McDermott, P; Khalfan, M and Swan, W (2005) Trust in construction projects. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 10(1), pp. 19-32. ISSN 1366-4387
Abstract
Trust is described as an elusive concept (Gambetta 1988), difficult to describe, understand and, therefore, manage. The Trust in Construction project undertook 6 exploratory case studies, of which 4 are presented in this paper, in order to understand how trust is formed, and the impact this has on project performance. The authors propose a model of the different forms of trust and the drivers and barriers to its development, derived through the case studies conducted. Through this model different approaches are identified that can either manage trust directly, or mitigate the factors that may cause its breakdown within project teams. The research focuses on the role of the commercial manger, the role of procurement mechanisms and the tools that are available to manage issues of project, commercial and relationship uncertainty, such as open book arrangements or partnering workshops, and sees how they can drive the level of trust within the project team. Based on both literature and experience of the case studies, the model identifies the risks to the development of trust and how they may be addressed. The paper also presents the trust inventory, developed during the case studies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; culture; procurement; teams; trust |
| Index terms: | case study, project team, workshop, project performance, inventory, partnering, construction project |
| Subjects: | project delivery, construction type, partnership management, production management, inventory management, project management theory and practice, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Supply Chain Management, Construction Technology, Research Practice, Project Management, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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