Nicholas Marshall

Partnering in construction: a critical review of issues, problems and dilemmas

Partnering in construction has been presented as a potentially important way of improving construction project performance through the direct benefits it can bring to both clients and contractors. However, there is still considerable debate about the nature and merits of a partnering approach. This paper attempts to contribute towards this debate by exploring the presumed link between partnering and cultural change within the industry, at both organizational and interorganizational levels of analysis. To do so, it draws upon theory and research from the social sciences (especially organizational theory) to explore some of the issues, problems and dilemmas which emerge when full and proper account is taken of the complexities of organizations, as well as some of the subtleties and intricacies of the concept of organizational culture. The paper concludes that it is only by fully appreciating the effects of such complexity that a more realistic and practical approach to the development and implementation of partnering will emerge.

Building Partnerships: Case Studies of Client-Contractor Collaboration in the UK Construction Industry.

Despite the enormous groundswell of interest in partnering and alliancing in recent years, there has been comparatively little research that has set out to investigate systematically the nature, feasibility, benefits and limitations of forms of client-contractor collaboration. This is despite the growing recognition that conditions conducive to partnering may well vary considerably and that partnering may not be the solution for problems within the industry that many commentators have taken it to be. This paper sets out to add to the growing literature and empirical database on partnering by reporting the findings of a research project designed to explore the economic, organizational and technological factors that encourage or inhibit collaboration in practice. The paper follows on from an earlier review and critique of the literature on partnering (Bresnen, M. and Marshall, N. 2000, Construction Management and Economics, 18 (2) 229-237). It includes as its database nine case studies of medium-to-large-scale projects, selected from across the industry, on which processes of collaboration are examined from the viewpoints of clients, contractors, designers and subcontractors. In contrast to much of the prescriptive work in this area, the analysis of the data and the papers conclusions stress some of the practical problems, limitations and paradoxes of partnering and alliancing when the effects of important economic, organizational and psychological factors are taken into account.

Motivation, commitment and the use of incentives in partnerships and alliances

The use of incentives in partnering and alliancing has been seen as an important way of reinforcing collaboration in the short term and helping to build trust between clients and contractors in the long term. Yet only rarely has the impact of incentives on such relationships been discussed, let alone subjected to systematic investigation. This is despite a wealth of theory and research which brings into question the use of incentives and reinforcers as ways of generating motivation and commitment. Drawing upon this theoretical knowledge base and using evidence from a number of case studies of partnerships and alliances, this paper demonstrates how a number of important cognitive and social dimensions affect the use and impact of incentives, sometimes in ways contrary to those intended. The conclusion drawn is that there are important limitations to the use of incentives as means of reinforcing collaboration and developing commitment and trust, and that this raises questions more generally about the assumptions that underlie many of the practical ‘tools and techniques’ commonly associated with partnering and alliancing.

The engineering or evolution of co-operation? A tale of two partnering projects

Accounts of the development of partnering in construction often stress the importance of formal mechanisms for ‘engineering’ collaboration and underplay the impact of social dynamics on the development of the relationship. Drawing upon case study evidence from two very different partnering projects, this paper examines the ways in which the nature and quality of relationships between client and contractor depend upon a complex and dynamic interplay of formal integrative mechanisms and informal social processes. The paper draws out a number of key implications for understanding partnering in practice. First, that attributing project success (or failure) to partnering is by no means a straightforward exercise. Second, that there is no one strategy or template for effective partnering. Third, that partnering is a dynamic process, involving short-term learning and mutual adjustment. Fourth, that wider organisational structures and cultures often have an impact upon partnering relationships. Finally, that partnering does not necessarily resolve project problems at source.

Knowledge Management and the Politics of Knowledge: Illustrations from complex products and systems

While there is an increasing recognition of the social character of knowledge in segments of the literature on knowledge management, this paper argues that there has been a limited engagement with issues surrounding the politics of knowledge. There is now a well-established critique of technically-led knowledge management practices in which knowledge is treated in passive, objectivised, and static terms. A key element of this critique concerns the limits of codification strategies directed at making tacit knowledge explicit. This is founded upon an interpretative conceptualisation of inter-subjective understanding as always provisional, incomplete, and embedded in contexts of social action. While sympathetic to this position, it is argued that there is more to considering knowledge practices than the problem of understanding. Shared understanding, where participants to an interaction achieve a satisfactory interpretation of their respective positions, in no way implies mutual agreement about the validity of these positions. Drawing on insights from Habermas about models of social action and knowledge-guiding interests, we offer a series of concepts encouraging sensitivity to the relationship between knowledge, power, and interests. Aspects of the argument are then illustrated with case examples drawn from research into organisational knowledge in companies producing and using complex products and systems.

Cognitive and Practice-based Theories of Organizational Knowledge and Learning: Incompatible or Complementary?

Cognitive and practice-based approaches to organizational knowledge and learning are typically portrayed as incommensurable, with the result that there has been little positive dialogue between the two traditions. This article argues that the incompatibility of the two sets of approaches has been overstated and that there is actually much that each can learn from the other. Cognitive approaches, which have often been accused of offering an effectively individualized, static and representationalist understanding of organizational knowledge, can benefit from taking on board the practice-based view of knowledge as historically, culturally and socially situated. However, the article also suggests that practice-based theories would do well to draw insights from cognitive approaches, particularly regarding the role of cognitive frameworks or schemas in guiding knowledge processes. To provide an example of how cognitive and practice-based approaches can be integrated, the latter part of the article offers an empirical illustration of how a team of consulting engineers represent and perform alternative schemas of project work through their day-to-day practices.

From here to eternity?: The practice of knowledge transfer in dispersed and co-located project organizations

This paper extends theoretical and empirical debates on knowledge transfer practices in geographically dispersed project teams using a range of communications media. It presents quantitative data comparing work interactions between dispersed and co-located teams in five international, project-based firms. It shows that contrary to conventional wisdom, their respective practices are similar for many work activities such as search and routine information exchange. However dispersed team members validate, verify and consult differently to the respective co-located teams. Qualitative data from interviews and observation then illustrates typical interactions using the differing means and media available to the observed project teams, such as task decomposition and emergency corrective work. Due to an unfortunate oversight one of the references in this article is incomplete. It can be found here.

Making Sense of Learning Landscapes in Project-Based Organizations

Management of knowledge in project environments is a unique text that brings together contributions from leading academic practitioners, to demonstrate how the management of knowledge can lead to p ...

The mutuality of emotions and learning in organizations

The interplay between emotion and learning is a continuing source of debate and inquiry in organization studies, attracting an increasing number of important contributions. However, a detailed understanding of the interaction between emotion and learning remains elusive. In an effort to extend the existing debate, this article offers an alternative approach that draws on the tradition of pragmatist philosophy, where emotion and learning can both be defined as dynamic processes that emerge in the relational context of social transactions. The mutually constructing interplay between these two processes is then illustrated with an example of a collaborative project in which anxiety, love, guilt, and hostility are all entangled in the learning process.

Thinking, saying and doing in collaborative projects: what can we learn from theories of practice?

Reflecting the practice turn across the social sciences more generally, there has been a recent upsurge of interest in practice theories for the study of engineering, architecture, and construction and research on the management of projects. This is a welcome addition to the theorization of projects. With their emphasis on the emergent and ongoing constitution of social orders and change through situated practices, practice theories offer a potentially powerful and sensitive way of understanding the complex unfolding of project work. However, this paper argues that they also bring with them a number of assumptions that may limit their potential unless addressed. In particular, I suggest that there is an anti-cognitivism in practice theories, which means that they tend to avoid important questions about the knowledgeability of practice. In an attempt to redress the balance, this paper proposes a view of thinking, saying and doing as qualitatively different practices, the differing configurations of which h...