Lau, C H; Mesthrige, J W; Lam, P T I and Javed, A A (2019) The challenges of adopting new engineering contract: A Hong Kong study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(10), pp. 2389-2409. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Project delays and cost over-runs are few common major problems arising from conventional contracts. To overcome these issues, the Hong Kong Government has been practicing the use of the New Engineering Contract (NEC) forms in several public works projects. However, despite the successful outcomes and the positive signs of adopting NEC, it appears that NEC forms of contracts are not widely adopted in the Hong Kong construction industry even after 25 years of their first introduction. The purpose of this paper is to identify the challenges and barriers for not implementing NEC widely in Hong Kong. Design/methodology/approach: Based on a questionnaire survey data collected from 45 senior industry professionals, and six semi-structured interviews, the study evaluated the perceptions of construction professionals as to why NEC is still not popular in the industry and reported the relative importance of challenges in the implementation of NEC in Hong Kong. Findings: The results reveal that “People are not willing to change,” “Limited number of trained professionals” and “Insufficient case law and adjudication experience” are the most significant challenges and barriers in adopting NEC. These findings are also supported by the opinions of construction professionals through semi-structured interviews. Practical implications: The findings are relevant and would benefit to the industry stakeholders for adopting NEC contracts by informing them of the most significant challenges so that proper strategies may be devised to overcoming them for early contractors' involvement, controlling cost and time overruns in infrastructure projects. Originality/value: The empirical evidence of the study provides an insight into the challenges faced by the construction industry of Hong Kong. NEC form of contract is the way forward in order to create a better working environment conducive for all the parties that would result in better construction project performance and productivity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | challenges; construction; construction planning; contract; Hong Kong; new engineering contract; partnering; project management |
| Index terms: | project delay, questionnaire, evidence, methodology, construction project, survey, strategy, interview, relative importance, case law, construction planning, project management, construction industry, implementation, infrastructure project, form of contract, construction professional, public work, New Engineering Contract, productivity, time overrun, Hong Kong, partnering, adjudication |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, infrastructure engineering, professional development, Geography, production management, research methods, management, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, project controls, partnership management, dispute resolution, risk assessment, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, construction planning, contractual arrangements, legal systems |
| Topics: | Site Management, Time Control, Legal Issues, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Procurement, Business Strategy, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| 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