Partnering public sector construction contracts: A conflict avoidance process

The purpose of this study is to identify, describe, and analyze the conflict avoidance process, partnering. This study used the perceptions of key participants to describe the actual process and to compare it with the prevalent theoretical model. This model was developed by Carr et al. (1999) for the purpose of documenting the dispute prevention process used by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and others over the last decade. A qualitative research design was used to purposefully select four partnered construction projects in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The four different construction projects conformed to the Virginia Public Procurement Act (VPPA). They all used the same state form of Contract for Construction and General Conditions of the Contract. The method of procurement, although different for each project, conformed to the VPPA and were: (a) two low bid projects; (b) one construction management project; and (c) one design/build project. The Architect/Engineer, the Owner, the General Contractor, and the Facilitator on each construction project were interviewed to determine their perceptions of the partnering process. The perceptions of these key informants were used in this research. The four major findings of this study are: (1) The operational model of the partnering process as described by the key informants is different from the foreshadowed concept, or model, of the partnering process of Carr et al. (1999). (2) Partnering is successful for conflict avoidance in all of the projects. (3) The commitment of the participants to make partnering work is instrumental to the success of partnering. (4) The activities of (a) gaining management support, (b) observing the common goals, (c) keeping the commitment to partnering with mutual trust, respect, and honesty without personal agendas, and (d) working together to solve problems cooperatively are key contributors of partnering. The model of the partnering process derived from the interviews depicts a different structure than the theoretical model. This model includes three sets of events in its process with four independent steps in the first event, four sequential steps in the second event, and two independent steps in the third event. This is compared with the foreshadowed theoretical model of the partnering process that contains six linear sequential steps. Implications for theory, practice, and future research are also discussed. The implications for theory suggest that the operational model is a more complex model than the foreshadowed theoretical process model of Carr et al. (1999). The implications for practice suggests that Virginia should recognize partnering and engage it as a procedure on its construction projects. The implications for future research suggests the replication of this study in other states would test its applicability under which contractual provisions which are different from those of Virginia.