Kenley, R; London, K and Watson, J (2000) Strategic procurement in the construction industry: Mechanisms for public sector clients to encourage improved performance in Australia. Journal of Construction Procurement, 6(1), pp. 4-19. ISSN 1358-9180
Abstract
The construction industry is dominated by procurement methods that encourage short-term competitive behaviour, driven by price competition. The Australian Procurement and Construction Council has been seeking alternatives in procurement methods, designed to achieve breakthrough change in the Australian industry. This paper examines five attributes of long-term competitive behaviour desired by the APCC and uses competition theory to argue why such behaviour is desirable. Procurement strategies that involve rewards or incentives are examined from the literature, and assessed against their contribution to the desired attributes. As part of the assessment, a new performance incentive selection method is described, which involves calculation of a contractors competitive assessment score to enable either rewards or incentives for change. Finally a table of mechanisms is described, against which it is possible to categorise rewards and incentives for change.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | procurement, strategic procurement, tendering, construction, prequalification |
| Index terms: | strategic procurement, selection method, public-sector client, competition, procurement strategy, Australia, procurement method, construction industry |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, sociology, Geography, tendering, market analysis, contractual arrangements, strategic project management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Project Management, Geographical Context, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice |
| 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