Chan, A P C; Chan, D W M and Ho, K S K (2003) An empirical study of the benefits of construction partnering in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 21(5), pp. 523-533. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Many construction companies have adopted partnering in their construction projects over the past 10-15 years due to favourable project outcomes achieved. Its use in construction projects has been increasing rapidly as its benefits become more apparent and pervasive. This paper reviews the partnering literature within the construction field and tries to portray the comprehensive picture of benefits for the partnering practice. Through partnering and the active involvement of all key project parties, the project is more likely to be completed within budget, on time, and with the least number of conflicts, claims and work defects. Also, this paper reports upon the findings of a questionnaire survey of partnering benefits in Hong Kong. Seventy-eight project participants completed a questionnaire to indicate the relative importance of partnering benefits. The perceived benefits were measured and ranked from the perspectives of the client, contractor and consultant for cross-comparison. The results revealed that 'Improved relationship amongst project participants', 'Improved communication amongst project participants' and 'More responsive to the short-term emergency, changing project or business needs' were the most significant benefits derived from the use of partnering. More partnering arrangements should be actively introduced into the construction procurement process so that every party can enjoy the full benefits of partnering.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | benefits; construction projects; Hong Kong; partnering |
| Index terms: | survey, construction company, project party, relative importance, construction project, questionnaire, project outcome, partnering, Hong Kong, empirical study, construction procurement |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, project completion, organization, risk assessment, data collection methods, sociology, partnership management, Geography, production management, research methods |
| Topics: | Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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