Fairness in interorganizational project relations: Norms and strategies

Kadefors, A (2005) Fairness in interorganizational project relations: Norms and strategies. Construction Management and Economics, 23(8), pp. 871-878. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

There is a strong preference for fairness in human interaction, so that people who experience unfairness tend to react with anger, resentment and loss of motivation. Concerns to appear fair influence the behaviour of both individuals and firms. Perceptions of fairness are susceptible to framing and may be influenced by various norms for outcome distribution as well as by decision processes and interpersonal relations. This paper deals with causes and effects of fairness perceptions in construction project relations, mainly fixed price contracts procured by competitive tendering. In such projects, uncertainty results in continuous post contract award problem-solving and negotiations, and fairness concerns may have incremental but significant influence on the terms of exchange. Case studies of client-contractor interaction in two projects are used to discuss of how fairness norms relate to strategies and industry culture. It is concluded that that an intuitive cost-based norm of fair pricing shapes interaction in construction projects, but that consequences vary between projects. The norm may favour contractors, but is also related to poor risk management and client distrust. To improve performance, clients need to design procurement practices and communication so that perceptions of contractor losses are counteracted.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: conflict; construction contracts; fairness; procurement; winner's curse
Index terms: preference, norms, fair pricing, construction project, strategy, motivation, framing, competitive tendering, interaction, negotiation, fairness, construction contract, risk management, decision process, interorganizational, case study
Subjects: management, tendering, decision-making and reasoning, production management, conflict resolution, decision analysis, sociology, leadership, price determination, behavioral psychology, risk assessment, data collection methods, contract type, business, psychology, conceptual models
Topics: Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Human Resources, Organizational Design
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

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