Partnering Paradigm

Harback, Herbert F.; Basham, Donald L.; Buhts, Robert E.

doi:10.1061/(asce)9742-597x(1994)10:1(23)

Cited by 47 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Freedom of speech, openness and innovation are harnessed to craft win-win incentives collectively that maximize opportunity in the face of shared risks (Crowley and Karim, 1995). Harback et al (1994) draw the analogy to a shift from the design of the best prenuptial agreement to a focus on the win-win goals and give and take behaviours needed for a successful marriage. Participatory models of stakeholder engagement likewise emphasize transparency and voice as means to foster shared purpose and identity overcoming suspicion and distrust.…”

Section: The Power Of Procedural Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a unified theory of project governance: economic, sociological and psychological supports for relational contracting

Henisz

Levitt

Scott

2012

Engineering Project Organization Journal

138

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large, global, cross-sectoral, multi-phased civil infrastructure projects tend to be one-off projects for which transactions have no strong 'shadow of the future', but where elements of relational contracting are still ubiquitous. Such projects evolve through discrete phases-financial and technical feasibility, conceptual design, detailed design, construction, operations and renovation/replacement-each phase of which can be viewed as a discrete transaction during which key participants and stakeholders rotate in and out of the project. This discontinuity of participation across phases in the project's lifecycle creates a heretofore neglected contractual hazard of 'displaced agency'. Similar governance challenges arising from displaced agency are found in longlived aerospace and defence programmes, large-scale software initiatives and other sectors. We review, integrate, extend and apply economic, legal, sociological and psychological governance perspectives on relational contracts to address the extreme governance challenges of civil infrastructure projects. The transaction cost economics literature has pointed out that such projects require relational governance, but has not spelled out strategies to attain and sustain such structures. We set out a framework based on institutional concepts that integrates a range of strategies designed to enhance the efficacy of relational contracts, drawing not only on 'regulative' institutional supports (e.g. laws, regulations, contracts and their enforcement through mediation, arbitration or litigation), but also institutional supports that are 'normative' (e.g. socially shared expectations of appropriate behaviour and social exchange processes) and 'cognitive' (e.g. creating shared identities, scripts or conceptual frameworks to bridge differences in values or interests). We present a set of propositions as a first cut at a contingent, integrated framework to guide future research on governance of engineering projects, and ultimately to help managers select and deploy the appropriate mix of regulative, normative and cognitive governance mechanisms for each project.

show abstract

Section: The Power Of Procedural Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a unified theory of project governance: economic, sociological and psychological supports for relational contracting

Henisz

Levitt

Scott

2012

Engineering Project Organization Journal

138

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The questionnaire was prepared with the help of the literature on critical success factors in partnering practices. As a result, efficient communication (Moore et al, 1992;Mohr and Spekman, 1994;Hellard, 1996;Black et al, 2000;Cheng et al, 2000;Chan et al, 2004;Tang et al, 2006), effective coordination (Mohr and Spekman, 1994;Cheng et al, 2000;Bayramoğlu, 2001;Chan et al, 2004), mutual objectives (Bennet and Jayes, 1998;Chan et al, 2004;Tang et al, 2006), common goals (Hardback et al, 1994Mohr and Spekman, 1994;Brooke and Litwin, 1997), long-term relationships (Mohr and Spekman, 1994;Black et al, 2000;Bresnen and Marshall, 2000a;Cheng et al, 2000;Chan et al, 2004), mutual trust (Hardback et al, 1994;Mohr and Spekman, 1994;Hellard, 1996;Black et al, 2000;Cheng et al, 2000;Chan et al, 2004;Tang et al, 2006), and management support (Harback et al, 1994;Hellard, 1996;Cheng et al, 2000;Chan et al, 2004) were investigated.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Individual goals create competitive behavior, while shared goals are the glue holding a relationship together in times of stress. Developing common goals enables firms to eliminate non-value-added activities, reduce waste and duplication, establish clarity of responsibility, resolve conflicts before they develop into disputes, and improve processes (Harback et al, 1994;Crowley and Karim, 1995;DeVilbiss and Leonard, 2000;Liu and Fellows, 2001;Chan et al, 2004;Nyström, 2005;Tang et al, 2006). Fox (1974) indicates that persons who share common goals are capable of allocating roles among themselves in light of what they perceive as "functional necessities."…”

Section: Common Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical Success Factors Of Partnering In The Building Design Process

Doğan¹,

Çalğici²,

Arditi³

et al. 2015

METU JFA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The construction industry is vertically fragmented because of the inherent nature of construction projects, which require planning, design, letting, construction, and operation in distinct phases (Fellows and Liu, 2012;Fong and Lung, 2007). The construction industry is also horizontally fragmented because of the general tendency of participants to work independently in all phases of the project (Fellows and Liu, 2012;Saram and Ahmed, 2001). Given the increasing number of construction projects in the current global environment, geographical fragmentation is caused by project participants that are frequently geographically separated. The construction industry is also temporally fragmented, as the phases of construction projects diverge over an estimated time period (Luck, 1996). According to Evbuomwan and Anumba (1998), the fragmentation in the industry results in costly engineering changes and design iterations, time and cost increases, poor communication between project participants, neglect of the application of sustainability principles throughout the life cycle of the building, and inadequate coordination and integration of the various participants. The root cause of much of these problems encountered in the management of building projects can be traced back to the design phase.The building design process typically involves the participation of architects, engineers (structural, mechanical, electrical, and environmental engineers) and material suppliers. In some project delivery systems, contractors are also involved in the design process. The lack of effective coordination among different disciplines in the building design process may affect not only the design but also the construction processes and the final product, creating problems related to schedule, quality, manpower, materials used, and cost. The interaction of the project participants is vital for the success of the project. Architects and engineers must recognize the collaborative nature of the building design process and support

show abstract

“…Many publications have been devoted to gaining a better understanding of trust in the context of construction partnering (Black et al, 2000;Harback et al, 1994;Wong & Cheung, 2004;Wong et al, 2008). In particular Smith and Rybkowski (2012), identified 15 characteristics relevant for the construction industry, according to the main theoretical contributions.…”

Section: Trust In the Construction Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust and Distrust in the Relationships between Construction Firms and Real Estate Agents: Empirical Evidence from Italy

Trio¹,

Iazzi²

2016

IJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research is to study the characteristics of the relationships between construction firms and real estate agents in order to understand the nature and the role of trust.In the construction industry trust plays a fundamental role as consequence of the long-lasting nature of the residential product, the big investment made in transaction specific assets, and the overlapping roles and responsibilities of the parties involved.Real estate agents are the connecting element between the firm and the market and represent a kind of intermediary between buyers and builders.Since they could assume an opportunistic behavior, in contrast with the builders' interest, the construction firms need to keep the control over the internal or external sales force.At this end we represent, through 30 in-depth interviews to builders and agents that operate in the Italian residential market, the actors' points of view on their relationship and on the role of trust for a good relationship with potential customers.Starting from the assumption that the main relevant theoretical dimensions of trust in this field are competence, affective and reputational trust, the research reveal a very low level of trust, both for the insufficient mutual recognition and for the scarce level of perceived transparency in the behavior of the counterpart. The builders and agents have many difficulties in their mutual relationship. There is no collaborative approach. The opportunism affects the behaviors both for the builders' criticality in selling and for seeking a royalty on the agent' side.

show abstract

Partnering Paradigm

Cited by 47 publications

References 0 publications

Toward a unified theory of project governance: economic, sociological and psychological supports for relational contracting

Toward a unified theory of project governance: economic, sociological and psychological supports for relational contracting

Critical Success Factors Of Partnering In The Building Design Process

Trust and Distrust in the Relationships between Construction Firms and Real Estate Agents: Empirical Evidence from Italy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About