Love, P E D; Ackermann, F; Teo, P and Morrison, J (2015) From individual to collective learning: A conceptual learning framework for enacting rework prevention. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(11): 05015009, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Using an exploratory case study approach, this paper examines a $375 million [Australian dollars (AU$)] program alliance, which delivered 129 water infrastructure projects over a 5-year period that had implemented a dedicated rework prevention program. The program provided an environment that enabled collective learning to materialize throughout the project organization to produce a cooperative learning alliance. Based on the case study, this paper presents empirical evidence of how coaching engendered by authentic leadership enabled the translation from individual into collective learning to occur within a program alliance. A conceptual learning framework for program alliances derived from the empirical findings presented is proposed. It is proffered that the case study offers a learning opportunity for other organizations that are confronted with rework in their projects, particularly those adopting similar contracting strategies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alliance; behavior; coaching; collective learning; contracting; infrastructure; rework |
| Index terms: | evidence, program, prevention, project organization, case study, rework, cooperative learning, infrastructure project, strategy |
| Subjects: | software systems, financial risk, management, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, organizational theory, infrastructure and transport systems, operations management, learning methods |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Project Management, Cost Management, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here