Exploring infrastructure procurement by Australian state governments

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to report on a research thesis that explores how Australian state government agencies procure infrastructure projects and the extent to which they view the procurement process as an opportunity to deliver more than just a physical facility. The primary purpose of this study was to understand the practice of construction project procurement by project managers on behalf of Australian state government agencies and to explore the creation of public value through procurement.Design/methodology/approachThis thesis presents results drawn from ten case studies of state government organisations that procure infrastructure; either roads or buildings. A total of 37 highly experienced project managers operationally responsible for the procurement of infrastructure within these organisations were interviewed.FindingsThe findings show that there is considerable scope for improving infrastructure procurement by Australian state governments and that broader public value creation approaches in the form of policy by‐products are either not considered or inconsistently pursued.Practical implicationsThe broader policy implications flowing from the research findings provide valuable commentary that inform the practice of infrastructure procurement and point to areas to which improvement efforts may be directed. These areas include the challenge of developing the next generation of infrastructure procurement managers, applying non‐price criteria in a rigorous way, using prequalification registers to engage in supplier development and delivering policy by‐products as part of standard procurement approaches.Originality/valueThis thesis presents qualitative data focused on the perspective of procurement professionals, a group who have, hitherto, been somewhat underrepresented in the literature.

Towards Sustainable Infrastructure Development: Drivers, Barriers, Strategies, and Coping Mechanisms

“…This can be improved if the involved stakeholders are aware of barriers and drivers to the adoption of SID. While numerous Australian studies have been conducted around sustainability and infrastructure development, recent ones focus on infrastructure procurement [5], social infrastructure in the areas of PPPs [6], development of sustainability reporting tools [7], and sustainable management through decision-making tools [8]. However, there is an obvious omission of South Australian and construction-specific studies.…”

Asymmetric Procurement in the Public Sector

“…However, there is a suggestion that the focus is changing, with 43.48% of BS staff stating that quality was also a consideration. Whilst this is representative of the responsibility to stewardship of public funds that such organizations face, it also reflects observations that public‐sector organizations are still cost focused (McIvor et al ., 2002; Staples and Dalrymple, 2011).…”

“…Many authors agree that procurement has become increasingly valued at the corporate level, with some suggesting that it should be considered equally important as other strategic functions such as marketing, finance, and operations (McIvor et al ., 1997; Cavinato, 1999; Rink and Fox, 1999; Paulraj et al ., 2006). Despite this, it has been observed that public procurement is still focused on reducing transaction costs and fails to consider the total acquisition costs of products (Staples and Dalrymple, 2011).…”

Public Sector Supply Chain Management: A Triple Helix Approach to Aligning Innovative Environmental Initiatives

“…Many authors agree that procurement has become increasingly recognized at the corporate level with some suggesting that it should be considered equally important like other strategically significant functions such as marketing, finance, and operations [Paulraj et al, 2006;Cavinato, 1999;Rink, Fox, 1999;McIvor et al, 1997]. Despite this, it has been observed that public sector procurement is still focused on reducing transaction costs and fails to consider the total acquisition costs of products [Staples, Dalrymple, 2011].…”