Rahman, M M and Kumaraswamy, M M (2005) Assembling integrated project teams for joint risk management. Construction Management and Economics, 23(4), pp. 365-375. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Exhaustive risk allocation cannot be achieved through contract conditions, because all risk items cannot be foreseen at the planning stage. Effective management of unforeseen risks/events at post-contract stage needs the collective efforts of all major contracting parties. The attitude and motivation of project participants are critical to such collaborative arrangements. Project 'partners' need to be conditioned, starting with their selection processes, by incorporating appropriate 'soft' or relational qualities as important selection criteria. They would then need to work under suitable teambuilding protocols, with flexible contract conditions and appropriate adjustment mechanisms that would all be tailored to suit each specific project. The theoretical construct so developed is examined through a series of recent Hong Kong based studies on 'joint risk management'. Results lead to the development of a framework for building a coalesced team that includes owners, consultants, contractors, subcontractors and suppliers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | integration; joint risk management; procurement; relational contracting; supply chain management |
| Index terms: | subcontractor, contract condition, relational contracting, project team, owner, selection criteria, contracting party, risk management, integration, Hong Kong, risk allocation, motivation |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, organizational analysis, project delivery, tendering, psychology, Geography, sociology, risk assessment, practitioner, contract structure, financial risk |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Cost Management, Contract Administration, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Human Resources, Risk Management |
| 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