Candel, M; Karrbom Gustavsson, T and Eriksson, P E (2021) Front-end value co-creation in housing development projects. Construction Management and Economics, 39(3), pp. 245-260. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
As a result of local governance, municipalities and housing developers work together to define housing development projects and to co-create value propositions. The purpose of this study is to explore how value propositions are co-created during the front-end of housing development projects and how this affects housing developers' ability to drive change and innovation. The value co-creation process is explored through interviews, documents and observations in a case study of an urban development programme in Sweden. The findings illustrate how emerging conflicts and the process of resolving them are central drivers for value co-creation between these actors. However, conflicts that are not managed and resolved constructively can lead to the co-destruction of value. In this study we illustrate how value co-creation processes that precede procurement limit the flexibility of housing developers and determine the scope for value that can be realised.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | conflict management; front-end; housing developers; municipalities; value co-creation/co-destruction; value propositions |
| Index terms: | Sweden, conflict management, governance, interview, programme, urban development, value co-creation, case study, housing development, documents, municipality, housing developer |
| Subjects: | urban design, business, value management, professional development, conflict resolution, administrative law, construction type, project controls, Geography, data collection methods, sociology |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Design Practice, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Legal Issues, Time Control, Urban Studies, Information Management, Governance, Geographical Context |
| 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