This study identifies barriers to realizing a stewardship relation instead of a classic principal-agent relation between client and vendor through implementation of an innovative procurement and risk management method, the Best Value approach. This approach focuses on calculus-based trust development through the use of metrics and alignment of goals and risks between client and vendor. Barriers to realizing a stewardship relation are analysed with the use of a theoretical framework that incorporates agency theory and stewardship theory. Data was collected in 2013 and 2014 through project documentation and interviews for four case studies at the Dutch Highways Agency. Collected data was used to analyse the roles of the client and vendor, the scope and level of the products and the overall process of the clarification phase of the Best Value approach to identify barriers in practice. Case study findings are analysed and explained by agency theory and stewardship theory. From a theoretical perspective the Best Value approach shows large similarities with stewardship theory. In practice, however, the cases show that the often traditional background of project teams and the lack of experience with Best Value result in a control-oriented relationship between client and vendor characterized by information asymmetry, lack of transparency and distrust. These characteristics of the relationship between client and vendor inhibit the realization of a stewardship relation using the Best Value approach.

One of the distinctive aspects of the Best Value approach compared to traditional approaches is the use of dominant information: simple, non-disputable information. It enables experts to explain complex situations to non-experts in a clear way. This leads to increased transparency in the supply chain and to mitigation of risks. Rijkswaterstaat, as one of the worldwide leading clients using the Best Value approach, pays increasing attention to performance information in their Best Value projects. However, both client and contractor encounter several problems, such as a lack of support for and performance measuring, difficulties in collecting data and a lack of knowledge regarding the development and use of performance indicators. This paper describes the problems encountered based on interviews with practitioners of both client and contractor. Suggestions are made to resolve these problems. Furthermore, a process model for the development and use of performance indicators in infrastructural Best Value projects is proposed. This model is based on theory and validated in practice.

In recent years Best Value (BV) has gained popularity in the Netherlands. Many clients have adopted BV after the successful application in the ‘Spoedaanpak Wegen’ projects (Fast Track Projects) by Rijkswaterstaat (Department of Public Works). The social system of users of BV is evolving. In the past years primarily the procurement community was interested in BV (where it all started), but recently risk managers and project managers are becoming increasingly aware of the philosophy. Van de Rijt & Santema (2012) observed that (potential) users of BV all have a different level of awareness of the BV methodology and that experts in BV cannot force others into the “right” or “pure” methodology. However, BV experts can reflect upon major misunderstandings in order to improve the understanding and implementation of the philosophy. In this paper, the authors elaborate on this matter. They observe ten common misperceptions in the everyday application of the Best Value approach, which may hinder a successful further diffusion of the Best Value approach in the Netherlands.

The project Extra Discharge Capacity Afsluitdijk (EDCA) of Rijkswaterstaat aims to enlarge the capacity of the discharge sluices by building new sluices, necessary because of the climate change. Rijkswaterstaat has decided to outsource the responsibility to write the Environmental Impact Report to an engineering firm. Specific problems in the outsourcing of engineering jobs involve the limited liability of the engineering firms as well as how they receive little or no feedback from the design and build phase. This paper tests the hypothesis that BVP can also be successful in the area of engineering services. The result shows that BVP can be successful in the procurement of engineering services. The application of BVP at EDCA was very distinguishing in selecting the best value vendor. It identified a vendor at a lower cost, shorter time schedule, and with more innovative ideas than the Rijkswaterstaat project team.

Rijkswaterstaat, part of the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and EnvironmentI has used the best value PIPS philosophy to procure infrastructure projects worth circa $ 800M. This is a case study of the largest PIPS pilot project in the sixteen year development of the best value PIPS, and tests the robustness of the PIPS philosophy within the constraints of the European law. Eleven adaptations to the original methodology are outlined and discussed. The procurement results of six tenders are outlined.