Risk management trends in the construction industry: Moving towards joint risk management

Motiar Rahman, M and Kumaraswamy, M M (2002) Risk management trends in the construction industry: Moving towards joint risk management. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 9(2), pp. 131-151. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

This paper reports the outcomes of the first of three planned questionnaire surveys in the first phase of a broader Hong Kong based study on Joint Risk Management' (JRM). The survey compared perceptions on both present and preferred risk allocation, including JRM, in construction contracts. Data was mainly collected in Hong Kong and mainland China (with most respondents having working experience from Hong Kong) from various professionals and practitioners representing broad groups of academics, consultants, contractors and owners (clients). Survey results reinforce previous observations (in Canada) of the divergences in perceptions on both present and preferred risk allocation, both within and between different contracting parties. The present study reveals quite wide (marked) divergencies with many individual cases of diametrically opposing views on allocating particular risks within specific groups. Despite such divergencies, respondents professed a general enthusiasm towards JRM, irrespective of their contractual or professional affiliation. Moreover, they generally preferred to assign reduced risks from either one or both contracting parties to JRM, rather than shifting more risks to the other party. This is indicative of a perceived trend towards more collaborative and teamwork based working environments.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Hong Kong; joint risk management risk allocation; risk perceptions; teamwork
Index terms: China, practitioner, questionnaire, risk perception, survey, construction industry, risk allocation, risk management, construction contract, owner, contracting party, Canada, Hong Kong, teamwork
Subjects: sociology, industry analysis, environmental hazards, management, Geography, financial risk, risk assessment, data collection methods, contract type, practitioner
Topics: Organizational Design, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Cost Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

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