Rooke, J and Seymour, D (1995) The NEC and the culture of the industry: Some early findings regarding possible sources of resistance to change. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 2(4), pp. 287-305. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
This paper describes some current research into the impact of the New Engineering Contract (NEC) on the culture of the industry. The intention is to explain the purpose of this research, describe the methodology used and report on some early findings. In the early sections, the authors outline the thinking behind the research and some of the difficulties involved and briefly consider the limitations of a conventional approach and compare it with an outline of the authors' own. They then look at the analysis of data, with reference to some findings of this and a previous study. In doing so, the authors focus on some cultural patterns which may be resistant to the changes the NEC is intended to promote and they go on to discuss some of the ways in which culture is transmitted between individuals, since, if the NEC is to be successful, it will involve changes in these patterns. In the final section, the authors discuss some implications for the future of the NEC.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | change; culture; methodology; New Engineering Contract; occupation |
| Index terms: | occupation, methodology, New Engineering Contract |
| Subjects: | sociology, research methods, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Procurement, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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