Bresnen, M and Marshall, N (2000) Partnering in construction: A critical review of issues, problems and dilemmas. Construction Management and Economics, 18(2), pp. 229-237. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Partnering in construction has been presented as a potentially important way of improving construction project performance through the direct benefits it can bring to both clients and contractors. However, there is still considerable debate about the nature and merits of a partnering approach. This paper attempts to contribute towards this debate by exploring the presumed link between partnering and cultural change within the industry, at both organizational and interorganizational levels of analysis. To do so, it draws upon theory and research from the social sciences (especially organizational theory) to explore some of the issues, problems and dilemmas which emerge when full and proper account is taken of the complexities of organizations, as well as some of the subtleties and intricacies of the concept of organizational culture. The paper concludes that it is only by fully appreciating the effects of such complexity that a more realistic and practical approach to the development and implementation of partnering will emerge.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alliancing; culture; partnering |
| Index terms: | organizational theory, construction project, cultural change, organizational culture, complexity, partnering, alliancing, interorganizational, social science, implementation |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, business, systems engineering, partnership management, sociology, production management, theoretical framing |
| Topics: | Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, 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