An evaluation of partnership development in the construction industry

Beach, Roger; Webster, Margaret; Campbell, Kendall M.

doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.04.001

Cited by 183 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, supplier-base reduction [45][46][47] or optimization [44] is required. Suppliers and subcontractors should be a firm's long-term partners instead of the traditional win-lose relationship of business partners with different objectives [48].…”

Section: Procurement Methods In Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Contractors Select Suppliers for Greener Construction Projects? The Case of Three Swedish Companies

Mokhlesian

2014

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:There are many studies of contractor selection based on clients and the selection of suppliers by contractors. However, supplier selection specifically related to green construction projects has been much less studied. Green construction differs from conventional construction because of differences in its underlying principles and use of environmentally-friendly materials and technologies. This paper studies how procurers in contractor companies in Sweden adopt green projects and how contractor perception of supplier mastery of green knowledge affects supplier selection. The investigation is based on a set of semi-structured interviews conducted among three large contractors in Sweden. A main finding is that the perceived differences between green and conventional projects do not change supplier selection dramatically. An implication is that "greener projects" is a more appropriate denotation than "green project". Evidence shows that suppliers' green knowledge is an important factor in supplier selection, as respondents rated suppliers' knowledge of green projects as very important, and to fix his, there was a consensus among respondents about the need for close collaboration between contractors and suppliers. To ensure knowledge acquisition from suppliers and to increase their competitive advantage over rivals, contractors collaborate with their suppliers in a partnering setting. It is anticipated that the results of this study will be used to fill the gap in the literature on supplier selection in green projects and can also be used for construction firms contemplating getting involved in green projects.

show abstract

Section: Procurement Methods In Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Contractors Select Suppliers for Greener Construction Projects? The Case of Three Swedish Companies

Mokhlesian

2014

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Challenging simplistic assumptions of collaboration and trust in construction supply chain management, Cox et al (2006) further argues that the dominant pro-market transactional relationship, typical within UK construction, should be viewed as being underpinned by power and leverage (Korczynski, 1996, Beach et al, 2005. This exposes, within dominant assumptions, a tension between competition and collaboration and supports the view of win-win scenarios being largely fanciful (Cox et al, 2004).…”

Section: Construction Supply Chain Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The non-adoption of supply chain management

Fernie

Tennant

2013

Construction Management and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Largely taken for granted within the UK construction sector has been a view that supply chain management theory is robust, relevant and reliable. As such it has formed a substantial aspect of previous and contemporary policy and government funded research. Despite this, the prevailing view of its development and diffusion over the last 15 years within the construction industry has been problematic.Coincidentally, prevailing debates within the supply chain management academic community point to the lack of unified theory, models of diffusion and strong connections to organisation theory. Using Straussian grounded theory; iterations between data and organisation theory provided a fresh perspective on the development and diffusion of supply chain management in construction. This inductive research provided contextually rich explanations for development and diffusion that explicitly connected with and drew upon robust, relevant and reliable theories of institutions, innovation diffusion, triads, quasifirms and mechanisms of organizational governance. These explanations challenge the simplistic assumption that chains and networks of organisations are holistically managed and controlled by any single organisation or institution in the construction industry. The paper therefore shifts the debate away from proselytising supply chain management towards research that explores rigor, relevance and reliability of supply chain management assumptions in construction. The paper also exposes the gap between industry practice and policy and, questions the extent to which policy and practice do, or should, constitute a recursive relationship.

show abstract

“…These include industry sponsored research into partnering (e.g., CII, 1991;Bennett and Jayes, 1995;Lenard et al, 1996;Chan, Chan, Fan et al, 2004), as well as general research on partnering (e.g., Cook and Hancher, 1990;Larson and Drexler, 1997;Conley and Gregory, 1999;Black et al, 2000;Cheng et al, 2000;Glagola and Sheedy, 2002;Ng et al, 2002;Chan, Chan, Chiang et al, 2004;Fisher, 2004), alliancing (Barlow et al, 1997;Halman and Braks, 1999;Barlow, 2000;Hauck et al, 2004;Rowlinson et al, 2006) and relational 16 contracting (e.g., Hampson and Kwok, 1997;Davis, 1999;Rahman and Kumaraswamy, 2002). Many studies also highlight the roles of partnering as a team-building mechanism and as a catalyst for cultural change (e.g., Mosley et al, 1991;Moore et al, 1992;Abudayyeh, 1994;Albanese, 1994;Brown, 1994;Wilson Jr et al, 1995;Miles, 1996;Gardiner and Simmons, 1998;Winch, 2000;Nicolini, 2002;Beach et al, 2005).However, these studies also create problems, which stand in the way of uniform understanding of the partnering concept. These issues are next discussed and clarified in the context of the proposed model of partnering in Figure 1.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptual Model of Partnering and Alliancing

Anvuur

Kumaraswamy

2007

J. Constr. Eng. Manage.

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This item was submitted to Loughborough's Institutional Repository (https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/) by the author and is made available under the following Creative Commons Licence conditions.For the full text of this licence, please go to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ Conceptual model of partnering and alliancing 1Aaron M. Anvuur and Mohan M. Kumaraswamy, M.ASCE Partnering as a concept has matured in its application and many empirical studies provide evidence of its impact on project performance beyond the rather prescriptive and anecdotal claims of earlier cookbooks on the subject. What has remained elusive, however, is a guiding theory on partnering. Drawing on the literature, partnering is explained within the framework of intergroup contact theory and teamwork in organizations. More specifically, partnering has the potential to create the essential conditions for optimal intergroup contact and hence, to reduce bias and increase cooperation among construction project workgroups and, consequently, IntroductionOver the last decade, partnering has gained considerable popularity. However, several issues raise serious difficulties with the uptake of, understanding of, approach to, and implementation of, partnering within and across different national and organizational settings (Loraine, 1994;Green, 1999;Uher, 1999;Bresnen and Marshall, 2000a;Bresnen and Marshall, 2000b;Li et al., 2000;Fisher and Green, 2001;Bresnen and Marshall, 2002;Naoum, 2003). In time, research has shed light on some of the contentious issues surrounding the concept of partnering. A number of empirical studies (e.g., Weston and Gibson, 1993;Larson, 1995;Gransberg et al., 1999) and a plethora of anecdotal evidence support the espoused benefits of partnering. Research highlights the usefulness and benefits of extending the practice of partnering down the entire supply and value chain to include subcontractors (e.g., Mathews et al., 1996;Love, 1997;Kale and Arditi, 2001;Miller et al., 2002;Sze et al., 2003). Partnering forms of contract (e.g., PPC 2000) attempt to prescribe and govern the behavior and relationships of contracting parties. While the legal status of such express good faith clauses has been questioned and their full practical import is yet unknown (see Cornes, 1996;Cox and Thompson, 1996), these attempts demonstrate a bold commitment to overcome the legal obstacles to the wider adoption of partnering. Some research has considered the potential impact of different cultural and national contexts on partnering performance (e.g., Kwan and Ofori, 2001;Liu and Fellows, 2001;Koraltan and Dikbas, 2002). With 'success stories' of partnering emerging from diverse cultural settings (e.g., Bennett and Baird, 2001;Bayliss et al., 2004;Chan, Chan, Fan et al., 2004), the general view is that partnering is by no means exclusive to any country, continent or culture. 3However, partnering still lacks conceptual-definitional specificity. Partnering is variously defined by its outcomes or the processes involved in its implementation...

show abstract

An evaluation of partnership development in the construction industry

Cited by 183 publications

References 12 publications

How Do Contractors Select Suppliers for Greener Construction Projects? The Case of Three Swedish Companies

How Do Contractors Select Suppliers for Greener Construction Projects? The Case of Three Swedish Companies

The non-adoption of supply chain management

Conceptual Model of Partnering and Alliancing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About