No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
How a Better Understanding of Relation can Increase Responsibility between Stakeholders?
Part of:
Design Management
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 July 2019
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Construction projects are complex and subject to a lot of conflicts. The misunderstanding between actors is one cause of these conflicts. To understand actor's interrelation is fundamental.
In this paper, we used FAcT Miror method to analyse the relation between the two main actors, Owner and Contractor. Based on the method we built a survey about Fears, Attractiveness and Temptations of treason of each actor, The Miror effect of the method allows us to evaluate what is the thought of an actor about the other and to measure differences between actors' thought on a specific aspect of the relation. Our results allow us to have a better understanding of the relation between Owners and Contractors on a construction project. Moreover, we point out specific aspects of the relation which need to be studied to improve the understanding.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 1155 - 1164
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- © The Author(s) 2019
References
Brunet, A. (2005), “UNIVERSITE PANTHEON-ASSAS ( PARIS II ) INCOMPLETUDE CONTRACTUELLE Daniel VITRY, Professeur à l”, Université de Paris II - Panthéon-Assas Eric BROUSSEAU, Professeur à l ‘ Université de Paris X - Nanterre, rapporteur’, (PARIS II).Google Scholar
Le Cardinal, G. et al. (2001), “Intervention methodology for complex problems: The FAcT-Mirror method”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 132 No. 3, pp. 694–702. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00178-8.Google Scholar
Le Cardinal, G., Guyonnet, J.F. and Pouzoullic, B. (1997), “La Dynamique de la Confiance - Construire la coopération dans les projets complexes”. DUNOD.Google Scholar
Dyer, J.H. (1997), “Effective interim collaboration: how firms minimize transaction costs and maximise transaction value”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 535–556. http://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<535::AID-SMJ885>3.3.CO;2-Q3.3.CO;2-Q>Google Scholar
Kartam, S. (1999), “Generic Methodology for Analyzing Delay Claims”, Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, Vol. 125 No. 6, pp. 409–419. http://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1999)125:6(409).Google Scholar
Levin, P. (1998), “Construction contract claim, changes & dispute resolution”, in. Reston.Google Scholar
Lu, P. et al. (2015), “The effectiveness of contractual and relational governances in construction projects in China”, International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier B.V., Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 212–222. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.03.004Google Scholar
Lumineau, F., Fréchet, M. and Puthod, D. (2011), “An organizational learning perspective on the contracting process”, Strategic Organization, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 8–32. http://doi.org/10.1177/1476127011399182Google Scholar
Mitropoulos, P. and Howell, G. (2001), “Model for Understanding, Preventing and Resolving Project Disputes”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 127 No. 3, pp. 223–231. http://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2001)127:3(223)Google Scholar
Morin, E. (2005), “Introduction à la pensée complexe”. Edited by Seuil, C. Points Essais. Paris.Google Scholar
Poppo, L. and Zenger, T. (2002), “Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements?”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 707–725. http://doi.org/10.1002/smj.249Google Scholar
Reuer, J. and Arino, A. (2017), “Strategic alliance contracts: dimensions and determinants of contractual complexity”, Information (Japan), Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 397–403. http://doi.org/10.1002/smjGoogle Scholar
Rooke, J., Seymour, D. and Fellows, R. (2004), “Planning for claims: An ethnography of industry culture”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 655–662. http://doi.org/10.1080/014461904200026324Google Scholar
SCL (2017), “Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption 2nd edition February 2017”. Available at: www.scl.org.uk.Google Scholar
Suprapto, M., Bakker, H.L.M. and Mooi, H.G. (2015), “Relational factors in owner-contractor collaboration: The mediating role of teamworking”, International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier Ltd and IPMA, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 1347–1363. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.03.015Google Scholar
Watzlawick, P., Helmick-Beavin, J. and Jackson, D.D.A. (1967), “Pragmatics of Human Communication: A Study of Interactional Patterns”, Pathologies and Paradoxes. 1St edn. Norton.Google Scholar
Wong, W.K. et al. (2008), “A framework for trust in construction contracting”, International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier Ltd and IPMA, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 821–829. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.11.004Google Scholar
Yiu, K.T.W. and Cheung, S.O. (2006), “A catastrophe model of construction conflict behavior”, Building and Environment, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 438–447. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.01.007Google Scholar
Zimmer, B. (2012), “Structuration d'un cluster d'innovation: Application aux projets d'innovation dans une grappe d'entreprises en gérontechnologie”, Thèse de Doctorat en génie industriel, Centrale Paris.Google Scholar
You have
Access
Open access