Supply Chain Management: An International Journal

Contractor practices for managing extended supply chain tiers

Mesut Pala Francis Edum-Fotwe Kirti Ruikar Nathan Doughty Chris Peters

Article information:

Downloaded by KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY At 08:18 20 July 2015 (PT)

To cite this document:

Mesut Pala Francis Edum-Fotwe Kirti Ruikar Nathan Doughty Chris Peters , (2014),"Contractor practices for managing extended supply chain
tiers", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 19 Iss 1 pp. 31 - 45
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SCM-04-2013-0142
Downloaded on: 20 July 2015, At: 08:18 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 54 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1030 times since 2014*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

Ming-Chang Huang, Ghi-Feng Yen, Tzu-Chuan Liu, (2014),"Reexamining supply chain integration and the supplier's performance relationships
under uncertainty", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 19 Iss 1 pp. 64-78 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SCM-04-2013-0114
Philip Beske, Stefan Seuring, (2014),"Putting sustainability into supply chain management", Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 19 Iss 3 pp. 322-331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SCM-12-2013-0432
Stefan Schaltegger, Roger Burritt, (2014),"Measuring and managing sustainability performance of supply chains: Review and
sustainability supply chain management framework", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 19 Iss 3 pp. 232-241 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/SCM-02-2014-0061

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:534288 []

For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how
to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for
more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290
journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer
resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and
also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Cont ract or pract ices f or managing ext ended

supply chain t iers
M esut Pala
Centre for Innovative and Collaborative Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK

Francis Edum-Fotwe and Kirti Ruikar

School of Civil and Building Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK, and
Downloaded by KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY At 08:18 20 July 2015 (PT)

Nathan Doughty and Chris Peters

Asite Solutions Ltd, London, UK
Abst ract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine how contractor rms manage their relationships with extended supply chain tiers and investigate
the range of ICT technologies used to facilitate such practices.
Design/methodology/approach An on-line questionnaire survey was conducted to gather information about supply chain management
operations, supplier relationship management and the ICT technologies used by contractor rms to manage their extended supply chain tiers.
Findings The extended supply chain relationships of contractor rms are primarily composed of contractual, technical and nancial entities, but
ndings suggest that the vision to consider extended supply chain rmswhen selecting suppliers are still myopic. Majority of ICTtechnologies are used
between Tier 1 supply chain rms and there is an inconsistency in the number of technologies adopted with the extended supply chain tiers. Despite
having a high involvement relationship with Tier 2 downstream rms, ndings indicate a lack of use of ICTtechnologies to manage the organisational,
personal and technological interactions with these rms.
Research limitations/implications On the basis of different relationship types this study develops an initial framework for management of supply
chains that are facilitated by relevant ICT technologies.
Originality/value This paper provides insights into the management of extended supply chain rms by contractor rms from a relationship-centric
perspective and develops an initial framework for relationship-centric supply chain management.
Keyw ords Construction, ICT, Supply chain management, Relationships, Contractors
Paper t ype Research paper

a construction project (Smyth, 2005; Wolstenholme et al.,

2009).
An optimal SC M strategy is said to be one which is
extended to include rms in many layers down or up in the
supply chain tiers (Jones and Saad, 2003). H owever, in
construction industry many studies report that contractors
dominantly focus on demand side of supply chains and spend
too little time and effort to understand suppliers who are
located in downstream tiers (Akintoye et al., 2000). As there is
a growin g tren d to in corp orate the whole-life-value,
innovation, sustainability, and supply chain risk reduction
con cepts into exten ded supply chains con tractors are
becom ing increasingly d epend ent on their d ownstream
supply chains too (C heng and Li, 2001). In addition to this
the push by U K government to cascade the good practices to
tiers down in the supply chain is also considered to be a
catalyst for management of extended supply chain tiers.
As a result of these factors there is a growing demand for
traceability and openness by construction contractors to

1. Int roduct ion

T he com plex an d dynam ic association between rm s,
projects, markets and commodities makes it a very difcult
task for contractor rms to m anage their supply chains
(H ughes et al., 2006; London, 2008). Indeed no single rm
would be able to, nor would have the power and resources to,
manage all the supply chain rms in a project (H olti et al.,
2000). H owever, the rm with the biggest inuence in
construction projects (generally main contractors due to
magnitude of their stake in the project) can exercise different
levels of control to different supply chain rms in a project.
M oreover, clients who have dominant position in projects
usually appoint responsibility of supply chain management
(SC M ) to main contractors to better coordinate, control and/
or manage project supply chains (Jones and Saad, 2003;
Briscoe et al., 2004). D epending on the procurement route
selected contractor rms can have huge inuence as well as
the resource capacity to coordinate and steer supply chains in
T he current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.em er a ld in sigh t .com /1359- 8546.h t m

T he authors would like to thank the EPSRC (Engineering and Physical

Sciences Research C ouncil) for their support of this research and all the
respondents who participated in the survey.
Received 26 April 2013
Revised 19 August 2013
27 August 2013
Accepted 30 August 2013

Supply C hain M anagement: An International Journal

19/1 (2014) 31 45
q Emerald G roup Publishing Lim ited [ISSN 1359-8546]
[D OI 10.1108/SC M -04-2013-0142]

31

Downloaded by KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY At 08:18 20 July 2015 (PT)

Cont ract or pract ices f or managing ext ended supply chain t iers

Supply Chain Management : An Int ernat ional Journal

M . Pala et al.

Volume 19 Number 1 2014 3145

monitor, control, coordinate, and manage the extended

supply chains. H owever, management of extended supply
chain actors by contractor rms do not usually go beyond
T ier 1 suppliers (that is imm ediate subcontractors or
suppliers to contractors) as very few suppliers own all the
activities along the chain (Vrijhoef and Koskela, 2000;
H u m ph reys et al., 2003; Briscoe an d D ain ty, 2005;
Bemelmans et al., 2012a, b). F urther to this many supply
rms in the industry refrain from being transparent and open
abou t their sup p ly ch ain s. Strategically, com m ercial
condentiality is believed to be one of the main factors that
result in companies keeping their cards close to their chest.
Exacerbated by the structural formation of construction
supply chains, the inability to leverage supply market and
complexity of the products are also recognised as some of the
main barriers to reaching down to rms in the extended
supply tiers (C heng and Li, 2001; Lambert and Pohlen, 2001;
Briscoe an d D ain ty, 2005). T hu s it is believed th at
con tractors have little, if non e at all, awareness and
knowledge about rms who are located remotely at many
layers down/up in the supply chains.
T he purpose of this paper is to shed light onto contractor
rms supply chain practices from a relationship-centric
perspective and examine how construction contractors in the
U K manage their upstream and downstream supply chain
rms in extended tiers. It aims to reect on the relationship
management approaches and provide insights into the use of
IC T technologies that directly or indirectly facilitate such
practices. In construction specic literature there is dearth of
research on the use of IC T technologies for extended supply
ch ain in teraction s an d in ter-rm relation sh ips. IC T
technologies support a wide ran ge of needs in supply chain
interaction processes, includ in g au tom ation of a task,
facilitation of collaboration process, and the enabling the
communication of information (Benton and M cH enry, 2010;
H adaya and Pellerin, 2010). H owever there is a lack of
research into the adoption of these technologies to manage
inter-rm relationships with extended supply chain tiers
(H adaya and Pellerin, 2010). It is argued that through an
understanding of inter-rm relationships IC T technologies
can better facilitate cooperative, collaborative and nonadversarial supply chain interactions between contractor
rms and their extended supply chains.
T his paper is structured in the following order. It begins
with the denition of main relationship types that exist in
construction supply chains and review of the use of IC T
technologies for strategic and operational SC M . Research
methodology is explained in the section thereafter, followed
by discussion and analysis of research results. T he study goes
on to su ggest a relation sh ip -cen tric SC M fram ework
supported with appropriate IC T technologies and concludes
with a summary of the paper.

supply chains in a construction project and suggested a cSC M

framework that is concerned with the interface between the
supply chain and construction site; reducing costs related to
logistics, lead-time and inventory on specic project supply
chains; transferring activities from the site to earlier stages of
the supply chain; and, integrated management of the supply
chain with emphasis on improvement of supply chain and the
site production. T his approach provides a good plan for
development of operational cSC M however it needs to be
applied in the right context as argued by C ox and Ireland
(2002). A cSC M also has a strategic organisational dimension
for extended supply chain tiers. H ere we follow C ox et al.
(2006) who describe different types of engagemen t in
construction supply chains and the strategic management
approach for each (e.g. supplier selection, supply chain
sou rcin g, su p plier d evelop m en t an d su pp ly ch ain
management strategies) in dyadic and extended supply
chain interactions.
A way to manage construction supply chains is through a
relationship-centric perspective where the aim is to maintain
an effective operational and strategic engagement with
su pp liers. T h is stu d y d en es Su pp lier Relation sh ip
M anagement (SRM ) in a broader context as one of the
components of SC M which is a company-wide business
strategy to manage its interconnected, dynamic and multidimensional interactions through its various interfaces so that
it facilitates development of better relationships with its
suppliers. In this paper the term suppliers and subcontractors
are used interchangeably and refer to any rm which provide
materials and/or specialist service for a contractor rm in a
construction project.
cSC M that is based on relationships is an important area
which is not fully explored in the literature (M eng, 2012). An
earlier study by the authors indicates there is a lack of
denition of different relationship types in the literature (Pala
et al., 2012b). T he relational cSC M is recognised as
important for several reasons. F irst, there are many different
types of relationships in an organisations supply network and
not every relationship type is appropriate for different
contexts (Spekman et al., 1998; C ox and Townsend, 1998;
C ox and Ireland, 2002; Ford et al., 2003). Without a clear
record of with who a business interacts and what the
attributes of that relationship are, any business and operations
strategy will fail to deliver the aspired benets and develop
longer-term relationships. As a result it is advocated that
cSC M must be unique for each relationship (Briscoe and
D ainty, 2005). Secondly, value in every relationship differs
from one another as some relationships are considered to be
more valuable than others (Ford and M cD owell, 1999). For
instance Spekman et al. (1998) suggested that relationship
management should be distinct for every supplier. T his is
supported by H olti et al. (2000) who argued that it is not
possible to manage all suppliers in a construction project.
H ence a relationship based approach which puts appropriate
emphasis on the links, values and associations in inter-rm
relationships is regarded as an important facet for alignment
of multiple-temporary organisations in construction projects.
Lastly, certain strategic decisions can have different level of
impact on some relationships (Ford and M cD owell, 1999)
therefore with a relationship based approach rms are able to
apply correct sets of tools, processes, procedures and motives
for an agile, efcient and smooth interaction.

2. Const ruct ion Supply Chain relat ionships and

ICT t echnologies in relat ionship-cent ric cSCM
T here are at least three types of supply chains associated with
construction projects; temporary supply chains, frameworkspecic supply chains and company strategic supply chains
(permanent supply chains) (D ubois and G adde, 2000;
Bankvall et al., 2010). Vrijhoef and Koskela (2000) argued
th at con stru ction specic SC M (cSC M ) is abou t
management of inter and intra-rm interactions with these
32

Downloaded by KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY At 08:18 20 July 2015 (PT)

Cont ract or pract ices f or managing ext ended supply chain t iers

Supply Chain Management : An Int ernat ional Journal

M . Pala et al.

Volume 19 Number 1 2014 3145

Alth ou gh the m ain stream relation ship research on

con str uction su p ply chain s is abou t pu rchasin g an d
procurement relationships, there exits different relationship
variables in an organisations supply network in terms of
value, strategic importance, complexity and other relational
entities (Spekman et al., 1998; C ox and Townsend, 1998; C ox
and Ireland, 2002; M eng, 2012). T he relationship attributes
that describe the interaction between two rms is generally
con d u cted in relation ship m arketin g an d b u sin ess
management research. For example G ummesson (2008)
described relationships from 30 d ifferent perspectives.
H a kansson and Snehota (1995) list four variables for
describing inter-rm relationships: continuity, complexity,
symmetry and informality, whilst H arland (1994) and C room
et al. (2000) point to the various attributes that inuence the
type relationships formed. Similarly, H olmlund and Tornroos
(1997) describe four factors that shape the type, form, length
and intensity of relationships: mutuality, duration, process
nature, and context dependence. In construction research
Smyth and Edkins (2007) classify the entities of inter-rm
relationships into two groups: soft attributes such as social,
psychological and, personality and cultural dynamics of
relation sh ips an d h ard attrib u tes su ch as tech nical,
contractual and nancial elements. For example as have
been revealed by Lau and Rowlinson (2009) and Laan et al.
(2011) the trust attribute of supply chain relationships is
recognised to be one of the most important factors that give
shape and form to construction supply chain relationships.
T he framework that describe relationships in construction
projects are based on a previous study by the authors (Pala
et al., 2012b). T he four relationship types commonly cited in
the literature are transactional, series of transaction, project
collab oration an d Lon g-Ter m Strategic Par tn erin g
relationships (Pala et al., 2012b). T hese relationships are
characterised by 17 attributes found in the literature and
shown in the Appendix (see Table AI). Tran saction al
relation sh ip s- which are th e m ost com m on type of
relationship that a rm has with its suppliers- are short,
simple, once-off and price-based transactional interactions
between dyadic actors in the chain (T hompson et al., 1998).
T he series of transaction relationship usually occurs between
a client who is a regular buyer or a contractor who interacts
with a supplier more intensely and frequently (C ox et al.,
2006). For example, most clients and contractors nowadays
have a framework agreement with their pre-selected suppliers.
Project collaboration relationships are project-based close
relational arrangements between rms. Project collaboration
may have been evolved from the previous relationship levels
(series of transactions or transactional relationships over a
period of time) or a rm may decide to work collaboratively
with a supplier in a specic project for strategic purposes
(G adde an d D ubois, 2010). T he Lon g-term Strategic
Partnerships (LT SP) are high level, strategic and long-term
orientated relationships between two actors in the supply
chains (G adde and D ubois, 2010). Each of the previously
m ention ed relation sh ip typ e h as ad van tages an d
disadvantages. G iven the multi-level, multi-faceted and
d yn am ic n atu re of any in t er-rm relation ships th e
advantages and disadvantages of these relationships are
summarised in Table I.
T he four relationship categories can appear at various levels
depending on the size, type and structure of the rms and
projects (D ubois and G adde, 2000; M ale, 2003). In broad

terms rm-rm relationships can form and develop as a result

of direct or indirect encounters (Stuckenbruck, 1997). F rom
a general project management perspective Wren (1967)
described the points of interaction or meeting points as
interfaces. T he activities occurring at each project interface
can be between organisational units, disciplines and people,
and systems such as technological and physical (e.g. on-site
activities) interactions (Stuckenbruck, 1997). With regards to
the former interface, Bemelmans et al. (2012b) described the
inter-rm relationships at four levels. Bemelmans et al.
(2012b) stated that rms come to contact with each other
d uring purchasin g and procurem ent process to create
relationships at project level, regional level, division level
and corporate level. H ere it must be noted that the interface
and the level at which a relationship is conducted can be
different on each project but in terms of the actors involved in
the relationship Alshawi and Ingirige (2003) stated that
highest interaction occurs between middle-level managers
known as knowledge workers.
In relation to the technological and physical interfaces IC T
technologies are recognised as crucial to coordination and
integration of supply chains (H adaya and Pellerin, 2010). T he
core function of IC T in each of the previously mentioned
relationships is to support wide range of needs ranging from
automation of a task and facilitation of a collaboration process
to enabling of inter-rm and intra-rm communication of
information between individuals (Alshawi and Ingirige, 2003;
G ohil et al., 2009; Benton and M cH enry, 2010). D espite the
fact that communication is the key to effective project delivery
majority of supply chain rms do not consistently share
accurate, up-to-date, timely and reliable information with each
other or with the other parties involved in the project (unless it
is expressed as an obligatory condition in the contract)
(H umphreys et al., 2003; Briscoe and D ainty, 2005; T itus and
Brochner, 2005). T he consequent outcome of such knowledge
and information deciency is the key reason for conicts
between supply chain rms, poor quality, mistrust, delay, rework and client dissatisfaction (Briscoe and D ainty, 2005).
T here are various factors that effect a rms decision to
adopt and deploy IC T technologies (Anumba and Ruikar,
2008) however as demonstrated by H adaya and Pellerin
(2010) characteristics of the supply chain relationships
(d ep end en cy, b argain in g p ower, collab oration, an d
relationship length) are the main determinants of IC T
adoption for different interaction needs at each interface
(organisational, individual and physical). As have been argued
by D ubois and G adde (2000) and Bankvall et al. (2010)
different supply chains exist in a project so each relationship
that a contractor rm has with a supplier will exhibit different
characteristics. T herefore in terms of its IC T requirements the
four relationship types will require distinctive technological
resources for management of supply chain rms. For example
as relationships progress towards LT SP the characteristics of
each relationship type increase in terms of longevity, volume,
complexity, integration and strategic importance. In other
words as relationships gain more dimensions in terms of
activities, actors and resources, the magnitude of the IC Tbased relationship management required to embrace these
dimensions also increase (H a kansson and Snehota, 1995;
C heng, 2009).
Although there are different IC T technologies available to
enable transaction, information exchange and collaboration
between rms (such as Electronic D ata Interchange, Project
33