Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Partnering: what is it, when should it be used, and how should it be implemented?
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Innovation and Design.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1746-2637
2010 (English)In: Construction Management and Economics, ISSN 0144-6193, E-ISSN 1466-433X, Vol. 28, no 9, p. 905-917Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The interest in construction partnering has increased during the last decade. Much research have, however, found that cooperation and its benefits are not easily obtained, partly due to a lack of understanding of the partnering concept and when and how to implement it. The aim is therefore to increase this understanding by investigating three research questions: 1) What is partnering? 2) When should partnering be used and to what extent? 3) How should partnering be implemented? A thorough literature review and four case studies are utilized to develop a definition of partnering and discuss when and how partnering should be implemented through cooperative procurement procedures. Partnering is defined as a cooperative governance form that is based on core and optional cooperative procurement procedures to such an extent that cooperation-based coopetition is facilitated. Mandatory core procedures are: soft parameters in bid evaluation, compensation form based on open books, and usage of the core collaborative tools start-up workshop, joint objectives, follow-up workshops, teambuilding, and conflict resolution techniques. Complementary optional procedures are: early involvement of contractors in concurrent engineering, limited bid invitation, joint selection and involvement of subcontractors in broad partnering teams, collaborative contractual clauses, incentives based on group performance, usage of complementary collaborative tools (e.g. partnering questionnaire, facilitator, joint risk management, joint project office, and joint IT-tools), and increased focus on contractors' self-control.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 28, no 9, p. 905-917
National Category
Other Engineering and Technologies not elsewhere specified
Research subject
Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-5142DOI: 10.1080/01446190903536422Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-77956752207Local ID: 32af2f70-3356-11df-b933-000ea68e967bOAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-5142DiVA, id: diva2:978016
Note
Validerad; 2010; 20100319 (pererik)Available from: 2016-09-29 Created: 2016-09-29 Last updated: 2018-07-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Eriksson, Per-Erik

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Eriksson, Per-Erik
By organisation
Innovation and Design
In the same journal
Construction Management and Economics
Other Engineering and Technologies not elsewhere specified

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 79 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf