Exploring a public client’s control systems in infrastructure projects from a relationship history perspective

Examining the Influence of UK Public Clients’ Characteristics on Their Own Innovation-Decision towards the Modern Methods of Construction (MMC)

“…Despite only achieving significance at a 90% confidence rate, this can be explained by the nature of construction procurement where control could be better sensed at the post-innovation decision and not before, meaning that controlling personality traits of decision-makers would have more influence on the innovation's processes and project delivery rather than on the actual adoption and uptake. Such discussions align with Granheimer et al [128], who infer that public clients tend to focus on results and output measurability of innovative solutions and are sure in their public sector's contractual firmness and ability to address their initial concerns [89]. Hence, a less controlling trait that welcomes long-term relationships is seen as an important factor that can predict the higher likelihood of an MMC uptake.…”

“…A controlling personality trait is reasonably assumed to influence a less favourable decision toward innovations. In construction, clients tend to have such a characteristic embedded in their practices towards their supply chain [89]. Generally, construction clients prefer to have more involvement and effect on the process; this happens by engaging their teams to oversee the practices [42].…”

“…The matter of price in the public sector, therefore, is not alone what determines public clients' choice of methods, but it is the sureness that the market critically understands their needs [127]. Moreover, Järvenpää et al [89] discuss the relationship between confidence and relationship history between public clients and their supply chain; based on the results, it is logical to state that the MMC uptake in the public sector is low, inhibiting the development of a robust relationship history that can better boost public clients' confidence as a reference. Such history, and familiarity, means that clients are aware that MMC firms have no foundations or past actions that can aid their competence to penetrate the public sector [89].…”

“…Moreover, Järvenpää et al [89] discuss the relationship between confidence and relationship history between public clients and their supply chain; based on the results, it is logical to state that the MMC uptake in the public sector is low, inhibiting the development of a robust relationship history that can better boost public clients' confidence as a reference. Such history, and familiarity, means that clients are aware that MMC firms have no foundations or past actions that can aid their competence to penetrate the public sector [89]. Therefore, it is reasonable to state that this study's findings extend a better understanding of the most influential variable driving the public sector's adoption of MMC and reveal the interplay between the level of market confidence perceived by public clients and their uptake of MMC projects as a critical gateway for both research and practice.…”

Modern methods of construction (MMC) and innovation negativism in the UK public sector

“…time) and develop managerial skills like organising trust-building activities to build good relationship atmosphere of strong solidarity”. Reflecting on the relationship history in the public sector, the finding subscribes to Järvenpää et al . (2022), who infer that “when there is no relationship history between the actors, the agent's unfamiliarity with the principal's actions may cause confusion and frustration, which in turn may reduce focus on project execution”.…”