Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Forgues, Daniel; Koskela, Lauri (2009)
Publisher: Emerald
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: NA, TH
Purpose - This paper aims to study the influence of procurement on the performance of integrated design teams.\ud Design/methodology/approach - The research paradigm is based on Russian socio-constructivist approach to activity theory. Activity theory, as opposed to natural or social science, is a design science approach that focuses on the context aspect of project. A triangulation of qualitative research methods was used to investigate the dynamic of integrated teams in two different procurement contexts.\ud Findings – The paper is conclusive regarding the influence of procurement on team efficiency. It demonstrates that traditional procurement processes reinforce socio-cognitive barriers that hinder team efficiency. It also illustrates how new procurement modes can transform the dynamic of relationships between the client and the members of the supply chain, and have a positive impact on team performance.\ud Practical implications - The paper demonstrates first that problems with integrated design team efficiency are related to context and not process – they are not technical but socio-cognitive; second that fragmented transactional contracting increases socio-cognitive barriers that hinder integrated design team performance; third that new forms of relational contracting may help to mitigate socio-cognitive barriers and improve integrated design team performance, fourth that changing the context through procurement does not address the problem of obsolete design practices.\ud Originality/Value – The paper brings together theories of production in lean construction and social learning as a rival approach to traditional project management theory for demonstrating the importance of context on team performance.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • ANCONA, D. G., KOCHAN, T. A., SCULLY, M. & J.V., M. (2004) Managing for the future: organizational behavior & processes, Cincinnati, Ohio, SouthWestern College Publishing.
    • AUSTIN, S. A. (2001) Design Chains: A Handbook for Integrated Collaborative Design, Thomas Telford.
    • BLACKLER, F., CRUMP, N. & MCDONALD, S. (1999) Managing experts and competing through innovation: an activity theoretical analysis. Organization, 6, 5-31.
    • BUCCIARELL, L. (1996) Designing Engineers New York, MIT Press.
    • CARLILE, P. R. (2002) A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development. Organization Science, 13, 442-455.
    • CARLILE, P. R. (2004) Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: an Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries. Organization Science, 15, 555-568.
    • DRUSKAT, U. & KAYES, D. C. (2000) Learning Versus Performance in ShortTerm Project Teams. Small Group Research, 31, 328-353.
    • DRUSKAT, U. & PESCOSOLIDO, A. (2002) The content of effective teamwork mental models in self-managing teams: Ownership, learning and heedful interrelating. Human Relations, 55, 283-314.
    • DUPAGNE, A. (1991) Computer Integrated Building. Strategic final Report. Exploratory action NO 5604. ESPRIT II.
    • EGAN, J. (1998) Rethinking Construction: The Report of the Construction Task Force. London, HMSO.
    • ENGESTRÖM, Y., ENGESTRÖM, R. & KARKKAINEN, T. (1995) Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and instruction, 5, 319-136.
    • FORGUES, D. (2008) Using boundary objects to generate better value in the construction industry. School of the Built Environment. Salford, University of Salford.
    • GLYNNE, P. (2006) Benefits management-changing the focus of delivery. Association for Progress Management Yearbook 2006/07.
    • HUOVILA, P., KOSKELA, L. & LAUTANALA, M. (1997) Fast or Concurrent: The Art of Getting Construction Improved. IN ALARCÓN, L. (Ed.) Lean Construction. Taylor & Francis Group.
    • KOSKELA, L. (2000) An exploration towards a production theory and its application to construction. Finland, Technical Research Center of Finland.
    • KOSKELA, L. & HOWELL, G. (2008) The underlying theory of project management is obsolete. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 36, 22- 34.
    • KOSKELA, L., HOWELL, G. & LICHTIG, W. (2006) Contracts and production. Symposium on Sustainability and Value through Construction Procurement. Salford , UK, CIBW92 Procurement Systems.
    • KOSKINEN, K., MAKINEN S. (2009) Role of boundary objects in negotiations of project contracts. International Journal of Project Management 27, 31-38.
    • LANGLEY, A. (1999) Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data. Academy of Management Review,, 24, 691-710.
    • LARSSON, N. (2002) The Integrated Design Process. Report on a National Workshop. Ottawa, Natural Resources Canada.
    • LATHAM, S. M. (1994) Constructing the Team, Final Report of the Government / Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements In The UK Construction Industry London, HMSO.
    • LAWSON, B. (2006) How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified, Architectural Press.
    • LÖHNERT, G., DALKOWSKI, A. & SUTTER, W. (2002) Integrated Design Process, A Guideline for Sustainable and Solar-Optimised Building Design. Task 23. Berlin / Zug, IEA.
    • MOORE, D. R. & DAINTY, A. R. J. (2001) Intra-team boundaries as inhibitors of performance improvement in UK design and build projects: a call for change. Construction Management and Economics, 19, 559-562.
    • NARDI, B. A. (1996) Studying context: A comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition. Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, 69-102.
    • PATTON, M. Q. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications.
    • PELLEGRINELLI, S., PARTINGTON, D., HEMINGWAY, C., MOHDZAIN, Z. & SHAH, M. (2007) The importance of context in programme management: An empirical review of programme practices. International Journal of Project Management, 25, 41-55.
    • PMI, P. M. I. (2003) Organisational Project Management Maturity Model, Newton Square PA, USA.
    • PMI, P. M. I. (2004) The guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Newton Square, PA, USA.
    • RODRIGUES, A. & BOWERS, J. (1996) The role of system dynamics in project management. International Journal of Project Management, 14, 213-220.
    • SCHÖN, D. A. (1995) The Reflective Practitioner: how professionals think in action, Ashgate Pub Co.
    • SMULDERS, F., LOUSBERG, L. & DORST, K. (2008) Towards different communication in Collaborative Design. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 1, 352-367.
    • STASSER, G. & TITUS, W. (1987) Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 53, 81-93.
    • THORP, J. (2003) The information paradox: realizing the business benefits of information, Toronto, Canada, McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
    • TORY, M., STAUB-FRENCH, S., PO, B. A. & WU, F. (2008) Physical and Digital Artifact-Mediated Coordination in Building Design. 17, 311-351.
    • TURNER, J. R. & MÜLLER, R. (2005) The project manager's leadership style as a success factor on projects: a literature review. Project Management Journal, 36, 49-61.
    • TURNER, J. R. & SIMISTER, S. J. (2000) Gower handbook of project management, Aldershot, Angleterre, Gower.
    • VAN DE VEN, A. H. (2007) Engaged Scholarship: Creating Knowledge for Science and Practice, Oxford University Press.
    • WALKER, D. & HAMPSON, K. (2003) Procurement Strategies - A Relationshipbased Approach, Oxford, UK, Blackwell Science Ltd.
    • WEICK, K. E. & ROBERTS, K. H. (1993) Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38.
    • WINCH, G. M. (2002) Managing Construction Projects, Oxford, UK, Blackwell Publishing.
    • WINTER, M. & SZCZEPANEK, T. (2008) Projects and programmes as value creation processes: A new perspective and some practical implications. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 95-103.
    • ZAGER, D. (2002) Collaboration as an Activity Coordinating with PseudoCollective Objects. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 11, 181-204.
    • ZIMMERMAN, A. (2006) Guide sur le processus de conception intégrée. SCHL.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article