Walker, D H T; Peters, R J; Hampson, K D and Thompson, M J (2001) Achieving a responsive industrial relations environment for construction industry workers: A project alliancing case study. Construction Innovation, 1(4), pp. 211-225. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
This paper outlines how the project agreement operating on the Australian National Museum project in Canberra, Australia facilitated a responsible and responsive workplace environment for construction workers. A project alliancing approach was adopted and designed to encourage industrial relations innovation in the workplace. The trigger for this approach was the perceived success of the alliancing working arrangements between key project delivery teams and a desire to extend this arrangement to subcontractors, suppliers and the workforce. Changes in the Australian workplace relations environment and introduction of a national code of practice for the Australian construction industry provided impetus for reaching a new type of workplace agreement. The workplace culture and characteristics of relationships formed between workers and management on that site shaped the agreed terms and conditions of work. It also spurred the pursuit of innovative approaches to project delivery from a technology, management and workplace culture perspective.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | industrial relations; procurement; project agreements; project alliancing; reward systems; risk sharing; workplace relations |
| Index terms: | workplace environment, subcontractor, case study, industrial relation, alliancing, Australia, reward system, agreements, project delivery, construction worker, construction industry |
| Subjects: | psychology, contract formation, project delivery, contractual arrangements, data collection methods, practitioner, sociology, industry analysis, management, Geography |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Contract Administration, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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