Raisbeck, P (2024) Australian architects and novation: The public narratives of novation practice. In: Thomson, C (ed.) Proceedings of 40th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2024, London South Bank University, UK.
Abstract
In Australia, novation is popular for large, complex public and private projects. In novated contracts, architects are contractually “transferred” from client to contractor. Consequently, Australian architects have raised questions about their role and the risks that might arise in novated projects. Australian architects and their membership organisations are alarmingly concerned that novation has diminished their traditional role. This study addresses these claims and asks if the diminished role of novated architects leads to poor building quality. This study brings together key previous novation research, recent Australian architect sponsored reports and in the public domain two expert panels. A methodology of narrative analysis is used to analyse the public dialogue at these panels. It is concluded that the claims of architects are only partially validated. However, the emerging narratives point to novation not as a legacy issue but a live issue constantly in flux. This idea contributes to understanding architects and the public narratives of novation in current Australian procurement practice. It is concluded that novation is a dynamic practice conditioned by different policy and project environments that requires further quantitative and qualitative research.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | novation; Australian architects; design consultants; procurement policies; procurement research |
| Index terms: | architect, methodology, qualitative research, narrative, procurement policy, Australia |
| Subjects: | profession, research design and methodology, public policy, research methods, qualitative and interpretive research, Geography |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Research Practice, Governance, Roles and Professions |
| 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