Khadaroo, M I (2006) Exploring perceptions of accountability and value for money in school PPP/PFI contracts. PhD thesis, Queen's University Belfast, UK.
Abstract
The main objectives of this study are, (a) to examine the school PFI decision making processes in Northern Ireland; (b) to clarify the meanings of the complex concepts of accountability and value for money (VFM); and, (c) to examine the perceptions of the usefulness of the accountability processes (or mechanisms) institutionalised in school PFI contracts in terms of their influence on VFM. In-depth interviews and survey methods were used to achieve the preceding objectives. Forty three interviews were conduced with forty two key participants involved in school PFI contracts in Northern Ireland. In addition, a national survey of the principals of 332 operational PFI schools in the UK was conducted. The main findings of this study, based on the in-depth interviews and survey questionnaires, are as follows. First, in line previous literature, multiple, interdependent and overlapping dimensions of accountability (such as, responsibility, liability, responsiveness, controllability, answerability, transparency, dialogue and legitimacy) were found to operate in the school PFI processes. Second, the informal dimensions of accountability were perceived to be more important than the formal accountability mechanisms (such as, the consultation process, the monitoring process and the PFI contract) to achieve VFM—for example, trust and good working relationships between the schools and service providers were often highlighted to be more important than the PFI contract. Third, contrary to the accountability, VFM, and equity claims in government publications, PFI was perceived to be an expensive, inequitable and opaque mechanism used to modernise the education estate. In particular, PFI did not enable the school Principals to focus on educational matters and spend less time on facilities management issues but introduced new administrative processes instead. As a caveat, the findings of this study should be interpreted in the light of its limitations and should not be extrapolated beyond the UK context.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Ireland; Northern Ireland; UK; accountability; decision making; education; facilities management; government; liability; monitoring; schools; trust; value for money |
| Index terms: | legitimacy, publication, value-for-money, facilities management, questionnaire, decision-making, accountability, survey, meaning, liability, interview, transparency, Ireland, dimension, monitoring, Northern Ireland, decision-making process, national survey |
| Subjects: | professional development, management, sociology, decision analysis, control systems, data collection methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics, Geography, evaluation, physical geography and landforms, liability law, research dissemination and communication, research products and data |
| Topics: | Value Management, Legal Issues, Risk Management, Geographical Context, Health and Safety, Organizational Design, Site Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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