Boundary action in construction projects: new collaborative project practices

Abstract

PurposeTraditional construction project practice has been based on rigid and impermeable boundaries that have made communication, cooperation and integration a major challenge. However, new collaborative approaches have been developed. This paper aims at adding to knowledge on projects‐as‐practice by interpreting findings from a case study on a contemporary collaborative construction project. The purpose of this paper is to provide knowledge about organizational development in the project‐based construction industry by identifying boundary actions in contemporary collaborative construction practices.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on an exploratory longitudinal case study approach covering both early design phase and the following production phase, including interviews, participant observation at formal meetings and informal gatherings and internal and external documents. Thus, the methodology used is triangulation and the analysis has followed an interpretative process.FindingsThe paper provides empirical insights into three examples of boundary actions of a collaborative construction project: stakeholder boundary action, professional boundary action and geographical boundary action. From a project‐as‐practice perspective, these boundary actions turn out to be interesting renewal initiatives, providing increased understanding of where and how renewal can take place.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings are based on a single case study and more research on this area is needed. However, the paper shows examples of boundary actions in a contemporary project and thus adds to the knowledge on contemporary projects‐as‐practice.Practical implicationsThe paper provides implications for construction project managers on examples of renewal arenas.Originality/valueThe paper is exploratory and the findings are important for much needed development and renewal of the construction industry.

Construction Logistics Solutions in Urban Areas

“…Construction project organizations thus often become disconnected from the company level and hard to manage and integrate throughout the process, from drawings to finished building. Gadde, 2000, 2002;Karrbom Gustavsson and Gohary, 2012;Karrbom Gustavsson and Hallin, 2015;Kristiansen, et al, 2005;London and Kenley, 2001) Dubois and Gadde (2002) characterizes the network structure of the construction industry as two-fold; the industry has tight relationship networks within the projects, and a much looser network structure between the parent companies and projects and between different construction stakeholders. This means that within a project each stakeholder and activity is dependent on one another.…”

“…Adding to the transport related coordination problems of urban construction, is the interorganizational relationships within the construction industry itself. Construction in general is produced on a project basis in temporary organizations, where the project organizations often become disconnected from the company level and hard to manage and integrate Gadde, 2000, 2002;Karrbom Gustavsson and Gohary, 2012;Karrbom Gustavsson and Hallin, 2015). Dubois and Gadde (2002) argue that within construction projects, the couplings between different stakeholders and activities on-site are characterized as tight, meaning that within a project each stakeholder and activity is dependent on one another.…”

Service design and knowledge management in the construction supply chain for an infrastructure programme

“…Large-scale infrastructure organizations are known for rigid boundaries between processes, functions and stakeholders (Gustavsson and Gohary, 2012). These boundaries inhibit knowledge exchange and cooperation across projects implemented by the supply chain.…”

Cross-Party Collaboration to Reduce Construction Waste to Design-Build Projects

“…Ethnic culture shapes their character, so that wherever they are, this cultural background greatly influences their character. A recent study conducted by Gustavsson and Gohary (2012) found that there was a wide range of boundaries encompassing facilitated activities and activities pursued during the design and production process, with three boundary range patterns having particular importance in efficient collaboration: geographical boundaries, professional boundaries and stakeholder boundaries. This study complements the concept of the boundary range with the addition of a cultural spanning boundary.…”