Winch, G (1989) The construction firm and the construction project: A transaction cost approach. Construction Management and Economics, 7(4), pp. 331-345. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Three of the influential perspectives for analysing construction management are reviewed – socio-technical systems; organization and environment; and project management – and it is suggested that in spite of their considerable usefulness, they contain no framework for analysing the inevitable differences in interest between the different firms who are members of the project coalition. An alternative approach is then presented – the transaction cost approach – which, it is suggested, does allow these differences to be analysed. In conclusion, the dynamics of the contracting system are assessed in terms of the contradiction between construction firms' responses to the uncertainties inherent in the project, and those deriving from the contracting system itself.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracting system; contracting uncertainty; project coalition; project uncertainty; transaction costs |
| Index terms: | project uncertainty, dynamics, transaction cost, project management, socio-technical system, construction project, construction firm |
| Subjects: | systems engineering, production management, project management theory and practice, theoretical framing, financial analysis, organization |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| 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