Carmichael, S (2002) The development of implementation processes for partnering in construction. PhD thesis, University of Salford, UK.
Abstract
Partnering emerged in the construction industry in the late 1980's and since then has developed into a mainstream management strategy for reducing traditional adversarialism and improving project,performance. The maturation of the approach reached a milestone recently with the publication of the first partnering contract. However the approach is still in its relative infancy and a myriad of definitions exist as to what it is. (Li, Cheng & Love, 2000). It has received considerable attention from practitioners and researchers alike yet it remains an alien approach to many and is consequently difficult to plan and implement. Even the recent partnering contract has been criticised for its complexity, while others believe partnering should remain an approach represented by management style not contractual documentation. The aim of this thesis is to develop a set of practical processes for the strategic development and implementation of partnering arrangements. It aims to develop, through the identification of best practice criteria, generic processes as well as recommend corresponding management techniques for both long term and Project Specific Partnering success. The generic processes can then be tailored to suit specific projects and business objectives. The work represents the first stage in the development of a dear and implementable partnering management tool for the construction industry. The further development required for industrial implementation has also been identified.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | best practice; complexity; documentation; partnering |
| Index terms: | management style, management strategy, partnering, best practice, implementation, construction industry, documentation, practitioner, publication, complexity |
| Subjects: | practitioner, research dissemination and communication, business, contractual arrangements, professional development, management, industry analysis, systems engineering, partnership management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Engineering Principles, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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