Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide insights into the reasoning behind the development of new procurement approaches by public sector clients.

A case study approach focuses on a procurement development process by a public sector client. It investigates the reasoning behind various applications of the project alliancing concept in rail infrastructure projects over a period of 15 years. Alliancing applications are singled out and mapped against a number of criteria derived from literature on alliancing. The reasoning behind these applications and their differences are reconstructed from contextual documentation. Theories and concepts from the fields of strategic management and knowledge management literature are used to analyse the results.

The development process seems to be evolutionary rather than deliberately planned. The uncovered variations in alliancing applications can only to a very limited extent be explained by the reconstructed reasoning. This suggests that the applied designs are mostly based on implicit reasoning by individual project teams. From a strategic management perspective, the development pattern resembles the emergent type of strategy formation.

This study offers an initial insight into the reasoning processes behind the (re-)design of procurement approaches within a public sector client organization. A unique feature of this study is that these reasoning processes are explored from the strategy formation perspective that conceptually links the design of new procurement approaches to strategic management theory.

There has been a significant increase in the use of relationship contracting in the global construction industry, with strategies such as Partnering, Alliancing and Public-Private Partnerships all used. These approaches were introduced to the Australian construction industry in the 1990s in an attempt to overcome the adversarial nature of traditional contracting methods. The purpose of this paper is to investigate factors that influence the successful implementation of Project Alliancing by means of a case study approach focusing on the procurement of a large water treatment plant. The research findings identify critical success factors (CSFs) both from literature and the case study project.

The research traces the origins of Alliancing and identifies CSFs by reviewing literature and analysing a current case study project. The paper first identifies CSFs on a global scale by establishing a theoretical framework of CSFs and then compares this to the case study project. A case study of an Australian Alliance project is investigated whereby a semi-structured interview process, involving senior managers from the six partners from the Alliance, was used in conjunction with a review of project documentation. The findings of the case study project are compared to the literature and any new CSFs are identified.

Alliancing helps to establish and manage the relationships between all parties, remove barriers and encourage maximum contribution to achieve success. Alliancing provides a project delivery method that promotes open communication, equality and a systematic problem resolution process. Team culture focusing on an “open book/no blame” approach is vital to the success of an Alliance. Five CSFs were identified as specifically influencing the success of the case study project: the use of an integrated Alliance office; the staging of project and stretch targets; establishing project specific key performance indicators; facilitating on-going workshops; and the integration of a web-based management programme.

The research findings assist both public and private sectors by identifying factors that are critical for success in Alliancing. Five additional factors were identified as specifically influencing the success of the case study project. Since this research was conducted, Australia has seen a further increase in relationship contracting where the likes of Alliancing is often used as the default approach for certain Public Sector projects. Ongoing research into Alliancing is vital to ensure the development of sustainable procurement models, successful operational viability, fair risk distribution and value for money.

Team leaders require enthusiasm and commitment from their team members to enable them to be agile, adaptable and responsive. This paper uses results from a longitudinal study of a successful building construction project delivered using a project alliancing approach. Results presented use a model pioneered by the US academic Peter Senge. This helps explain the system dynamics that generated the necessary enthusiasm and commitment to support collaboration and co‐operation within and between project teams. It became clear that enthusiasm and commitment can be achieved on construction projects provided that a collaborative and co‐operative workplace environment is carefully nurtured and crafted, which not only supports drivers for enthusiasm and commitment, but also addresses barriers that inhibit those values. Experience gained from studying the exemplar project illustrated in this paper provides the basis for a model of how to create and maintain the necessary workplace environment.

Price reliability for complex and highly complicated infrastructure projects is problematic. Traditional project delivery approaches generally fail in achieving targeted end cost reliability. However, integrated project delivery (and particularly Alliancing), develop a far more reliable and robust project delivery plan and outturn time-cost targets. This paper aims to explore why this may be the case.

This case study investigated the project design, planning, cost/time estimation approach and how risk/uncertainty was dealt with. Five senior project delivery experts from an organisation that delivers multi-billion-dollar infrastructure projects in Australia were interviewed. These five experts collectively had 100+ cross-disciplinary experience years delivering complex infrastructure projects.

Alliancing adopts a radically different approach to project design, time/cost planning and risk assessment and management to traditional project delivery approaches. Key findings explain how the project alliance agreement designs-in processes that maximises team integration and collaboration. Analysis concludes that design thinking is used to craft and shape collaborative behaviours and project governance. Additionally, including project owner and facilities operator representatives in the project team adds valuable insights, expertise and knowledge contributing to planning reliability.

This study is exploratory and focussed on complex infrastructure projects so findings cannot be generalised.

We unpack Alliancing processes that develop the target outturn cost plan, comprising a holistic and realistic plan to design a project to meet expected project outcomes. This case study may serve as an exemplar for complex project delivery.

This paper illustrates how Alliancing more effectively delivers best value than traditional procurement approaches through its TOC-TAE processes.

The paper contributes to the scant existing academic literature analysing these processes. Its novel contribution is explaining how Alliancing treats unexpected events that in traditional delivery forms trigger expensive and time-energy-wasting disputation. This case study may serve as an exemplar for complex project delivery.

Significant differences between project partnering and project alliancing occur in the selection process, management structure of the organisations undertaking the project and nature of risk and reward incentives. This paper helps clarify the nature of project alliancing and how alliance member organisations were selected for this case study. A core issue that differentiates between the two approaches is that in partnering, partners may reap rewards at the expense of other partners. In alliancing each alliance member places their profit margin and reward structure “at risk”. Thus in alliancing, the entire alliance entity either benefits together or not all. This fundamentally changes the motivation and dynamics of the relationship between alliance members.

The purpose of this paper is to explore innovation in alliance contracting in the New Zealand construction industry in terms of features (i.e. development process, risk/reward framework and leadership structure) that could influence successful project outcomes.

This study employed a qualitative research methodology. Three alliancing projects have been identified as the cases. By using interviews with the project’s owner and non-owner participants and related project documentation, the relevant features in the three examined cases were identified and compared.

The findings revealed differences in the reasoning why a particular alliance approach was implemented, how the alliance selection process was conducted and what kind of leadership structure was adopted. Interestingly, a number of unique and innovative practices to alliancing were also highlighted, notably the innovative agreements, innovative governance structure and innovative functional teams that influence the synergistically creative solutions to suit the clients’ needs.

The innovative practices identified in this study have brought the alliancing concept to a new level of practice in the industry. The findings provide a basis and a platform for discussion, both nationally and internationally, to gain greater understanding in managing different alliance contracting towards breakthrough outcomes.

This study extends the alliancing procurement literature, in particular, but also provides significant insights into innovative advancements to the collaborative procurement approaches.

In this study, we develop further understanding of how institutional change is created within a mature and local industry. In this pursuit, we examine how a collaborative large project governance model was institutionalized at an industrial sector-level through both industry-level activities and “institutional projects”.

This study builds on the foundations of institutional fields and institutional change, suggesting that projects are not only shaped by their contexts but also produce institutional change themselves. We conducted extensive fieldwork on the institutionalization of a collaborative project governance model in Finland.

The findings illustrate how institutional change in governance of large and complex inter-organizational projects is created at the institutional field level. The institutionalized collaborative project governance model includes aspects of both relational and contractual governance. The change was facilitated by temporal links between the institutional projects as well as vertical links between the institutional projects and the field-level development programs.

This is one of the first studies to address how a collaborative large project governance model becomes the norm at the institutional field level beyond the boundaries of an individual project or organization.

This paper outlines how the project agreement operating on the Australian National Museum project in Canberra, Australia facilitated a responsible and responsive workplace environment for construction workers. A project alliancing approach was adopted and designed to encourage industrial relations innovation in the workplace. The trigger for this approach was the perceived success of the alliancing working arrangements between key project delivery teams and a desire to extend this arrangement to subcontractors, suppliers and the workforce. Changes in the Australian workplace relations environment and introduction of a national code of practice for the Australian construction industry provided impetus for reaching a new type of workplace agreement. The workplace culture and characteristics of relationships formed between workers and management on that site shaped the agreed terms and conditions of work. It also spurred the pursuit of innovative approaches to project delivery from a technology, management and workplace culture perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to explore and explain the circumstances in which a highly collaborative integrated project delivery form such an alliance is the most appropriate choice of delivering infrastructure projects.

The paper draws upon two previously published studies on alliancing to enable gathering insights from a quantitative study with some qualitative data that indicates project alliance delivery performance is high and suggests why it may be adopted as a project delivery form. A second qualitative study recently completed and published on integrated collaborative forms of project delivery such as alliances is re-analysed to better understand how and why this form may be successful. Together these two studies allowed a focus on the motivation to form an alliance and specific conditions relating to the alliance party’s level of ability and willingness to deeply collaborate.

The motivation to deeply collaborate may be triggered by specific internal and external trigger mechanisms. These are identified in the paper together with discussion about the requirement of parties to have sufficient knowledge, skills, attributes and experience to collaborate at a deeply engaged level.

The data used in the studies were from large scale infrastructure construction projects. The examples are mainly drawn from countries where collaboration is common and culturally acceptable; results may not apply to cultures, country or workplace, where high levels of competition are seen to be the optimal strategy for project delivery success. Also, the data were drawn from construction project management (PM). Other project-based areas such as professional services for example may present a different context and hence a different rationale.

The study provides deep insights about the nature of collaboration. It may have wider applicability.

Project organising is a social activity with social implications for how they are delivered that affect internal as well as external stakeholders. Being mindful about the motivation to choose a particular delivery form is important.

This is a new area of research in PM and the world faces a massive demand for large scale complex projects. This paper may provide a rational to drive policy in project delivery choices.

An alliance with another company can deliver rewards in the shape of increased efficiency, value and effectiveness. But as a strategy it should be approached as a joint journey facilitated by shared goals and experiences, shared gain and shared pain.