La estructura de producción posfordista

The choice of the procurement route for construction work is one of the many decisions that are important for project clients to make since project success depends among other factors on the procurement route used (Anumba and Evbuomwan, 1997; Love, et al., 1998). Moreover, construction KPIs are concerned with the predictability of design cost and time as well as construction cost and time which can be regarded as procurement oriented (Takim and Akintoye, 2002). Stakeholders are likely to have different perception about the performance of a project when different procurement strategies are adopted (Toor and Ogunlana, 2010). Therefore, the appropriateness and/or effectiveness of the procurement method adopted for any construction project plays a vital role in the

68

success or failure of the project. For example, Chan and Chan (2004) in a study of key performance indicators for measuring construction success found that the completion time as it relates to speed of a project depended on the procurement method adopted for the project. They attributed the slow speed (delay) observed in one of the projects studied to be due to the use of the traditional procurement method. They however, acknowledge the possibility of other factors playing a part as it was observed that the project which suffered delay, performed better in terms of cost compared to those procured through the design and build method. Similarly, Newcombe (1996) compared the traditional and construction management procurement paths in terms of the power base and the process used by the project manager. He argues that the traditional system represents the old class-based division between management and workers where position power based on a hierarchy of command is exercised by the project manager, i.e., the Architect; while the construction management is based on the modern management principle of empowerment or power equalisation and reflects the trend towards a more pluralistic project environment. These however depend on many factors such as the form of contract used, the people involved, the environment of the project, the nature of and complexity of the project, the client (public or private), etc. Furthermore, procurement routes where contractors and other key stakeholders are engaged early enough and involved in design lead to greater commitment to the project hence it is important to identify who is going to work on the project and get them involved especially in the decision making process (Ankrah et al., 2009).

Past research (Cheung et al., 2001; Ng et al., 2002; Fewings, 2005) suggest procurement selection criteria to include: desired project completion speed; cost certainty; time certainty, level of quality required of the end product; complexity relating to the suitability of the procurement route in executing the project; risk avoidance/allocation by the parties involved on the project; the level of clarity in the delineation of responsibilities; the degree of price competition associated with the procurement options; the ability and authority of the client to effect changes on the project; tendering process(single or two stage, open or selective, close or negotiated); degree of collaborative practice or partnering required. All of these are concerned mainly and more directly with the internal stakeholders those who are directly involved in the project execution process. None the less, it is important to understand the different procurement routes that are being used for construction projects.

69

Past studies, for example (Oyegoke, 2001; Dorsey, 2004) have shown that most project use the traditional procurement route from the early 1900s through to most part of the first half of the twentieth century; this was followed by the emergence of the construction management (CM) procurement route between the 1960s and 1970s; the design and build (D&B) and programme management method came to lime light between the 1970s and 1980s. Other management oriented approaches such as partnering and framework agreements (FA) which are based on and geared towards integrated teamwork and collaborative arrangements emerged between the 1990s and 2000s (McDermott and Khalfan, 2006). In the bid for the continuous improvement of procurement process, the evolving construction procurement routes have been modified. Over the years, different categorisations of procurement routes have been advanced by different scholars. Recently, Oyegoke et al. (2009) based on an extensive literature review, categorised construction projects procurement routes into four groups which include: categorisation based on the ways project are organised; categorisation based on financial issues; categorisation based on the conditions of contracts; and categorisations based on management process, relational contracting and integrated working arrangement (Table 3.1). Although this represents a good picture of the various construction procurement routes, it does not provide clear points of demarcation between the different categorisations for example between categorisation based on project organisation and categorisation based on management process.

For a more comprehensive presentation, the procurement routes have been grouped into: separated procurement routes; integrated procurement routes and management based procurement routes (Figure 3.3). Separated procurement routes: these are unique for the separation of design and construction processes, allow full completion of design and project documentation (in most cases) before tendering, take longer time and guarantee cost certainty. Variants include: two stage selective tendering contracts, negotiated contracts and cost-reimbursable contracts which is further divided into cost plus and target cost contracts. Integrated procurement routes: these basically seek to improve the level of integration among the internal stakeholders and reduce the level of conflicts in projects. Therefore, an integrated procurement route ensures that the design, construction, operation and maintenance of projects are considered as a whole; it also ensures that the delivery team work together as an integrated project team (OGC, 2008). These include design and build (package deal, turnkey, and develop and construct) and public private partnership (DBO, DBOM, BOT, BOO, DBOT, BOOT, BBO, LDO,

70

DBFO, PFI, PSI). Management based procurement routes: this provides a single point of contact in the project manager (management organisation) for the project. These include management contracting, construction management and design and manage. Table 3.1 Categorisation of construction procurement routes

Scholar(s)/Year Categorisation bases

Categories

Mohsini (1993), Masterman (2002), Walker and Hampson (2003)

Project organisation

Traditional, D&B, MC & CM

Cox (2001), Graham (2001), Best and Valence (2002),

Miller (2002)

Financial issues DBO, DBOM, BOT, BOO, DBOT, BOOT, BBO, LDO, DBFO, PPP/PFI, PSI Akintoye (1994), RICS (2004) Conditions of contract JCT-DB Oyegoke (2001), Masterman (2002), Walker and Hampson (2003), McDermott and Khalfan (2006), Rwelamila (2010) Management process

Partnering & strategic alliance, FA, PC, MC, CM, D&B

Separated Integrated Management Oriented

Traditional Methods Design & Build Public Private _Partnerships Management Contracting

Construction Management

Design & Manage

DBO, DBOM, BOT, BOO, DBOT, BOOT, BBO, LDO,

DBFO, PPP/PFI, PSI Package deal,

Turnkey, Develop & construct

71

Delineation of responsibilities depends to a large extent on the procurement route adopted for the project which is what determines when the project manager comes in and raises and or try to answer the question of who does stakeholder management especially at the design stage if the project manager is not involved yet and after the project have been completed and handed over or is put to use. Understanding the relationships between stakeholder management and construction procurement routes is therefore very important and to this we now turn in the next section.