Ibrahim, K I; Costello, S B and Wilkinson, S (2015) Validation of a model for assessing alliance team integration. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 31st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2015, Lincoln, UK.
Abstract
An approach towards fostering continuous team integration practice in project alliancing is essential for stimulating breakthrough outcomes. However, until recently there was no standard or systematic approach for measuring the integration practice over the life cycle of alliance projects. This paper presents such an assessment model, the Alliance Team Integration Performance Index (ATIPI), to measure the current state of the team integration performance. With the aid of a panel of alliance experts, seven dominant key indicators (KIs) with their respective quantitative measures (QMs) and performance scales were identified for inclusion in the ATIPI. As the focus of this paper, a means of examining the validity of the model is demonstrated through the use of the face validity method with a panel of experts in the field of project alliancing. The results indicate that the proposed assessment model was found to be applicable in objectively measuring team integration performance. Based on the lessons learned from the expert’s interviews, the reliability of the model could be further enhanced in order to enable owner and non-owner participants to gain an insight into the team integration performance consistently and objectively.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alliance; team integration; validation; New Zealand |
| Index terms: | validity, owner, life cycle, face, New Zealand, alliancing, interview, lessons learned, key indicator, validation, integration |
| Subjects: | Geography, professional development, organizational analysis, sociology, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, value management, psychology, contractual arrangements, project delivery |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Information Management |
| 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