Cheung, F Y K; Rowlinson, S; Jefferies, M and Lau, E (2005) Relationship contracting in Australia. Journal of Construction Procurement, 11(2),
Abstract
Trust is the principle foundation of partnering and relationship management. Successful partnering can only be achieved when a cooperative relationship is built between partners. In order to build either a long or short-term relationship, trust is a major component because of the increase in openness it engenders between parties. This paper discusses how procurement methods in the construction industry are changing and moving towards a more relationship-based contracting approach. This paper details the role of trust in facilitating relationship-based contracting from a general perspective to its implications for a construction project. The authors indicate how changes in procurement culture towards sustainable business relationships benefit different parties in the industry and have the potential to achieve empowerment and regional development. This paper is based on research undertaken in the public sector in Queensland, Australia.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | culture, public sector procurement, relationship contracting, trust |
| Index terms: | relationship management, construction industry, business relationship, partnering, procurement method, Australia, public sector, regional development, construction project, public sector procurement, empowerment, Queensland |
| Subjects: | strategic management, urban planning, contractual arrangements, Geography, production management, management, partnership management, industry analysis, administrative law |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Human Resources, Geographical Context, Project Management, Procurement, Legal Issues |
| 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