Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 8 results ...
Chang, C-Y, Chou, H-Y and Wang, M-T (2006) Characterizing the corporate governance of UK listed construction companies. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 647-56.
Duncan, K, Philips, P and Prus, M (2006) Prevailing wage legislation and public school construction efficiency: a stochastic frontier approach1. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 625-34.
Hartmann, A (2006) The context of innovation management in construction firms. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 567-78.
Hyari, K and El-Rayes, K (2006) Field experiments to evaluate lighting performance in nighttime highway construction. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 591-601.
Navon, R and Berkovich, O (2006) An automated model for materials management and control. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 635-46.
Phua, F T T (2006) When is construction partnering likely to happen? An empirical examination of the role of institutional norms. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 615-24.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: Construction partnering; institutional norms; procurement methods
- ISBN/ISSN: 0144-6193
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190500521256
- Abstract:
Despite the vast interest and enthusiasm on the benefits of construction partnering, no apparent trend exists to show that it has become the dominant choice of procurement method across construction industries internationally. Rather, the implementation of construction partnering has been patchy, with varying degrees of success and, in many instances, its adoption is more an exception than the norm. This study argues and sets out to test the proposition that despite the huge advocacy for the use of partnering, its slow uptake and, more importantly, the inconsistent results it yields are due to the lack of systematic investigation into the institutional determinants of partnering. Based on data collected from 526 firms covering various industry disciplines, results show that firms’ use of partnering is selective and that this selectiveness is significantly determined by the industry’s level of institutional norms and not by the conventional notion that partnering increases a firm’s profitability or efficiency. Findings further indicate that firms that perceive there are strong industry norms for partnering are twice as likely to use partnering as firms that do not have such perception. By empirically examining the institutional conditions under which partnering is more likely to occur, this study sheds some light on why the implementation of partnering remains at a conservative rate and suggests avenues for future research.
Soetanto, R, Dainty, A R J, Glass, J and Price, A D F (2006) Towards an explicit design decision process: the case of the structural frame. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 603-14.
Song, Y, Liu, C and Langston, C (2006) Linkage measures of the construction sector using the hypothetical extraction method. Construction Management and Economics, 24(06), 579-89.