The project-based construction industry finds itself in a paradoxical situation: while it weighs heavily in the world economy, it does have a history of low productivity. One important issue that plagues the industry is related to the challenges that stem from collaborative efforts (or lack thereof) between actors. The objective of this paper is to explore how actors of the construction industry organize their inter-firm relationships while examining the characteristics of such interactions and the elements affecting them (drivers, barriers, facilitators, outcomes). These interactions and elements were uncovered using a systematic literature review. A qualitative content analysis was carried out to categorize these elements and to generate dimensions describing the forms. The 139 articles retrieved depicted 12 relational forms established between construction companies (in descending order of citation): partnering, alliancing, project delivery methods, supply chain integration, joint ventures, integrated project delivery, joint risk management, collaborative design, contingent collaboration, quasi-fixed network, resource sharing, and collaborative planning. A multitude of drivers, barriers, facilitators, and outcomes were found. An analysis of the results led to the conceptualization of a multidimensional profile, which allows for a practical and flexible identification of the relationship form potential partners in the construction sector intend to establish. To provide guidelines for the implementation of this profile, a three-step framework was developed.

PurposeIn highly competitive industries such as the construction sector, companies with limited capabilities struggle to maintain their current standing, let alone acquire more market share. Before they are able to address their shortcomings, these companies need to pinpoint where their performance stands when it comes to market demand. Furthermore, competitiveness is strongly linked with companies' ability to win tenders and deliver the associated construction projects. Tenders are, therefore, a mechanism that reflects the strengths and weaknesses of construction firms and can be deemed an indicator of competitiveness. This paper aims to help small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) increase their presence in the construction sector by suggesting a systematic approach to evaluate their competitiveness.Design/methodology/approachParticipation requirements were extracted from 11 calls for tenders and organized into categories using a qualitative content analysis. These requirements along with winning assets deduced from the literature constitute the basis of the tool. The qualitative evaluation of the difficulty in satisfying requirements or acquiring assets was transformed into unified, quantifiable scores by means of fuzzy numbers.FindingsA total of 233 requirements were found and classified in 3 main categories. In addition, a list of 54 assets organized into five categories was compiled. The entire methodology led to a five-step assessment tool whose output can be depicted on the proposed competitiveness readiness matrix (CRM).Research limitations/implicationsThis study contributes to the limited number of articles discussing the contractor's side in the tendering process. Furthermore, it combines three theoretical perspectives (i.e. resource-based view, relational view, and industry structure perspective), which are scarcely applied in the construction management field. Consideration of the calls for tenders when developing solutions is also a unique aspect of this research when compared to previous studies.Practical implicationsThis tool may help practitioners navigate the rather elusive tendering process by outlining the necessary elements to participate in and win tenders. It may also allow construction firms to better position themselves in the market with respect to customers' requirements and competitors' performances.Originality/valueThis study provides an approach of both self-assessment and market benchmarking. It assists companies in formulating strategies to become more competitive in general and make better bidding decisions. This is especially interesting because of three aspects: the study is based on a fundamental element of the construction competitiveness concept, i.e. calls for tenders; it offers a mechanism to transform systematically qualitative attributes into quantifiable scores; and it provides a practical and reliable display of the assessment results.