Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2381/7351
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBishop, Daniel-
dc.contributor.authorFelstead, Alan-
dc.contributor.authorFuller, Alison-
dc.contributor.authorJewson, Nick-
dc.contributor.authorKakavelakis, Konstantinos-
dc.contributor.authorUnwin, Lorna-
dc.date.accessioned2009-12-14T16:26:08Z-
dc.date.available2009-12-14T16:26:08Z-
dc.date.issued2008-01-
dc.identifier.citationLearning as Work: Teaching and Learning Processes in Contemporary Work Organisations, Research Paper No.13en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://learningaswork.cf.ac.uk/outputs.htmlen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2381/7351-
dc.descriptionThis working paper is Research Paper No. 13 of a series produced for Learning as Work: Teaching and Learning Processes in the Contemporary Work Organisation, an ESRC Teaching and Learning Programme (TLRP) Phase III funded project (2003 - 2008). It is available from http://learningaswork.cf.ac.uk/outputs.htmlen_GB
dc.description.abstractThis paper examines two competing systems of organising the construction process and their consequences for learning. Under the adversarial system, contractors compete solely on price, risks are shifted onto those next in line and disputes are institutionalised through complicated, but inevitably incomplete, contracts. However, under collaborative working the costs and risks of the project are shared and the parties involved communicate openly and freely, often in the absence of tightly specified contracts. The move from the former to the latter – prompted and encouraged by government enquiries, large public sector clients and building regulations – represents a shift towards a climate in which problems are shared and solved regardless of where they occur in the productive system (a process conceptualised as ‘knotworking’ in the literature). The paper argues that such learning theories and policy pressures from above fail to take adequately into account the heavy hand of history and the importance of understanding the nature of the productive systems in which ‘knotworking’ is expected to occur. Both are important in understanding the fragility of collaborative working across the stages and structures of the construction production process which place limits on making ‘knotworking’ an habitual and commonplace activity.en_GB
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherCardiff School of Social Sciences, Cardiff Universityen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesLearning as Worken_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseries13en_GB
dc.titleConstructing Learning: Adversarial and Collaborative Working in the British Construction Industryen_GB
dc.typeReporten_GB
Appears in Collections:Reports, Centre for Labour Market Studies

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Working_Paper_13.pdf1.93 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in LRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.