Value‐enhanced collaborative working: case study of a small management advisory firm

Abstract

-8 -how of different tools and techniques was a setback to the core business idea behind this collaboration expecting Associates to market the services of Firm A. Hence, tools issues were unique in that, it led to inability of Associates to market Firm A collaboration technical competencies to prospective Clients.An overall analysis of the case study thus revealed the issues related to people, processes and tools, leading to the following consequences prevalent in the organisational collaboration between Firm A and its stakeholders: Next section describes the conceptual VECW framework. A conceptual framework is required here to set the different issues identified in the interview findings and organise them to communicate them effectively. It is an overview of ideas and practices involved in VECW that will shape effective collaborative working in Firm A. Conceptual VECW FrameworkThe conceptual framework forms part of working hypothesis prepared for VECW and it defines descriptive categories (factors) as stated by Shields (1998). The conceptual framework identifies sub-factors within these factors that needs to be considered to improve the collaboration efforts of Firm A and Associates based on literature review and the case study interviews.As mentioned in the previous section, the majority of collaboration issues could be divided into three major issues i.e. Processes, People and Tools. Researchers like Prasad (1996), Austin et al. (2001) and Khalfan (2001) suggested similar factors to control the character of an organisation in their studies. Prasad's work was based on manufacturing organisations, while Austin et al. referred to design chains and Khalfan adopted a construction organisations' perspective. Table 1 below is a comparison of Prasad (1996) and Austin et al's. (2001) view of these factors. Combined effectiveness of collaborating organisations is ensured by no duplication of processes.-9 - PeopleConsists of the value system of an organisation and human factors such as cultural, social, training and intelligence.It is the simple ability of people to work together. ToolsConsists of the tools and technology available with the organisation.The design processes are allocated based on the organisation's technical competency.Prasad concentrated on the organisational elements while Austin et al.'s analysis focuses on how best to achieve these factors. Prasad's (1996) manufacturing organisations are different from the traditional engineering view as they have a more value-centric view; where instead of just providing a manufactured product they might even provide the subsequent service supporting those products to generate more value for the client. Austin et al.'s (2001) design chains are considered similar to management advisory firms as parallels exist between a design chain; where different people/organisation are involved in providing a service, which satisfies common objectives of the project. Hence, identification of the issues from the case study interviews and Prasad's (1996) classification of organi...

Change in Uk Construction: Moving Toward Supply Chain Collaboration

“…Although many construction researchers in the UK, such as Fernie and Thorpe (2007), Bresnen (2009) and Gohil et al (2011), have provided evidence for the successful application of supply chain collaboration through particular case studies, few empirical studies have been conducted to measure the development of supply chain relationships in both breadth and depth. The limitation of existing studies forms a barrier to get a thorough understanding of the change movement in UK construction.…”

Reflecting on 10 years of focus on innovation, organisational learning and knowledge management literature in a construction project management context

“…Numerous other researchers in the UK are also active in this field, including Loughborough University, the University of Reading and the University of Salford; with publications by authors from those universities appearing in this journal. Martin Sexton, from the University of Salford (Zhang et al , 2006; Lee and Sexton, 2007; Ruikar et al , 2009) and Anumba, for example (Robinson et al , 2005; Mohamed and Anumba, 2006; Shelbourn et al , 2007; Anumba et al , 2008; Anumba, 2009; Gohil et al , 2011), have been active KM researchers over the past 10 years in this journal.…”