ARCOM

Search or browse again.

Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 22 results ...

Aziz, A M A (2007) A survey of the payment mechanisms for transportation DBFO projects in British Columbia. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 529–43.

Cameron, I and Duff, R (2007) A critical review of safety initiatives using goal setting and feedback. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 495–508.

Che Ibrahim, C K I, Costello, S B and Wilkinson, S (2018) Making sense of team integration practice through the “lived experience” of alliance project teams. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(05), 598–622.

• Type: Journal Article
• Keywords: New Zealand; Team integration; Construction; Alliance; Lived experience;
• ISBN/ISSN: 0969-9988
• URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-09-2016-0208
• Abstract:
  Team integration is a concept that has been widely fostered in alliances as a way of improving collaborative relationships between diverse organisations. However, deeper insights into the practice of high levels of team integration remain elusive. The purpose of this paper is to develop a deeper understanding of team integration through the “lived experience” of practitioners in an alliance. This study employed a qualitative research methodology. Using a phenomenological examination, via the lived experiences of 24 alliance practitioners, the practice of alliance team integration has been investigated based on the key indicators that foster alliance team integration: team leadership, trust and respect, single team focus on project objectives and key results areas, collective understanding, commitment from project alliance board, single and co-located alliance team, and free flow communication. The findings highlight that alliancing gives the project teams’ flexibility to change and adapt, to advance the collaborative environment and that successful integration of multi-disciplinary project teams requires commitment to the identified indicators. These findings have led to the development of a framework of leadership for successful alliance integrated practices. It is proposed that to influence the leadership for the purpose of achieving successful integration practice, a team-centric approach is required which includes four elements: task and relationship-oriented behaviours; collaborative learning environments; cultivating cross-boundary networks; and collaborative governance. As team integration is the central tenet of alliance projects, greater understanding regarding the leadership of integration practice is of value in leveraging the benefits of outstanding performance. Also, the results of the study are expected to be informative and provide insight for alliance teams to help them proactively recognise how the context of integrated teams is influenced by specific indicators, impacting on the extent of integration practice. This study contributes to the current body of knowledge concerning the insights from the “lived experience” of alliance teams towards achieving a greater understanding of what contributes to the leadership of successful integration practices.

Cooper, I (1997) The UK's changing research base for construction: the impact of recent government policy. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 292–300.

Courtney, R (1997) Building Research Establishment: past, present and future. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 285–91.

Davidson, C H (1997) The Building Centres: CIB's information allies. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 313–7.

El-Sayegh, S (2018) Resource levelling optimization model considering float loss impact. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(05), 639–53.

Gann, D M (1997) Should governments fund construction research?. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 257–67.

Harty, C, Goodier, C I, Soetanto, R, Austin, S, Dainty, A R J and Price, A D F (2007) The futures of construction: a critical review of construction future studies. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 477–93.

Kose, S (1997) Building Research Institute in Japan: past, present and future. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 268–71.

Krima, N A, Wood, G, Aouad, G F and Hatush, Z (2007) Assessing the performance of Libyan supervising engineers. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 509–18.

Lansley, P R (1997) The impact of BRE's commercialization on the research community. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 301–12.

Leppavuori, E K M (1997) Commercial building research: threat or opportunity for customer satisfaction?. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 272–8.

Ling, F Y Y, Ning, Y, Chang, Y H and Zhang, Z (2018) Human resource management practices to improve project managers’ job satisfaction. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(05), 654–69.

Mason, J R (2007) The views and experiences of specialist contractors on partnering in the UK. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 519–27.

Prakash, A and Phadtare, M (2018) Service quality for architects: scale development and validation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(05), 670–86.

Seaden, G (1997) The future of national construction research organizations. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 250–6.

Skitmore, M and Cheung, F K T (2007) Explorations in specifying construction price forecast loss functions. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 449–65.

Tran, D H and Long, L D (2018) Project scheduling with time, cost and risk trade-off using adaptive multiple objective differential evolution. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 25(05), 623–38.

Tsai, H, Wang, L and Lin, L (2007) A study on improving the ranking procedure for determining the most advantageous tender. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 545–54.

Watts, G (1997) The National Centre for Construction in the UK. Building Research & Information, 25(05), 279–84.

Widén, K and Hansson, B (2007) Diffusion characteristics of private sector financed innovation in Sweden. Construction Management and Economics, 25(05), 467–75.