An overview into the concept of partnering

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(01)00059-XGet rights and content

Abstract

This paper examines the relatively new concept and philosophy of partnering, as a response to client demand within the UK construction industry. It is suggested that partnering improves productivity, lowers costs and provides the product of construction to satisfactory standards and time. The concepts, philosophies and definitions of partnering, as observed by a number of leading researchers, are established, as are some of the practical responses observed currently within the private and public sectors. It is concluded that there are identifiable ingredients of good partnering practice, but that partnering remains in an evolutionary phase. Whilst claims for huge savings in terms of cost and time have been made, it is held that it is too early yet to conclude that these are the direct result of partnering. Meanwhile, it is noted that methods that motivate good practice are emerging.

Introduction

Partnering is a concept which provides a framework for the establishment of mutual objectives among the building team with an attempt to reach an agreed dispute resolution procedure as well as encouraging the principle of continuous improvement. This framework enthuses trust, co-operation and teamwork into a fragmented process which enables the combined effort of the participants of the industry to focus upon project objectives.

Partnering has grown out of the development of strategic alliances in order to manage the supply chain in a particular process such as construction. This concept was first originated in Japan, USA and Australia. It evolved out of the failure of the traditional procurement methods to meet client criteria and to achieve project objectives due to ever increasing project size and complexity. Its foundation in Japan may well be advocated to the Japanese management revolution ‘Kaizen’ which focuses upon Total Quality Management (TQM). However, unlike other systematic approach to management, partnering focuses upon the importance that all parties have to play in the construction process as opposed to the ‘top down’ approach.

Since its introduction into the UK some 10–15 years ago, support for the concept has been clear. Client organisations such as the British Airports Authority, Railtrack, Tesco and National Westminster Bank PLC all reported positive, measurable and identifiable results. However, the concept of partnering can be rather confusing as to what it is and what it is supposed to achieve. This conceptual paper provides an overview of the principle of partnering and presents some examples of cost benefits and efficiency. It unfolds the findings of various reports and research projects in the field of partnering in an attempt to present the advantages, disadvantages and applicability.

Section snippets

Client satisfaction and change

The UK construction industry has for almost a century, been analysed and observed by a number of reports, mainly from the public sector. The underlying concern of these reports has proved to be the inefficiency of the construction industry as compared with others together with culture and working practices. Root causes for the reasons for economic inefficiency have over the years been directed to the fragmented nature of the industry, the uniqueness of construction as a product, the divorce

Concepts, philosophies and definitions

I have previously established the criticisms that have led to the UK construction industry embracing teamwork as a method of improving productivity and quality. Until now the problems of fragmentation have been considered to be a management problem that might be resolved by different procurement techniques. However the latter address methods of production and have mostly failed to address the problems of integrating the entire construction team into the construction process. Indeed most

Cost savings and incentives

It does appear that some projects have established benchmarks to claim substantial savings. On individual projects up to 10% of the original project budget has been achieved, while over the longer term, some suggest that partnering can result in savings of up to 30%. [14], [17]. However it is unclear in many cases how the benchmarking was established or that traditional methods of saving costs could not have equally resulted in similar savings, i.e. in the recent past value engineering was held

Conclusions

This paper has outlined the desire for a change in the method of construction procurement. This has emanated from large construction clients at the international and national level in the UK in response to continued dissatisfaction with UK performance. It would appear that many within the industry have accepted the challenge and have entered into partnership arrangements. These arrangements are said to still be in the stage of evolution [14] and can only be achieved through experience. There is

References (28)

  • SirJohn. Egan

    Rethinking construction. The construction industry task force

    (1998)
  • SirM. Latham

    Constructing the team

    (1994)
  • J. Gerard

    Construction

    Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE

    (1995)
  • Partnering—contract without conflict

    (1991)
  • USA Construction Industry Institute. In search of partnering excellence. USA Construction Industry Institute, July...
  • HMSO. Competitiveness—helping business to win. Para 15.5, HMSO, May...
  • Price J. Overview of current developments. The public sector construction procurement revolution. The proceedings of a...
  • Wood Sir K. The public client and the construction industries (the Wood Report). Building and Civil engineering EDC’s,...
  • Bromilow F. Contract time performance expectations and the reality. Building Forum, Australia, September 1969, pp....
  • King D. Clients snub partnering, says survey. Building, 21 August...
  • Atkins WS. Strategies for the European Construction Industry. A programme for change. European Commission, May...
  • Hellard R. Project partnering—principle and practice. Thomas Telford,...
  • E. Cook et al.

    Partnering contracting for the future

    Journal of management Engineering

    (October 1990)
  • Bennett J, Jayes S. The seven pillars of partnering—a guide to second generation partnering. The Partnering Task Force...
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text