{"title":"公共客户组织实施关系契约:政策冲突、资源和项目自治的影响","authors":"Lilly Rosander, A. Kadefors","doi":"10.1080/01446193.2023.2190992","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Relational contracting models are increasingly being used for large and complex public infrastructure construction projects, but both practices and outcomes still widely vary. When analyzing the causes of failures and successes, most studies have focused on practices at the project level. In this paper, we add to the current understanding of relational contracting in public construction by examining the influence of factors at the organizational and institutional levels. We develop a framework based on theories of policy implementation and analyze two projects piloting a new Early Contractor Involvement model in a large public infrastructure client organization. In this case, a previous marketization policy, prescribing low client involvement in project processes, interfered with the relational contracting policy. This policy clash was not openly acknowledged from the start, despite causing significant confusion and frustration at the project level, but became recognizable largely through its consequences for resource allocation and managerial attention. We conclude that policy ambiguities, combined with a project-based implementation context, produce local interpretations and variations in relational contracting models. When project autonomy is high, industry-level agreements, standards and resources are important to align practices also between projects within the same client organization.","PeriodicalId":51389,"journal":{"name":"Construction Management and Economics","volume":"41 1","pages":"651 - 669"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing relational contracting in a public client organization: the influence of policy clashes, resources and project autonomy\",\"authors\":\"Lilly Rosander, A. Kadefors\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01446193.2023.2190992\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Relational contracting models are increasingly being used for large and complex public infrastructure construction projects, but both practices and outcomes still widely vary. When analyzing the causes of failures and successes, most studies have focused on practices at the project level. In this paper, we add to the current understanding of relational contracting in public construction by examining the influence of factors at the organizational and institutional levels. We develop a framework based on theories of policy implementation and analyze two projects piloting a new Early Contractor Involvement model in a large public infrastructure client organization. In this case, a previous marketization policy, prescribing low client involvement in project processes, interfered with the relational contracting policy. This policy clash was not openly acknowledged from the start, despite causing significant confusion and frustration at the project level, but became recognizable largely through its consequences for resource allocation and managerial attention. We conclude that policy ambiguities, combined with a project-based implementation context, produce local interpretations and variations in relational contracting models. When project autonomy is high, industry-level agreements, standards and resources are important to align practices also between projects within the same client organization.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51389,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Construction Management and Economics\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"651 - 669\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Construction Management and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2023.2190992\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Construction Management and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2023.2190992","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Implementing relational contracting in a public client organization: the influence of policy clashes, resources and project autonomy
Abstract Relational contracting models are increasingly being used for large and complex public infrastructure construction projects, but both practices and outcomes still widely vary. When analyzing the causes of failures and successes, most studies have focused on practices at the project level. In this paper, we add to the current understanding of relational contracting in public construction by examining the influence of factors at the organizational and institutional levels. We develop a framework based on theories of policy implementation and analyze two projects piloting a new Early Contractor Involvement model in a large public infrastructure client organization. In this case, a previous marketization policy, prescribing low client involvement in project processes, interfered with the relational contracting policy. This policy clash was not openly acknowledged from the start, despite causing significant confusion and frustration at the project level, but became recognizable largely through its consequences for resource allocation and managerial attention. We conclude that policy ambiguities, combined with a project-based implementation context, produce local interpretations and variations in relational contracting models. When project autonomy is high, industry-level agreements, standards and resources are important to align practices also between projects within the same client organization.
期刊介绍:
Construction Management and Economics publishes high-quality original research concerning the management and economics of activity in the construction industry. Our concern is the production of the built environment. We seek to extend the concept of construction beyond on-site production to include a wide range of value-adding activities and involving coalitions of multiple actors, including clients and users, that evolve over time. We embrace the entire range of construction services provided by the architecture/engineering/construction sector, including design, procurement and through-life management. We welcome papers that demonstrate how the range of diverse academic and professional disciplines enable robust and novel theoretical, methodological and/or empirical insights into the world of construction. Ultimately, our aim is to inform and advance academic debates in the various disciplines that converge on the construction sector as a topic of research. While we expect papers to have strong theoretical positioning, we also seek contributions that offer critical, reflexive accounts on practice. Construction Management & Economics now publishes the following article types: -Research Papers -Notes - offering a comment on a previously published paper or report a new idea, empirical finding or approach. -Book Reviews -Letters - terse, scholarly comments on any aspect of interest to our readership. Commentaries -Obituaries - welcome in relation to significant figures in our field.