Challender, J; Farrell, P and Sherratt, F (2014) Partnering practices: An investigation of influences on project success. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 30th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2014, Portsmouth, UK.
Abstract
Historically, traditional procurement systems have resulted in low levels of client satisfaction, owing mostly to poor cost and time predictability. Alternative approaches, including partnering and collaborative working have consequently been developed. This paper examines whether such collaborative approaches can deliver improvements in project procurement and management, and considers the extent to which partnering practices influence the success of building projects. Project success in this regard is measured in terms of cost predictability, programme implications, quality control, health and safety, risk management, teamwork and communications. A focus is made on the importance and influence of contractor selection processes within collaborative procurement, and what constitutes best practice in this regard. Exploratory interviews were conducted with a group of construction project managers who have had extensive experience with both collaboratively and traditionally procured construction projects. Coding and analysis of the resultant data indicated that collaborative procurement routes do have many advantages over traditional adversarial routes in most cases, but not all. Practitioners regarded the individuals deployed on projects having more influence on success than choice of procurement method. Projects were categorised as suitable or unsuitable for modern innovative procurement methods, dependent on a number of determining factors. There is support for the premise that partnering practices can potentially yield more benefits where projects are highly complex. Early supply chain involvement in design is required, and robust contractor selection processes are vital for collaborative procurement to be successful. Further research is proposed to expand the knowledge base around the range of suitable projects which may benefit from partnering approaches to procurement, in order to facilitate decisions in practice.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; contractor selection; partnering; procurement |
| Index terms: | knowledge base, interview, contractor selection, manager, partnering, procurement method, low level, health and safety, project success, teamwork, traditional procurement, programme, collaboration, construction project, best practice, investigation, risk management, client satisfaction, practitioner, quality control, project procurement |
| Subjects: | production management, health safety and environment, project management theory and practice, management, tendering, information systems, partnership management, project controls, measurement and scaling, practitioner, data collection methods, risk assessment, business, client relations, contractual arrangements, project delivery |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Project Management, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Digital Applications, Quality Management, Time Control, Organizational Design |
| 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