Rooke, J; Seymour, D and Fellows, R (2003) The claims culture: A taxonomy of attitudes in the industry. Construction Management and Economics, 21(2), pp. 167-174. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper presents an analysis of a familiar aspect of construction industry culture that we have dubbed 'the claims culture'. This is a culture of contract administration that lays a strong emphasis on the planning and management of claims. The principal elements of the analysis are two sets of distinctions. The first comprises economic and occupational orders, referring to two kinds of control that are exercised over the construct ion process; predicated respectively on economic ownership and occupational competence. The second refers to contrasting attitudes towards relationships and problem solving within these orders: respectively 'distributive' and 'integrative'. The concepts of economic and occupational order entail further sub-categories. The various attitudes associated with these categories and sub-categories are described. They are assessed as to their consequences for change initiatives in the industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | claims management; culture; ethnography; grounded theory; procurement |
| Index terms: | construction industry, taxonomy, ownership, grounded theory, ethnography, contract administration, competence, problem solving, occupational order, claims culture |
| Subjects: | decision-making and reasoning, economics, theoretical framing, personnel development, contract management, qualitative and interpretive research, sociology, industry analysis, contractual relationship, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, 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