Relational partnership in public construction organizations: Front-line employee perspective

Tawalare, A; Laishram, B and Thottathil, F (2020) Relational partnership in public construction organizations: Front-line employee perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(1): 04019086, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The adoption of relational contracting (RC) has been increasingly used by parties in various developed countries as one of the innovative tools in traditional contracting to achieve benefits such as cost savings, schedule reduction, reduced litigation, improved teamwork, increased trust, stronger relationships, and overall satisfaction. However, the adoption of RC in public-sector construction organizations has been observed to encounter difficulties when compared with implementation in private-sector organizations because of typical barriers, including a lack of understanding of partnering principles and personality indifference, in addition to a low offer mentality, ineffective top management, and a lack of positive working-level commitment. Studies in this area conducted with the objective of ensuring the effective implementation of RC in public-sector organizations are also limited. In view of this, this study aims at exploring the factors that will have an important impact on developing RC practices and the relationship between the contractor and the public firm. Previous studies focused on the identification of the success factors of RC, but those studies were limited to RC implementation from a top management perspective only. Thus, this study investigates the critical factors in RC that are necessary to produce successful relational partnerships in public organizations exclusively from the perspective of front-line employees. The front-line employees include junior engineers and assistant engineers, who are responsible for the day-to-day management of construction activities. An extensive literature review offered 9 important relational contract success factors that were identified and measured by 29 indicators. The data were collected from 202 operational-level employees at four public-sector construction organizations in India. The structural equation modeling technique was used for data analysis. The critical factors identified from the study are training, organizational change, commitment of top management, partner selection, and the assessment process. Organizational change for partnering emerged from this study as one of the new critical factors. The findings from this study could be used to improve the relational partnerships of public organizations.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: partnering; public-sector relational contracting; structural equation modeling
Index terms: public construction, implementation, India, cost saving, teamwork, satisfaction, relational contracting, construction organization, partnering, partner selection, litigation, traditional contracting, personality, critical factor, engineer, construction activity, partnership, developed country, top management, data analysis, organizational change, success factor, commitment, structural equation modelling, literature review
Subjects: organization, business, profession, risk assessment, dispute resolution, psychology, health monitoring assessment and metrics, project delivery, data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements, construction operations, economics, management, development economics, Geography, building construction, partnership management, statistical analysis, behavioral psychology
Topics: Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Procurement, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, International Construction, Legal Issues, Organizational Design, Site Management
Descriptive scope: 3 PCA

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