Partnering: A Plus for Safety
March 2000
Whether called a partnership, strategic alliance,
strategic team-building, or any other buzzwords, the partnering concept is the
current rage in the construction industry. Partnership can deliver superior
results. However, as with all things of value, there is a price to be paid.
Partnering is not a cure-all, but it is another mechanism used by firms to improve
the construction delivery system, and as a plus for safety.
by Ron
Prichard, P.E. Ph.D.
Aon Worldwide Resources
The concept of partnering as a new mechanism for producing project success
has been getting a lot of interest lately from all segments of the construction
industry. The Corps of Engineers has successfully utilized partnering for many
years to deliver high-quality projects, with no litigation. The American General
Contractors of America (AGC) has conducted an extensive outreach program to
explain partnering to its members. The Building and Construction Trades Department
of the AFL-CIO claims to have invented the concept. The consulting industry
has latched onto partnering as a new venue for revenue generation.
Whether called a partnership, strategic alliance, strategic team-building,
or any other buzzwords, the partnering concept is the current rage in the construction
industry. Perhaps this widespread acceptance best illustrates both the opportunities
for and misunderstandings of partnering. This article helps explain partnering---the
concept, the rewards, and how to structure it. Throughout, the value of partnering
for improving construction safety is addressed.
The Concept
Partnering is not a new concept. The idea behind partnering is to build a
trust-based, cooperative environment where the many parties involved in a construction
project collaborate to build the project instead of confronting each other.
Partnering can be used as a one-time, one-project approach for a finite period
of time, or to create an ongoing, long-term arrangement that covers many projects
over an extended period of time.
The principle goal of partnering is to reduce the effort and expense of construction
disputes. The focus is to get the job built. A project that finishes on time,
within budget, and without the pain, frustration, and cost of litigation (or
its alternatives) benefits participants. Partnering entails a more rational
approach to problem-solving on a project. Rather than view every problem as
an obstacle or an issue to fight over, the participants work to resolve the
problem, at the lowest level, as quickly as possible.
Owners and contractors have reached out to partnering as a way to increase
the cost effectiveness of the construction delivery system. When it is successful,
partnering results in on-time, cost-efficient performance. When partnering fails,
projects are no better than average-meaning late and with cost overruns. Partnering
is not easily achieved, nor is it always a success. The caveat that sometimes
appears on TV shows: "These are professionals, do not attempt this at home!",
applies to partnering. It is not a panacea for all construction woes. Extensive
and intensive work goes into creating success.
The most difficult aspect of partnering is to gain the commitment of all
parties to the process. If their commitment is half-hearted or on the basis
of "wait and see," then the probability for success is low. Most partnering
arrangements gradually fall apart as the levels of enthusiasm and involvement
of senior management diminishes with the passage of time since the chartering
meeting. It is up to the participants to dedicate themselves to making it work.
When partnering fails, it usually flounders due to selfish interests-where
one party seeks to advance only its own interests at the expense of others rather
than advancing some of its interests along with some of those of the others.
Partnering is for the mutual gain of all parties to the process. Where one party
seeks favors or to gain significant advantage over the others, the process quickly
deteriorates back into adversarial confrontation. All parties must work together
as a team, or partnering does not succeed.
Basic Partnering Premises
- Partnering is hard work
- The benefits outweigh the costs
- Real trust is essential at all levels
- Old attitudes must change
- Cooperation is more productive than confrontation
- Management must set the example through both word and deed
- Differences must be dealt with openly
- Commitment to partnering begins at the top
The Rewards
Partnering is a process. It revolves around creating equity of risks and
rewards among the various parties to the contract. The aim is to establish a
structure for resolving problems that leads to continual win-win situations.
Partnering takes a commitment of time, energy, and resources in order to create
the right working relationship among the principle parties to the project. It
is not a "one and done" activity, but a chore that requires continual effort
throughout the course of the project.
The primary basis for the success of partnering comes from the core around
which the partnering charter is built-alignment of project goals. This is the
equivalent of making sure, in writing, that every party to the process is in
the same boat and all rowing together. Goal alignment also leads to other benefits
of partnering: trust, open communications, and early problem resolution.
Trust takes a commitment from each party and is not easily achieved. To reach
trust, there must be mutual sharing of objectives, expectations, and values,
as well as dedication to common objectives. All parties must understand each
other and be committed to helping each other achieve their common objectives.
They must also all agree to abandon confrontation.
Open communication is perhaps the most important partnering benefit. To attain
it, all parties must be willing to communicate honestly with each other. This
is what makes partnering difficult. Honest, open communication makes people
feel vulnerable because it entails taking risks and openly accepting dependency
on others.
Problem resolution is a proactive process where the participants have empathy
for the position of the others. This is accomplished when the parties to the
contract respect and have confidence in each other, and recognize how disputes
pose a danger to the achievement their goal.
Superior cost performance, enhanced safety, and significantly better quality-by-products
of a successful partnership-generate improved profitability or cost savings
for the project. This is the tangible reward for the effort that is put into
a successful partnership. However, trust, open communication, and effective
problem resolution require effort and courage-and patience.
Trust builds over an extended period of time and is also a fragile thing.
It results from the cumulative testing, by others, of one's commitment. The
actions of each party are constantly under scrutiny for verification that actions
indeed match words. If there is a disconnect between what is said and done,
all bets are off. What we are talking about is effecting cultural change on
the job site. This is not a process for the faint of heart.
The Structure
Partnering can be started either before or after the contracts are signed.
Generally, for one-project efforts, it is best to begin the partnering process
after all the project players have been selected through competitive or negotiated
bids. Once everyone is signed up, with a requirement to participate in partnering
written into the contract, the process can begin. This methodology eliminates
the source of many potentially contentious elements from discussion-namely,
the scope of work and the price.
Partnering begins with a joint workshop involving all parties. This sets
the tone for the entire project. All parties share in the cost of the workshop,
a first gesture toward mutual commitment. The most successful efforts also enlist
the aid of an experienced facilitator to lead the team-building process in the
workshop.
The workshop includes all the key players on the project. However, there
will be many parties to the work who will not arrive on the job site until the
project is well underway. These parties may or may not be included as a part
of the initial workshop, depending on the significance of their work. If the
decision is made to not include them, provisions must be made to educate them,
prior to the commencement of their work, regarding the partnering process and
the site procedures.
The focus of the workshop is to bring out the expectations of the parties,
establish a charter that defines the project mission statement, and then agree
on key project goals, objectives, and measures. One of the key areas addressed
in the project charter is safety expectations.
A team must also be created to define a proactive dispute resolution process.
This helps create a common, project-wide consensus and process for conflict
resolution. As a part of the dispute prevention structure, the team should serve
as the "keeper of the process." The composition of the team can change over
the course of the project, but its key role is to serve as a focal point for
resolution of problems that cannot be eliminated at the site management level.
This team, and any others who are key players on the project, should hold
regular meetings to evaluate their efforts and critique how they are doing.
There should be no "undiscussables" among this group. Everything is open to
discussion or there really is no trust within the project team.
The agreement around objectives, and the process to resolve disputes, serves
to significantly diminish project risk, a result which manifests itself in improved
safety performance on the job site. There must be an equitable sharing of the
rewards of the success of partnering-improved profitability or cost savings
for project. This is the tangible reward for the effort that is put into a successful
partnership.
Conclusion
Partnering leads to a change in attitude about many aspects of the construction
process. The most important shift in attitudes is how problems are viewed. If
anything is certain about a construction project, it is that unforeseen problems
will arise. Problems in partnerships are seen as challenges to be overcome,
not obstacles to progress. Once all parties buy into the work and effort entailed
by partnering, the process can begin.
Partnership can deliver superior results. However, as with all things of
value, there is a price to be paid. The price is a willingness to take a risk
and to make the effort over the duration of the project. If there is no investment,
there can be no return. Partnering succeeds because people work together to
get the job built safely, on time, for the stated budget, and without fighting.
Partnering is not a cure-all, but it is another mechanism used by firms to
improve the construction delivery system, and as a plus for safety.
Opinions expressed in Expert Commentary articles are those of the author and are
not necessarily held by the author's employer or IRMI. Expert Commentary articles
and other IRMI Online content do not purport to provide legal, accounting, or other
professional advice or opinion. If such advice is needed, consult with your attorney,
accountant, or other qualified adviser.