Prioritizing quality over profit: Value trade-offs within architect-client relations

Architectural service delivery involves a complex system of economic and quality related value dimensions, which are mutually dependent and prioritized differently by actors. Responding to professional logics as well as organizational logics, value creation goals of architects and clients are multidimensional, resulting in tensions within and across collaborating organizations. Value related tensions are evident in organizations, as has been illustrated by paradox research. However, studies on how these tensions are handled in the interaction process of collaborating organizations are still fairly limited. This explorative research focusses on value trade-offs within architect-client relations. Twenty in-depth interviews with architects and their respective clients are used to explore how economic and quality related values are negotiated by actors from collaborating organizations. Results indicate that the value negotiation process is largely dominated by tensions between profit and project quality. An analysis of two situations provides in-depth information on how architects and clients either follow an individual or mutual strategy to prioritise quality over profit. This research contributes to the theory development on value management in the construction process and helps practitioners to more consciously and efficiently handle tensions in order to improve shared value creation.

[1]  B MilesMatthew,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis , 2018, Approaches and Processes of Social Science Research.

[2]  M. Lamont.  Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation , 2012 .

[3]  K. Seers.  Qualitative data analysis , 2011, Evidence Based Nursing.

[4]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  Complex Business Models: Managing Strategic Paradoxes Simultaneously , 2010 .

[5]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  TOWARD A THEORY OF PARADOX : A DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM MODEL OF ORGANIZING , 2011 .

[6]  F. Vatin.  Valuation as Evaluating and Valorizing , 2013 .

[7]  Marianne Jahre,et al.  Balancing value creating logics in construction , 2009 .

[8]  Kevin G. Corley,et al.  Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research , 2013 .

[9]  Stephen P. Borgatti,et al.  Professional Service Constellations: How Strategies and Capabilities Influence Collaborative Stability and Change , 1998 .

[10]  V. Ambrosini,et al.  Value Creation Versus Value Capture: Towards a Coherent Definition of Value in Strategy , 2000 .

[11]  Constantine Andriopoulos,et al.  Six Paradoxes in Managing Creativity: An Embracing Act , 2003 .

[12]  Pieter Jan Stappers,et al.  Contextmapping: experiences from practice , 2005 .

[13]  Gernot Grabher,et al.  Introduction to paradoxes of creativity: managerial and organizational challenges in the cultural economy , 2007 .

[14]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  Value Creation and Value Capture: A Multilevel Perspective , 2007 .

[15]  Paula Jarzabkowski,et al.  Responding to competing strategic demands: How organizing, belonging, and performing paradoxes coevolve , 2013 .

[16]  Michael Hutter,et al.  Infinite Surprises: On the Stabilization of Value in the Creative Industries , 2011 .

[17]  Peter W. G. Morris,et al.  MANAGING THE PERFORMING PARADOX IN ARCHITECTURAL COMPETITIONS , 2012 .

[18]  Claire Jamieson.  The Future for Architects , 2011 .

[19]  Ingrid Creppell.  On Justification: Economies of Worth , 2007, Perspectives on Politics.

[20]  Christopher L. Tucci,et al.  Internet Business Models and Strategies , 2000 .

[21]  Tobias Bachmeier,et al.  Business Model Generation A Handbook For Visionaries Game Changers And Challengers , 2016 .

[22]  F. Duffy,et al.  Professionalism and architects in the 21st century , 2013 .

[23]  W. Hughes,et al.  Professionalism and professional institutions in times of change , 2013 .