110,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
Provides a practical framework and toolkit for improved construction project outcomes based on trust and collaboration This book explores the concept of trust as a tool in improved construction procurement strategies, and provides important insight into the influence of trust on the success of construction projects and redevelopment programs. It is a practical guide that offers readers a solid outline and expert strategies for improving project outcomes through collaboration--ultimately proving that teamwork can really make the dream work. Building Collaborative Trust in Construction Procurement Strategies: A Practical Guide incorporates a toolkit, complete with flowcharts, to introduce certain trust building interventions within projects. It shows how initiatives and factors that influence collaborative trust can be easily implemented and embedded in construction management for improved practice. It also covers potential challenges, risks, problems, and barriers when it comes to trust. In addition, the book looks at the influences for collaborative trust in the construction industry as well as implications in practice for it in construction. It finishes by looking at the future of collaborative trust in construction procurement. * Teaches the importance and influence of trust on collaborative working and partnerships principles * Examines to what extent trust within collaborative working arrangements influences the success of collaborative working practices * Covers the effect that certain factors and trust building mechanisms have on collaborative working and partnerships and how they can be embedded into procurement of projects * Discusses what constitutes best practice and how trust in collaborative procurement practices influences the success of construction projects Building Collaborative Trust in Construction Procurement Strategies: A Practical Guide is an excellent book for construction management professionals, including clients, consultants, and contractors. It will also serve as a helpful text for undergraduate and postgraduate students and academics.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 549
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Author Biographies
Dr Jason Challender (Lead Author)
Dr Peter Farrell
Professor Peter McDermott
Foreword by Mark Farmer
Foreword by Emeritus Professor Peter Brandon
References
Preface
References
Acknowledgements
List of Figures
List of Tables
1 Introduction
References
2 Context of the Lack of Trust in the Construction Industry
2.1 From Where Has the Lack of Trust Emerged?
2.2 Calls for More Research into the Study of Trust in Construction Contracting
2.3 Deficiencies with Traditional Construction Procurement
2.4 Overall Context of Collaborative Working and Partnering Within the Construction Industry
2.5 Why is Trust Important in Achieving More Successful Project Outcomes? Trust as a Collaborative Necessity
2.6 The Importance for Collaborative Working and Trust in Construction
2.7 Problems Challenging the Philosophy of Partnering: The Influence and Absence of Trust
2.8 Summary
References
3 The Theory of Trust: Concept, Components, and Characteristics
3.1 Introduction to Chapter
3.2 What is Trust, Distrust, and Mistrust?
3.3 Potential Benefits of Trust: Incentives to Trust
3.4 Composition and Characteristics of Trust
3.5 Categories and Classifications of Trust
3.6 Importance, Influence, and Effects of Different Types of Trust
3.7 Relationships Between Trust and Distrust
3.8 The Dynamic Nature of Trust
3.9 The Fragility and Robustness of Trust in a Constantly Changing and Dynamic Environment
3.10 Summary
References
4 The Challenge of Trust Initiation and Formation
4.1 Evolution of Trust from Social Sciences Perspective
4.2 The Notion of Trustworthiness
4.3 Mechanisms, Factors, and Processes for the Development of Trust
4.4 Measuring the Quality of Trust
4.5 Trust‐building Mechanisms: Constructs and Attributes
4.6 Relationship Between Trust and Conflict
4.7 Trust as an Independent (Cause) and Dependent (Effect) Variable
4.8 Relationships Between Trust, Risk, and Control
4.9 Relationship Between Trust and Interdependence (Reliance)
4.10 Summary
References
5 Introduction and Background to Collaborative Working and Partnering
5.1 What is Collaborative Working and Partnering?
5.2 Different Types and Variations of Collaborative Working
5.3 Mechanisms for Agreeing Tender Prices Under Partnering Contracts
5.4 Perfection Through Partnering Procurement: The Philosophy and Benefits of Teamwork and Integration of the Whole Supply Chain
5.5 Potential Problems and Risks for Collaborative Working and Project Team Integration
5.6 Summary
References
6 The Importance, Reliance, and Influence of Trust in Construction Partnering
6.1 The Reliance and Importance of Trust for Construction Partnering
6.2 Propensity to Trust Theories, Applied to Collaborative Working
6.3 Trust as a Collaborative Necessity
6.4 Relationship Between Trust and Collaborative Working as a Measure of Performance for Improved Project Outcomes
6.5 Summary
References
7 Potential Problems, Barriers, and Risks for Trust in Collaborative Working
7.1 Introduction to the Problem of Trust in Collaborative Working Relationships
7.2 Potential Obstacles, Risks, and Difficulties
7.3 Methods to Address Potential Risks, Barriers, and Problems for Trust in Partnering Practices
7.4 Summary
References
8 Factors Which Influence the Development of Trust in Construction
8.1 Introduction to the Factors for Influencing Collaborative Trust in Partnering Strategies
8.2 Influence of Motivational Factors on Collaborative Trust in the Construction Industry
8.3 Influence of Ethical Factors on Collaborative Trust in the Construction Industry
8.4 Influence of Organisational Factors on Collaborative Trust in the Construction Industry
8.5 Influence of Economic Factors on Collaborative Trust in the UK Construction Industry
8.6 Summary
References
9 Developing a Framework of Trust‐Building Mechanisms for the Partnering Toolkit
9.1 Previous Studies as Context for the Influence of Trust‐Building Mechanisms in Generating Trust Within Construction Partnering
9.2 Regular Workshops and Review Meetings with Mutually Aligned Objectives
9.3 Fair and Equitable Incentivisation Schemes: Transparency and Sharing of Data
9.4 Partnering Charters Encapsulating Ethical Considerations
9.5 Senior Management Commitment, Effective Open‐Communication Strategies, and Issue‐Resolution Processes
9.6 Co‐location Arrangements
9.7 Social Networking, Teambuilding, and CPD Events
9.8 Integrated Project Insurance (IPI) Initiative
9.9 Compatibility and Complementary Nature of Management Systems and Joint Evaluation Processes
9.10 Styles of Leadership and Recognition and Alignment of Organisational Strategies and Mutual Objectives
9.11 Partner Selection Processes to Achieve Aligned Synergies
9.12 Summary
References
10 A Partnering Toolkit Based on Integrated Trust‐Building Mechanisms
10.1 Introduction and Purpose of a Partnering Toolkit
10.2 Embedding Trust‐Building Mechanisms into the Partnering Toolkit as Part of Collaborative Management Strategies
10.3 Incorporating Partnering Toolkit Within Procurement Processes
10.4 Tailoring the Partnering Toolkit to Suit the Nature of Projects and Their Environment
10.5 Monitoring of the Partnering Toolkit and Influence on Project Performance
10.6 Summary
References
11 Implications in Practice for Collaborative Trust in Construction
11.1 Critical Success Factors for Trust in Collaboration
11.2 Embracing Trust‐Building Strategies
11.3 Fostering Trusting Relationships for Management Outcomes
11.4 Nature of Projects and Their Suitability to Trust‐Building Strategies and Collaborative Working
11.5 Need for Evidence of Project Benefits from Collaboration Management Strategies
11.6 Implication for Future Construction Procurement Strategies; Potential Application of the Trust‐Building ‘Partnering Toolkit’
11.7 Summary
References
12 Reflections and Closing Remarks
References
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms
References
Appendix B: List of Abbreviations
Appendix C: Collaboration Champion/Facilitator Services
C.1 Introduction
C.2 Facilitation Services
C.3 Summary
Appendix D: Partnering Charter (Details of project removed for confidentiality)
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 3
Table 3.1 Definitions of trust (various sources).
Table 3.2 Outline of alternative frameworks (models) of trust from Hartman, Rous...
Table 3.3 Practical examples of how different forms of trust may affect construc...
Table 3.4 Examples of potential breaches of trust and their effects on contracti...
Chapter 4
Table 4.1 Trust‐building processes, description, and characteristics based on Do...
Table 4.2 Items for measuring trust (Wu and Udeaja 2008).
Table 4.3 Forms of dependence, risks, and qualities of trustworthiness and mecha...
Chapter 5
Table 5.1 Levels and characteristics of partnering.
Table 5.2 Benefits of partnering from the perspective of clients, contractors, a...
Chapter 6
Table 6.1 The importance, reliance, and influence of trust in partnering strateg...
Chapter 7
Table 7.1 Barriers to trusting collaborative working and differing priorities an...
Table 7.2 Example of how cost savings may be apportioned amongst the project tea...
Chapter 8
Table 8.1 Qualitative themes and data analysis linked to identifying those facto...
Table 8.2 Qualitative themes and data analysis linked to identifying the importa...
Chapter 9
Table 9.1 Attributes of motivational‐based trust‐building mechanisms.
Table 9.3 Attributes of organisational‐based trust‐building mechanisms.
Chapter 10
Table 10.1 Collaboration champion outputs, outcomes, key activities, and expecta...
Chapter 11
Table 11.1 Best practices and improvement measure the development of trust.
List of Illustrations
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1 The iron triangle of cost, time, quality, and scope.
Figure 2.2 Illustrating traditional procurement structure.
Figure 2.3 Traditional procurement route under RIBA Plan of Work 2013.
Figure 2.4 Illustrating design and build procurement structure.
Figure 2.5 Design and build procurement route under RIBA Plan of Work 2013
Figure 2.6 Conceptual framework between trust and success.
Figure 2.7 Flowchart to illustrate the influence of trust on improved project p...
Figure 2.8 Participation in partnering. Responses relate to the questions posed...
Figure 2.9 Benefits of early integration of contractors.
Figure 2.10 Percentage of participants who support advantages and disadvantages...
Figure 2.11 The percentage of clients, consultants, and clients who adopted col...
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1 Weak, semi‐strong, and strong form trust (Barney and Hansen 1994).
Figure 3.2 Proposed effects of unconditional trust on interpersonal cooperation...
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1 Diagram to illustrate ‘Virtuous Circle’.
Figure 4.2 Trust maturity framework.
Figure 4.3 Trust attributes for construction partnering.
Figure 4.4 Illustration reflecting principal agency theory framework, showing k...
Figure 4.5 Shallow dependence, shallow independence, deep dependence, and deep ...
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1 Barriers to collaboration. National Construction Contracts and Law ...
Figure 7.2 Potential barriers to collaboration.
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1 The influence of motivational, ethical, organisational, and economic...
Chapter 9
Figure 9.1 Scatter diagram illustrating the influence of motivational, ethical...
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 Collaborative toolkit.
Figure 10.2 Influence of trust‐building mechanisms on relationship management s...
Figure 10.3 Influence of trust‐building mechanisms on communications management...
Figure 10.4 Influence of trust‐building mechanisms on organisational management...
Figure 10.5 Influence of trust‐building mechanisms on risk management strategie...
Figure 10.6 Influence of trust‐building mechanisms on financial management stra...
Figure 10.7 Flowchart to illustrate various stages of partnering toolkit.
Figure 10.8 Questionnaire to measure the status of trust (trust inventory).
Figure 10.9 Template to determine which mechanisms should be used as part of th...
Figure 10.10 Kolb's learning model (Sheehan and Kearns 1995).
Figure 10.11 Applying the partnering toolkit to four stages of Kolb's learning ...
Figure 10.12 Professional practice process map (Sheehan and Kearns 1995).
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
iii
vi
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xxi
xxiii
xxv
xxvi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
227
228
229
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
E1
Building Collaborative Trust in Construction Procurement Strategies
Dr Jason Challender
University of Salford, UK
Dr Peter Farrell
University of Bolton, UK
Professor Peter McDermott
University of Salford, UK
Copyright
This edition first published 2019
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of Jason Challender, Peter Farrell and Peter McDermott to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered Offices
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
Editorial Office
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty
While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data
Names: Challender, Jason, author. | Farrell, Peter, 1955- author. |
McDermott, Peter, author.
Title: Building collaborative trust in construction procurement strategies /
Jason Challender, Peter Farrell, Peter McDermott.
Description: Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2019. | Includes
bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018061442| ISBN 9781119492269 (hardcover) | ISBN
9781119492290 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: Construction industry--Management. | Building
materials--Purchasing. | Industrial procurement.
Classification: LCC HD9715.A2 C46 2019 | DDC 624.068/7--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018061442
Cover Design: Wiley
Cover Image: © Supavadee butradee/Shutterstock
Author Biographies
Dr Jason Challender (Lead Author)
Jason Challender has acquired 30 years ‘client‐side’ experience in the UK construction industry and procured numerous successful major construction programmes during this time. He is the Director of Estates and Facilities at the University of Salford, member of its Senior Leadership Team, and responsible for overseeing a large department of approximately 350 estates and construction‐related staff. He is also a construction researcher with 10 published academic journal and conference papers in the last three years, all of which have been dedicated to his studies around trust and collaborative procurement in the construction industry. Furthermore, he has previously participated as a book reviewer for Wiley. He has also attended many national construction and institutional conferences as a guest speaker over the years and is a Fellow and Board Director of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.
Dr Peter Farrell
Peter Farrell has 16 years' industry experience and over 25 years in higher education. He is a Reader in Construction Management at the University of Bolton, and has over 90 publications, including four textbooks. His early industry work was as a quantity surveyor; then as contractor's site manager, responsible for multi‐million pound new‐build construction projects. He has been an External Examiner at seven institutions, including internationally, and is academic journal referee and book reviewer. Peter is a Fellow of both the Chartered Institute of Building (FCIOB) and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (FRICS), and formerly acted for three years as Chair of the CIOB Greater Manchester Branch.
Professor Peter McDermott
Peter McDermott is Professor of Construction Management and Procurement in the Built Environment at the University of Salford. He has over 60 publications including one book. For many years, he has been instrumental in leading research for work commissioned by the former Department of Trade and Industry and Cabinet Office (Construction Strategy). He is currently Chair of the North West Construction Hub and working with the Treasury on ‘Infrastructure UK’. He is a founder member and now Joint Coordinator of CIB (International Building Research Council) and Chair of the Shadow Infrastructure Construction Review Implementation Group of the North West. Furthermore, he has led Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) research work in the area of procurement systems.
Foreword by Mark Farmer
My 2016 report for the Construction Leadership Council ‘The Farmer Review of the UK Construction Labour Model, Modernise or Die’ highlighted starkly that the construction industry and its clients have non‐aligned interests reinforced by traditional procurement protocols and a deep‐seated cultural resistance to change. This has partly contributed to extremely poor levels of productivity when assessed against other industries. Previous calls to arms have not really drawn any wholesale reaction, certainly not on any real scale to make a difference. Resistance to change and lack of integration and alignment of project team players has become accepted de facto norms for the industry. Inefficiency and poor predictability of delivery against success factors of time, cost, and quality have led to an inability to produce successful outcomes and deliver to clients requirements. One of the critical symptoms of failure and poor performance has been identified as lack of collaboration and improvement culture. The added fuel for this burning platform is the unprecedented and growing structural skills crisis that looks set to drive a long‐term decline in competent resources across all parts of our industry markedly increasing future delivery risks. Put simply, as a consequence of these inherent difficulties, there is an absolute imperative for long‐term transformational change. The construction industry and its clients, I believe, are now at a critical juncture. It is worth also noting that this is not just a UK issue. According to the World Economic Forum and the McKinsey Global Institute amongst others, this is a generic and global ‘construction problem’, something I have seen first‐hand from my international travels over the last 12 months.
This book is not the first to outline some of these shortcomings in the construction industry, but does, I believe, offer what many in the construction industry have been waiting for. The book focuses strongly on the lack of trust in the construction industry which has been highly documented by authoritative sources over many years as a barrier to the success of construction projects. It addresses the needs of the wider project team to collaborate through prescribed trust building mechanisms. The methodology in doing so, is facilitated through the creation of a collaborative framework, supported by the introduction of a ‘partnering toolkit’. The book draws on case studies from the lead author's experiences and interviews with construction practitioners. It provides its readers with a practical guide to address this ongoing dilemma and should act as a catalyst for improvements to collaborative procurement processes. This is designed to raise productivity and add value by increasing integration, innovation, transactional efficiency, and changing mind sets. This would represent a big challenge for the industry in changing old traditional working practices, mostly derived from commercially focused perspectives and potentially adversarial behaviours and attitudes. It is also wholly necessary if we are going to move construction towards more of a manufacturing type process.
I hope this book offers the inspiration for building more trust and collaboration and taking a different view of the roles of the project team participants, in the overall pursuit of modernising the industry we work in. If it creates a new perspective of understanding and dialogue, then it will have served its purpose.
Mark Farmer
CEO Cast Consultancy and
author of The Farmer Review
of the UK Construction Labour Model
Modernise or Die (2016)
Foreword by Emeritus Professor Peter Brandon
This book is important to all those who wish to see productivity, trust, and fairness enhanced in the construction industry. It is also a ‘must read’ for all those who wish to take a pragmatic view to construction improvement and it is written in a style that makes it accessible to all students and practitioners in the industry.
The true importance of the construction industry to national economies is appreciated by few. According to the Office of National Statistics (ONS 2017) the value of all new construction work in 2016 was £99 266 million in the United Kingdom, which represented 6.1% of gross domestic product (GDP). Furthermore, construction employment in the United Kingdom has been rising steadily since 2011, employing 4.1% of the total workforce in 2016 (ONS 2017). Notwithstanding its importance, the productivity in construction has been consistently the slowest to change when compared to all the UK manufacturing sectors. The Farmer Review of the UK Construction Labour Market highlights that if we do not address how the industry operates and delivers, it could lead to an inexorable decline to its fortunes. Alongside this report, there have been many other repeated calls over many years for the construction industry to deliver better value for money for clients. These calls are in response to the criticisms of the industry by clients, who complain that they do not always get what they ask for. Furthermore, poor productivity has brought the sector under the scrutiny of successive governments. One example is Construction 2025 (HM Government 2013) which identifies that fractious qualities are embedded in the UK construction industry. The report stresses that collaboration and trust across the entire supply chain are crucial to deliver successful projects. There is an apparent consensus that improved performance of the construction industry is dependent upon increased collaboration and joint working between clients and the whole supply chain. The behaviour of project team individuals is arguably one of the most important ingredients for improving performance and trust, leading to more successful outcomes for the construction industry.
The authors seek to address the above inherent problems of the sector in a practical way. Accordingly, they consider the dilemma from the perspective of project teams moving towards a more integrated way of working. Since the lack of trust in the construction industry has been highly documented by authoritative sources over many years, clients in particular, must on their part, aim to work in a more collaborative and joined‐up way with their supply chain, deploying hands‐on management and not just making demands. The authors explore the extent to which trust is a viable tool in collaboratively procuring improved construction procurement strategies and provide an important insight into the influence of trust on the success of construction projects and redevelopment programmes. They address this ongoing paradigm and provide the visionary tools for project teams to act as the catalyst for improvements to procurement processes. The contributions of the authors describe a methodology for embedding trust‐building mechanisms as part of a partnering toolkit. The toolkit provides a collaborative framework which is intended as a practical guide to raise awareness of best practice and instil more trust in construction contracting. It provides innovative and unique initiatives for project management to better achieve value for money and more effectively satisfy business objectives. This toolkit is continuing to be applied and embedded into practice in the higher education sector and it will be interesting to see how successful it will be in delivering improved outcomes.
The book is useful for practicing practitioners and also for students as a valuable teaching and learning platform. It represents a unique, inventive, and much‐welcomed pragmatic approach to construction management. I hope this book inspires readers to take a different perspective on the procurement of construction services and will encourage transformational real change in practice. It opens new angles for understanding and dialogue and enriches the knowledge and experience of all those involved with construction processes. The authors should be congratulated on providing us all with a book which is not only of real tangible benefit but is well written and engages the reader.
Peter Brandon
University of Salford
References
HM Government (2013).
Construction 2025. Industry Strategy: Government and Industry in Partnership
, vol. 23–25, 61–71. London: HM Government.
ONS (2017). Office for National Statistics.
Gross Domestic Product Data
. Available at
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171780_350942.pdf
(accessed 28 January 2017).
Preface
The construction industry, especially within the United Kingdom, has for many years become synonymous for having attitudes and behaviours associated with an adversarial culture. Many government and industry reports have aimed to change the industry. These have included Constructing the Team (Latham 1994), Rethinking Construction (Egan 1998) and Accelerating Change (Egan 2002), and have largely focused on reforming procurement strategies linked to partnering and collaborative working. They have sought to encourage a greater sense of team working and integration between clients, consultants, contractors, and supply chains involved in the procurement processes. Such improvements have been promoted as a vehicle to obtain better value and increased level of quality and service delivery. Despite these, however, partnering and collaborative procurement in the construction industry have suffered through organisations not fully committing to the fundamental principles and philosophies which underpin them. Aspirations and ambitions to revolutionise the industry with expectations of more successful time, cost, and quality outcomes have in most cases simply not materialised. This has given rise to evidence of low levels of client satisfaction, owing mostly to lack of trust between project stakeholders. Possible explanations why organisations fail to trust their partners sufficiently include scepticism of realisable benefits, opportunism, and inequitable working relationships. These underlying problems are explored widely in the book, and trust is identified as one of the major barriers to successfully implementing successful partnering strategies. In some reported cases, clients may feel that the only way to assure themselves that they are not paying too much money for their projects is to market test bids in highly competitive environments. This reflects a movement back to traditional procurement and is regarded as a worrying trend for the future of the industry. The report commissioned for Government in 2016, Modernise or Die (Time to Decide the Industry's Future) by Mark Farmer has identified and articulated a ‘collaboration problem’ at the root of change inertia in this regard. Furthermore, Mark has written the foreword to this book and fully supports the approach to transformational industry change that has been proposed.
Trust has been identified widely as one of the most important drivers for relationship management and the success of partnering strategies in many other industries. Manufacturing represents one sector where industry has led the way in creating and developing strategic partnerships build on trusting relationships. This has generated improved project outcomes and created environments which encourage joint problem‐solving and win‐win scenarios. Despite this, however, the construction industry has been slow to embrace trust building strategies. Furthermore, the study and practice of trust has not received the attention level it requires in an environment dominated by technical knowledge and skills. To respond to this dilemma, the main focus of this book is to provide a suitable context for paradigm shifts in practice with measures to increase collaboration and trust as catalysts for increasing the success of construction procurement strategies. The partnering toolkit, as part of a collaboration framework, created as part of this book will seek to educate practitioners and students in practical ways of embedding partnering philosophies within construction projects. The partnering toolkit is currently being used on a live project for the University of Salford, with construction partners Morgan Sindall. In this regard, it is intended that the whole project team will be committed to embedding its mechanisms and guiding principles in each of the construction procurement stages. Action research will be conducted on the toolkit to enable an evaluation of its usefulness in practice, gain lessons learn from it, and hopefully shape future construction procurement best practice.
The research for the book has been derived from a combination of sources which include the authors' own experiences, interviews with a wide range of construction professionals, and literature. The book is mainly intended for construction practitioners, including employers, design teams, contractors, subcontractors, and lower levels of the supply chain. It could also be useful for teaching and learning and suit a wide target audience including under and post‐graduate students and academics. The authors are hopeful that it will make a constructive and useful contribution to the field.
References
Egan, J. (1998).
Rethinking Construction. The Report of the Construction Task Force
, 18–20. London: DETR.TSO.
Egan, J. (2002).
Accelerating Change. Rethinking Construction
. London: Strategic Forum for Construction.
Latham, M. (1994).
Constructing the Team
. London: The Stationery Office.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all the research participants, including Richard Jackson of Altitude 501 Consulting, who contributed to the book's findings through interviews. In addition, many thanks to Hawre Baban, Associate Director (Development) of the University of Salford and other colleagues at the university including Danny Cheung, Peter Dentith, and Charlotte France for their assistance in developing the ‘partnering toolkit’ for the book. Acknowledgement and gratitude also to Morgan Sindell for working alongside the lead author in implementing the partnering toolkit on a live project.
Special thanks goes out to the lead author's family, Margaret, Kristin, and Bobby Challender for their support and proof reading provided throughout the book's development.
List of Figures
Figure 2.1
The iron triangle of cost, time, quality, and scope.
Figure 2.2
Illustrating traditional procurement structure. Source: Adapted from Higham et al. (
2017
).
Figure 2.3
Traditional procurement route under RIBA Plan of Work 2013. Source: Adapted from RIBA (
2013
).
Figure 2.4
Illustrating design and build procurement structure. Source: Adapted from Higham et al. (
2017
).
Figure 2.5
Design and build procurement route under RIBA Plan of Work 2013 Source: Adapted from RIBA (
2013
).
Figure 2.6
Conceptual framework between trust and success. Source: Adapted from Pinto et al. (
2009
).
Figure 2.7
Flowchart to illustrate the influence of trust on improved project performance. Source: Developed from Fukuyama (1995, as cited in O'Hara, 2006); Wong et al. (
2008
); Wu and Udeaja (
2008
); and Pinto et al. (
2009
).
Figure 2.8
Participation in partnering. Responses relate to the questions posed to clients, consultants, and contractors, as to the percentage number of projects that they have carried out in the last five years that fall under four categories. The four categories are those shown on the left of the chart. Source: NBS (
2015
). Adapted from National Construction Contracts and Law Survey 2015.
Figure 2.9
Benefits of early integration of contractors. Source: Adapted from findings of Latham (
1994
) and Egan (
1998
,
2002
).
Figure 2.10
Percentage of participants who support advantages and disadvantages of partnering approaches. Source: NBS (
2015
). Adapted from NBS National Construction Contracts and Law Survey 2015.
Figure 2.11
The percentage of clients, consultants, and clients who adopted collaborative working on projects with the last year. Responses related to the question: Did you adopt any collaboration techniques, in projects that started in the last 12 months? Source: NBS (
2015
). Adapted from NBS, National Construction Contracts and Law Survey 2015.
Figure 3.1
Weak, semi–strong, and strong form trust (Barney and Hansen
1994
).
Figure 3.2
Proposed effects of unconditional trust on interpersonal cooperation and teamwork. Source: Adapted from Jones and George (
1998
).
Figure 4.1
Diagram to illustrate ‘Virtuous Circle’. Source: Adapted from Huxham and Vangen (
2000
).
Figure 4.2
Trust maturity framework. Source: Adapted from Fawcett et al. (
2012
).
Figure 4.3
Trust attributes for construction partnering. Source: Adapted from Cheung (
2007
).
Figure 4.4
Illustration reflecting principal agency theory framework, showing key relationships between project parties. PO, project owner; C, contractor; PM
po
, project owner's project manager; PM
c
, contractor's project manager. Source: Adapted from Ceric (
2014
).
Figure 4.5
Shallow dependence, shallow independence, deep dependence, and deep interdependence. Source: Adapted from Shepperd and Sherman (
1998
).
Figure 7.1
Barriers to collaboration. National Construction Contracts and Law Survey (NBS 2018) of construction consultants. Responses based on question: What prevented you from becoming involved in, or using, (more) collaboration in projects during the last 12 months?
Figure 7.2
Potential barriers to collaboration. Source: Adapted from Hansen and Nohria (
2004
).
Figure 8.1
The influence of motivational, ethical, organisational, and economical factors on collaborative trust. Source: Challender (
2017
).
Figure 9.1
Scatter diagram illustrating the influence of motivational, ethical, and organisational trust–building mechanisms (independent variable) on trust generation within projects (measured by trust expectations as the dependent variable).
Figure 10.1
Collaborative toolkit.
Figure 10.2
Influence of trust–building mechanisms on relationship management strategies. Mech 1—14 refer to trust–building mechanisms.
Figure 10.3
Influence of trust–building mechanisms on communications management strategies. Mech 1—12 refer to trust–building mechanisms.
Figure 10.4
Influence of trust–building mechanisms on organisational management strategies. Mech 5—13 refer to trust–building mechanisms.
Figure 10.5
Influence of trust–building mechanisms on risk management strategies. Mech 1—11 refer to trust–building mechanisms.
Figure 10.6
Influence of trust–building mechanisms on financial management strategies. Mech 3—10 refers to trust–building mechanisms.
Figure 10.7
Flowchart to illustrate various stages of partnering toolkit.
Figure 10.8
Questionnaire to measure the status of trust (trust inventory).
Figure 10.9
Template to determine which mechanisms should be used as part of the partnering toolkit.
Figure 10.10
Kolb's learning model (Sheehan and Kearns
1995
).
Figure 10.11
Applying the partnering toolkit to four stages of Kolb's learning model.
Figure 10.12
Professional practice process map (Sheehan and Kearns
1995
)
List of Tables
Table 3.1
Definitions of trust (various sources).
Table 3.2
Outline of alternative frameworks (models) of trust from Hartman, Rousseau, Lewicki, and Bunker (as cited in Pinto et al.
2009
).
Table 3.3
Practical examples of how different forms of trust may affect construction partnering relationships.
Table 3.4
Examples of potential breaches of trust and their effects on contracting relationships.
Table 4.1
Trust‐building processes, description, and characteristics based on Doney et al. (
1998
).
Table 4.2
Items for measuring trust (Wu and Udeaja
2008
).
Table 4.3
Forms of dependence, risks, and qualities of trustworthiness and mechanisms of trust (Shepperd and Sherman
1998
).
Table 5.1
Levels and characteristics of partnering.
Table 5.2
Benefits of partnering from the perspective of clients, contractors, and design teams.
Table 6.1
The importance, reliance, and influence of trust in partnering strategies.
Table 7.1
Barriers to trusting collaborative working and differing priorities and objectives between organisational groups.
Table 7.2
Example of how cost savings may be apportioned amongst the project team.
Table 8.1
Qualitative themes and data analysis linked to identifying those factors which instil trust in partnering strategies.
Table 8.2
Qualitative themes and data analysis linked to identifying the importance and influence of hard and soft factors for partnering strategies.
Table 9.1
Attributes of motivational‐based trust‐building mechanisms.
Table 9.2
Attributes of ethical and economical‐based trust‐building mechanisms.
Table 9.3
Attributes of organisational‐based trust‐building mechanisms.
Table 10.1
Collaboration champion outputs, outcomes, key activities, and expectations.
Table 11.1
Best practices and improvement measure the development of trust.
1Introduction
Sir Michael Latham was told ‘there is no trust in this industry anymore’.
Latham (1993)
Latham in titling his interim report to government ‘Trust and Money’ (Latham 1993) was signalling the importance he attached to the lack of trust in the UK construction industry. In Constructing the Team (Latham 1994), he described trust as being the gatekeeper to any real progress in improving contractual relations in the United Kingdom. Other commentators, such as Cox and Townsend (1997) were of the view that cultural change would not be easy:
… it is unlikely that trust (based on dependency) will be volunteered in such a deep‐rooted traditionally adversarial culture as that of the construction industry.
(Cox and Townsend 1997)
The progress since these observations by Latham is the focus for this book. The intent is to describe the state of development and to attempt to change current working practices and improve project outcomes in the construction sector. The meaning of trust has been re‐enacted on many construction projects over the years according to professional practitioners, and therein typifies the need to consider measures to improving practice through trust generation. In this regard, the book explores the extent to which trust is a viable tool in collaboratively procuring successful construction projects. In addition, it will provide an important insight into the influence of trust on the success of construction strategies and redevelopment programmes. Trust will be considered in this context from an inter‐organisational rather than individual perspective. The terms ‘collaborative working’ and ‘partnering’ will be used interchangeably through the book, and both are intended to promote mutual benefits of cooperation, team working, and problem‐solving (Larson 1997, p. 190; Wong and Cheung 2004). Their definitions and meaning are more fully explained in Chapter 3. Furthermore, the book investigates current partnering arrangements that exist within the global construction industry, to create a comprehensive understanding of problems of trust which are hindering its overall effectiveness. The book also reviews the overall commitment of organisations to partnering philosophies. The main focus of the book is, however, intended to provide a suitable context for paradigm shifts in practice with measures to increase collaborative trust and act as a catalyst for increasing the success of construction procurement strategies. Calls for changes in working practices have been predicated by perceptions that partnering, within the construction industry, is not being fully committed to through lack of trust. The book identifies those factors and constructs that influence trust in partnering in an effort to create a framework for potential improvements in practice through strategies specifically linked to motivational, organisational, ethical, and economical trust‐building initiatives.
The book provides the framework of a ‘partnering toolkit’ for improved project outcomes. From this perspective, it is intended as a practical guide to raise awareness of best practice and instil more trust in construction contracting. The lack of trust in the construction industry has been documented by authoritative sources over many years. The book will seek to address this ongoing dilemma and recommend improvements to collaborative procurement processes and encourage more successful team integration and collaborative ways of working. This is a deliberate attempt to improve construction practices, which have arguably not been delivering the impact, and benefits that were intended in terms of successful collaborative project outcomes. Various government reports have reinforced this dilemma over the years. Early work in this respect included the Simon Report, Emmerson Report, Banwell Report, and Potts Report (Simon 1944; Emmerson 1962; Banwell 1964). These were followed by Constructing the Team, Latham (1994), Rethinking Construction, Egan (1998), and Accelerating Change, Egan (2002). All the aforementioned reports highlighted the deficiencies with construction‐related business approaches in terms of low performance, failure to meet client satisfaction levels, and need for efficiency measures. Another recent example includes Construction 2025, Industry Strategy: Government and Industry in Partnership (HM Government 2013) which identifies that fractious qualities are embedded in the UK construction industry. The report stresses that collaboration and trust across the entire supply chain are crucial to deliver successful projects. More recently, this dilemma has been reiterated and become a major feature of Modernise or Die: The Farmer Review of the UK Construction Labour Market (Farmer 2016). Furthermore, findings from the Low Carbon Construction Final Report (HM Government 2010) confirm the growing need for increased collaboration and integration across the industry, especially between supply chains and clients, in order to make greater contributions to the pursuit of efficiencies.
The mentioned emphasis on the need for improvements in collaboration and integration are especially crucial given the low achievement of UK construction projects, when compared with other sectors. The UK Industry Performance Report, (Construction Excellence 2016) based upon a survey of projects, analyses a number of construction key performance indicators (KPIs). The survey shows that when considering both design and construction phases, ‘just’ 65% of projects meet budget requirements and 66% meet time predictability targets. Whilst these figures are reported positively by NBS (2018) to be improvements on previous years' performance levels, clients may wish to read them in terms of projects that do not complete successfully; 35% over‐budget and 34% late. In terms of satisfaction levels, Construction Excellence (2016) also reports on the percentage of projects or responses that achieve a rating of 8 out of 10 or better. Clients rated their ‘overall satisfaction with the finished product’ as 90%; ‘service received from contractors’ 81%; ‘value for money’ 80%; and ‘condition of the facility in respect to defects’ 78%. In terms of ‘contractor satisfaction with the performance of clients and consultancy teams’, 77% rated performance as 8 out of 10 or better. Whilst this 2016 report suggests there are improvements on previous years, questions need to be asked. Why only 8 out of 10 and not 10 out of 10? If clients rate ‘condition of the facility in respect to defects’ as 78% in 8 out of 10 cases, what about the other 22%? Imagine taking a new car from a showroom, and 22% of customers' rate defects on their cars at less than 8 out of 10 – perhaps 4 or 5? Even with these improved figures, the margins for improvement in construction seem substantive.
In light of the aforementioned satisfaction levels, the book is intended to assist academics, construction‐related practitioners and clients in their awareness, understanding, and breadth of knowledge of the issues around building trust between contracting parties on projects. This objective has the overarching aim of delivering projects that are more successful. This is felt to be particularly important as in previous studies into collaborative working, very little attention has been focused on trust‐building processes. In addition, scant attention has been paid to the role and development of trust in the practice of construction procurement (Thorgren et al. 2011). There is also a need to address calls for greater insight into how trust is created, mobilised, and developed (Huemer 2004) and for more understanding of the effects and impact of other factors interacting with trust (Huang and Wilkinson 2013). The book has sought to address gaps in the literature gaps through examination of trust‐building constructs and mechanisms, and the influence of these on generating trust in construction relationships. For this reason, early chapters are focused on theory and literature from academic sources. Case studies and practical examples have, however, been included to assist readers on how theoretical perspectives can be applied to real‐life construction projects and scenarios. The book has also addressed academic calls for greater insight into how trust is created, mobilised, and developed and for more understanding of the effects and impact of other factors interacting with trust. There is frequent reference to construction practitioners' views and opinions throughout, and these have been sought through research carried out in 2015 from a small sample of semi‐structured interviews. Participants in these interviews included clients, design consultants, main contractors, and subcontractors. The sample size for participants is not intended to represent fully the population at large, owing to constraints on the study, but it was designed to attract more widespread insights than if only one or two specific participant groups had been targeted.
There have been few books which have been written on the specific subject of incentivising trust in construction specifically through interventions. Those which have been published have largely focused on theoretical studies examining different contracting behaviours and relational analysis of construction contracts. Furthermore, the component elements of trust have been covered previously, but there has been very little to articulate how these can be incorporated into construction procurement strategies. This book, drawing on case studies from the authors' experiences and interviews, takes a different approach to trust in construction by asking some very fundamental questions:
What is the importance and influence of trust on collaborative working and partnerships principles?
What is the extent to which trust within collaborative working arrangements influences the success of collaborative working practices?
What influence do certain factors and trust‐building mechanisms have on collaborative working and partnerships and how can these interventions be best embedded into procurement of projects?
What constitutes best practice and what is the extent to which trust in collaborative procurement practices influences the success of construction projects?
The findings of the book are presented to encourage professional practitioners to implement improvement measures through trust‐building interventions. The introduction of such mechanisms are explained in the book and presented as a practical guide, or toolkit, for improvements in construction project procurement practice. Reading this book will hopefully support the development of a deeper understanding of the benefits of having trusting relationships between contracting parties in terms of improved outcomes for construction projects. With a better insight into how trust can be instrumental to project success, there should be the potential to embrace the true philosophy of collaborative working and therein promote better management practice. The book is not intended as a holistic course textbook albeit it could be worthy inclusion on a recommended reading list for courses related to construction procurement. The partnering toolkit for improving trust on projects, in Chapter 10, could be used as a basis for short‐term training or conference proceedings for professional institutions and public sector organisations. Notwithstanding this, it is not intended solely as a practitioner guide. Rather, the book aims to cross divides and provide useful insight to students, academics, and practitioners in developing their understanding of the topic area.
Although the research was undertaken in the United Kingdom, and all findings are likely to therefore have best fit with the UK construction industry, the overall knowledge and understanding provided by this book will have international relevance. Other countries seeking to develop trust‐building strategies in collaborative working practices using similar approaches to the United Kingdom will be able to utilise the book, with consideration of how the findings fit with their own understanding in practice.
Finally, it is worth acknowledging that the three authors have all individually gained over 30 years' experience of construction management from both practitioner and academic perspectives. From this, the book has drawn on both academia and practice, and it seeks from both these perspectives to prove an important insight into an area which has long been problematic for the construction industry.
References
Banwell, S.H. (1964).
The Placing and Management of Contracts for Building and Civil Engineering Work
. HMSO.
Constructing Excellence (2016).
UK Industry Performance Report Based on the UK Construction Industry Key Performance Factors
.
https://www.glenigan.com/sites/default/files/UK_Industry_Performance_Report_2016_LR.pdf
.
Cox, A. and Townsend, M. (1997). Latham as a half‐way house: a relational competence approach to better practice in construction procurement.
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management
4 (2): 143–158.
Egan, J. (1998).
Rethinking Construction. The Report of the Construction Task Force
, 18–20. London: DETR.TSO.
Egan, J. (2002).
Accelerating Change. Rethinking Construction
. London: Strategic Forum for Construction.
Emmerson, S.H. (1962).
Survey of Problems Before the Construction Industries: A report prepared for the Minister of Works
. HMSO.
Farmer, M. (2016).
Modernise or Die: The Farmer Review of the UK Construction Labour Market
. London: Construction Leadership Council.
HM Government (2010).
Low Carbon Construction Final Report (November 2010)
, vol. 52–62, 196–199. London: HM Government.
HM Government (2013).
Construction 2025. Industry Strategy: Government and Industry in Partnership
, vol. 23–25, 61–71. London: HM Government.
Huang, Y. and Wilkinson, I.F. (2013). The dynamics and evolution of trust in business relationships.
Industrial Marketing Management
42 (3): 455–465.
Huemer, L. (2004). Activating trust: the redefinition of roles and relationships in an international construction project.
International Marketing Review
21 (2): 187–201.
Larson, E. (1997). Partnering on construction projects: a study of the relationship between partnering activities and project success.
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
44 (2): 188–195.
Latham, M. (1993).
Trust and Money: Interim Report of the Joint Government/Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual arrangements in the United Kingdom Construction Industry
. London: HMSO.
Latham, M. (1994).
Constructing the Team, Final Report of the Joint Government/Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the United Kingdom Construction Industry
. London: HMSO.
NBS (National Building Specification) (2018).
National Construction Contracts and Law Report 2018
.
https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/national‐construction‐contracts‐and‐law‐report‐2018
(accessed 18 January 2018). London: RIBA Enterprises Ltd.
Simon, S.E. (1944).
The Placing and Management of Building Contracts
. London: HMSO.
Thorgren, S., Wincent, J., and Eriksson, J. (2011). Too small or too large to trust your partners in multi‐partner alliances? The role of effort in initiating generalized exchanges.
Scandinavian Journal of Management
27 (2011): 99–112.
Wong, S.P. and Cheung, S.O. (2004). Trust in construction partnering: views from parties of the partnering dance.
International Journal of Project Management
22: 437–446.
2Context of the Lack of Trust in the Construction Industry
… it is unlikely that trust (based on dependency) will be volunteered in such a deep‐rooted traditionally adversarial culture as that of the construction industry.
Cox and Townsend (1997)
2.1 From Where Has the Lack of Trust Emerged?
Although the above quotation may seem like a provocative and unrepresentative position, it is reiterated in many quarters of the construction industry. Jamie Ratcliff, assistant director at the Greater London Authority, chose to describe the construction industry to the House of Lords offsite enquiry as ‘People don't trust each other’ (Construction New Briefing 2018). He went on to add:
To make this work, you have to trust each other and work together at an early stage. You need to commit to it, depend on your partners and work with them. For whatever reason, culturally lots of people in construction find that very difficult.
It is interesting to explore where a lack of trust has emerged from and why there is a culture of distrust in construction. There are different theories around it. As a starting point, it is important to understand what makes construction different and potentially ‘at odds’ from most other industries. In answering this question, it is worth contemplating that procurement processes in construction are very unlike that of most other industries. Organisations are made up of mostly small teams, ranging from design consultants through to specialist contractors, who come together on a temporary basis for the life of a project and then disband to work elsewhere. This creates fragmentation and does not always allow time for relationships to develop and flourish, which could be in itself a contributory challenge for trust generation. It is also important to reflect upon the ‘end product’ and that construction projects are nearly always bespoke to client requirements. This ‘one off’ or ‘made to measure’ aspect creates risk and uncertainty for all parties. To fully appreciate and understand this context, it may be useful to compare the procurement of a new building with the purchase of a new car. When one buys a car, the make and model that suits the given budget will be agreed alongside any affordable optional extras that are required. One can even ‘test drive’ the same model to ensure that it meets expectations in terms of feel and drivability. At this stage, on ordering the vehicle, they will know exactly what will be received on the due delivery date, which is normally a few weeks at most and at an agreed fixed price. In this regard, there is very little risk that they will not receive exactly what is expected when ordered for the price that has been agreed. As the car is made in a factory, it will be standardised, and the quality of the vehicle is normally predictable.
The complete opposite scenario could be argued to prevail when buildings are being procured. It normally involves a prolonged period of time for design consultants to formulate briefs with clients, progress design development, and tender projects to construction contractors. On receipt of bids, this is where the process probably varies most from the car purchase example. In selecting the most appropriate bid, it is important to consider the quality of the bid submissions rather than just accept the lowest price. Such factors as reputation of bidding teams, track record, resources, and demonstration of an understanding of the project are vitally important, as the quality, cost, scope, and timescale in delivering the final project are normally anything but assured. There are three elements which are widely regarded as critical success factors namely cost, time, quality, and scope, and these form what is commonly referred to as the ‘iron triangle’ illustrated in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 The iron triangle of cost, time, quality, and scope.
There are several unknown factors in any construction process which could cause the cost of projects to increase, programmes to be delayed, and the quality of builds to be compromised. These introduce two aspects which come into play around commerciality and risk, and which party incurs additional costs is frequently an area where disputes arise between clients, consultants, and contractors. Furthermore, given that construction works often incur significant amount of money, the stakes are high in terms of the final bill for clients and the level of profit attained by contractors. It is therefore perhaps not surprising for reasons of commerciality that parties to construction contracts have traditionally not relied on trust in dealings with each other, especially around financial matters.
2.2 Calls for More Research into the Study of Trust in Construction Contracting
Many authoritative sources have highlighted the problem of trust in construction. Despite such literature, it is probably surprising that the study of trust, in respect of behavioural aspects and determinants, has been a neglected area of research (Madhok 2006).
Wood and McDermott (1999) explored the reasons why the construction sector was perceived to have a stronger preference for distrust rather than embracing the potential benefits of co‐operation and collaboration. Pinto et al. (2009) referred to a deficiency of knowledge around trust and stated that within a construction context ‘… it would be intriguing to consider more completely the antecedent factors that can an impact on it’. Their study revealed that trust was a leading factor for project performance and success. Despite this, they suggested that ‘future research should consider expanding their path model to isolate and evaluate the combined and differential effect of various antecedent conditions or actions that can impact upon trust’. Lu and Hao (2013) presented similar recommendations and stated that ‘future studies should seek to determine other drivers of trust and cooperative performance’ and argued that more in‐depth studies should be conducted to assess the formation and evaluation of trust given its complex nature. Further reinforcement came from Rousseau et al. (1998) who explained the importance of assessing trust as a way to inform senior management of possible implications and outcomes from organisational changes and certain strategic decisions.
There is a common misnomer that trust exists in one form only, and as such there is only one ‘form’ or ‘type’ of trust. Actually, theoretical research suggests that there are many different aspects and categories of trust; these will be covered in Chapter 3. For instance, Wong and Cheung (2004) differentiated between trust types and suggested that it would be useful to more fully comprehend which ones are more effective than others for construction industry partners to adopt. Similarly, Smith et al. (1995, as cited in Silva et al. 2012) reinforced the argument and advocated more research on trust types and their determinants in the study of partner relationships. McDermott et al. (2005) examined the proposition that while collaborative working needs effective and efficient processes and ICT support, trust development is the key element and was in need of further investigation. The book in Chapter 5 will address these calls and discuss the relative impact of different types in relation to collaborative working.
This book deals with the argument that mistrust has been inherent within the UK construction industry for a long time, and it is important to comprehend the factors which build trust for partnering to be successful. In this way, critical factors can be realised, and senior managers may become more able to facilitate alignment of organisational interventions to build trust (Hawke 1994). This is especially important, as the development of trust has proved problematical, with only limited success owing to the different contractual interests of those involved (Lu and Yan 2007). Maurer (2010) not only reiterated this argument but also concluded that retaining trust, in addition to building it, can be an equally challenging task. This is an area of study which has received only limited attention within the realms of construction management. For example, Swan et al. (2006) investigated how commercial managers function in terms of other design–construction team members and examined their role in impacting trust within those project teams. According to Maurer (2010), in addressing these challenges, further research is recommended into different factors which influence the development of trust and likely outcomes. This book explores these issues in later chapters.
2.3 Deficiencies with Traditional Construction Procurement
In considering the problem of trust, it is imperative to consider the traditional adversarial nature of the construction industry which has often been attributed to creating barriers for trusting relationships to grow. Most practitioners would argue that this has stemmed from the traditional forms of procuring construction work, which over recent years has been blamed for achieving low client satisfaction levels, poor cost predictability, and poor time certainty. Such a dilemma has largely been attributable to coordination difficulties associated with separation of design and construction and the greater need for teamwork (Latham 1994, pp. 81–83; Egan 1998, pp. 18–21, 2002, p. 6). Traditional or conventional procurement methods in this sense have been regarded as the standard practice in the construction sector for many years (JCT 2014) and normally rely on completion of design and full documentation before tender. It has been predominantly geared around stages that include feasibility, design, tender, construction, commissioning, and handover. Traditionally, contracts have normally been procured with minimal if any contractor, subcontractor, or supplier design input in the early stages (MacKenzie and Tuckwood 2012
