Moore, D R and Dainty, A R J (2001) Intra-team boundaries as inhibitors of performance improvemeent in UK design and build projects: A call for change. Construction Management and Economics, 19(6), pp. 559-562. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The success of the design and build (D&B) procurement route could be undermined by issues arising from the rigid professional cultures of individual participants within project workgroups. These have the potential to inhibit the achievement of a key espoused benefit of D&B procurement, i.e. that it promotes the integration of the design and construction processes for improved project performance. Cultural non-interoperability is identified as a significant potential barrier to effective change management, and to the achievement of innovation within the design and construction processes. This note argues that project responsibilities, which currently are delineated along professional identity lines, produce design and construction solutions that fail to fulfil the potential of D&B procurement. It is suggested that addressing cultural inter-operability will require a fundamental and long term reshaping of the industry's structure, beginning with the professional bodies and the higher education system that underpins their future membership.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design and build; interoperability; performance improvement; professional cultures |
| Index terms: | change management, design and build, boundaries, integration, higher education, interoperability, design and construction, identity, project performance, performance improvement |
| Subjects: | management, performance measurement, project management theory and practice, sociology, educational institutions, organizational analysis, systems and processes, property law, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Procurement, Research Practice, Project Management, Education, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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