1

Wendy Zhang

zhang.wendy@bls.gov

Wendy Zhang is an economist in the Office of 

Employment and Unemployment Statistics, U.S. 

Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Can “bigger” be a roadblock?

Bigger Isn’t Necessarily Better: Lessons from the Harvard 

Home Builder Study. By Frederick Abernathy, Kermit Baker, 

Kent Colton, and David Weil. Lexington Books, 2012, 119 

pp., $41.99 paperback.

Choosing a homebuilder is a serious decision. When 

purchasing a new home, a family entrusts its future safety 

and comfort to the homebuilder. It seems reasonable to 

expect that potential buyers would typically start a new 

home search by visiting the websites of the big-name 

brands. But why? Possible reasons include associating 

those big-name brands with good overall quality of 

construction, excellent customer service, and outstanding 

home design. Bigger Isn’t Necessarily Better examines the 

meaning and impact of being “big.”

The findings of the book are largely based on the Harvard 

Home Builder Study. Using a detailed survey of 

homebuilders, this study focused on how economic scale 

contributed to homebuilder operational performance during 

the housing boom of 1999–2004. In total, 41 homebuilders 

participated in the survey: 22 larger builders with minimum 

sales of 2,500 units in 2004, and 19 smaller builders with 

500–2,499 units sold. The survey’s questions addressed 

areas such as financial performance, supply-chain 

management, labor and subcontracting, and information 

and communication technology. The study sought to 

investigate whether larger residential homebuilders could 

take advantage of their scale to outperform their smaller 

competitors in terms of operational efficiency, called 

“virtuous circle.”

The book illustrates how scale played an important role in 

contributing to builder profitability. Scale brought large 

homebuilders significant advantages in three key business functions: securing capital, acquiring land positions, 

and building a distinctive corporate brand. Because of their larger scale and perceived stability, bigger 

homebuilders acquired more capital, at lower financing costs, thereby achieving balance-sheet metrics superior to 

January 2018
 U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

2

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW 

those of smaller competitors. Moreover, many of the larger builders went public, a pivotal decision given that equity 

financing provides companies with a source of capital during uncertain economic times. More solid financial 

standing enabled the large builders to be more aggressive in land acquisitions, especially in markets with higher 

appreciation, which was viewed as another key driver of profitability. In terms of customer satisfaction, large 

builders focused on ensuring consistent customer experiences by standardizing their product options, design 

requirements, sales protocols, etc. Strong branding also enabled these companies to achieve higher returns by 

convincing customers to pay a premium for the products they bought. Because of these key operational aspects, 

being bigger yielded an advantage that translated into profits.

Nearly every builder in the survey used a construction-manager (CM) model. Under this model, builders relied 

heavily on contractors and subcontractors, employing a very small direct workforce. For instance, direct employees 

represented less than 5 percent of a builder’s major expenses, whereas contractors represented approximately 40 

percent of those expenses. This strategy shielded builders from assuming many human-resource costs related to 

the hiring process, social benefits (such as unemployment insurance and medical insurance), and potential 

workplace accidents. It also mitigated the impact of layoffs and hiring during seasonal fluctuations in the 

construction market. Moreover, the widespread use of the CM model imposed higher demands on the onsite 

coordination and quality control of numerous contractors and subcontractors involved in the residential 

development of hundreds of homes. Construction costs and construction time were two important dimensions of 

overall performance. In essence, the quicker the builders could transform an empty lot into a finished home—a 

mature product that could generate revenue and freeze up building costs—the lower the cost and risk to the 

builders.

More importantly, the CM model had the significant drawback of creating a potential for inferior workforce quality. It 

removed the builders from the direct-employer role, leaving contractors and subcontractors in charge of recruiting, 

compensating, and managing the workforce. The book reveals that, because of price-bidding pressures from the 

builders and a large pool of workers, subcontractors tended to hire undocumented workers from Mexico, as well as 

Central and South America, in order to increase profit margins. Around 12.7 percent of the residential construction 

workers surveyed received compensation below the minimum wage, and about 70.5 percent of those surveyed 

were asked to work overtime without overtime compensation. The low-wage and low-skill employment strategy 

could directly affect the quality of construction.

Surprisingly, the survey found that builder performance, measured in terms of costs and construction time, did not 

improve with builder size, contradicting the “virtuous circle.” According to the book, increased scale did not 

translate into greater operational efficiency in supply-chain management, particularly in component preassembly 

and supplier installation. There also was a limited connection between scale and the application of information and 

communication technology in building-cost estimation and information sharing with suppliers and subcontractors. 

During 1999–2004, it was acquisitions, rather than organic growth, that drove homebuilder expansion. 

Consequently, large homebuilders spread out across multiple metropolitan areas with various market conditions 

(e.g., housing styles, customer preferences, and labor arrangements), using distinct operational practices. The 

geographically decentralized organizational structure not only complicated the process of implementing 

standardized operational procedures, but also increased the cost of adopting innovative practices across multiple 

homebuilder divisions. While riding the rising tide of soaring home prices, large builders put priority on increasing 
 U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

3

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW 

production volume rather than adopting company-wide operational innovations. Short-term profits supplanted 

longer term operational efficiencies.

Overall, the book emphasizes the importance of operational innovation—including improvements in onsite 

coordination, cost savings from suppliers, workforce quality, and the use of information technology—in achieving 

sustainable financial success. The results reported demonstrate that local market conditions contributed more to 

such innovation than did sheer builder size. Compared with builders in high-appreciation markets, builders in lowappreciation markets (i.e., areas with lower land costs and lower sales prices) faced weaker gross margins on 

homes sold during the housing boom. Cost pressures drove operational efficiency and compelled homebuilders to 

adopt different tactics in low-appreciation markets. It was not striking to learn that builders in low-appreciation 

markets more readily adopted productivity-enhancing technology (e.g., sharing timely information with suppliers, 

utilizing computerized estimation). As a result, homebuilder divisions in markets with lower appreciation reported 

shorter construction-cycle times and lower cost per square foot than did divisions in markets with higher 

appreciation.

The book excels in applying a quality research methodology to quality data. It is written in a way that is both 

accessible and interesting. Importantly, it uses various embedded charts and tables that are intuitive and easy to 

understand. I especially liked the engaging writing style and analytical insights. Although the book does sometimes 

become repetitive, this does not detract from its overall quality and knowledge imparted. In general, the book is 

insightful and worth a read, especially for those curious about the home-construction industry or its operation 

during the recent housing boom.