Critical Review of Collaborative Working in Construction

Critical Review of Collaborative Working in Construction Projects:Business Environment and Human Behaviors

Xiaolong Xue1;Qiping Shen2;and Zhaomin Ren3

Abstract:The changing business environment characterized by tense competitiveness and wide global links requires construction organizations to establish effective and ef?cient interorganization collaborative management systems.Collaborative working?CW?,as a new term and especially as a working model,is emerging for improving performance and enhancing competitiveness by responding to the changing environment in construction.This research presents the de?nition of CW underpinned by the principle of collaboration.Through a thorough literature review of selected papers from the well-known academic journals in construction management,the business environment and human behavior are identi?ed as two key areas which impact the performance of CW in construction projects.Critical reviews on these areas are presented by focusing on different subcategories in each area to investigate the state of the art and trends of CW in construction projects.Some limits of research and practice on CW in construction projects are discussed and future research directions are recommended.

DOI:10.1061/?ASCE?ME.1943-5479.0000025

CE Database subject headings:Project management;Business management;Human factors.

Author keywords:Collaboration;Collaborative working;Construction projects;Literature review.

Introduction

The construction industry has suffered from its fragmentation along the phases of the construction project life cycle for a long time period.Construction projects typically are projects in which a large number of stakeholders,such as the owner,designer,con-sultants,main contractor,subcontractors,and suppliers,have to work together on the design and construction of a complex prod-uct that is one of a kind.Traditionally and generally,many of these stakeholders have not motivation to work together voluntar-ily.This is because the stakeholders always pursue bene?ts that maximize their own selves as rationally economic man but have little consideration for the bene?ts of others.This nature of the fragmentation of the construction industry has been seen as the critical factor that results the poor performance,low productivity, and uncompetitiveness.

With the trends of economic globalization and the rapid devel-opment of technology,the whole business environment in the construction industry has been changed.Over the years,there has been an accelerating trend toward major initiatives to improve the performance of the construction industry,such as the study of International Council for Building on“Reengineering Construc-tion,”the research of International Group for Lean Construction ?IGLC?and Lean Construction Institute on“Lean Construction ?LC?,”including“Supply Chain Management?SCM?,”and the

program of“Construction Excellence”in the U.K.construction industry.Especially,following the recommendations of Sir Michael Latham’s report?1994?“Constructing the Team”and Sir John Egan’s report?1998?“Rethinking Construction,”it is en-couraging to have seen many owners,consultants,contractors, subcontractors,and specialists changing from traditional adver-sarial relationships and discovering the bene?ts to be gained from a fully integrated way of working.Now,there has been increasing recognition that collaborative working?CW?,as one of the most important critical success factors?CSFs?for operating construc-tion projects,has become the core of new management paradigms in the construction community.

This research presents a critical literature review on CW in the process of construction projects.The aims of this review are to investigate the state of the art and trends in CW in construction and to identify key areas,such as business environment and human behavior,which could be involved in CW or impact the performance of collaboration.Limitations of current research and practice on CW and future research directions for effective,ef?-cient,and sustainable CW are discussed in the Discussion section. Conclusions are presented in the?nal section of this paper.

De?nition of CW

There have been no precise de?nitions of the term“CW”al-though it has emerged in literature and practice in recent years. The concise oxford dictionary?2001?de?nes“collaborative”as “working jointly.”Therefore,a simple de?nition of CW is the joint working or working together of project stakeholders or dif-ferent organizations to effectively and ef?ciently accomplish a

1Dept.of Construction and Real Estate,School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology,Harbin150001,China?corresponding author?.E-mail:xlxue@https://www.360docs.net/doc/a63302140.html,

2Dept.of Building and Real Estate,The Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ.,Hung Hom,Kowloon,Hong Kong,China.E-mail:bsqpshen@ https://www.360docs.net/doc/a63302140.html,.hk

3Div.of Built Environment,Faculty of Advanced Technology,Univ. of Glamorgan,Pontypridd,Wales CF371DL,U.K.E-mail:zren@glam. https://www.360docs.net/doc/a63302140.html,

Note.This manuscript was submitted on October10,2008;approved on March21,2010;published online on May6,2010.Discussion period open until March1,2011;separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers.This paper is part of the Journal of Management in Engineering,V ol.26,No.4,October1,2010.?ASCE,ISSN0742-597X/2010/4-196–208/$25.00.

product.Here,“joint working”or“working together”means that stakeholders work with others with shared goals for which the team attempts to?nd solutions that are satisfying to all concerned. Effective and ef?cient means that the goals can be achieved in the right quantities at the right place,at the right moment,and at minimal cost as compared to independent working arrangements.

The core principle underpinning CW is collaboration.?Note that cooperation is also one of the principles underpinning CW, but it is seen as a simpler concept than collaboration?Kvan 2000?.?Collaboration is a highly complex and challenging task, which can be de?ned as“the agreement among specialists to share their abilities in a particular process to achieve the larger objectives of the project as a whole”?Kalay2001?.CW covers a spectrum of ways that two or more organizations can work to-gether.Options range from informal networks,alliances,or part-nering to full integration.CW can last for a?xed length of time or can form a permanent arrangement.The National Council for V oluntary Organizations?2007?presented the following?ve forms taken by CW:

?Separate organizations maintain their independence but work jointly on some activities or functions;

?Organizations with resources or expertise offer assistance to other organizations,e.g.,a large national organization working with a small local group;

?A new organization to do joint work on some activities or functions;

?A group structure where a“parent”organization governs a group of“subsidiary”organizations;and

?Merger to form a new organization working as one body on all activities.

Collaboration has the advantages that attract organizations,for example,increased probability of winning business,faster,better, or cheaper development or delivery of products,services,or markets;in-depth learning;meeting an external requirement;and saving costs.CW cannot only share the work based on each mem-ber’s expertise but achieve a seamless information?ow among the collaborative team members?Li and Lai2005?.Collaborative advantage will be achieved when an organization accomplishes more than it would have independently by developing effective working relationships with other organizations?Lank2006?.Im-proving effectiveness of organizational operation and the need for more ef?cient use of the resources of organizations are two of the factors,which drive collaboration.

Research Methodology

Following the above de?nition of CW,this study presents a thor-ough review based on a literature survey in the well-known jour-nals of construction research to map the development of CW in construction projects.Seven well-known academic journals were chosen within the area of construction management based on two key criteria:

1.The journal is included in the popular database Science Ci-

tation Index?SCI?-Expanded database or Engineering Index ?EI?Compendex database.The SCI-Expanded,published by the Institute for Scienti?c Information,is a multidisciplinary database which indexes more than5,300major journals across164scienti?c disciplines,which has been used for evaluating academic performance of the journal.The EI Compendex database provides bibliographic citations and abstracts to over5,000engineering journals and conferences in all?elds of engineering,which is a product offered by

Elsevier Engineering Information.Elsevier Engineering In-formation is the leader in providing online information, knowledge,and support of the highest professional relevance for research and industrial practitioners in applied physical sciences and engineering.

2.The journal has an important impact and prominent position

in the research community of construction management.

Following the above selection criteria,the journals selected were the following:

?ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management ?CEM?;

?ASCE Journal of Management in Engineering?JME?;?Automation in Construction?AIC?;

?Building Research and Information?BRI?;

?Construction Management and Economics?CME?;?Engineering,Construction,and Architectural Management ?ECAM?;and

?International Journal of Project Management?IJPM?.

These journals are all included in EI Compendex database, especially CEM,AIC,JME,and BRI,which are indexed by SCI. They also have been accepted as the prominent and high-quality journals?Chau1997?and have been used to review other topics in construction management by professionals in the construction re-search area.For example,Lin and Shen?2007?,based on a key-words search in these journals,presented a critical review of measuring the performance of value management studies in con-struction;Li et al.?2000?and Chan et al.?2002,2004a?used these journals in their studies to identify the CSFs of construction projects,design/build projects,and partnering projects.

From the above journals,CW papers were searched by using keywords through title,abstract,and keywords.As enormous terms have been used to describe CW,such as cooperation,col-laboration,collaborative work,CW,alliance,partnership,partner-ing,network,coalition,consortium,teamwork,joint venture, group,community,and coordination?Lank2006?,therefore how to select the right keywords to retrieve papers is an important issue which would have a great impact upon the?nal research results.To get a compelling result,the writers?rst carried out an initial search using all of the above terms.The result shows that more than600articles were retrieved.For improving the effec-tiveness and ef?ciency of the review process,the writers quickly scanned the titles,abstracts,and keywords and found that coop-eration and collaboration were the most popular words appearing in the search results.So we planned to choose these two words as the?nal searching keywords.In addition,CW and collaborative work are also naturally used for retrieving papers,because they are the topics of this research.Here,collaborative work is seen as having the same meanings as CW,only with a different style. Finally,“collaboration,”“cooperation,”“CW,”and“collaborative work”are selected as four keywords to narrow down the number of articles related to CW in construction projects.Since all the seven journals are indexed by EI database,we used this database as the data source to be searched.The procedures for retrieving papers were as follows:

1.The titles,keywords,and abstracts were scanned with the

keywords collaboration,cooperation,CW,or collaborative work in each journal.There are180articles that contained at least one of the keywords in the default areas.

2.Abstracts were assessed to?nd out whether or not these pa-

pers really?tted with our research objectives and if not,they were declined.

3.After?ltering,94articles reporting on CW were left and

examined in greater detail,as shown in Table1.

Overview of CW in Construction Projects

In nature,CW in construction projects has emerged and been

implemented for a long period from the viewpoint of working

together.The development of CW can be seen from two view-

points:a working relationship?working model?and delivery sys-

tems?operational model?,as shown in Fig.1.

From the viewpoint of working relationship,there are various

forms of CW in construction projects,such as teamwork,partner-

ship,project alliance,joint venture,strategic alliance,coalition,

and SCM.Table2presents some samples of these CW forms

introduced by academic scholars.The central principle of these

different forms of CW is to build an integrated team or entity ?virtual or physical?to work collaboratively with a common goal. CW forms can be seen as different governance structures for per-

forming effective project management?PM?from the perspective

of economics?Bell2003?.These CW forms have been applied to

improve organizational performance and working relationships

among stakeholders in construction projects.The practical effec-

tiveness of these CW forms has been evaluated and discussed.

Compared to traditional construction management?TCM?model,

more bene?ts were obtained through applying these governance

structures?Hauck et al.2004;Pryke2004;London and Kenley

2001;Anumba et al.2003;Sillars and Kangari2004;Beach et al.

2005;Fong and Lung2007?.

From the viewpoint of delivery systems,the industry mainly

experienced three development processes:the TCM model,the

PM model,and the partnering model.TCM relies on independent

?rms brought together by competitive bids and tough contracts.

This approach provides no overall direction,reducing everyone

involved to defending their own interests.It ignores the need for

the well-developed links between workers that are the hallmark of

effective teams.PM,a project-based management approach,has been used for resolving TCM failures.Cost,time,and quality are controlled to achieve the client’s objectives in PM.Design build, engineering-procurement construction,and build-operate transfer are the three main forms of PM.However,there are many risks frequently incurred which impact the performance of PM?Shen 1997;Ibbs et al.2003;Shen and Wu2005;Wong and Hui2006?.

Figs.2and3illustrate the trends of published journal papers related to CW by year and country or region.Fig.2presents the information that research related to CW has been getting increas-ing attention since1995,especially in the past?ve years.Re-search on CW is mainly centered in U.K.,United States,Hong Kong,Australia,and Singapore,as shown in Fig.3.The research-ers in Canada,China,Taiwan,The Netherlands,and Sweden are also paying attention to CW now.

Critical Review of CW in Construction Projects

Two major areas which affect effective and ef?cient CW in con-struction projects have been identi?ed through a detailed review and analysis on the selected94papers.They are business envi-ronment and human behaviors,which are categorized from differ-ent stages and different organizational levels.The following section discusses the critical review of CW in construction projects from these two viewpoints.

Business Environment

The need to consider environmental impact on organizations is obvious and widely accepted?Chen2003?.The business environ-ment of construction projects is always characterized as having adversarial relationships,fragmented operation processes,a lack of genuine cooperation over time,and complexity?Cicmil and Marshall2005?.However,this condition is changing now with the trends of macromarket globalization and microchanges in the management of?rms.Collaborative business culture,attitudes, and strategy?working forms?in the construction industry are emerging.An overview of the state-of-the-art business environ-ment of CW is given in Table3.It can be seen that the research on the business environment of CW in construction projects mainly focuses on the construction stage and at project or orga-nizational level.This section presents a review of CW in con-struction projects from the viewpoints of business strategy and business culture.

Business Strategy

Partnering and Alliancing

Partnering and alliancing can be seen as two kind forms of busi-ness strategy in CW in construction projects from the organiza-

Table1.Overview of Journals and Selected Papers

Journal Search range Number of papers

?initial selection?

Number of papers

??nal selection?

Journal of CEM110?4?,1984–133?3?,20073122 JME2?3?,1986–23?1?,20072312 AIC1?3?,1992–16?4?,20075227 CME12?2?,1994–25?2?,2007115 BRI22?1?,1994–35?1?,2007219 IJPM12?3?,1994–25?4?,20073110 ECAM10?6?,2003–14?2?,2007119 Total180

94

Fig.1.Development of CW in construction projects

tional viewpoint.Partnering formerly was regarded as a new CW method in construction to improve the adversarial relationship between the owner and the contractor?Drexler and Larson2000; Dozzi et al.1996?.Brooke and Litwin?1997?argued that partner-ing requires the mobilization of partners and their organizations since it is a radical change from traditional practices.The de?ni-tions and concepts have been widely discussed;some examples are shown in Table1.Here this research introduces two view-points on partnering.Bresnen and Marshall?2002?draw out?ve key implications for understanding partnering in practice drawing upon case study.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 organizational structures and cultures often have an impact upon partnering re-lationships.Finally,that partnering does not necessarily resolve project problems at source.Anvuur and Kumaraswamy?2007?

Table2.Review of CW from the Viewpoint of Working Relationship

Forms of CW Concepts

Teamwork Teamwork is a kind of working model where a group of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose and hold themselves mutually accountable for its achievement works together in a coordinated and mutually

supportive way to ful?ll their goal or purpose?constructing excellence?.Teamwork involves the effective cooperation of a

group of people in activities that are directed toward a common goal.Its whole point is that the performance of the group as

a whole is better than would be the normal sum of the performances of the individuals comprising the group?Gabriel1991?.

There are two forms of teamwork:intraorganizational teamwork and interorganizational teamwork.Intraorganizational

teamwork refers to the project teams consisting of members from one organization.It focuses directly on enhancing one

organization’s effectiveness.However,interorganizational teamwork refers to the project team,which is made up of

representatives from the owner,designer,and contractor organizations that are involved together in completing project.It

focuses directly on a project’s effectiveness by addressing issues that concern owner,designer,and contractor working

relationships?Albanese1994;Fong and Lung2007?.

Partnership A partnership is a type of business entity in which partners share with each other the pro?ts or losses of the business undertaking in which all have invested.Partnership in construction refers to an entity formed by owner,designer,and/or

contractor with collaborative relationships in partnering process?Bresnen and Marshall2000;Beach et al.2005?.

Project alliance An agreement between entities which undertake to work cooperatively,on the basis of a sharing of project risk and reward, for the purpose of achieving agreed outcomes based on principles of good faith and trust?Abrahams and Cullen1998?.In

project alliancing,the hard contractual issues that affect the entities’bottom lines,such as risk allocation and remuneration,

are used.This is an obvious difference between project alliance and partnering?Hauck et al.2004?.

Joint venture A construction joint venture is a partnership of contractors who have formed a business alliance for the purpose of undertaking a project?Ashley1980?.The term joint venture is de?ned as the“commercial agreement”?Kling and Burley

1991?between two or more companies in order to allow greater ease of work and cooperation toward achieving a common

aim,through the manipulation of the appropriate resources.Joint ventures seem to offer a little more stability in what is often

a volatile and“short-term project”construction industry.They can be relatively straightforward to set up and bring to a close

without the need to form a separate legally incorporated company?Norwood and Mans?eld1999?.Joint venture is a special

form of alliance.It is a new temporary entity created as an association between an organization and a partner or partners for

the purpose of pursing and performing a project?Sillars and Kangari2004?.

Integrated PM Integrated PM aims to bridge the separated construction life-cycle stages?e.g.,inception,feasibility and strategy,design and tender,construction,commission,and client occupation?or activities?e.g.,planning,procurement,and construction?,teams

?e.g.,designers and contractors?,or information?ow?e.g.,input and output of each stage??Anumba et al.2003?.New

management concepts,principles,methodologies,and technologies have been developed such as concurrent engineering

?Anumba and Evbuomwan1997?,e-engineering platforms?Ren et al.2006?,and integrated risk management approach?del

Ca?o and de la Cruz2002?to facilitate the integration of different perspectives of construction projects.

Strategic alliance A strategic alliance is an interorganizational arrangement usually between two companies that extends beyond a speci?c project?Hauck et al.2004?.In long term,a higher standard of on-site construction processes may provide better value for

money with respect to the facility life cycle?Kwok1998?.

Coalition A coalition is an alliance among entities,during which they cooperate in joint action,each in their own self-interest.This alliance may be temporary or a matter of convenience.A coalition in economics refers to a group of companies that create a

mutual trust between each other in order for increased pro?t.Intracoalition in construction projects can be represented as a

multilayer of interdependent networks,such as contractual relationships,performance incentives,and information exchange

?Pryke2005?.Coalition can be regarded as a network of?rms working together for the purpose of a project?Pryke2004?,

especially as a network of information?ows?Winch2002?.The coalition is a de?ned as a project-related temporary

information exchange network of actor?rms governed through contractual conditions and?nancial incentives operating on a

dyadic basis between the coalition members?Pryke and Pearson2006?.

SCM SCM is the practice of a group of organizations working collaboratively in a network of interrelated processes structured to best satisfy end-customer’s needs with regard to all the members of the chain?Walsh et al.2004;Arbulu et al.2003?.

Construction SCM is the coordination of interorganizations’decision making in construction supply chain?CSC?and the

integration of key construction business processes and key members involved in CSC.It is a management philosophy that

extends traditional intraenterprise activities by bringing partners together with the common goal of optimization and

ef?ciency?Xue et al.2005?.SCM to the construction industry is a new way of working or new management approach?Green

et al.2005?.SCM is the integration of business processes?Cooper et al.1997?.Construction SCM has been widely discussed

through the IGLC Annual Conference under the general theme LC,which aims to eliminate waste and improve work?ow in

construction?London and Kenley2001?.

explained partnering within the framework of intergroup contact theory and teamwork in organizations.They argued that partner-ing has the potential to create the essential conditions for optimal intergroup contact and to reduce bias and increase cooperation among construction project workgroups and,consequently,favor-ably impact on project performance.Apart from the above ben-e?ts,partnering also has the potential to promote technological innovation in the design and construction phases ?Leiringer 2006?.

The emergence of alliancing,such as partnering,has also re-ceived a great deal of attention in the construction industry since the late 1990s ?Walker et al.2000?.Yeung et al.?2007?identi?ed the major similarities and differences between partnering and al-liancing based on a literature review.The major similarity is that they both derive results through collaborative relationship.A key difference between them is that the former runs alongside stan-dard contracts,having no contractual force itself,whereas allianc-ing arrangements are expressed in contractual form.Project alliancing and strategic alliancing are two forms of alliancing,as shown in Table 1.Here,one notes that there is a conceptual dif-ference between partnering and strategic alliance ?Anvuur and Kumaraswamy 2007?.A strategic alliance is a long-term interor-ganizational arrangement for mutual bene?t,which is based on equivalence and high complementarity ?Cox 1996;Hampson and Kwok 1997?.A joint venture is a special type of alliance often is used to form competitive organizational structures ?Sillars and Kangari 2004?.

The bene?ts of alliancing also hold researchers’interests.Al-liances between organizations are becoming an increasingly im-portant way of creating corporate competitiveness and client value.According to Doz and Hamel ?1998?,alliances provide opportunities for individuals,teams,and ?rms to gain mutual ben-e?t from sharing skills and resources,combining insights and understanding to reduce uncertainties and accelerate learning.Al-

liances play an important role in enhancing a ?rm’s competitive advantages in a global market,in determining the future growth of companies,and in improving the performance of construction ?Badger and Mulligan 1995?.Ingirige and Sexton ?2006?indi-cated that alliances in the construction industry can be used as vehicles to achieve sustainable competitive advantage.Although the volume of alliance activity is growing,the potential bene?ts of such organizational arrangements are not being realized in practice because participating ?rms are emphasizing short-term pro?t-sharing and accountancy procedures to the detriment of the more long-term and,ultimately,core value-added dimensions of knowledge creation and organizational learning ?Ingirige and Sexton 2006?.SCM

Understanding industries in terms of the concepts of chains,clus-ters,and networks is becoming increasingly important in econo-mies around the world ?London and Kenley 2001?.The supply chain is the network of organizations that are involved,through upstream and downstream linkages,in the different processes and activities that produce value in the form of products and services in the hands of the ultimate customer ?Christopher 1992?.SCM has been seen as the ?fth-generation innovation of enterprise management in manufacturing industry ?Saad et al.2002?,which is de?ned as “coordination of independent enterprises in order to improve the performance of the whole supply chain by consider-ing their individual needs ?Lau et al.2004?”and “a management activity that has to do with the coordination of logistic process being locally controlled by various independent organizations in the environment of the internationalization and globalization of markets together with an increased focus on organizations’core competence ?Schneeweiss and Zimmer 2004?.”The process of SCM is inseparable from that of lean thinking,partnering,and CW ?Green et al.2005?.It is also regarded as one of the emerging forms of CW,also known as third-generation partnering ?Bennett and Peace 2006?in the construction industry.

Although scholars repeatedly cite SCM as a means of allevi-ating industry fragmentation,SCM is less well established in con-struction with a notable diversity of views.Progress toward the implementation of any normative framework of SCM within con-struction would appear very limited ?Green et al.2005?.De?ni-tion and concept ?Green et al.2005;Xue et al.2005;Vrijhoef and Koskela 2000?,economic and industrial organizational analysis ?London and Kenley 2001?,framework of application ?Xue et al.2005?,approach for SCM ?Arbulu et al.2003?,and coordination mechanisms ?Xue et al.2007?are the main research directions of SCM in construction.However,bridging the gaps between prac-tice and theory development of SCM in construction still needs effort.The vague and uncommon understanding on the nature of SCM between partners and the lack of belief in the potentials for improving construction performance are the main limits to the effective application of SCM.Green et al.?2005?argued that the in?uence of collaborative SCM practices on the construction in-dustry at large is likely to remain small in comparison to highly consolidated sectors such as aerospace.They believe that the emergence of prime contracting and the increasing use of frame-work agreements in the construction sector potentially provide a more supportive climate for SCM than has prevailed

traditionally.

5101520251995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007

Fig.2.Papers related to CW published by

year

22

20

20

6643

2

2

21111111110

100United Kingdom

United States HongKong

Australia Singapore Canada China

Taiwan

Netherlands

Sweden

Austria

Korea,Republic Of

Malaysia South Africa

Japan

Norway Thailand Fig.3.Papers related to CW published by country or region

CSFs

The concept of“CSFs”was developed by Rockart and the Sloan School of Management with the phrase?rst used in the context of information systems and PM?Rockart1982?.He de?ned CSFs as “those few key factors absolutely necessary to reach goals.”Row-linson?1999?stated that CSFs are those fundamental issues in-herent in construction projects,which must be maintained in order for team working to take place in an ef?cient and effective manner.CSFs are vital for managers engaging in the improve-ment of their organization,as they will indicate how much progress is being made in particular areas?McCabe2001?.The research on CSF of CW in construction projects is one of the mainstream research directions.A number of authors have identi-?ed different factors they consider critical to the success of CW in construction projects from different viewpoints.Table3presents a list attempting to summarize these.

Table4shows that although there are many CSFs which are identi?ed for different forms of CW,we can summarize that col-laborative arrangement?such as approaches for collaborative problem solving,commitment,and agreement?,common value viewpoint on collaboration?such as long-term relationship,clear de?nition of responsibilities,and success are seen as the core business operation?,effective communication?such as integrated project teams,communication enhancement,and communication of con?ict resolution strategy?,trust and risk sharing,perfor-mance measurement,and early involvement of stakeholders are extracted as the six most important CSFs for successful CW in construction projects.

Table3.Business Environment of CW in Construction Projects

References Focus

Stage Level

Design Construction

Design and

construction Project Organization

Cicmil and Marshall2005Complexity and social setting Y

Yeomans et al.2006CSFs Y

Partnering(p1–p7)

Bresnen and Marshall2002p1:Implications for understanding partnering Y

Dozzi et al.1996;

Drexler and Larson2000

p2:Owner-contractor relationships Y Y

Chan et al.2004a p3:CSFs Y Y

Jefferies2006p4:CSFs for PPP Y Y

Anvuur and Kumaraswamy2007p5:Conceptual model Y Brooke and Litwin1997p6:Mobilization of partners Y Leiringer2006p7:Technological innovation Y

Alliance(a1–a6)

Ngowi and Pienaar2005a1:Trust factor Y Sillars and Kangari2004a2:Joint venture Y

Hauck et al.2004a3:Project alliancing-key elements Y

Ingirige and Sexton2006;

Badger and Mulligan1995

a4:Bene?ts Y Xu et al.2005a5:CSFs Y Yeung et al.2007a6:Hard and soft elements Y

SCM(s1–s4)

Xue et al.2005s1:De?nition and framework for coordination Y London and Kenley2001s2:Concepts of SCM in construction Y Green et al.2005s3:Issues for implementation Y Arbulu et al.2003s4:Value stream analysis Y Chan and Tse2003c1:International construction contracts Y Y Kumaraswamy et al.2005;

Rahman and Kumaraswamy2004

c2:RC factors facilitating RC Y

Phua and Rowlinson2003; Kwan and Ofori2001c3:Effect of cultural differences

?Chinese culture?

Y

Chinowsky et al.2007c4:Learning organization culture Y

KM(k1and k2)

Carrillo and Chinowsky2006; Maqsood et al.2007k1:Knowledge sharing and to pull

to deliver innovation

Y

Teerajetgul and Charoenngam2006k2:Factors inducing knowledge creation Y

Organizational Culture

General Effects of Culture

The impact of culture on project performance is becoming an increasingly important topic as both of these are important factors in?uencing the establishment of a sound alliancing approach to projects?Phua and Rowlinson2003?.Loosemore?1999?stated that“a culture of a society is its shared values,understandings, assumptions,and goals learned from earlier generations.It results in common attitudes,codes of conduct,and expectations that guide behavior.”Organizational culture is“a pattern of basic assumptions—invented,discovered,or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration—that has worked well enough to be con-sidered valid and,therefore,to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive,think,and feel in relation to those prob-lems”?Schein1985?.Ravasi and Schultz?2006?de?ned organi-zational culture as a set of shared mental assumptions that guide interpretation and action in organizations by de?ning appropriate behavior for various situations.An organization’s culture is the set of shared ideas and values that serve as a means to accomplish something?Stock et al.2007?.Prevailing research claims that strong organizational cultures improve a?rm’s performance by facilitating internal behavioral consistency?Li et al.2001;S?-rensen2002?.The organizational culture is also a strong in?uence on the demise of itself?Brown and Starkey1994?.

Within the trends of globalization and business integration, culture issues of the construction organizations have been dis-cussed,although there is relatively little formal analysis?Chan and Tse2003?.Cultural issues are expected to contribute to con-

Table4.CSFs of CW in Construction Projects

Reference CSF Forms of CW

Yeomans et al.2006Early involvement of all project stakeholders CW

Selection by value

Development of common processes and tools

Performance measurement?benchmarking?

Long-term relationships

Supporting collaborative arrangements

Open book accounting

Integrated project teams

Hauck et al.2004High-performance teams Project alliancing

Optimization and performance measurements

Communication enhancement

Incentives and risk sharing

Approaches for problem solving and decision making

Chan et al.2004b Establishment and communication of con?ict resolution strategy Partnering

Commitment to win-win attitude

Regular monitoring of partnering process

Clear de?nition of responsibilities

Mutual trust

Willingness to eliminate nonvalue added activities

Early implementation of partnering process

Willingness to share resources among project participants

Ability to generate innovative ideas

Subcontractor involvement

Xu et al.2005Mutual trust Strategic alliances

Synergistic strengths and complementarities

Market demand for services

Flexibility for both parties

Minimum change of top managers

Yeung et al.2007Formal contract Alliancing

Real gain-share arrangement

Real pain-share arrangement

Trust

Long-term commitment

Cooperation and communication

Jefferies2006Government manages bidding risk PPP

Agreement is a very streamline approval and negotiation process

Success is seen as the core business operation

Having a streamline?nance process with reasonable participant

Equity

Sharing risk

?icts among the parties to an international project and increase dif?culties in the management of the project?Fellow and Han-cock1994?.Chan and Tse?2003?argued that cultural differences can do substantial damage to the organization of an international construction project.They conclude that a better understanding of in?uential cultural factors will help to reduce and manage con-?icts in international construction projects.Recognizing and sen-sibly manipulating cultural differences could allow improvements in the ef?ciency and pro?tability of international projects.Kwan and Ofori?2001?examined the in?uences of Chinese culture on partnering in Singapore’s construction industry and suggested that Chinese contractors should apply the elements of their culture to facilitate partnering https://www.360docs.net/doc/a63302140.html,ing social identity theory, Phua and Rowlinson?2003?advanced a framework for analyzing the cooperative behavior of project participants based on their cultural orientation.Strong organizational cultures facilitate reli-able performance in relatively stable environments,but as vola-tility increases,these bene?ts are dramatically attenuated.Strong-culture?rms excel at exploiting established competencies but have dif?culty exploring and discovering new competencies that better suit changing environmental conditions?S?rensen2002?. RC

Adopting CW,such as partnering and alliancing,in construction projects calls for radical culture changes to reduce adversarial con?icts.The theoretical basis for such an approach can be

tracked back to the relational contracting?RC?principle?Alsagoff

and McDermott1994?.RC de?nes the working relationship

among the parties who do not always follow the legal mechanism

offered by the written contracts.RC is based on the recognition of

mutual bene?ts and win-win scenarios through more cooperative

relationships between the parties?Rahman and Kumaraswamy

2004?.According to these RC principles,parties do not strictly

adhere to the legal mechanisms provided in speci?c contracts but

instead operate from a dynamic standpoint within a collective

framework of contractual,economic,and behavioral forces ?Macaulay1963?.“If such RC principles are translated into prac-tices that are made almost mandatory in contracting and selection

procedures,all potential project patterns will be forced to key into

the new culture in order to obtain new work”?Rahman and Ku-

maraswamy2004?.They believed that the next generation of the

construction industry can then be expected to be horizontally and

vertically integrated in RC-oriented virtual organizations to pro-

vide effective and ef?cient services to enlightened clients.Kuma-

raswamy et al.?2005?identi?ed six facilitators and seven

impediments to RC,which provide pointers to building relation-

ally integrated teams to boost performance to much higher levels,

as shown in Table5.They perceived that trust should be at the

core of RC approaches to construction procurement but also saw

that the current level of trust is low.

Organization Learning and KM

Organizational cultures and organizational learning are closely

related,which can be seen as the product of histories of organi-

zational learning?S?rensen2002?.The transformation of organi-

zations from production-oriented organizations to proactive

learning organizations that continuously leverage the knowledge

of the workforce is a primary objective of management research-

ers.Chinowsky et al.?2007?developed a maturity model together

with the Construction Industry Institute that provides construction

organizations with a framework for developing a learning organi-zation culture.The maturity model focuses on learning organiza-tion characteristics of leadership,processes and infrastructure, communication/collaboration,education and culture at the orga-nization,community,and individual levels.

A learning organization is skilled at creating,acquiring,shar-ing,and applying knowledge?Chinowsky et al.2007?.That is to say knowledge management?KM?plays important role in the process of organizational learning or creating a learning organi-zation.KM seeks to formalize the manner in which companies exploit their knowledge assets by harnessing organizational knowledge,promoting greater collaboration between groups with similar interests,and capturing and using lessons learned on pre-vious projects?Carrillo and Chinowsky2006?.KM has been sold as a tool to improve performance with many academics and prac-titioners advocating the business bene?ts of KM including rev-enue growth,shorter design and production times,customer and staff satisfaction,and market leadership?Mertins et al.2001?. Maqsood et al.?2007?also found that innovation could be facili-tated through KM.

Teerajetgul and Charoenngam?2006?presented four knowledge-creation processes:socialization,externalization, combination,and internalization.They argued that incentives,in-formation technology?IT?,and individual competencies are three knowledge factors affecting the knowledge-creation process.By undertaking a case study in the construction industry,Ingirige and Sexton?2006?demonstrated the value of leveraging shared knowledge in achieving sustainable competitive advantage.In the knowledge era and changing business environment,KM and or-ganization learning have become the CSFs for successful CW in construction projects.

Human Behaviors

Despite the contribution of behavior analysis to CW in construc-tion projects remaining relatively small,there are increasing in-Table5.Factors In?uencing RC?Adapted from Kumaraswamy et al. 2005?

Factors

Facilitating

RC

Impeding

RC Top management and client’s support

for RC approaches

Y

Alignment of various team objectives Y

Trust,open communication,and

teamworking culture

Y

Clearly de?ned and equitable risk

allocation

Y

RC experience and adequate resources Y

Flexible contracts Y Unenthusiastic participation in RC

approaches

Y

Inappropriate contract strategy and project

planning

Y Inappropriate risk allocation Y Exclusion of major subcontractors and

suppliers in the risk reward plan

Y

Persisting adversarial cultures of

contracting parties

Y Lack of top management commitment Y Incompatible personalities and corporate

cultures

Y

terests in this area.Increasingly,researchers argue that to study

the attitudes and behaviors of individuals involved in the project

environment is a relevant and important area of research?Phua

and Rowlinson2003;Cheung et al.2003?.There are many be-

havioral factors which are discussed and identi?ed in CW in

construction projects,such as trust,concern for relationship,in-

centive,con?ict,tension,etc.,as shown in Table6?Cheung et al.

2003;Wong et al.2005;Diallo and Thuillier2005;Leung et al.

2004?.

Trust is one of the popular factors that are widely discussed by

the researchers.It is also the success factor for CW accepted by

researchers,as shown in Table5.Trust is a multilevel phenom-

enon that exists at the personal,organizational,interorganiza-

tional,and even international levels.At the inter?rm level,

researchers believe that trust is a key element in cooperative re-

lationships.It is effective in lessening concerns about opportunis-

tic behavior,better integrating the partners,and reducing formal

contracting?Das and Teng2001?.Cheung et al.?2003?regarded

trust as the pivotal attitudinal factor.They argued that trust build-

ing is an indispensable exercise of the partnering arrangement.

From the opposite viewpoint,they also identify the main sources

of mistrust in construction,including incompetence,failure of

integrity,and unworthy information.Smyth and Edkins?2007?

used trust and con?dence as measures of relationship conditions

in PFI/PPP projects,which will foster CW that goes beyond re-

active behavioral adjustment to new procurement conditions,con-

ceptually a shift from RC to proactive relationship management

principles.

Diallo and Thuillier?2005?con?rmed that trust and communi-

cation between partners are proxy variables.Project success is

strongly linked to communication and cooperation between stake-

holders.Trust between the task manager and the coordinator in

projects is the key success factor.Rahman and Kumaraswamy ?2005?also con?rmed that trust and business-ethics-related fac-tors are more helpful for CW arrangements than other factors.

Wong et al.?2005?identi?ed two critical trust factors for two

groups of construction partners:performance and permeability.

Performance describes the partner’s competence and problem-

solving ability as perceived by their counterpart.Permeability re-

?ects the partner’s openness in sharing information.Their

research suggests that the contractor is in a position to initiate trust through competent performance and maintaining effective communication with the client.

Vaaland?2004?explored how collaboration between clients and major contractors can be improved in situations where ten-sion is challenging a relationship’s continuation.He suggested that a“tense”relationship can be improved or restored by focus-ing on perceptual differences related to issues of con?ict.For improvement,the parties must adopt a more relaxed view about the role of con?ict,recognizing it as a natural and even a valuable ingredient in any well-developed relationship.

Con?ict behaviors are present on all construction projects. Con?icts are caused by the size and duration of the project,the complexity of the contract documents,changed conditions,poor communication,limited resources,?nancial issues,inadequate de-sign,and labor issues?Harmon2003?.Harmon?2003?proposes an intervention process,a combination of partnership and media-tion,to prevent and resolve dispute prior to contract closeout.On the other hand,con?icts also provide an opportunity for project participants to think through ideas,produce higher-quality solu-tions,deliver better performance,and improve organizational ef-fectiveness?Hoffman1959;Rahim and Bonoma1979?.Leung et al.?2004?found that con?ict,cooperation/participation,and com-mitment are strongly correlated to direct participant satisfaction. They argued that high commitment attenuates the negative effects of a dif?cult situation?high task and team con?ict?on participant satisfaction.

Apart from the above behaviors,appropriate incentives within construction projects can contribute to effective project gover-nance?Pryke and Pearson2006?.Pryke?2004,2005?proposed a social network analysis approach to explore?nancial incentives in project coalition through case studies in different contracting arrangements.In general,research on human behaviors’effects on the performance of CW in construction projects has become an emergent direction with signi?cant academic and practical values. Discussion

The changing business environment characterized by intense competitiveness and wide global links requires construction orga-

Table6.Human Behaviors in CW in Construction Projects

References Focus

Stage Level

Design Construction

Design and

construction Project Organization

Wong et al.2005Critical trust factors Y Kumaraswamy et al.2005Approach to promoting trust Y Rahman and Kumaraswamy2005CW arrangements Y Diallo and Thuillier2005Communication and trust Y Cheung et al.2003Trust and mistrust Y Pryke and Pearson2006Financial incentive within

project coalition

Y Y

Heerwagen et al.2004Collaborative work environments’

interaction between physical workplace

and human behavior

Y

Harmon2003;Vaaland2004Tension and con?ict Y Leung et al.2004Behavioral management mechanism Y

Smyth and Edkins2007Relationship management in PPP trust

and con?dence as measures

Y

nizations to establish effective and ef?cient organization manage-ment systems to support their survival.CW has been regarded as the CSF for a?rm’s survival and performance improvement when responding to the changing environment and solving fragmented issues in construction.

Business environment and human behaviors play important roles for effective CW in construction projects.The business en-vironment of construction is always characterized as having ad-versarial relationship and fragmented operation processes. However,this condition is changing now with the trends of mac-romarket globalization and microchanges to the management of a ?rm.Collaborative business culture and strategy?forms of CW?in the construction industry are emerging.Partnering,alliancing, and SCM are regarded as three business strategies adopted for CW in construction management practice.These business strate-gies now are accepted as one kind of effort to establish collabo-rative relationship and improve performance.One important note is that although SCM as a new generation innovative management model has attracted many scholars’interests,the best practice of applying SCM in construction lacks the validation of a case study. Additionally,CSF for different forms of CW is one of the main research topics over the past years.This research summarizes the six top CSFs:collaborative arrangement,common values view-point on collaboration,effective communication,trust,perfor-mance measurement,and the early involvement of stakeholders, which have been investigated and accepted by https://www.360docs.net/doc/a63302140.html,ani-zational culture is also regarded as one critical aspect effecting CW in construction projects.Strong organizational cultures can effectively improve a?rm’s performance by facilitating internal behavioral consistency.Better understanding of in?uential cul-tural factors will help to reduce and manage con?icts in construc-tion projects.RC is the theoretical basis of the radical culture changes,partnering and alliancing,to reduce adversarial con?icts in construction projects.The next generation of the construction industry can then be expected to be horizontally and vertically integrated in RC-oriented virtual organizations to provide effec-tive and ef?cient services to enlightened clients.Establishing learning organization and carrying out KM strategy are two main changes in business culture,which provide the opportunity to enhance a?rm’s competitiveness and sustainability.

Human behaviors have direct in?uences on successful CW in construction projects.Behavior analysis and research has become an important research methodology to investigate ways to im-prove collaborative performance.Trust,incentive,con?ict,and tension are identi?ed as the main behavioral factors affecting CW in construction projects.Especially,trust has been founded as having the most signi?cant in?uence on effective CW,which is not only as the main factor of behaviors but also as the CSF for a collaborative business strategy.

Although many efforts have been made to enable effective CW,there are some limitations on the research and practice on CW in construction projects,which include the following:?Lack of a systemic theoretical framework for CW in construc-tion projects.Since there is no clear de?nition of CW and there has been a relatively short time since the term’s emergence,a systemic theoretical analysis has not taken place.Hence,the principles underpinning CW have not been clearly identi?ed.?Lack of integrated research on CW in construction projects.

Construction projects involve multiprinciples and multistages over a long time period.Hence,it is very dif?cult to do a thorough research within one person or one professional group over the life-cycle period.However,only considering one as-pect,such as technology or business environment or human

behavior,is insuf?cient to provide effective solutions for CW in construction projects.It is a real challenge to integrate tech-nology,environment,and human into a system framework to investigate effective theoretical and practical solutions for CW in construction projects.

?Research on interorganizational management,organization culture,and human behaviors need greater efforts.Research on these themes still focuses on the beginning stage and cannot meet demands and changes of practice.Bene?ts’con-?icts,environmental uncertainty,behavioral complexity,and cultural diversity are the main factors which result in the com-plexity of CW and furthermore set up some barriers to re-search interests.

?Lack of an effective framework for measuring the performance of CW in construction projects.Effectiveness and ef?ciency are the?nal pursuing goals of CW.Measurement of the effec-tiveness and ef?ciency of CW can provide ways to monitor the operational performance of a CW management system.How-ever,although past research identi?ed many valuable CSFs for CW,little research has investigated the performance indicators and measuring approaches for CW in construction projects.

Summarizing the above,the writers believe that the following research directions could be valuable and signi?cant to academic and practical applications:

?To establish a theoretical framework underpinning CW in con-struction projects from the viewpoints of technology,environ-ment,and behaviors.

?To form an integrated research network which includes differ-ent participants in different stages of the project life cycle and to develop a systematic research program for effective and ef?cient CW in construction.

?To investigate indicators and approaches for measuring CW performance in construction projects,including steps toward practical application of CW.

?To discover in-depth and internal behavioral factors which hide in a person’s nature and maybe results in some external behaviors,such as trust and con?ict.For example,to investi-gate effects of a human’s altruistic behavior and reciprocity on collaboration.The theory of economics of reciprocity and al-truism is emerging,in economic areas,which provides effec-tive tools to analyze the human nature of cooperation.

?To investigate appropriate collaborative contracts or arrange-ments,for example,collaboration-oriented RC.Collaborative arrangements are the foundation of collaboration relationships since a?rm is an economic rational man and pursuing the maximization of bene?ts as its goal.Therefore,appropriate collaborative contracts or arrangements provide a probable guarantee of effective collaboration.

?How to establish a collaborative organizational culture?Cul-ture plays important roles to enhance sustainable competitive-ness of organization in the modern business environment,for example,how to form a learning organization or learning team or group and how to establish a knowledge sharing culture among stakeholders in the CW process.

Conclusions

This research de?nes CW in construction projects as“joint work-ing or working together of project stakeholders to effectively and ef?ciently accomplish a construction product.”The aim of CW is to develop effectively CW relationships with other construction organizations.Our de?nition of CW provides an underpinning

principle to carry out a literature review.Two related areas to enable effective CW in construction projects—business environ-ment and human behaviors—have been identi?ed through the re-view of the94selected papers.

Business environment is categorized into business strategies and organizational culture in this research.Business strategy plays an important role in pursuing collaborative relationship and improving performance,which has been surveyed from three sub-areas,partnering and alliancing,SCM,and https://www.360docs.net/doc/a63302140.html,anizational culture has signi?cant impacts on construction performance, which has been analyzed from three subareas,general effects of culture,RC,and organization learning and KM.Human behavior research is another important area of research on CW in construc-tion projects.We identi?ed trust,tension,con?ict,and incentive as four main human behaviors that affect the performance of CW in construction projects.Trust,specially,has been accepted as the most signi?cant factor that effects on effective CW.

Although many efforts have been made to explore effective CW in construction projects,we can still identify some limits of current research,such as lack of a systematic theoretical frame-work,lack of integrated research,lack of research on the impacts of interorganizational culture and behaviors,and lack of an effec-tive framework for measuring the performance of CW.Six re-search topics have been suggested aiming to bridge current gap between theoretical research and practical applications of CW. This research presents an in-depth review of94papers published in seven well-known construction management journals to ana-lyze the state of the art and trends of CW in construction projects; however,some relevant literatures may not be included,such as the papers published in the Project Management Journal,as the scope of this research is limited to the construction industry.Ex-ploring applications and research on CW in other industries is also an interesting topic in future research.This paper has not touched more practice issues of CW in the industry since the goal of this research is to provide valuable information of the state of the art and trends of CW in construction projects through litera-ture analysis.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China?NNSFC??Grant No.70801023?and the foundation under Grant No.htcsr06t05from the National Center of Technology,Policy and Management,Harbin Institute of Tech-nology.The work described in this paper was also funded by the Development Program for Outstanding Young Teachers in the Harbin Institute of Technology?Grant No.HITQNJS.2007.027?, the Postdoctoral Foundation of the Harbin Institute of Technol-ogy,The Hong Kong Polytechnic University?Grant No. 1-ZV1V?,and the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region,China?Grant No.PolyU5264/ 06E?.

References

Abrahams,A.,and Cullen,A.?1998?.“Project alliances in the construc-tion industry.”Australian Construction Law Newsletter,62,31–36. Albanese,R.?1994?.“Team-building process:Key to better project re-sults.”J.Manage.Eng.,10?6?,36–44.

Alsagoff,S.A.,and McDermott,P.?1994?.“Relational contracting:A prognosis for the UK construction industry?”Proc.,CIB W92-

Procurement Systems-East Meets West,S.Rowlinson,ed.,Univ.of Hong Kong,Hong Kong,11–19.

Anumba,C.J.,and Evbuomwan,N.F.O.?1997?.“Concurrent engineer-ing in design/build projects.”Constr.Manage.Econom.,15,271–281. Anumba,C.J.,Ren,Z.,Ugwu,O.O.,Thorpe,A.,and Newnham,L.

?2003?.“Negotiation within a multi-agent system for the collaborative design of light industrial buildings.”Adv.Eng.Software,34?7?,389–401.

Anvuur,A.M.,and Kumaraswamy,M.M.?2007?.“Conceptual model of partnering and alliancing.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,133?3?,225–234. Arbulu,R.J.,Tommelein,I.D.,Walsh,K.D.,and Hershauer,J.C.

?2003?.“Value stream analysis of a re-engineered construction supply chain.”Build.Res.Inf.,31?2?,161–171.

Ashley,D.B.?1980?.“Construction joint ventures.”J.Constr.Div., 106?3?,267–280.

Badger,W.W.,and Mulligan,D.E.?1995?.“Rationale and bene?ts as-sociated with international alliances.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage., 121?1?,100–111.

Beach,R.,Webster,M.and Campbell,K.M.?2005?.“An evaluation of partnership development in the construction industry.”Int.J.Proj.

Manage.,23?8?,611–621.

Bell,S.?2003?.Economic governance and institutional dynamics,Oxford University Press,Melbourne,Australia.

Bennett,J.,and Peace,S.?2006?.Partnering in the construction industry: Code of practice for strategic collaborative working,Butterworth-Heinemann,Amsterdam/Elsevier,Amsterdam.

Bresnen,M.,and Marshall,N.?2000?.“Building partnerships:Case stud-ies of client-contractor collaboration in the UK construction industry.”

Constr.Manage.Econom.,18,819–832.

Bresnen,M.,and Marshall,N.?2002?.“The engineering or evolution of cooperation?A tale of two partnering projects.”Int.J.Proj.Manage., 20?7?,497–505.

Brooke,K.L.,and Litwin,G.H.?1997?.“Mobilizing the partnering process.”J.Manage.Eng.,13?4?,42–48.

Brown,A.D.,and Starkey,K.?1994?.“The effect of organizational cul-ture on communication and information.”J.Manage.Stud.(Oxford), 31?6?,807–828.

Carrillo,P.,and Chinowsky,P.?2006?.“Exploiting knowledge manage-ment:The engineering and construction perspective.”J.Manage.

Eng.,22?1?,2–10.

Chan,A.P.C.,Chan,D.W.M.,Chiang,Y.H.,Tang,B.S.,Chan,E.H.

W.,and Ho,K.S.K.?2004a?.“Exploring critical success factors for partnering in construction projects.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,130?2?, 188–198.

Chan,A.P.C.,Scott,D.,and Chan,A.P.L.?2004b?.“Factors affecting the success of a construction project.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage., 130?1?,153–155.

Chan,A.P.C.,Scott,D.,and Lam,E.W.M.?2002?.“Framework of success criteria for design/build projects.”J.Manage.Eng.,18?3?, 120–128.

Chan,E.H.W.,and Tse,R.Y.C.?2003?.“Cultural considerations in international construction contracts.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage., 129?4?,375–381.

Chen,C.J.?2003?.“The effects of environment and partner characteris-tics on the choice of alliance forms.”Int.J.Proj.Manage.,21?2?, 115–124.

Cheung,S.O.,Ng,T.S.T.,Wong,S.P.,and Suen,H.C.H.?2003?.

“Behavioral aspects in construction partnering.”Int.J.Proj.Manage., 21?5?,333–343.

Chinowsky,P.,Molenaar,K.,and Realph,A.?2007?.“Learning organi-zations in construction.”J.Manage.Eng.,23?1?,27–34. Christopher,M.?1992?.Logistics and supply chain management strate-gies for reducing costs and improving services,Pitman,London. Cicmil,S.,and Marshall,D.?2005?.“Insights into collaboration at the project level:Complexity,social interaction and procurement mecha-nisms.”Build.Res.Inf.,33?6?,523–535.

The concise Oxford dictionary.?2001?.9th Ed.?CD-ROM?,Oxford Uni-versity Press,New York.

Cooper,M.C.,Lambert,M.,and Pagh,J.D.?1997?.“Supply chain management:More than a new name for logistics.”Int.J.Logistics Manage.,8?1?,1–13.

Cox, A.?1996?.“Relational competence and strategic procurement management:Towards an entrepreneurial and contractual theory of the?rm.”European J.Purchasing Supply and Management,2?1?, 57–70.

Das,T.K.,and Teng,B.S.?2001?.“Trust,control,and risk in strategic alliances:An integrated framework.”Organ.Stud.,22?2?,251–283. del Ca?o,A.,and de la Cruz,M.P.?2002?.“Integrated methodology for project risk management.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,128?6?,473–485. Diallo,A.,and Thuillier,D.?2005?.“The success of international devel-opment projects,trust and communication:An African perspective.”

Int.J.Proj.Manage.,23?3?,237–252.

Doz,Y.,and Hamel,G.?1998?.Alliance advantage:The art of creating value through partnering,HBS Press,Boston.

Dozzi,P.,Hartman,F.,Tidsbury,N.,and Ashra?,R.?1996?.“More stable owner-contractor relationships.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,122?1?,30–

35.

Drexler,Jr.,J.A.,and Larson,E.W.?2000?.“Partnering:Why project owner-contractor relationships change.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage., 126?4?,293–297.

Fellow,R.F.,and Hancock,R.?1994?.“Con?ict resulting from cultural differentiation:An investigation of the new engineering contract.”

Council of International Construction Research and Documentation Proc.,Construction Con?ict:Management and Resolution,CIB,Rot-terdam,The Netherlands,259–267.

Fong,P.S.W.,and Lung,B.W.C.?2007?.“Interorganizational teamwork in the construction industry.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,133?2?,157–168.

Gabriel,E.?1991?.“Teamwork—Fact and?ction.”Int.J.Proj.Manage., 9?4?,195–198.

Green,S.D.,Fernie,S.,and Weller,S.?2005?.“Making sense of supply chain management:A comparative study of aerospace and construc-tion.”Constr.Manage.Econom.,23?6?,579–593.

Hampson,K.D.,and Kwok,T.?1997?.“Strategic alliances in building construction:A tender evaluation tool for the public sector.”J.Constr.

Procure.,3?1?,28–41.

Harmon,K.M.J.?2003?.“Con?icts between owner and contractors: Proposed intervention process.”J.Manage.Eng.,19?3?,121–125. Hauck,A.J.,Walker,D.H.T.,Hampson,K.D.,and Peters,R.J.?2004?.

“Project alliancing at national museum of Australia—Collaborative process.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,130?1?,143–152. Heerwagen,J.H.,Kampschroer,K.,Powell,K.M.,and Loftness,V.

?2004?.“Collaborative knowledge work environments.”Build.Res.

Inf.,32?6?,510–528.

Hoffman,R.L.?1959?.“Homogeneity of member personality and its effect on group problem-solving.”J.Abnorm.Soc.Psychol.,58,27–

32.

Ibbs,C.W.,Kwak,Y.H.,Ng,T.,and Odabasi,A.M.?2003?.“Project delivery systems and project change:Quantitative analysis.”J.Constr.

Eng.Manage.,129?4?,382–387.

Ingirige,B.,and Sexton,M.?2006?.“Alliances in construction:Inves-tigating initiatives and barriers for long-term collaboration.”Eng., Constr.,Archit.Manage.,13?5?,521–535.

Jefferies,M.?2006?.“Critical success factors of public private sector partnerships:A case study of the Sydney SuperDome.”Eng.,Constr., Archit.Manage.,13?5?,451–462.

Kalay,Y.E..?2001?.“Enhancing multi-disciplinary collaboration through semantically rich representation.”Autom.Constr.,10?6?,741–755. Kling,E.,and Burley,S.?1991?.“Joint ventures in Europe.”European community joint ventures,Chap.1,Butterworths,1. Kumaraswamy,M.M.,Rahman,M.M.,Ling,F.Y.Y.,and Phng,S.T.

?2005?.“Reconstructing cultures for relational contracting.”J.Constr.

Eng.Manage.,131?10?,1065–1075.

Kvan,T.?2000?.“Collaborative design:What is it?”Autom.Constr.,9, 409–415.

Kwan,A.Y.,and Ofori,G.?2001?.“Chinese culture and successful

implementation of partnering in Singapore’s construction industry.”

Constr.Manage.Econom.,19?6?,619–632.

Kwok,T.?1998?.“Strategic alliances in construction:A study of contract-ing relationships and competitive advantage in public sector building works.”Ph.D.dissertation,Queensland Univ.of Technology,Bris-bane,Australia.

Lank,E.?2006?.Collaborative advantage:How do organizations win by working together,Palgrave Macmillan,London,5–23.

Lau,J.S.K.,Huang,G.Q.,and Mak,K.L.?2004?.“Impact of informa-tion sharing on inventory replenishment in divergent supply chains.”

Int.J.Prod.Res.,42?5?,919–941.

Leiringer,R.?2006?.“Technological innovation in PPPs:Incentives,op-portunities and actions.”Constr.Manage.Econom.,24?3?,301–308. Leung,M.Y.,Ng,S.T.,and Cheung,S.O.?2004?.“Measuring construc-tion project participant satisfaction.”Constr.Manage.Econom., 22?3?,319–331.

Li,E.Y.,and Lai,H.?2005?.“Collaborative work and knowledge man-agement in electronic business.”Decision Support Sys.,39?4?,545–547.

Li,H.,Cheng,E.W.L.,and Love,P.E.D.?2000?.“Partnering research in construction.”Eng.,Constr.,Archit.Manage.,7?1?,76–99.

Li,J.,Lam,K.,and Qian,G.M.?2001?.“Does culture affect behavior and performance of?rms?The case of joint ventures in China.”J.Int.

Business Stud.,32?1?,115–131.

Lin,G.B.,and Shen,Q.P.?2007?.“Measuring the performance of value management studies in construction:Critical review.”J.Manage.

Eng.,23?1?,2–9.

London,K.A.,and Kenley,R.?2001?.“An industrial organization eco-nomic supply chain approach for the construction industry:A review.”

Constr.Manage.Econom.,19?8?,777–788.

Loosemore,M.?1999?.“International construction management research-cultural sensitivity in methodological design.”Constr.Manage.

Econom.,17?5?,553–561.

Macaulay,S.?1963?.“Non-contractual relations in business:A prelimi-nary study.”Am.Sociol.Rev.,28?1?,55–67.

Maqsood,T.,Walker,D.H.T.,and Finegan,A.D.?2007?.“Facilitating knowledge pull to deliver innovation through knowledge manage-ment:A case study.”Eng.,Constr.,Archit.Manage.,14?1?,94–109. McCabe,S.?2001?.Benchmarking in construction,Blackwell Science, Oxford,U.K.

Mertins,K.,Hesig,P.,and V orbeck,J.?2001?.Knowledge management: Best practices in Europe,Springer,Berlin.

The National Council for V oluntary Organizations.?2007?.An intro-duction to collaborative working,?https://www.360docs.net/doc/a63302140.html,/ collaborativeworkingunit/??Apr.25,2007?.

Ngowi,A.B.,and Pienaar,E.?2005?.“Trust factor in construction alli-ances.”Build.Res.Inf.,33?3?,267–278.

Norwood,S.R.,and Mans?eld,N.R.?1999?.“Joint venture issues con-cerning European and Asian construction markets of the1990s”Int.J.

Proj.Manage.,17?2?,89–93.

Phua,F.T.T.,and Rowlinson,S.?2003?.“Cultural differences as an explanatory variable for adversarial attitudes in the construction in-dustry:The case of Hong Kong.”Constr.Manage.Econom.,21?7?, 777–785.

Pryke,S.,and Pearson,S.?2006?.“Project governance:Case studies on ?nancial incentives.”Build.Res.Inf.,34?6?,534–545.

Pryke,S.D.?2004?.“Analysing construction project coalitions:Explor-ing the application of social network analysis.”Constr.Manage.

Econom.,22?8?,787–797.

Pryke,S.D.?2005?.“Towards a social network theory of project gover-nance.”Constr.Manage.Econom.,23?9?,927–939.

Rahim,A.,and Bonoma,T.V.?1979?.“Managing organizational con?ict:

A model for diagnosis and intervention.”Psychol.Rep.,44,1323–

1344.

Rahman,M.M.,and Kumaraswamy,M.M.?2004?.“Contracting rela-tionship trends and transitions.”J.Manage.Eng.,20?4?,147–161. Rahman,M.M.,and Kumaraswamy,M.M.?2005?.“Relational selection for collaborative working arrangements.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage., 131?10?,1087–1098.

Ravasi,D.,and Schultz,M.?2006?.“Responding to organizational iden-tity threats:Exploring the role of organizational culture.”Acad.Man-age J.,49?3?,433–458.

Ren,Z.,Anumba,C.J.,Hassan,T.M.,Augenbroe,G.,and Mangini,M.

?2006?.“Collaborative project planning:A novel approach through an e-engineering hub—A case study of seismic risk analysis.”Comput Ind.,57?3?,218–230.

Rockart,J.F.?1982?.“The changing role of the information systems executive:A critical success factors perspective.”Sloan Manage.Rev., 24?1?,3–13.

Rowlinson,S.?1999?.“Selection criteria.”Procurement systems:A guide to best practice,S.Rowlinson and P.McDermott,eds.,E&FN Spon, London,276–299.

Saad,M.,Jones,M.,and James,P.?2002?.“A review of the progress towards the adoption of supply chain management?SCM?relation-ships in construction.”European J.Purchasing&Supply Chain,8?3?, 173–183.

Schein,E.H.?1985?.Organizational culture and leadership,Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Schneeweiss, C.,and Zimmer,K.?2004?.“Hierarchical coordination mechanisms within the supply chain.”Eur.J.Oper.Res.,153,687–703.

Shen,L.Y.?1997?.“Project risk management in Hong Kong.”Int.J.

Proj.Manage.,15?2?,101–105.

Shen,L.Y.,and Wu,Y.Z.?2005?.“Risk concession model for build/ operate/transfer contract projects.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,131?2?, 211–220.

Sillars,D.N.,and Kangari,R.?2004?.“Predicting organizational success within a project-based joint venture alliance.”J.Constr.Eng.Man-age.,130?4?,500–508.

Smyth,H.,and Edkins,A.?2007?.“Relationship management in the man-agement of PFI/PPP projects in the UK.”Int.J.Proj.Manage.,25?3?, 232–240.

S?rensen,J.B.?2002?.“The strength of corporate culture and the reli-ability of?rm performance.”Adm.Sci.Q.,47?1?,70–91.

Stock,G.N.,McFadden,K.L.,and Gowen,C.R.?2007?.“Organiza-tional culture,critical success factors,and the reduction of hospital errors.”Int.J.Prod.Econ.,106?2?,368–392.

Teerajetgul,W.,and Charoenngam,C.?2006?.“Factors inducing knowl-edge creation:Empirical evidence from Thai construction projects.”

Eng.,Constr.,Archit.Manage.,13?6?,584–599.Vaaland,T.I.?2004?.“Improving project collaboration:Start with the con?icts.”Int.J.Proj.Manage.,22?6?,447–454.

Vrijhoef,R.,and Koskela,L.?2000?.“The four roles of supply chain management in construction.”European J.Purchasing and Supply Management,6,169–178.

Walker,D.H.T.,Hampson,K.D.,and Peters,R.J.?2000?.“Project alliancing and project partnering—What’s the difference?—Partner selection on the Australian National Museum Project—A case study.”

Proc.,CIBW92Procurement System Symp.on Information and Com-munication in Construction Procurement,A.Serpell,ed.,Santiago, Chile,641–655.

Walsh,K.D.,Hershauer,J.C.,Tommelein,I.D.,and Walsh,T.A.

?2004?.“Strategic positioning of inventory to match demand in a capi-tal projects supply chain.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,130?6?,818–826. Winch,G.M.?2002?.Managing construction projects,Blackwell Science Ltd.,Oxford,U.K.

Wing,C.K.?1997?.“The ranking of construction management journals.”

Construction Economics and Management,15?4?,387–398. Wong,J.T.Y.,and Hui,E.C.M.?2006?.“Construction project risks: Further considerations for constructors’pricing in Hong Kong.”Con-str.Manage.Econom.,24?4?,425–438.

Wong,P.S.P.,Cheung,S.O.,and Ho,P.K.M.?2005?.“Contractor as trust initiator in construction partnering—Prisoner’s dilemma perspec-tive.”J.Constr.Eng.Manage.,131?10?,1045–1053.

Xu,T.,Smith,N.J.,and Bower,D.A.?2005?.“Forms of collaboration and project delivery in Chinese construction markets:Probable emer-gence of strategic alliances and design/build.”J.Manage.Eng., 21?3?,100–109.

Xue,X.L.,Li,X.D.,Shen,Q.P.,and Wang,Y.W.?2005?.“An agent-based framework for supply chain coordination in construction.”

Autom.Constr.,14?3?,413–430.

Xue,X.L.,Wang,Y.W.,Shen,Q.P.,and Yu,X.G.?2007?.“Coordina-tion mechanisms for construction supply chain management in the Internet environment.”Int.J.Proj.Manage.,25?2?,150–157. Yeomans,S.G.,Bouchlaghem,N.M.,and El-Hamalawi,A.?2006?.“An evaluation of current collaborative prototyping practices within the AEC industry.”Autom.Constr.,15?2?,139–149.

Yeung,J.F.Y.,Chan,A.P.C.,and Chan,D.W.M.?2007?.“The de?ni-tion of alliancing in construction as a Wittgenstein family-resemblance concept.”Int.J.Proj.Manage.,25?3?,219–231.