Thread Content
There is a gap between the current concepts of qualification management in our country and the prevailing economic environment as well as the trends in reform: First, the concept of qualification management fails to break free from the framework of maintaining the existing order. First is the pursuit of a balance between tasks and teams; this was conceived and proposed at the outset of qualification management in the construction industry, but no practical approach has ever been developed. It can be said that the idea of achieving balance through administrative measures is a product of the planned economy era. In today’s world, with continuous technological progress and improvements in production efficiency, it is difficult to achieve and maintain balance across the country by relying on human judgment and administrative actions. In fact, in a market economy, the only way to achieve optimal allocation of resources and reach dynamic equilibrium is through market competition. Next is the restriction on corporate upgrading. As a result, enterprises with vitality and potential for growth fail to develop, while those that have already reached a high level of competence experience increased inertia due to the lack of pressure; this leads to some enterprises neglecting to improve their management and technical capabilities, and instead relying on methods such as obtaining fake certifications to sustain themselves. Third is the artificial elevation of industry entry barriers. Industry barriers in a market economy should primarily be established through fierce competition, that is, market forces regulating the barriers to entry. When an industry reaches a considerable scale, natural barriers prevent companies that lack the economic strength and technical capabilities from entering it rashly, making it even harder for them to survive. Moreover, it should be the companies already in the industry that strongly demand the establishment of policy barriers to protect their **interests. **Departments should focus on reducing policy barriers, introducing competition, and preventing monopolies. Second, the qualification management standards carry a strong flavor of departmental management. Of the current 35 categories of qualifications, 23 are classified according to the areas of responsibility of the relevant departments under the State Council. Excessive categorization prevents the construction capabilities of similar specialties from developing and being utilized, reduces companies’ opportunities for competition, and weakens their competitive strength. The classification into three tiers—general construction contractors, construction contractors, and specialized subcontractors—in qualification management is somewhat detached from reality. Especially at the beginning of establishing general contracting enterprises for intellectually intensive construction projects, since existing construction companies were unable to transform themselves into intellectually intensive enterprises immediately, some industry authorities positioned themselves as general contracting enterprises during the process of transitioning from ** to enterprises. Due to less pressure to survive, these companies do not penetrate the market deeply, and some of them have never developed capabilities comparable to those of general contractors, aside from having a brand name. No qualification standards have been established for specialized subcontracting enterprises; as a result, labor-intensive companies are unable to register. In the end, the vast majority of enterprises compete for construction contracting qualifications. Those that do not meet the requirements, especially new and small enterprises, resort to methods such as forming large alliances or borrowing professional titles in order to satisfy the necessary qualifications; as a result, a considerable number of small and medium-sized enterprises do not live up to their name. Third, the qualification management measures fail to fully reflect the principle of survival of the fittest. The core of qualification management measures is dynamic management; it is necessary to act in strict accordance with qualification standards and regulations, promoting those who deserve it and demoting those who do not. However, in the process of qualification management, it is difficult for enterprises to upgrade as well as to downgrade. Enterprises that apply for an upgrade may not be able to get one even if they meet the criteria. When downgrading is necessary, there are many cases where it cannot be done. Basically, it is easier for lower-level enterprises to downgrade, while it is harder for higher-level enterprises. One important reason is that some regulatory bodies in the construction industry have become representatives of industry interests, regional interests, and corporate interests, working to secure a foothold for companies that do not meet the standards. In operations such as qualification management and grading, considerations for regional and departmental balance also result in some enterprises failing to meet the corresponding qualification standards. Fourth, there is no encouragement for the inflow of capital and talent. Attracting capital and talent is not only a matter for enterprises but also an important aspect of industry management. Due to the chronic lack of awareness in the construction industry to transform it from a labor-intensive sector to a technology-driven one, insufficient attention has been paid to attracting investment and talent. Those entering the construction industry are mainly laborers, which has become the main means for poor areas to escape poverty; as a result, the development of the construction industry has meant an increase in the number of laborers, without a significant improvement in overall quality. In the third census in 1982, 80% of those in the construction industry had a education level below junior high school, while this figure was 76% in the fourth census in 1990. Those with a low level of education still account for over three-quarters, while those with a college degree or higher make up only 4%. The power equipment per capita was 4.0 kilowatts per person in 1980, and it rose only to 4.3 kilowatts per person in 1998. There are many studies and reports on the management of qualifications abroad; an analysis of these shows the following characteristics: The scope of qualification management is determined by the ability to **control and manage effectively**. If Japan implements a construction industry licensing system, there are no grades. However, enterprises involved in government projects are classified into different tiers, and only those with excellent performance are allowed to submit applications, with their eligibility approved by the Ministry of Construction. Qualification management classifies into fewer categories, providing enterprises with greater room for development. In Japan, it is divided into 28 categories; aside from general contracting for civil engineering and general contracting for building construction, most of the others are classified by type of work. Singapore classifies projects into only five categories: construction, construction-related work, mechanical and electrical engineering, building maintenance, and supply of building materials. Among them, building maintenance and the supply of building materials have little to do with construction capabilities. The other three categories are further divided into 30 subcategories, among which construction is only divided into general construction, civil engineering, and foundation works. Qualification management is based on individual technical qualifications. For example, Japan requires that the technical responsible persons of companies hold **certified architect qualifications, and that each business location have full-time management staff who meet the technical qualification requirements. The degree of economic marketization is related to the level of government intervention in the economy. Europe and the United States **emphasize free competition; there is no** grading system, and it relies mainly on the mutual restraint among market participants. Japan is the most highly interventionist developed country in terms of its economic policies; therefore, it has a relatively simple system for regulating construction industry qualifications. Countries such as Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan have long been **leader-type economies, where the regulation of construction industry qualifications is more complex and stringent. While drawing on foreign experience, it is also necessary to take into account the characteristics of China’s construction industry: first, the construction industry differs from other industries in that companies can work together to expand the market share. Due to the insufficient investment capacity of China’s construction enterprises, they can only expand the market within the limits of total societal investment. This means that the market can only be improved by eliminating companies of poor quality that are not competitive. Second, enterprises established under the division of regional departments have so far failed to fully break free from the constraints of such segmentation, and there is no industry-wide flagship enterprise that is widely recognized. The top ten companies in terms of output value account for only about 6% of the total output value of the construction industry nationwide in terms of the volume of work they complete each year (where China State Construction Engineering Corporation is counted as one such company). The top 10 companies in Japan account for over 20% of the country’s total. Therefore, the focus of China’s construction industry is to increase industry concentration, particularly by fostering giant and flagship enterprises in the sector through market competition. Especially with China’s accession to the WTO, the competition between domestic and foreign construction companies in our market will be primarily based on technical capabilities rather than practical experience; as a result, it will be the larger enterprises that are affected. Thirdly, specialized small enterprises, especially those in the service sector, lack an environment in which to survive; as a result, such specialized small enterprises cannot develop, and no hierarchy can be established within the industry. Therefore, developing specialized small businesses should also be an issue that requires great attention. Qualification management should take the following principles into account: Qualifications should be classified in a broad manner rather than in a detailed one, in order to reduce internal barriers and provide companies with more room for development, enabling them to fully leverage their advantages and potential. Ultimately, this will lead to the emergence of several leading players in the construction industry through competition. In this regard, the regulatory authorities in the electronics industry are open-minded, which is worth our attention. The classification system for construction industry qualifications abroad is relatively simple, as it also takes into account the comprehensive development of enterprises. Qualification management should appropriately ease access for enterprises with financial resources, talent, and technical capabilities, thereby creating an environment in the construction industry that attracts funds and talent, which is conducive to improving the quality of talent across the industry as well as enhancing its financial resources. Among Japanese construction companies, large firms such as Mitsui Construction, Sumitomo Construction, Nissan Construction, and Tokyu Construction are all diversified companies from other industries that have entered the construction sector. Many other large construction companies also have groups or consortia such as banks, insurance companies, and trading firms as their major shareholders. If they are turned away, it will have a devastating impact on Japan’s construction industry. Qualification management should simplify the procedures for companies to be established, enabling entities that meet project requirements to enter the market swiftly, while also promoting the development of specialized companies. On the one hand, it aims to facilitate research institutions and researchers, especially those who invent new technologies and materials, in transforming their achievements into productive forces as quickly as possible ； On the other hand, it encourages companies with insufficient capabilities to split up and reorganize themselves through professional subcontracting, in order to complete their professional transformation as soon as possible. Thirdly, it enables affiliated entities and individuals to operate independently, reduces disputes, cleanses the market, and facilitates management and supervision by the **responsible authorities. There are only a little over 90,000 construction companies in our country, which is far fewer than the 550,000 companies in Japan; it would not be excessive for the number of construction companies in our country to reach hundreds of thousands. Qualification management should create a sense of crisis among enterprises, prompting them to constantly work on improving their strength, management level, technical capabilities, and project quality; otherwise, they will be downgraded or eliminated. The construction industry abroad has the highest rate of closures, while in our country it is one of the industries with the lowest rates. It is a fact proven across all industries that construction companies can improve only when faced with a survival crisis. Personal technical qualifications are the foundation among the required criteria, and in this regard, China’s construction industry still lags far behind. Without a foundation of individual technical qualifications, the overall quality of the industry will be significantly reduced, and it will be difficult to hold anyone accountable when problems arise. The international experience in this area is highly valuable for reference.