Razmdoost, K and Mills, G (2016) Towards a service-led relationship in project-based firms. Construction Management and Economics, 34(4-5), pp. 317-334. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Project-based firms increasingly apply practices that are in line with relationship marketing (RM), which is a shift from individuality to mutuality, and service-dominant logic (SDL), which is a shift from a focus on goods exchange to an emphasis on service exchange. These firms also adopt value co-creation processes, benefiting from both RM and SDL views. However, their overall transition towards RM, SDL and/or both is not clearly understood. Therefore, the research aim is to explain how and why project-based firms have moved away from transitional marketing. A retrospective action research between 2002 and 2009 provides process data on how a single main contractor adapted their marketing approach over five publicly funded projects within the oil, gas and petrochemical industries. The findings show that the uniqueness and dynamics of projects necessitate the adoption of both SDL and RM, a view that is entitled the service-led relationship here. This transition occurs through services expansion, multi-level distributed interactions and process-oriented performance management in projects. The firm enabled the transition through the evolution of both institutional mechanisms such as contracts and organizational structure, and people attributes such as capabilities and culture.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | interaction; project-based firms; relationship marketing; service-dominant logic; service-led relationship |
| Index terms: | organizational structure, action research, relationship marketing, evolution, value co-creation, project-based firm, performance management, main contractor, service-led relationship, service-dominant logic, marketing, dynamics, interaction |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, relationship marketing, systems engineering, behavioral psychology, sociology, value management, practitioner, data collection methods, organization, business, environmental science |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Design Practice, Quality Management, 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