Beställar-entreprenörrelationer i byggandet: Samarbete, konflikt och social påverkan (Client-contractor relationships in building projects: Co-operation, conflict and social influence)

Kadefors, A (1997) Beställar-entreprenörrelationer i byggandet: Samarbete, konflikt och social påverkan (Client-contractor relationships in building projects: Co-operation, conflict and social influence). PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.

Abstract

The division of responsibility in the client-contractor relationship and the formal contractual arrangements has long been a question of considerable debate and concern, in the Swedish construction industry as well as in construction management research. Due to uncertainty and incomplete contractual documents, many negotia-tions continue between the parties during the contract period. These negotia-tions are often performed by the client's and contractor's repre-sentatives on the construction site. The aim of this thesis is to gain an increased understanding of informal aspects of the client-contractor relation-ship and of the role of the client during the contract period. The discussion is based on two case studies of the interaction between the parties during the production phase of building projects. The focus is on the individuals who participate in the decision making, and an ethnographic, interpretative approach is used. Theories of human decision making and social influence form the basis of the analysis. As there is a great need for joint problem-solving during the execution of the work, it is important to the parties that the relations between the interacting individuals are kept co-operative, and that perceptions of unfair-ness are avoided. A main finding is that the contractor has a naturally strong informal position. In part, this is due to intuitive norms of justice, according to which it is considered unfair that a seller makes a loss. Also, the contractor's organization involves many people, while the client's representative often works autonomously in close contact with the contractors. This can explain why contractors often prefer informal decision making and communication. Clients tend to improve their position by organizing the interaction so that the contractors' informal power is neutralized. Conceptions formed on the industry level are important determinants of informal power relations. This is because perceptions of fairness are social constructs, and are influenced by explanations as well as by expectations. Publicly expressed conflicts and antagonistic attitudes should, therefore, be viewed as ways of promoting interests without harming relations on the project level. An improved understanding of informal aspects of client-contractor relationships, thus, suggests novel explanations of general cultural aspects of the construction industry.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Uncontrolled Keywords: uncertainty; construction site; communication; conflicts; decision making; client; case studies
Index terms: case study, determinant, interaction, construction industry, operative, fairness, construction site, justice, management research, norms, decision-making, documents
Subjects: work location, legal systems, data collection methods, risk assessment, research design and methodology, practitioner, decision analysis, sociology, leadership, industry analysis, behavioral psychology, professional development
Topics: Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Information Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Organizational Design, Legal Issues
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

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