Bresnen, M; Lennie, S J and Marshall, N (2025) Partnering in construction re-visited: Gauging progress in industry practice and prospects for advances in academic research. Construction Management and Economics, 43(1), pp. 59-77. ISSN 0144-6193
Abstract
Despite the ubiquity of partnering and alliancing in industry discourse and academic research, questions remain about the extent of transformational change within the sector towards more collaborative working. Revisiting earlier work that highlighted issues, problems and dilemmas of partnering related to definitional ambiguities, conflicting (commercial) orientations and cultural reach and readiness, this paper highlights continuing problems of definition, formalization, translation and performance. Attention is directed towards the lack of external validation and institutionalization, as well as the need for more comparative analysis, situated understanding, awareness of organizational pluralism and recognition of relational dynamics. From this critical review, a framework is presented that embraces the variety and indeterminacy in the many definitions, pathways to collaboration, realizations in practice and evaluative recipes used. Partnering is presented instead as being constituted through complex and interacting bundles of practices that cut across levels of interaction, and which reflect competing (and contested) institutional influences, situated practices, outcomes/effects and performance evaluations. This practice-based approach is more attuned to the diversity and fluidity of the institutional contexts, organizational processes, and project/programme settings wherein partnering is situated and through which it is instantiated, and thus affords new avenues of research into its nature and effects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alliancing; collaboration; institutionalization; partnering; practice-based theory |
| Index terms: | institutionalization, partnering, alliancing, interaction, dynamics, programme, comparative analysis, performance evaluation, collaboration, validation |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, professional development, management, performance measurement, systems engineering, partnership management, project controls, sociology, contractual arrangements, behavioral psychology |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Procurement, Quality Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Organizational Design, Time Control |
| 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