Rose, T and Manley, K (2010) Client recommendations for financial incentives on construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 17(3), pp. 252-267. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose - The paper seeks to provide recommendations for construction clients who design and implement financial incentive mechanisms (FIMs) on projects. Design/methodology/approach - Four large Australian building projects commissioned by government clients under managing contractor contracts and completed between 2001 and 2005 were examined to explore the "drivers" that promoted motivation toward financial incentive goals. The results were triangulated across data sources, projects and stakeholder types. Findings - FIM design should incorporate: flexibility to modify goals and measurement procedures over time; multiple goals covering different project areas; distribution of rewards across all the key organisations contributing to team performance (e.g. potentially not just the contractor, but the subcontractors and consultants) and a reward amount sufficient to be valued by potential recipients. FIM benefits are maximised through the following complementary procurement initiatives: equitable contract risk allocation; early contractor involvement in design; value-driven tender selection; relationship workshops; and future work opportunities. Research limitations/implications - This paper provides practical recommendations to industry and hence does not emphasise theoretical aspects. Practical implications - The uptake of these recommendations is likely to increase the impact of FIMs on motivation and improve project and industry outcomes. Although the study focuses on government clients of building projects, all the recommendations would seem to apply equally to private-sector clients and to non-building projects. Originality/value - In order to improve motivation and reward high performance, clients are increasingly using FIM in their construction contracts. Despite the rising use of financial incentives, there is a lack of comprehensive construction-specific knowledge available to help clients maximise outcomes. The study addresses this gap in the literature.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; contracts; incentives |
| Index terms: | construction industry, team performance, risk allocation, construction contract, construction client, workshop, subcontractor, methodology, construction project, early contractor involvement, motivation, financial incentive |
| Subjects: | management, industry analysis, practitioner, contract type, construction type, economic analysis, contractual arrangements, psychology, financial risk, production management, research methods |
| Topics: | Procurement, Project Management, Organizational Design, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Cost Management, Business Strategy, 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