Challender, J; Farrell, P and Sherratt, F (2014) Partnering in practice: An analysis of collaboration and trust. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 167(6), pp. 255-264. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
Many authoritative sources are calling for collaborative and integrated working to be used as a vehicle to obtain better value, levels of quality and service delivery. However, clients in the current economic climate may feel vulnerable about entering into arrangements built on collaborative working practices, which could be deemed as taking unnecessary risk. The effects of recent austerity on collaborative working are explored in this study, with particular emphasis on the positioning of trust within such relationships and its manifestation in practice. A qualitative research methodology approach is adopted through interviews with eight senior UK construction professionals. Findings from the research suggest that construction clients have returned to traditional competitive procurement methods based on lowest cost, seeking to reduce risk in their practices and maintain control in uncertain times. Perceptions of collaborative working have shifted within the austerity context, and individuals have responded with a quest for job security, which has in turn developed risk-averse work practices and affected the establishment of long-term collaborative relationships. Sceptical considerations of collaboration have re-emerged, the abuse of collaborative relationships for financial benefits and employing austerity as leverage. Further research is recommended to examine the repercussions of this shift in both practice and philosophy.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | communications & control systems; contracting; project management |
| Index terms: | construction professional, project management, service delivery, partnering, procurement method, construction client, working practice, lowest cost, control system, work practice, collaboration, qualitative research, methodology, interview, austerity, philosophy |
| Subjects: | practitioner, economic analysis, contractual arrangements, bidding, research methods, research design and methodology, data collection methods, project management theory and practice, professional development, service delivery, monitoring and control, management, philosophical studies, partnership management |
| Topics: | Project Management, Procurement, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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