000 | 4.65 | 0.000 | 4.43 | 0.000 | 4.41 | 0.000 | 4.46 | 0.000 | 4.56 | 0.000 |
| We contract the same type of work with any one particular subcontractor | 3.45 | 0.000 | 2.75 | 0.000 | 3.85 | 0.000 | 3.24 | 0.215 | 2.90 | 0.617 | 3.12 | 0.352 | 3.77 | 0.000 | |
| We invest a lot of effort in building a good and close relationship with subcontractors | 4.28 | 0.000 | 4.13 | 0.000 | 4.38 | 0.000 | 4.31 | 0.000 | 4.05 | 0.000 | 4.26 | 0.000 | 4.21 | 0.000 | |
| We select our subcontractors according to clearly defined criteria | 4.28 | 0.000 | 4.04 | 0.000 | 4.30 | 0.000 | 4.15 | 0.000 | 4.27 | 0.000 | 4.23 | 0.000 | 4.26 | 0.000 | |
| Contracts with our subcontractors contain detailed specifications and adaptive clauses | 3.89 | 0.000 | 3.92 | 0.001 | 3.92 | 0.000 | 3.90 | 0.000 | 3.88 | 0.000 | 3.89 | 0.000 | 3.92 | 0.000 | |
| Cooperation with our subcontractors is repeated on several projects | 4.41 | 0.000 | 4.29 | 0.001 | 4.68 | 0.000 | 4.24 | 0.000 | 4.27 | 0.000 | 4.30 | 0.000 | 4.59 | 0.000 | |
| Cooperation with our subcontractors has a long-term character | 4.32 | 0.001 | 4.33 | 0.396 | 4.58 | 0.000 | 4.24 | 0.000 | 4.20 | 0.000 | 4.29 | 0.000 | 4.44 | 0.000 | |
| The intensity of cooperation with subcontractors is high | 3.90 | 0.000 | 3.63 | 0.000 | 4.00 | 0.000 | 3.74 | 0.000 | 3.76 | 0.000 | 3.77 | 0.000 | 3.95 | 0.000 | |
| Relationships with our subcontractors are very strong | 3.88 | 0.000 | 3.67 | 0.002 | 4.13 | 0.000 | 3.71 | 0.000 | 3.78 | 0.000 | 3.81 | 0.000 | 4.00 | 0.000 | |
| We use informal warranties with our subcontractors | 3.38 | 0.000 | 2.79 | 0.000 | 3.70 | 0.000 | 3.29 | 0.123 | 2.88 | 0.453 | 3.11 | 0.359 | 3.67 | 0.001 | |
Sample structure by the legal entity of the enterprise_
| Legal entity | F | % |
|---|---|---|
| LLC | 94 | 76.4 |
| SC | 24 | 19.5 |
| Others | 5 | 4.1 |
| Σ | 123 | 100.0 |
Sample structure by the size of the enterprise (number of employees)_
| Enterprise size (number of employees) | F | % |
|---|---|---|
| 0–40 | 40 | 32.5 |
| 40–100 | 42 | 34.1 |
| 100+ | 41 | 33.3 |
| Σ | 123 | 100.0 |
Differences in the importance of motives for concluding collaborative relations with subcontractors with regard to the legal form, company size and the contractor status_
| Legal form | Company size | Contractor status | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ltd | R | JSC | R | p | MP | R | SP | R | VP | R | p | GI | R | PI | R | p | |
| Access to new technologies | 3.95 | 6 | 3.92 | 6 | 0.889 | 4.08 | 7 | 3.98 | 6 | 3.76 | 8 | 0.288 | 3.90 | 6 | 4.00 | 5 | 0.599 |
| Achieving lower costs with increased workload | 4.15 | 2 | 4.17 | 4 | 0.923 | 4.15 | 2 | 4.19 | 2 | 4.10 | 4 | 0.866 | 4.20 | 2 | 4.03 | 4 | 0.247 |
| Operational flexibility | 4.43 | 1 | 4.21 | 3 | 0.138 | 4.48 | 1 | 4.33 | 1 | 4.27 | 1 | 0.337 | 4.38 | 1 | 4.31 | 1 | 0.558 |
| Cost-sharing | 3.85 | 9 | 3.71 | 9 | 0.525 | 4.05 | 8 | 3.81 | 7 | 3.61 | 9 | 0.122 | 3.77 | 9 | 3.92 | 7 | 0.428 |
| Risk reduction | 3.95 | 7 | 3.92 | 7 | 0.890 | 4.10 | 5 | 3.76 | 8 | 3.90 | 5 | 0.252 | 3.90 | 7 | 3.95 | 6 | 0.816 |
| Competitive advantage | 4.09 | 4 | 4.04 | 5 | 0.822 | 4.15 | 3 | 4.17 | 3 | 3.83 | 7 | 0.102 | 4.04 | 5 | 4.08 | 3 | 0.797 |
| Complementarity of resources and synergy | 4.06 | 5 | 4.39 | 1 | 0.076 | 3.98 | 9 | 4.12 | 5 | 4.24 | 2 | 0.306 | 4.20 | 3 | 3.92 | 8 | 0.064 |
| Reputation | 3.91 | 8 | 3.83 | 8 | 0.670 | 4.13 | 4 | 3.69 | 9 | 3.85 | 6 | 0.054 | 3.88 | 8 | 3.90 | 9 | 0.911 |
| Lack of own resources | 4.12 | 3 | 4.33 | 2 | 0.223 | 4.10 | 6 | 4.17 | 4 | 4.20 | 3 | 0.852 | 4.18 | 4 | 4.10 | 2 | 0.612 |
Differences in RG, LIS and SND with regard to legal form, company size and contractor status (scales individually)_
| Legal form | Size of the company | Contractor status | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ltd | JSC | p | MP | SP | VP | p | GI | PI | p | ||
| RELATIONAL GOVERNANCE | We can count on our subcontractor to keep their promises | 3.78 | 3.58 | 0.504 | 3.88 | 3.60 | 3.76 | 0.273 | 3.71 | 3.79 | 0.600 |
| We can count on the honesty of our subcontractor in doing business with our company | 3.77 | 3.67 | 0.306 | 4.03 | 3.64 | 3.65 | 0.030 | 3.73 | 3.87 | 0.332 | |
| Our subcontractor is a company that keeps its word | 3.89 | 3.52 | 0.073 | 4.08 | 3.67 | 3.75 | 0.059 | 3.76 | 3.97 | 0.177 | |
| We have full confidence in the motives of the subcontractors | 3.86 | 3.79 | 0.539 | 4.15 | 3.60 | 3.78 | 0.015 | 3.79 | 3.95 | 0.347 | |
| Subcontractors are open to us | 3.81 | 3.70 | 0.798 | 4.08 | 3.62 | 3.73 | 0.036 | 3.78 | 3.85 | 0.701 | |
| The relationship built with subcontractors is based on a fair relationship | 4.20 | 4.17 | 0.927 | 4.40 | 4.12 | 4.07 | 0.136 | 4.13 | 4.33 | 0.191 | |
| We stayed with our subcontractor because we feel like we are part of his family | 3.28 | 2.92 | 0.198 | 3.50 | 3.12 | 3.07 | 0.140 | 3.06 | 3.59 | 0.009 | |
| We stayed with our subcontractor because we were attracted to the issues they supported as a company | 3.63 | 3.58 | 0.841 | 3.95 | 3.44 | 3.51 | 0.033 | 3.50 | 3.92 | 0.024 | |
| We expect that the relationship and cooperation with the subcontractor will last for several projects | 4.37 | 3.96 | 0.039 | 4.50 | 4.19 | 4.24 | 0.185 | 4.27 | 4.38 | 0.483 | |
| Subcontractors are committed to our cooperation | 3.89 | 3.67 | 0.244 | 4.18 | 3.67 | 3.73 | 0.008 | 3.80 | 3.97 | 0.260 | |
| Subcontractors have sacrificed for us on past projects | 3.27 | 3.13 | 0.804 | 3.38 | 3.17 | 3.22 | 0.654 | 3.20 | 3.36 | 0.445 | |
| The various jobs and work activities between our company and subcontractors fit together very well | 3.94 | 3.63 | 0.170 | 4.05 | 3.83 | 3.76 | 0.173 | 3.80 | 4.05 | 0.073 | |
| Employees of our company and subcontractors who had to work together did the job properly and efficiently | 4.31 | 3.88 | 0.027 | 4.38 | 4.12 | 4.17 | 0.249 | 4.17 | 4.34 | 0.215 | |
| Routines between our company and subcontractors are well-established | 4.11 | 3.42 | 0.001 | 4.05 | 3.93 | 3.85 | 0.560 | 3.92 | 4.00 | 0.603 | |
| Activities with subcontractors are well-coordinated | 4.12 | 3.71 | 0.060 | 4.10 | 4.05 | 3.98 | 0.788 | 4.01 | 4.10 | 0.566 | |
| Our subcontractors’ enterprises and our enterprise complement each other very well | 4.15 | 3.88 | 0.078 | 4.28 | 4.07 | 4.00 | 0.261 | 4.06 | 4.23 | 0.259 | |
| When conflicts arise, our company and the concerned subcontractor would jointly find an appropriate solution | 4.19 | 3.79 | 0.024 | 4.33 | 4.07 | 3.95 | 0.042 | 4.06 | 4.23 | 0.199 | |
| If the subcontractor’s execution was not in line with our expectations, we would help him or make a proposal | 4.40 | 4.33 | 0.897 | 4.62 | 4.36 | 4.17 | 0.013 | 4.33 | 4.47 | 0.296 | |
| When our company encountered construction problems, the subcontractor gave us helpful opinions | 3.88 | 3.70 | 0.591 | 4.08 | 3.80 | 3.63 | 0.090 | 3.77 | 3.97 | 0.253 | |
| LEVEL OF INFORMATION SHARING | We openly exchange ideas with a subcontractor in order to solve problems | 4.22 | 4.04 | 0.268 | 4.58 | 4.05 | 3.95 | 0.001 | 4.12 | 4.34 | 0.179 |
| Divergent opinions are resolved to a mutual satisfaction | 4.15 | 3.92 | 0.340 | 4.30 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 0.153 | 4.02 | 4.26 | 0.136 | |
| We inform subcontractors in advance about changes in our needs | 4.10 | 3.92 | 0.471 | 4.28 | 3.98 | 3.90 | 0.102 | 4.01 | 4.13 | 0.464 | |
| Our subcontractors share business knowledge with us about core business processes | 3.86 | 3.29 | 0.013 | 4.03 | 3.64 | 3.56 | 0.036 | 3.60 | 4.05 | 0.006 | |
| Our subcontractors inform us fully on issues that affect our business | 3.61 | 3.29 | 0.078 | 3.79 | 3.52 | 3.41 | 0.128 | 3.49 | 3.74 | 0.136 | |
| We share information with our subcontractors to help establish business planning | 3.80 | 3.67 | 0.467 | 4.00 | 3.79 | 3.61 | 0.175 | 3.74 | 3.92 | 0.312 | |
| We inform each other about events and changes that may have an impact on other partners | 3.84 | 4.04 | 0.564 | 3.98 | 3.88 | 3.85 | 0.793 | 3.94 | 3.82 | 0.460 | |
| Direct contact with our subcontractors is important for our company | 4.53 | 4.33 | 0.425 | 4.65 | 4.43 | 4.41 | 0.197 | 4.46 | 4.56 | 0.436 | |
| SUBCONTRACTOR NETWORK DESIGN | We contract the same type of work with any one particular subcontractor | 3.45 | 2.75 | 0.005 | 3.85 | 3.24 | 2.90 | 0.001 | 3.12 | 3.77 | 0.005 |
| We invest a lot of effort in building a good and close relationship with subcontractors | 4.28 | 4.13 | 0.634 | 4.38 | 4.31 | 4.05 | 0.137 | 4.26 | 4.21 | 0.710 | |
| We select our subcontractors according to clearly defined criteria | 4.28 | 4.04 | 0.406 | 4.30 | 4.15 | 4.27 | 0.664 | 4.23 | 4.26 | 0.861 | |
| Contracts with our subcontractors contain detailed specifications and adaptive clauses | 3.89 | 3.92 | 0.672 | 3.92 | 3.90 | 3.88 | 0.978 | 3.89 | 3.92 | 0.865 | |
| Cooperation with our subcontractors is repeated on several projects | 4.41 | 4.29 | 0.394 | 4.68 | 4.24 | 4.27 | 0.015 | 4.30 | 4.59 | 0.048 | |
| Cooperation with our subcontractors has a longterm character | 4.32 | 4.33 | 0.831 | 4.58 | 4.24 | 4.20 | 0.044 | 4.29 | 4.44 | 0.313 | |
| The intensity of cooperation with subcontractors is high | 3.90 | 3.63 | 0.291 | 4.00 | 3.74 | 3.76 | 0.302 | 3.77 | 3.95 | 0.282 | |
| Relationships with our subcontractors are very strong | 3.88 | 3.67 | 0.049 | 4.13 | 3.71 | 3.78 | 0.034 | 3.81 | 4.00 | 0.199 | |
| We use informal warranties with our subcontractors | 3.38 | 2.79 | 0.044 | 3.70 | 3.29 | 2.88 | 0.003 | 3.11 | 3.67 | 0.009 | |