Search results

The purpose of this research is to explore and test conceptual issues of how communities of practice (CoPs) are a recognized means of transferring knowledge. Analysis of data, derived from reflection upon experience gained by close full‐time engagement on three complex, large‐scale engineering construction projects. Five emerging themes that help to explain how CoPs may be nurtured to increase the effectiveness of project management are revealed: creating a knowledge environment, discovering and recruiting potential members, information sharing, time for communicating, and motivation and rewards. The development of CoPs requires time and the creation of a knowledge environment. In the complex world of international construction, most projects are unique physical undertakings, have teams that have never worked together before, have a limited duration, with participants located in numerous countries. Thus, there is a natural tension between the need and the reality that requires strong cross‐cultural leadership, and special techniques, if CoPs are to be utilized. This paper practically illustrates, based on rigorous organizational literature theory largely missing from the engineering community, how CoPs can be actually nurtured and used. The metaphor used to illustrate this should resonate strongly with construction engineers and designers.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to explore an interesting complex infrastructure construction case study project in which the initiation/design and delivery phases were managed differently, with diverse assumptions and workplace culture. It uses a recently developed collaboration and relationship-based procurement taxonomy to analyse the decision to commence a project and to deliver the project. The taxonomy tool reveals underlying assumptions and helps explain actions taken. The paper provides a window into the decision-making process. It also illustrates levels of innovation applied at the design and delivery phases.

A case study was undertaken, primarily using recorded and transcribed interviews, with five key senior participants in the project. This gathered a client, designer and contractor perspective that was subsequently analysed using a sense-making approach.

It is possible to start a project adopting a highly collaborative approach that maximises innovation, understanding complexity and developing a design that can then be delivered using a more traditional approach. The taxonomy used demonstrates that it is a useful visualisation tool for this purpose.

The research was limited to the perspectives of only five individuals even though they were key decision-makers and had a robust overview of the project as a whole. The delivery phase was chosen as a matter of policy without the ability to break loose from that policy. The implications for beginning the initiation and design process in a highly collaborative hands-on mode influenced the understanding of all parties involved in the project in a positive direction. The case study was based in Australia, which has extensive experience of collaborative project delivery approaches.

The taxonomy and its ability to provide visualisation of the experienced collaboration presents a powerful tool in helping us understand how it may be useful and what limitations to collaboration exists.

The paper illustrates the value of social interactions as alliance forms tend to consider triple bottom line issues and stakeholder engagement more highly than traditional, transnational approaches to project design and delivery.

The case study was unusual in its technical complexity; however, the main value of the paper is the application of the taxonomy and visualisation tool as a way to better understand how a project is being managed from a collaboration perspective.

Construction time performance (CTP) factors recently identified in work commissioned by the Construction Industry Institute Australia (CIIA) indicate that project team effectiveness significantly influences CTP. Project complexity also was found to significantly contribute to CTP. However, no residential projects were studied in that survey. This paper reports upon CTP research undertaken into Australian multi‐unit residential construction that fills this theory gap. Results indicate that the construction management (CM) team's effectiveness in managing theconstruction process has a major but not predominant role in influencing CTP. Team communication effectiveness and teamwork factors are also essential factors influencing CTP. Other factors found to affect CTP include: design team's management style; intra‐team working relationships; the degree of experience and expertise for the same type and size of project; procurement method; and the level of the CM team's current workload.

Conclusions flowing from an investigation of the literature together with the results of two recent research studies suggest that the relationship quality between the client representative (CR), the design team and the team undertaking construction management activities is a major factor governing construction time performance (CTP). While the managerial performance of the manager of the construction team was found to be a pivotal factor, the interaction between the CR and the construction management team was found to be crucial in facilitating good CTP, i.e. achieving a fast build rate. One interesting and valuable insight gained from the research studies reviewed in the present paper suggests that selection of a CR should be based on the capacity of the CR to gain the confidence of the project team. The CR characteristics which are significantly associated with good CTP are also discussed. It is proposed that these provide useful selection guidelines for appointing the appropriate person or team to represent the client's interests within the project coalition.