Multi-Outcome Construction Policies : Industry-Focused Research Summary

The Multi-outcomes Construction Policies research project, funded by the Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation (Project 2006-036-A), sought to explore the costs and benefits of leveraging social outcomes on public construction contracts. The context of the research project was the trend towards the contracting out of public construction works and the attempts that have been made to use new contractual arrangements with construction companies to construction achieve a wide range of social outcomes. In federal and state jurisdictions it is now common for governments to impose a range of additional requirements on public works contractors that relate to broad social/community objectives. These requirements include commitments to train apprentices and trainees; to provide local and/or indigenous employment opportunities; to buy local materials; and to include art works. The cost and benefits of using public construction contracts to achieve social/community goals have, to our knowledge, not been thoroughly researched in an Australian context. This is likely to reflect in large part the relatively short history of contracting out public works. As Jensen and Stonecash (2004) explain, most previous empirical studies of contracting out have attempted to measure the cost savings achieved through privatization, as this was the focus of policy debate in the 1980s and 1990s. Relatively few studies have addressed the ability of contracting arrangements to ensure the delivery of desired ‘quality’ outcomes1, or the costs of achieving these outcomes via contracting arrangements. One of the potential costs of attempting to leverage social/community outcomes on public construction projects is a reduction in the amount of competition for these projects, with obvious consequences for average bid prices and choice. In jurisdictions, such as Western Australia and Queensland, where currently construction market conditions are already

Discourse practice gaps in work life balance : comparative case studies in the Australian construction industry

Perspectives on work-life balance (WLB) reflected in political, media and organisational discourse, would maintain that WLB is on the agenda because of broad social, economic and political factors (Fleetwood 2007). In contrast, critical scholarship which examines work-life balance (WLB) and its associated practices maintains that workplace flexibility is more than a quasi-functionalist response to contemporary problems faced by individuals, families or organisations. For example, the literature identifies where flexible work arrangements have not lived up to expectations of a panacea for work-home conflicts, being characterised as much by employer-driven working conditions that disadvantage workers and constrain balance, as they are by employee friendly practices that enable it (Charlesworth 1997). Further, even where generous organisational work-life balance policies exist, under-utilisation is an issue (Schaefer et al, 2007). Compounding these issues is that many employees perceive their paid work as becoming more intense, pressured and demanding (Townsend et al 2003).

The relationship between construction firm strategies and innovation outcomes

Survey results provide a preliminary assessment of the relative contribution of a range of tactical business strategies to innovation performance by firms in the Australian construction industry. Over 1,300 firms were surveyed in 2004, resulting in a response rate of 29%. Respondents were classified as high, medium or low innovators according to an innovation index based on the novelty and impact of their innovations and their adoption of listed technological and organizational advances. The relative significance of 23 business strategies concerning (1) employees, (2) marketing, (3) technology, (4) knowledge and (5) relationships was examined by determining the extent to which they distinguished high innovators from low innovators. The individual business strategies that most strongly distinguished high innovators were (1) ‘investing in R&D’, (2) ‘participating in partnering and alliances on projects’, (3) ‘ensuring project learnings are transferred into continuous business processes’, (4) ‘monitoring international best practice’, and (5) ‘recruiting new graduates’. Of the five types of strategies assessed, marketing strategies were the least significant in supporting innovation. The results provide practical guidance to managers in project-based industries wishing to improve their innovation performance.