holland cib 2005 partnering paper

7/28/2019 Holland CIB 2005 Partnering Paper

1/5

Discussion paper: REVALUING CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE INTERNATIONAL COUNCILFOR RESEARCH AND INNOVATION INBUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION (The Hague)

PRINCIPLES OF BEHAVIOUR UNDERPINNINGCLIENT BEST PRACTICE IN PARTNERSHIPS ANDALLIANCES- illustrations and outcomes

Professor John Carlisle, Chairman, Cooperation Works Ltd and BRG SA.

The introduction of partnering or alliancing into project managementoffers the biggest challenge to the client company, even when it ismost often client who has insisted on this way of working. There are anumber of reasons for this, the most significant of which areembedded in the culture. This paper examines these at the most basic

levels, i.e. attitudes, and behaviours.

1. THE ILLUSION OF CONTROL

The first challenge offered to the client organisation is to let go of theneed to be completely in control. This need comes in many forms; buthas one source the Hierarchical attitude. This attitude says: I am incharge; therefore my job is to give orders, and to demandcompliance. This leads to a contractual mentality that not only stiflesinnovation from the contractor; but also creates inefficiencies in

planning and delivery.So, here are some simple principles about partnering to get away fromthis bad habit after you have selected your key provider from many:

First Principle: EARLY JOINT PLANNING = PROFITABLEIMPLEMENTATIONPartnering is all about extracting maximum value from theSystem by using cooperative strategies to remove waste andencourage innovation.In my own organizations experience in over 200 projects only fivecould be classified as failures. At their height in the nineties the

projects we were facilitating yielded savings of about $450 millionannually against budget. This is testament to the power of earlyinvolvement and trusting the professionals you hire, rather than to theeffectiveness of command and control. In other words, it is all aboutbringing together all the best knowledge and experience in the systemto produce the best PLAN, and then using the good relationshipbrought about in this process to bring about a great IMPLEMENTATION.


2/5

Diagram 1 below illustrates this, making the point that ourconservative approach to working with suppliers and stakeholderscreates less space for innovation and actually increase risk of failure.Diagram 1

Where intellectual capital andrisk management make the

biggest impact

Copyright John Carlisle, 1994/7. Adapted from Baker Hughes Inteq

Potential

for Supplier/

Contractor/

User to AddValue

Area of Wasted PotentialInvolvement stage

in traditionalrelationships

Viability Managing the mess

THE EARLY INVOLVEMENT CURVE

Conceptual

Design ExecutionFollow Up -

Learning PointsDetailedDesign

Evaluation

Involvement stagein traditional

Relationships, i.e. too

late to innovate

U pstr ea m Downstr eam

However, even when we accept the logic of this we still do notimplement it, preferring to be in control rather than be economicallysuccessful.Why, then is the inefficient control approach still adhered to, if it isproven to be sub-optimal? Well, old habits die hard! As organisations,firstly, many bureaucrats find comfort in it, especially those whosepolitical masters are concerned more about doing things right ratherthan doing theright things i.e. minimum risk. Secondly, wholeorganizations are designed around the command and controlmentalities, exemplified by targets, bonuses and threats, and will dowhat they are designed to do control, no matter the cost.

Second Principle: BEHAVIOURS, NOT VALUESA great deal of attention is given today to values in organisations,and how they need changing. That is the wrong focus. Our researchhas indicated again and again that it is changing behaviour that is thesolution, because I only understand your values through thebehaviour that I experience from you. Consequently, it is important to


3/5

identify and name the behaviours that work and help people todevelop them as conscious skills, and the culture will shift, starting atthe very top of an organisation where the change must begin.

2. THE BEHAVIOURAL JOURNEYModels of Effective Meeting BehaviourThe first step of the journey, after setting out the strategy, is to changebehaviours; but before that happens you need to understand whichbehaviours are effective, and whether you are using them. The changealso needs to apply the rule of practicality; namely to where peoplespend significant amount of time and this is in meetings.By and large the client/supplier meetings in the early part of a newrelationship are a real trial. Our research shows that, with developersand the public sector in particular, most meetings are horriblyinefficient, because people do not have a model of a good partnering

meeting. They really do not understand the waste they engender atthe meeting through their traditional behaviour.Put quite simply therefore, if you improve the effectiveness ofmeetings, you will improve the relationships and the outputs.Improving meetings is, therefore, the best place to start, and meetingbehaviour is what you need to work on. But, what does an improvedmeeting look like? We will explore just one of the behavioural models.

Effective Meeting Model . The Power of Behaviour FeedbackThe pie charts below, shows what happens when top teams arecoached on their behaviours. It is a good illustration of what change is

possible when people begin to see what behaviours work and which donot. The left hand pie chart was used to give feedback to theexecutives, and the right hand pie chart is the result of the coaching.We use this model because the change in behaviour must begin at thetop if it is to be a practice throughout the project, and secondly itshows that, with the right coaching, people can change even at thetop!


4/5

PARTNERING MEETINGS

= Giving information

= Asking questions

= INITIATING

= REACTING

Copyright John Carlisle , 1997

70%81

11%

9%

72

48%

24%

13% 15%

CLARIFYING

10%

NON-PARTNERING MEETINGS

TOP TEAM BEHAVIOR WHEN

COACHED including clientsCOMBINED MEETINGS

#

# Railtrack

Best

Practice

48

27

16

3:1

9

Two slices are worth exploring: The first, Giving Information (Telling),is reduced by 30%, while Asking Questions (Including) is increased byover 50%.Secondly, Initiating (Generating Ideas) is also increased by 50%. Thismeans that much more intellectual capital becomes available; and thisreally assists in planning.Of particular importance in this model is the Reacting Behaviour, asubset of which is Disagreeing. One of the most important aspects ofhonesty and trust-building is the ability to say NO when you are

thinking no especially among the contractor community.Contractors think partnering is about being nice. It is not. It is aboutbeing honest in the relationship and that means challenging the clientwhen they are asking for the impossible or are just being bloody-minded. The client has to appreciate this behaviour and, in return,reward it.

The way to begin the relationship is to hold a workshop with thestakeholders and, inter alia, agree a charter on the aim and how youwill work together. Then agree what the expectations are of each otheras to what you need to succeed as separate parts, e.g. plans on time,

carrying out agreements to the letter, transparent costs etc. And, veryimportant, but most neglected, a review process to nip problems in thebud, and continuously to improve together.

Finally both the client and the contractors need to educate theinvestment community, both public and private sectors, in theeffectiveness of cooperation. This is the next important challenge,which can only be met by illustrating that working in partnership does


5/5

holland cib 2005 partnering paper

Documents