Winch, G M (2001) Governing the project process: A conceptual framework. Construction Management and Economics, 19(8), pp. 799-808. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
There has been considerable development in a process approach in construction management research in recent years. However, such work begs the question of how those processes are governed. Processes, be they flows of information or materials, need to be channelled in the desired direction as they are handed from team to team. This paper aims to present a conceptual framework for understanding the governance of construction project processes, drawing on transaction cost economics. Earlier attempts to apply this theoretical framework in construction management research have been partial, in that they have focused on only one type of transaction, typically that between client and principal contractor. This paper aims to be comprehensive in covering all the different transactions throughout the project lifecycle within one conceptual framework, and thereby it is hoped that more incisive empirical research can be developed and executed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | project coalition; project governance; project lifecycle; project processes; transaction costs |
| Index terms: | drawing, principal contractor, project lifecycle, management research, construction project, conceptual framework, transaction cost, governance |
| Subjects: | production management, technical documentation, business, project completion, financial analysis, theoretical framing, practitioner, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Governance, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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