Relaciones entre los elementos de la estrategia y los cambios en las Habilidades

1.7.1 Deficiencies with traditional construction procurement

There has long been a view and general perception that an embedded mentality is prevalent within the construction industry which relates to a general lack of

integration of design and construction (Cartlidge, 2004, p.11). The choice of

procurement strategies on projects has therefore become a long contentious issue within the construction industry to address such perspectives.

There have been many criticisms of traditional (transactional) procurement methods over many years and these have mainly focused on their adversarial nature,

deficiencies of design and construction interface and the inefficiencies that these can bring for construction projects. Recommendations for changes, designed as

improvement measures, emanated from such criticism and included bridging the gap between design and construction and encouraging early contractors’ involvement in value management and buildability (Emmerson, 1962; Banwell 1964; Latham 1994, pp.40-51; Egan 1998; Egan 2002). Furthermore, others have outlined that risk management under such traditional arrangements is problematic especially when complex projects create greater risks for project teams. Contracting parties in these cases may seek to preserve their own individual commercial positions, frequently causing disputes to arise. These have in some cases led to reports of programme delays, cost overruns, conflict, distrust and legal action (Chan et al., 2008). To prevent such occurrences arising there is an argument that partnering offers a more suitable context for developing cooperation and trust as less focus on price and authority (Erikson and Lann, 2007).

The aforementioned perspectives would tend to suggest that traditional procurement strategies are widely considered to be inefficient and perhaps confrontational.

Perhaps construction partnering could address calls for change and fulfil the future challenges ahead but only if parties are prepared to build trust within such

relationships (Kulaurachi and Jones, 2007).

1.7.2 Theoretical basis for study

There are many different theoretical foundations or ‘coat pegs’ (Farrell, 2011) considered as part of this thesis and these have been applied wherever possibly within a construction partnering context. Examples of these include theories around dependence/interdependence (Shepperd and Sherman, 1998), the

conditional/unconditional nature of trust (Jones and George, 1998), the economic motivation theory of self-interest (Kadefors, 2004), propensities to trust (Briscoe and Dainty, 2005; Karlsen et al., 2008; Madhok, 1995) and the conceptual framework between trust and performance (Pinto et al., 2009). In the latter case, the theory was related to the relationship between trust and project success through improved working relationships (see Figure 1.8 for illustration). For this thesis it is intended that

new research will provide further insight or discredit certain strands of the theories and test them within a construction setting as advocated by Farrell (2011, p.31).

Figure 1.8 Conceptual framework between trust and success, adapted from Pinto et al. (2009)

1.7.3 Recommendations for further research as a justification into the study of trust in partnering

The purpose of this section is to justify the study aim based on calls from for future additional academic research. Many have argued that the study of trust, in respect of behavioural aspects and determinants including communication and shared values, has been a neglected area of research (Madhok, 2006). Pinto et al. (2009) refer to such a deficiency and suggested that trust, as a psychological state, could be influenced by a number of factors as to how well it develops. They 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 considered trust as an independent variable to measure other dependent variables against it, which included project performance and success. 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 trust”. In this way trust could be measured as a dependent variable rather than an independent variable. Lu and Hao (2013) present similar recommendations and state that “future studies should seek to determine other drivers of trust and cooperative

Owner Trust Competence trust Integrity Trust Intuitive Trust Intu Contractor Trust Integrity Trust Intuitive Trust Satisfaction with working relationship Project Success

performance” and argue that more in-depth studies should be conducted to assess the formation and evaluation of trust given its complex nature. Furthermore, since previous studies have shown that trust has a positive impact on project performance, it is reasonable to explore measures by which it can be cultivated (Pinto et al., 2009). Rousseau et al. (1998) also explained the importance of assessing trust as a

dependent variable to inform senior management of possible implications and outcomes from organisational changes and certain strategic decisions.

There is an 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 the critical factors can be realised and senior managers are then 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) 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. According to Maurer (2010), in addressing these challenges, further research is recommended into different factors which influence the development of trust and likely outcomes. Research carried out by 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, Carroll and Ashford (1995, as cited in Silva et al., 2012) reinforced the argument and advocated for more research on trust types and their determinants in the study of partner relationships.