Walker, D H T (2002) Enthusiasm, commitment and project alliancing: An Australian experience. Construction Innovation, 2(1), pp. 15-31. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Team leaders require enthusiasm and commitment from their team members to enable them to be agile, adaptable and responsive. This paper uses results from a longitudinal study of a successful building construction project delivered using a project alliancing approach. Results presented use a model pioneered by the US academic Peter Senge. This helps explain the system dynamics that generated the necessary enthusiasm and commitment to support collaboration and cooperation within and between project teams. It became clear that enthusiasm and commitment can be achieved on construction projects provided that a collaborative and cooperative workplace environment is carefully nurtured and crafted, which not only supports drivers for enthusiasm and commitment, but also addresses barriers that inhibit those values. Experience gained from studying the exemplar project illustrated in this paper provides the basis for a model of how to create and maintain the necessary workplace environment.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | change management; commitment; enthusiasm; project alliancing |
| Index terms: | construction project, collaboration, alliancing, workplace environment, change management, operative, building construction, commitment, project team, system dynamics |
| Subjects: | practitioner, sociology, management, computing systems, production management, contractual arrangements, project delivery, psychology, building construction |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Construction Technology, Project Management, Organizational Design |
| 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