CONTRIBUTIONS OF EXISTING PRACTICES TO PURSUING VALUE IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

This research was motivated by the identification of a practical problem with theoretical relevance. Empirical observation of a large infrastructure programme pointed out managerial difficulties to achieve the expected outcomes of that construction project. The observed problem is related to the challenge of collectively defining and pursuing a project’s value proposition throughout its entire implementation. In order to better understand the nature of this problem and search for potential solutions, this research focused on evaluating the contributions of existing practices to solve the problem in hand. For that, a design science research methodology was adopted and with emphasis on the evaluative aspect of such method. Two existing practices were evaluated: the BeReal model, being developed and tested in healthcare infrastructure projects in the UK; and the Lean Project Delivery System (LPDS), being developed and tested in different construction projects in the US. While the BeReal model was specifically designed to support project teams to collectively define and pursue outcomes throughout project implementation, the LPDS brings critical elements for establishing the desired conditions that allow teams to collectively pursue value. The findings of this research indicate that it is necessary to combine the different underlying rationale of the analysed approaches to improve value generation in the construction industry: engagement of key players in a value definition and value pursuit effort; the establishment of favorable conditions for them to work together and the formulation and specification of goals, which are aligned with business strategy and reviewed and refined by key players.

[1]  Leonard Susskind The information paradox of black holes , 1997 .

[2]  Mike Kagioglou,et al.  Benefits realisation: Planning and evaluating healthcare infrastructures and services , 2010 .

[3]  Lauri Koskela,et al.  Should project management be based on theories of economics or production? , 2006 .

[4]  David Pearce,et al.  Is the construction sector sustainable?: definitions and reflections , 2006 .

[5]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[6]  Glenn Ballard,et al.  The Lean Project Delivery System: An Update , 2008 .

[7]  W. Hanemann The economic conception of water , 2005 .

[8]  G. Howell,et al.  Integrated Project Delivery An Example Of Relational Contracting , 2005 .

[9]  H. Simon,et al.  Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. , 1959 .

[10]  M. Augier,et al.  Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision‐Making Processes in Administrative Organizations , 2002 .

[11]  Stephen Emmitt,et al.  Collaboration and communication in the design chain: a value-based approach , 2009 .

[12]  Gregory Howell,et al.  The Underlying Theory of Project Management Is Obsolete , 2008, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[13]  Ofer Zwikael,et al.  Towards an outcome based project management theory , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management.

[14]  Lauri Koskela,et al.  Contracts and production , 2006 .

[15]  H. Johnson,et al.  A former management accountant reflects on his journey through the world of cost management , 2002 .

[16]  Elizabeth Daniel,et al.  Benefits management : delivering value from IS & IT investments , 2005 .

[17]  William A. Lichtig,et al.  The Integrated Agreement for Lean Project Delivery , 2010 .

[18]  Graham Winch,et al.  Towards a theory of construction as production by projects , 2006 .

[19]  W. Hanemann The economic conception o / water , 2006 .

[20]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[21]  Jan Holmström,et al.  Bridging Practice and Theory: A Design Science Approach , 2009, Decis. Sci..

[22]  Mark Winter,et al.  Images of Projects , 2009 .