Jones, K and Kaluarachchi, Y (2007) Operational factors affecting strategic partnering in UK social housing. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 14(4), pp. 334-345. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose - This paper seeks to report the findings of a research project that observed and monitored the performance of a four-year strategic partnering agreement between a consortium of Registered Social Landlords (AMPHION) and their contracting partner as they procured approximately 800 new houses, across 33 separate development projects. Design/methodology/approach - The research project used a combination of in-depth case studies (of individual housing projects and the relationship between the client group and their main contractor) supplemented by quantitative measures of project performance (Key Performance Indicators) and integrated workshops to study the operational factors that affected the success of the partnering initiative. Findings - The paper concludes that failures to manage expectations within and between partners undermined confidence and trust in the partnering process. Research limitations/implications - Whilst strategic partnering within the UK social housing sector was immature at the time of the study, the lessons learned have implications for other organisations considering strategic partnering relationships. Originality/value - Evidence is provided from a long-term study of strategic partnering which explores the dynamic nature of strategic partnering and its impact on success. Very few studies have addressed this issue.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; housing; partnership; United Kingdom |
| Index terms: | social housing, construction industry, project performance, partnership, workshop, landlord, case study, key performance indicator, consortium, main contractor, partnering, housing, lessons learned, evidence, methodology, housing project, United Kingdom |
| Subjects: | sociology, partnership management, housing and residential development, industry analysis, research methods, project management theory and practice, professional development, Geography, project delivery, construction type, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management |
| 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