Delivering a water treatment plant project using a collaborative project procurement approach
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore an interesting complex infrastructure construction case study project in which the initiation/design and delivery phases were managed differently, with diverse assumptions and workplace culture. It uses a recently developed collaboration and relationsh...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Construction innovation 2016-04, Vol.16 (2), p.158-184 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 184 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 158 |
container_title | Construction innovation |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Walker, Derek H.T Rahmani, Farshid |
description | Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore an interesting complex infrastructure construction case study project in which the initiation/design and delivery phases were managed differently, with diverse assumptions and workplace culture. It uses a recently developed collaboration and relationship-based procurement taxonomy to analyse the decision to commence a project and to deliver the project. The taxonomy tool reveals underlying assumptions and helps explain actions taken. The paper provides a window into the decision-making process. It also illustrates levels of innovation applied at the design and delivery phases.
Design/methodology/approach
A case study was undertaken, primarily using recorded and transcribed interviews, with five key senior participants in the project. This gathered a client, designer and contractor perspective that was subsequently analysed using a sense-making approach.
Findings
It is possible to start a project adopting a highly collaborative approach that maximises innovation, understanding complexity and developing a design that can then be delivered using a more traditional approach. The taxonomy used demonstrates that it is a useful visualisation tool for this purpose.
Research limitations/implications
The research was limited to the perspectives of only five individuals even though they were key decision-makers and had a robust overview of the project as a whole. The delivery phase was chosen as a matter of policy without the ability to break loose from that policy. The implications for beginning the initiation and design process in a highly collaborative hands-on mode influenced the understanding of all parties involved in the project in a positive direction. The case study was based in Australia, which has extensive experience of collaborative project delivery approaches.
Practical implications
The taxonomy and its ability to provide visualisation of the experienced collaboration presents a powerful tool in helping us understand how it may be useful and what limitations to collaboration exists.
Social implications
The paper illustrates the value of social interactions as alliance forms tend to consider triple bottom line issues and stakeholder engagement more highly than traditional, transnational approaches to project design and delivery.
Originality/value
The case study was unusual in its technical complexity; however, the main value of the paper is the application of the taxonomy and visualisation tool as a way to |
doi_str_mv | 10.1108/CI-03-2015-0015 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_emera</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1877842959</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1877842959</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c374t-26b31024ad025d762a38c6409f6d432d184c8869b05b70e88bbf89e9d29820e23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1LxDAQhoMouK6evRa8eMnu5KNNepT6tSB40aOENE21S7ddk1Tx35tuRVA8eJlJmOedTOZF6JTAghCQy2KFgWEKJMUQwx6aES4EBpmK_d2ZYE5EeoiOvF8DUE4yPkNPl7Zt3qxruudEJ-86WJcEZ3XY2C4k21aP0fVra0Iy-Ikyfdvqsnc6ROV3NWYzOLvT6W28afNyjA5q3Xp78pXn6PH66qG4xXf3N6vi4g4bJnjANCsZiRPpCmhaiYxqJk3GIa-zijNaEcmNlFleQloKsFKWZS1zm1c0lxQsZXN0PvWNz74O1ge1abyxcczO9oNXRAohOc3T_B8oSOBpBjKiZ7_QdT-4Ln5E0VgWnMZ9Rmo5Ucb13jtbq61rNtp9KAJqdEYVKwVMjc6o0ZmoWEyKuCyn2-oPwQ8r2Sfim42A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2083742175</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Delivering a water treatment plant project using a collaborative project procurement approach</title><source>Emerald Complete Journals</source><source>Standard: Emerald eJournal Premier Collection</source><creator>Walker, Derek H.T ; Rahmani, Farshid</creator><creatorcontrib>Walker, Derek H.T ; Rahmani, Farshid</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore an interesting complex infrastructure construction case study project in which the initiation/design and delivery phases were managed differently, with diverse assumptions and workplace culture. It uses a recently developed collaboration and relationship-based procurement taxonomy to analyse the decision to commence a project and to deliver the project. The taxonomy tool reveals underlying assumptions and helps explain actions taken. The paper provides a window into the decision-making process. It also illustrates levels of innovation applied at the design and delivery phases.
Design/methodology/approach
A case study was undertaken, primarily using recorded and transcribed interviews, with five key senior participants in the project. This gathered a client, designer and contractor perspective that was subsequently analysed using a sense-making approach.
Findings
It is possible to start a project adopting a highly collaborative approach that maximises innovation, understanding complexity and developing a design that can then be delivered using a more traditional approach. The taxonomy used demonstrates that it is a useful visualisation tool for this purpose.
Research limitations/implications
The research was limited to the perspectives of only five individuals even though they were key decision-makers and had a robust overview of the project as a whole. The delivery phase was chosen as a matter of policy without the ability to break loose from that policy. The implications for beginning the initiation and design process in a highly collaborative hands-on mode influenced the understanding of all parties involved in the project in a positive direction. The case study was based in Australia, which has extensive experience of collaborative project delivery approaches.
Practical implications
The taxonomy and its ability to provide visualisation of the experienced collaboration presents a powerful tool in helping us understand how it may be useful and what limitations to collaboration exists.
Social implications
The paper illustrates the value of social interactions as alliance forms tend to consider triple bottom line issues and stakeholder engagement more highly than traditional, transnational approaches to project design and delivery.
Originality/value
The case study was unusual in its technical complexity; however, the main value of the paper is the application of the taxonomy and visualisation tool as a way to better understand how a project is being managed from a collaboration perspective.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1471-4175</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-0857</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/CI-03-2015-0015</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>Alliances ; Case studies ; Collaboration ; Complexity ; Construction ; Cooperation ; Decision analysis ; Decision making ; Design analysis ; Experts ; Innovation ; Innovations ; Petroleum refineries ; Petroleum refining ; Phases ; Policies ; Procurement ; Project design ; Social behavior ; Social factors ; Taxonomy ; Triple Bottom Line ; Visualization ; Water treatment ; Water treatment plants</subject><ispartof>Construction innovation, 2016-04, Vol.16 (2), p.158-184</ispartof><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</rights><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c374t-26b31024ad025d762a38c6409f6d432d184c8869b05b70e88bbf89e9d29820e23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c374t-26b31024ad025d762a38c6409f6d432d184c8869b05b70e88bbf89e9d29820e23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CI-03-2015-0015/full/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,969,11642,21702,27931,27932,52696,53251</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Walker, Derek H.T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rahmani, Farshid</creatorcontrib><title>Delivering a water treatment plant project using a collaborative project procurement approach</title><title>Construction innovation</title><description>Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore an interesting complex infrastructure construction case study project in which the initiation/design and delivery phases were managed differently, with diverse assumptions and workplace culture. It uses a recently developed collaboration and relationship-based procurement taxonomy to analyse the decision to commence a project and to deliver the project. The taxonomy tool reveals underlying assumptions and helps explain actions taken. The paper provides a window into the decision-making process. It also illustrates levels of innovation applied at the design and delivery phases.
Design/methodology/approach
A case study was undertaken, primarily using recorded and transcribed interviews, with five key senior participants in the project. This gathered a client, designer and contractor perspective that was subsequently analysed using a sense-making approach.
Findings
It is possible to start a project adopting a highly collaborative approach that maximises innovation, understanding complexity and developing a design that can then be delivered using a more traditional approach. The taxonomy used demonstrates that it is a useful visualisation tool for this purpose.
Research limitations/implications
The research was limited to the perspectives of only five individuals even though they were key decision-makers and had a robust overview of the project as a whole. The delivery phase was chosen as a matter of policy without the ability to break loose from that policy. The implications for beginning the initiation and design process in a highly collaborative hands-on mode influenced the understanding of all parties involved in the project in a positive direction. The case study was based in Australia, which has extensive experience of collaborative project delivery approaches.
Practical implications
The taxonomy and its ability to provide visualisation of the experienced collaboration presents a powerful tool in helping us understand how it may be useful and what limitations to collaboration exists.
Social implications
The paper illustrates the value of social interactions as alliance forms tend to consider triple bottom line issues and stakeholder engagement more highly than traditional, transnational approaches to project design and delivery.
Originality/value
The case study was unusual in its technical complexity; however, the main value of the paper is the application of the taxonomy and visualisation tool as a way to better understand how a project is being managed from a collaboration perspective.</description><subject>Alliances</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Collaboration</subject><subject>Complexity</subject><subject>Construction</subject><subject>Cooperation</subject><subject>Decision analysis</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Design analysis</subject><subject>Experts</subject><subject>Innovation</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>Petroleum refineries</subject><subject>Petroleum refining</subject><subject>Phases</subject><subject>Policies</subject><subject>Procurement</subject><subject>Project design</subject><subject>Social behavior</subject><subject>Social factors</subject><subject>Taxonomy</subject><subject>Triple Bottom Line</subject><subject>Visualization</subject><subject>Water treatment</subject><subject>Water treatment plants</subject><issn>1471-4175</issn><issn>1477-0857</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1LxDAQhoMouK6evRa8eMnu5KNNepT6tSB40aOENE21S7ddk1Tx35tuRVA8eJlJmOedTOZF6JTAghCQy2KFgWEKJMUQwx6aES4EBpmK_d2ZYE5EeoiOvF8DUE4yPkNPl7Zt3qxruudEJ-86WJcEZ3XY2C4k21aP0fVra0Iy-Ikyfdvqsnc6ROV3NWYzOLvT6W28afNyjA5q3Xp78pXn6PH66qG4xXf3N6vi4g4bJnjANCsZiRPpCmhaiYxqJk3GIa-zijNaEcmNlFleQloKsFKWZS1zm1c0lxQsZXN0PvWNz74O1ge1abyxcczO9oNXRAohOc3T_B8oSOBpBjKiZ7_QdT-4Ln5E0VgWnMZ9Rmo5Ucb13jtbq61rNtp9KAJqdEYVKwVMjc6o0ZmoWEyKuCyn2-oPwQ8r2Sfim42A</recordid><startdate>20160404</startdate><enddate>20160404</enddate><creator>Walker, Derek H.T</creator><creator>Rahmani, Farshid</creator><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160404</creationdate><title>Delivering a water treatment plant project using a collaborative project procurement approach</title><author>Walker, Derek H.T ; Rahmani, Farshid</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c374t-26b31024ad025d762a38c6409f6d432d184c8869b05b70e88bbf89e9d29820e23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Alliances</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Collaboration</topic><topic>Complexity</topic><topic>Construction</topic><topic>Cooperation</topic><topic>Decision analysis</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Design analysis</topic><topic>Experts</topic><topic>Innovation</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>Petroleum refineries</topic><topic>Petroleum refining</topic><topic>Phases</topic><topic>Policies</topic><topic>Procurement</topic><topic>Project design</topic><topic>Social behavior</topic><topic>Social factors</topic><topic>Taxonomy</topic><topic>Triple Bottom Line</topic><topic>Visualization</topic><topic>Water treatment</topic><topic>Water treatment plants</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Walker, Derek H.T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rahmani, Farshid</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>Career & Technical Education Database</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Construction innovation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Walker, Derek H.T</au><au>Rahmani, Farshid</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Delivering a water treatment plant project using a collaborative project procurement approach</atitle><jtitle>Construction innovation</jtitle><date>2016-04-04</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>158</spage><epage>184</epage><pages>158-184</pages><issn>1471-4175</issn><eissn>1477-0857</eissn><abstract>Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore an interesting complex infrastructure construction case study project in which the initiation/design and delivery phases were managed differently, with diverse assumptions and workplace culture. It uses a recently developed collaboration and relationship-based procurement taxonomy to analyse the decision to commence a project and to deliver the project. The taxonomy tool reveals underlying assumptions and helps explain actions taken. The paper provides a window into the decision-making process. It also illustrates levels of innovation applied at the design and delivery phases.
Design/methodology/approach
A case study was undertaken, primarily using recorded and transcribed interviews, with five key senior participants in the project. This gathered a client, designer and contractor perspective that was subsequently analysed using a sense-making approach.
Findings
It is possible to start a project adopting a highly collaborative approach that maximises innovation, understanding complexity and developing a design that can then be delivered using a more traditional approach. The taxonomy used demonstrates that it is a useful visualisation tool for this purpose.
Research limitations/implications
The research was limited to the perspectives of only five individuals even though they were key decision-makers and had a robust overview of the project as a whole. The delivery phase was chosen as a matter of policy without the ability to break loose from that policy. The implications for beginning the initiation and design process in a highly collaborative hands-on mode influenced the understanding of all parties involved in the project in a positive direction. The case study was based in Australia, which has extensive experience of collaborative project delivery approaches.
Practical implications
The taxonomy and its ability to provide visualisation of the experienced collaboration presents a powerful tool in helping us understand how it may be useful and what limitations to collaboration exists.
Social implications
The paper illustrates the value of social interactions as alliance forms tend to consider triple bottom line issues and stakeholder engagement more highly than traditional, transnational approaches to project design and delivery.
Originality/value
The case study was unusual in its technical complexity; however, the main value of the paper is the application of the taxonomy and visualisation tool as a way to better understand how a project is being managed from a collaboration perspective.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/CI-03-2015-0015</doi><tpages>27</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1471-4175 |
ispartof | Construction innovation, 2016-04, Vol.16 (2), p.158-184 |
issn | 1471-4175 1477-0857 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1877842959 |
source | Emerald Complete Journals; Standard: Emerald eJournal Premier Collection |
subjects | Alliances Case studies Collaboration Complexity Construction Cooperation Decision analysis Decision making Design analysis Experts Innovation Innovations Petroleum refineries Petroleum refining Phases Policies Procurement Project design Social behavior Social factors Taxonomy Triple Bottom Line Visualization Water treatment Water treatment plants |
title | Delivering a water treatment plant project using a collaborative project procurement approach |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-04T14%3A56%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_emera&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Delivering%20a%20water%20treatment%20plant%20project%20using%20a%20collaborative%20project%20procurement%20approach&rft.jtitle=Construction%20innovation&rft.au=Walker,%20Derek%20H.T&rft.date=2016-04-04&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=158&rft.epage=184&rft.pages=158-184&rft.issn=1471-4175&rft.eissn=1477-0857&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/CI-03-2015-0015&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_emera%3E1877842959%3C/proquest_emera%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2083742175&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |