Mickovski S B, B J D S M J (2013) Innovative use of ECC (NEC) for procurement and management of infrastructure projects with limited funding: Bervie Braes case study. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (eds.) Proceedings of 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK.
Abstract
This study considers a number of alliance projects. The variation amongst these projects is mapped against a number of criteria derived from the literature. Contracting plans, the tendering board's minutes, contracts and other policy documents were scanned and interviews were held with key players to reconstruct the motivations for the various alliance approaches. The initial results confirm that changes and choices made in terms of the particular alliance domain are mostly implicit and only sparsely explained by motivations. This paper will present a first overview of ProRail’s alliancing variants, corresponding motivations and expectations, plus more explicit insights into the prevailing implicit reasoning. This study offers a first step in mapping the variation in alliance methods, evaluating their effects and moving the implicit evolutionary development of alliance methods towards more deliberate planned choices in future alliancing variations. The next step in the research project will be to verify the validity of the expectations and logic regarding alliancing.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | procurement; research method; risk management; sustainability; value management |
| Index terms: | documents, funding, case study, alliancing, motivation, variation, reasoning, value management, validity, mapping, interview, infrastructure project, risk management |
| Subjects: | psychology, infrastructure and transport systems, data collection methods, contractual condition, risk assessment, management, cognitive psychology, economic analysis, contractual arrangements, professional development, evaluation and assessment methods, spatial and geospatial analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Human Resources, Value Management, Procurement, Contract Administration, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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