The non-adoption of supply chain management

Fernie, S and Tennant, S (2013) The non-adoption of supply chain management. Construction Management and Economics, 31(10), pp. 1038-1058. ISSN 1466433X

Abstract

Largely taken for granted within the UK construction sector has been a view that supply chain management theory is robust, relevant and reliable. As such it has formed a substantial aspect of previous and contemporary policy and government funded research. Despite this, the general view of its development and diffusion over the last 15 years within the construction industry has been problematic. Coincidentally, prevailing debates within the supply chain management academic community point to the lack of unified theory, models of diffusion and strong connections to organization theory. Using Straussian grounded theory, iterations between data and organization theory provided a fresh perspective on the development and diffusion of supply chain management in construction. This inductive research provided contextually rich explanations for development and diffusion that explicitly connected with and drew upon robust, relevant and reliable theories of institutions, innovation diffusion, triads, quasifirms and mechanisms of organizational governance. These explanations challenge the simplistic assumption that chains and networks of organizations are holistically managed and controlled by any single organization or institution in the construction industry. The debate therefore shifts away from proselytizing supply chain management towards research that explores the rigour, relevance and reliability of supply chain management assumptions in construction. The gap between industry practice and policy is exposed and the question is posed: to what extent policy and practice do, or should, constitute a recursive relationship.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: clans; grounded theory; quasi-firm; supply chain management; triads
Index terms: construction industry, grounded theory, governance, management theory, construction sector, innovation diffusion
Subjects: sociology, industry analysis, theoretical framing, management, business
Topics: Governance, Business Strategy, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PTA

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