Bresnen, M and Marshall, N (2000) Building partnerships: Case studies of client-contractor collaboration in the UK construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 18(7), pp. 819-832. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Despite the enormous groundswell of interest in partnering and alliancing in recent years, there has been comparatively little research that has set out to investigate systematically the nature, feasibility, benefits and limitations of forms of client-contractor collaboration. This is despite the growing recognition that conditions conducive to partnering may well vary considerably and that partnering may not be the solution for problems within the industry that many commentators have taken it to be. This paper sets out to add to the growing literature and empirical database on partnering by reporting the findings of a research project designed to explore the economic, organizational and technological factors that encourage or inhibit collaboration in practice. The paper follows on from an earlier review and critique of the literature on partnering (Bresnen, M. and Marshall, N. 2000, Construction Management and Economics, 18(2) 229-37). It includes as its database nine case studies of medium-to-large-scale projects, selected from across the industry, on which processes of collaboration are examined from the viewpoints of clients, contractors, designers and subcontractors. In contrast to much of the prescriptive work in this area, the analysis of the data and the paper's conclusions stress some of the practical problems, limitations and paradoxes of partnering and alliancing when the effects of important economic, organizational and psychological factors are taken into account.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alliancing; clients; management; partnering |
| Index terms: | collaboration, subcontractor, paradox, construction industry, case study, partnering, alliancing, critique, database, designer, partnership |
| Subjects: | management, industry analysis, partnership management, data management, practitioner, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, profession, social theory and frameworks, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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