Relationship Contracting: The South Australian Experience- 
A Case Study 
Jian Zuo (School of Natural and Built Environments, University of South Australia, Adelaide,Australia) 

 

GeorgZillante (School of Natural and Built Environments, University of South Australia  Adelaide 
Australia) ' ' 

 
 
 

ABSTRACT                                                           

The construction industry has long been accused 
of poor performance. The confrontational attitude 
of its members and the resultant adversarial 
atmosphere has been identified as a major factor 
responsible for this poor performance. A cultural 
change is required to remove these barriers and 
to promote optimum project outcomes. 
Relationship contracting is promoted as a way to 
support the shift  from the adversarial culture to 
the co-operative and collaborative culture within 
the industry and the project team. 

 

The Adelaide Convention Centre Extensions 
project was the first in South Australia to be 
procure  und r the principles of  relationship 
contract1ng. Usmg the case study approach, this 
paper reviews the form of relationship contracting 
used in this milestone project. The paper 
documents the lessons learned from this project 
and makes recommendations that can lead to 
improvements for future projects. 

 

Keywords:    Relationship    contracting,     South 
Australia,win-win approach, best-for-the-project 

 
 
 
 
 

RELATIONSHIP CONTRACTING - 
TARGETING THE CULTURAL SHIFT   

 
 

The public image of the construction industry is 
generally poor. It has long been notorious for its 
poor performance and confrontational disputes. 
Construction  projects  are  usually  procured  by 
competitive tendering. This competitive approach, 
the different objectives of the contracting parties 
and the practice of improper  risk allocation, has 
often resulted in  the creation of an adversarial 
relationship. The need for process improvement 
and  cultural  shifts  has  been  advocated  as  a 
means   of   improving   the   effectiveness    and 
competitiveness   of   the   construction   industry 
(APCC 1997,  RCBCI 2002,  Latham 1994,  Egan 

 

MI,.,..,..,,  ""' '..-"'"""""'• 

1998} and relationship contracting is often 
recommended to support this cultural shift. By 
fostering collaborative relationships between 
project participants, relationship contracting has 
become the most popular procurement approach 
in the public sector over recent years. 
 
 
The term Relationship Contracting is used to 
illustrate delivery systems that concentrate on 
relationships between participating parties in a 
construction contract, rather than just on the 
project-specific requirements i.e. achieving the 
objectives of the contract (Quick 2002). In 
relationship  contracts  there  is  a  formal 
expression of the relationship between 
participating parties. 
 
 
The Australian Constructors Association (ACA), a 
group whose member companies  are all leading 
construction  industry    organisations,    defines 
Relationship Contracting as: 
 
 

"..a process to establish and manage the 
relationships between the parties that aims to: 
remove baffiers; encourage maximum 
contribution; and allow all parties to achieve 
success."   (Australian Constructors 
Association. 1999, p.4) 

 
 
From  the above definition, it can be  discerned 
that the most important  element of relationship 
contracting,   as   the   name   suggests,   is   the 
relationship between the parties involved in the 
project. Reasons to develop and sustain a good 
relationship   between  the   participating   parties 
include:(a) to remove the barriers (to outstanding 
outcomes) that exist in a conventional contract· 
and (b) to encourage maximum commitment and 
contribution from all parties and individuals. The 
most important facet of relationship contracting is 
to enable (or at least aim to enable) all parties to 
achieve  success. Such a 'win-win' approach is 
achieved by  the alignment of the objectives of 
parties   (individuals)   and   gainshare/painshare 





The Australian Journal of Consttu<tion Economics and Building [Vot 6, No 2)   21  

mechanisms. This is a significant departure from 
the traditional 'win-lose' scenario. 

 

A relationship contract could be any contract that 
seeks to emphasise the relationship between the 
parties in order to achieve optimal outcomes for 
the job to be done (Quick 2002). There are two 
kinds of relationship contracts that are currently 
popular within the industry, viz, alliancing and 
partnering  (Rawlinson  &  Cheung  2004;  Ross 
2001). Alliancing, where the parties form a 
cohesive entity, is characterised by all parties 
jointly  sharing the risk and reward. This 
gainshare/painshare  scheme  is  the  key 
difference from partnering, where the parties still 
retain independence and may individually suffer 
or gain from the relationship (Walker et al. 2002). 

 
 

Although alliancing has been applied in the 
Australian industry for more than ten years, all 
those    projects   have    been   of   a    complex 
engineering           nature           rather           than 

and meetings market in South Australia and is a 
vital contributor to South Australia's  $2.7 billion 
tourism  industry (The Public  Works Committee 
1999a). This industry has continued to grow and 
is currently (2005)  worth just under $3.7  billion 
(The Advertiser 4/11/05 p28). 
 
 
Conventions  have  been  growing  in  size  and 
increased  exhibition space  and  banquet  space 
was needed to support the existing conference 
facilities and provide more flexibility in operation. 
Expansion was essential to attract new business 
and, to maintain its position as one of the top 10 
convention  centres  in  the  world  outside  the 
United  States  (The   Public  Works  Committee 
1999a). 
 
 
The project scope included: 
 

• Plaza level 
2 

building/construction  projects.  The  National 
Museum   of   Australia   (the   Acton   Peninsula 

o  7,200m 
halls 

exhibition and banquet 

Alliance) was the first building project in the world 
to employ alliance contracting. This project was 
identified as a successful alliancing project by the 
Australian National Audit Office for its excellent 
achievements in relation to budget, time, quality, 
design integrity, and risk management etc 
(Australia National Audit Office 2001). 

 
 
 
 

THE PROJECT- THE ADELAIDE 
CONVENTION CENTRE EXTENSIONS   

 
 

In South Australia, the Adelaide Convention 
Centre Extensions project was the first to be 
procured under the principles of relationship 
contracting (DAIS 2001). 

 
 

Being established in 1987 as the first dedicated 
convention  venue   in   Australia,  the  Adelaide 
Convention  Centre  was  complemented  by  the 
development of the Exhibition Hall in 1990. The 
Ade!aide Convention Centre p!ays a critic('ll role 
in the development of the convention, exhibition 

o  1,800m2 of  lobby  and  pre- 
function space 

 

o  Services   storage   and   support 
spaces 

 

o  Western loading dock area 
 
 

• Terrace level 
 

o  3 banquet rooms 

o   110 seat bistro 

o  New kitchen and support areas 
 
 
As a large construction project, The Adelaide 
Convention Centre Extension project involved 
significant risks. The project had a very strict 
target completion date and budget and was to be 
built over an operating railway station. In order to 
better handle these risks, the form of relationship 
contracting adopted was chosen with the view to 
selecting the contractor best qualified to deliver 
the project and to achieve optimum outcomes. 



The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building [Vol6, No 21    22 

 

 

 
 
 

Figure 1: Progress of the ACC EXT- over the track of the railway 
 

Courtesy of Mr. Paul Schlosser; Baulderstone and Hornibrook 
 

RESEARCH PROCESS                                        
 
 

This research employed a case study approach 
to review South Australia's experience with the 
application of relationship contracting in the 
construction  industry. As the  first project to  be 
procured  using  this  alternative   approach,  the 
Adelaide Convention Centre Extensions  project 
made for an ideal case study. 

 
 

Six project participants were interviewed. They 
were  from the key participating  parties 
namely: the government agency, the project 
management consultant.   the   collaborative   
consultant,   the 

 
They were asked to comment on their experience 
with the relationship contracting approach used 
on  the  project.  Specifically,  they  were  asked 
about the benefits and the problems of 
relationship contracting. 
 
 
After  the   interview   process,   some   project 
documents were evaluated in order to confirm the 
statements made by  the interviewees. These 
documents included: 
 
 

• Tendering documents 

managing   contractor,   the   architect   and   the 
engineering consultant.  They were  chosen 

• High  performance team 
workshop reports 

building 

because (1) they had significant involvement with 
the  project; (2)  they  were  available  when  this 
research was conducted; and (3) the multi-source 
of information improves the reliability of the 
research. 

• Project completion workshop report 
 
 
The   research   findings   are   reported   in   the 
following sections. 

 
 

22  The Australian Journal of Construction Economicsand  Building (Vol6, No 21 



 

 
 
THE STRUCTURE OF THE PROJECT 
ORGANIZATION   

 
 
The organization structure was established with 
an  Integrated  Management  Team  (IMT), a 
Project Control Group (PCG), and a Site group 
(see Figure 2). 

• decision making in regard to matters that 
impacted on the project, including the 
collaborative relationship; 

 

• providing advice to the Principal; 
 

• ensuring corporate management support; 
and 

 

• ensuring    adequate    resources    were 
provided. 

 
 
The  Integrated 
responsible for: 

Management  Team     was    The  IMT  comprised  senior   executives  of  the 
client, end user, purchaser and risk manager 
(DAIS),  project manager, primary consultant 
architect, cost manager and managing contractor 
(see Figure 3). 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The Minister for 
Tourism 

 
 
 
 
 
 

ltvlT 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

PCG 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Site 

Senior executives of 
key participating 
parties 
 

 
 
 
 
 
Management 
representatives of 
key participating 
parties 
 
 
 
 
Operatives of each 
contracting 
companies 

 

 
Figure 2: The structure  of the project organization 



The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building [Vol6, No 21    23 

 

 
 
 

Client 
 
 
 

Govt. 
Agencies 

Project 
Manager 

 

 
 
 
 

Architect 
 
 
 
 

Cost planner 
and manager 

 
 
 
 

/ 
 
 
 
 
 
Engineer 
consultants 

Managing 
contractor 

 
 
 
 
\c ollaborative 

consultant 
 
 
 
 
Sub- 
contractors 

 
 

 
 
 
 

Figure 3: The structure of the Integrated Management Team 
 
 

Reporting   to  the  IMT  was  the  Project  Control 
Group (PCG) compnsmg management 
representatives of  the  same  organizations. The 
PCG was responsible for the day-to-day 
management of the project. 

 
 

The Site group was composed  of operatives  from 
each of the contracting companies. 

 
 

Traditionally, a  hierarchical organizational 
structure  is  used  for  construction projects.    In 
such arrangements, one party, usually  the client 
sits on the top of the structure and dominates the 
process.    In the  ACC  EXT  project, a  non- 
hierarchical  structure  was established from the 
beginning   of  the  project   with  all  participating 
parties  having  an equal role. Under  this system 
no  party  can  dominate  the  team  and  all parties 
work together under the principles  of relationship 
contracting. Similarly, all parties  share ownership 
of  the  project  outcomes   by  taking  part  in  the 
decision making process.  They share profits and 

risks  and have  common  goals  as objectives  for 
the project which they work very hard to achieve. 
 
 
THE COLLABORATIVE CONTRACT                 
 
 
A true alliance usually  starts with no contract, no 
consultants  and no appointments. Subsequently, 
a contractor  and all consultants  are appointed in 
one  hit.  This  'true' alliance  contracting  is  at the 
'top end of the spectrum' of the relationship 
contracting (Ross 2001). 
 
 
Unlike the National Museum  of Australia project, 
this project is not a true alliance. It started with a 
set  of  contract  conditions  and  with  the 
consultants already employed under different 
arrangements. All consultant appointments 
involved an open call for registrations  of interest, 
from which a selection  of short-listed  companies 
was invited to submit a services and fee offer  for 
the works and the most suitable consultants were 
selected  (The  Public  Works  Committee  1999b). 

 
 
 

14 1 The Australian Journal of Constru<tion Economics and Building [Vol6, No 2] 



 

These consultants  subsequently  became  The DAIS report also supports this view. 
members of the selection panel used to choose 
the managing contractor and the sub-contractors. 

 

The potential contractors were asked to submit 
documents to illustrate how they satisfied the pre- 
qualification requirements, which required 
contractors to meet a set of benchmarks under 
the  following  criteria  (The  Public  Works 
Committee 1999b): 

 
 

•   technical capability 
•   financial capacity 
•   quality assurance 
•   human resource management 
•   OH&S 
•   skills formation 
•   industry initiative 

 
 

They were also required to illustrate their 
capabilities to cooperate with other project team 
members.  Innovative  tendering  process, 
including interviews and workshops were 
conducted in this projed. 

 
 

The differences between the traditional lump sum 
contract and the collaborative contract adopted in 
this project (illustrated in Table 1) were deduced 
from the interviews and the project documents. 

 
 

All six interviewees stressed that best-for-project 
participants were selected via this approach. 

 
 

"... each party had the appropriate expertise 
and skills to work out the allocated tasks. 
Furthermore, all participants were  willing to 
help each other  during the project process 
and were prepared to shift their individual 
objectives/interests   to   focus   on   common 
goal." 

 
 

"... there is a high level of trust across the 
project team...     All parties committed 
themselves towards achieving optimum 
project outcomes." 

 
 
 
 

1 The detailed information about the contractor 
tendering process in the collaborative contract will be 
introduced  in another paper. 

"The project team is unanimous in its 
assessment that the collaborative approach 
contributed to these successes" (DAIS report, 
2001). 

 
 
Selection of suitable partners is very important for 
the success of relationship contracting projects 
(Walker and Hampson 2003).   Partner selection 
is encompassed with relationship development 
(Davis, 2004).  During the selection process, the 
purpose of the relationship is defined, boundaries 
are established and value is created and 
maintained.   Other relationship development 
exercises include agreement of ground rules, 
knowledge transfer, common goal attainment and 
all these lead to increased trust (Davis, 2006). 
 
 
This selection process and the set of selection 
criteria used in ACC EXT project are quite similar 
with those adopted in the world-first alliancing 
building   project  - The   National  Museum  of 
Australia.  The study of the collaborative process 
used in the National Museum of Australia project 
revealed that the principles of Alliancing and the 
selection process facilitate high level of trust and 
high   level   of   commitments   from   all   parties 
(Walker and Hampson 2003). 
 
 
 
PROJECT OUTCOMES                                       
 

 
 
 
The extension project has achieved excellent 
outcomes. It was awarded the best project in the 
category - 'Commercial  Industrial building over 
$10 million' by the Australian Institute of Building 
(AlB). The judges' comments include: 
 
 

"The Adelaide Convention Centre is an 
outstanding example of commercial building." 

 

"The complex architectural and structural 
design of this huge addition to the Riverbank 
Precinct called for innovation in construction 
and  excellence  in  management  of  a  very 
large workforce." 

 

"The builder was required to work alongside 
the operating Adelaide Convention Centre, 
Hyatt  Hotel,  Adelaide  Festival  Centre  and 
over  the  Adelaide  Railway  Station  tracks. 
This created a multitude of operational and 



The Australian Journal of Consttu<tion Economics and Building [Vol6, No 21  25 

 

environmental challenges all of which were 
successful overcome." 

 

"(The managing contractor) is justly proud of 
its  collaborative   approach  to   the   project 
which is an asset to the State and a fine 
example of high-quality construction and 
outstanding management of building project 
delivery". 

There is a mixture of great pride and satisfaction 
that the objectives of implementing  the 
collaborative contract were achieved. The risks of 
industrial action, environment and safety were 
managed to very low levels (DAIS report 2001). 
 
 
The project outcomes are illustrated in Table 2. 

 
 

  Traditional Lump Sum Contract 
 

Collaborative  Contract 
 

Tendering 
 

Decisions  are  made  by  selection 
panel, not involving tenderer. 

 

Interviews and workshops are part of the 
selection process, which give the tenderer 
opportunities to show their capabilities. 

  Price is the only selection criteria. 
 

Price is one of the selection criteria but does 
not have the highest priority. The capability to 
cooperate with other project team members is 
given the highest priority. 

 

Ownership 
 

Without incentive and reward 
scheme; only penalties clauses are 
included   in   the   contract   for   
not achieving the project objectives. 

 

Incentives are included in contract to reward 
optimum performance and encourage 
innovation. 

  Nil accountability  for final product 
other than producing what is 
documented. 

 

Everyone makes the  decision and has to be 
accountable for success or failure. 

  All participants attempt  to  transfer 
the risks to the other party. 

 

All participants share the risks. 

  Contractor has minimal say  in the 
decision making process. 

 

Contractor   is   proactively   involved   in the 
decision making. 

  Contractor is engaged solely to 
construct according to the 
documentation. 

Contractor is engaged in a very early stage 
and could affect the design, documentation 
and construction of the project. 

 

Table 1 The differences between traditional and collaborative contract 
 

(Adopted from DAIS report 2001 and incorporated with the interview notes) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

_j    
26   Tht Australian Journal of Construction E<onomiaand Building [Vol6, No 2] 



 

 

 
Objective 

 
Achievements 

 

Notes 
 

Time 
 
Ready  for  use  on  31  Aug  2001  and 
completed 19 October 2001. 

 

Pre-scheduled  International  Wine 
Conference held on time. 

 

Budget 
 

Over  budget  by  an  estimated  $7.4M or 
8.7%. 

 

Budget overrun between 10% and 30% 
is common for one-off iconic public 
projects in Australia. 

 

Cost  per 
square 
metre 

$3,635/m2 excellent value for money. 
 

The  Melbourne    Exhibition    Centre 
($3,511/m\ the Glasgow Scottish 
Exhibition and Conference Centre 
($4,130/m2  ,    Sydney    Convention   & 

) 
Exhibition   Centre   ($4,214/m2 ),     Hong 
Kong Convention Centre ($4 560/m2   ) 

 

Quality 
 

Errors and om1ss1ons account for 85% 
contingency expenditure or 10% of 
construction value. 

 

International standard facility  achieved. 
High levels of re-documentation as part 
of savings strategy. Some re-work of 
construction. 

 

Safety 
 

6 lost time accidents. 
 

Design for construction and operational 
safety achieved. 

 

Environment 
 

Limited design for environmental 
sustainability but some incremental 
improvement above benchmark. 
Environmental management plan 
developed, externally audited monthly, 
environmental awareness training 
implemented. 

 

Environmental risks  were  managed  to 
very low levels. 

 

For  air  conditioning  purposes, the 
design incorporates a central chilled 
water system. This has a higher capital 
cost than alternative packaged air 
conditioning units ($1.0m to $1.2m) but 
energy consumption costs are 10-15% 
lower and carbon dioxide emissions are 
signfi icantly less for the central system, 
resulting   in  a  more  economical   
and environmentally   friendly  life  cycle  
cost for this aspect of the project. 

 

Contractual 
and 
Workplace 
Relations 

 

No disputes with the managing contractor; 
disputes existed with two sub-contractors; 
higher level of respect for stakeholder 
profitability. 

 

Subcontractors acknowledge the project 
was a great experience. They did not 
have a real Mcarror or "stick". 

Table 2 The outcomes  of the Adelaide Convention Centre Extensions project, Source: DAIS report 2001 
 
 

All  the     interviewees     stressed     that     the 
collaborative contract approach was a significant 
contributor to these successes. They suggested 
that the principles of relationship contracting (in 
this project: collaborative contract) should be 
applied in future projects. 

"Without doubt the collaboration contract 
achieved its fundamental aim - to manage 
and m1t1gate the nsKs, the Adeiaide 
Convention Centre Extensions project is a 
showcase to the project team and the 
contract's success." (DAIS report, 2001) 

 
 

The  relevant  government  agency  (DAIS)  also  The   Relationship  approach  has  ensured  that 
documented the success of this project as:  potential claims and disputes have been worked 

through without a major conflict (Memo for ACC 



The Australian Journal of Construction E<onomics and Building [Vol6, No 2.1    J7 

 

EXT project, by Mr. Gary Dare, the construction 
manager of this project). 

 
 

All interviewees were extremely satisfied with the 
relationship with other participating parties. From 
their perspective, all parties were willing to help 
each other yet did not hesitate to point out any 
potential issues.      This  'early warning' 
characteristic of the project culture supplemented 
the collaborative culture with project participants 
co-operating  with  each  other  to  resolve  each 
issue as it arose during the project process. This 
did not, however, deter them raising  questions 
about the design and construction process. 

 
 

"These are positive signs of the internal 
culture of the project team... it is not good to 
hide any concerns... talking straight is to help 
rather than to challenge others..." (from 
interview notes) 

 

The  significant  achievements  of  the  Adelaide 
Convention  Centre  Extensions  project  has 
resulted  in  more  major  public  projects  in  SA 
being procured via this alternative approach. Carr 
and  Exton  have  previously  described  (Clients 
Driving Innovation International Conference 2004) 
the  success  of  relationship  contracting  on  the 
Lyell  McEwin  Health   Service   Redevelopment 
Stage A project. 

 
 
 

LESSONS LEARNED 
 

 
 
 

Although this project has achieved optimum 
outcomes,  there  are  still  some  problems  that 
need to be addressed for future projects that are 
procured   using   this   approach.   The   lessons 
learned from this project (based on interview 
findings  and  the  reports  from  relevant 
government authorities e.g. DAIS &  The Public 
Works Committee), are illustrated as follows: 

 
 

Firstly, the preferred project culture only spreads 
amongst the major parties in the  project (main 
level}  e.g. main  contractor, primary  consultant, 
the client. Sub-cultures that are different from this 
project  culture  exist  at  the  sub-level  e.g.  sub- 
contractor, other  consultants. For instance, one 
interviewee stated: 

 
 

"Straight talk was achieved at the core team 
level......however, sub-contractors found it 
very difficult  to be upfront  and honest  and 

discuss the problems encountered at the site 
meeting.  Instead,  sub-contractors  preferred 
to show the problems to the managing 
contractor and to try and resolve the problem 
via the managing contractor." 

 
 
Developing and crafting a coherent project vision 
helps   to   shift   the   subcultures   to   be   more 
consistent with the universal project culture.  The 
project vision encompasses three factors: vision 
clarity, vision support and vision stability. Each of 
these components is  positively associated with 
success in certain types of innovation (Lynn 1999; 
Lynn and Akgun 2001). 
 
 
Project participants may have a variety of 
motivations, aspirations and agenda which may 
often clash with best-for-project objectives. 
Christensen and Walker (2004) argue that project 
vision makes a significant contribution towards 
project success. 
 
 
Developing a project v1s1on relies on clearly 
defining project goals.  Creating an effective 
project vision requires excellent communication 
skills and a deep understanding of each 
stakeholder's objectives.  Accordingly there is a 
need to facilitate the inputs of all stakeholders to 
ensure that all insights are taken into account. 
 
 
It is suggested that more workshops and training 
should  be  conducted  to let  the  subcontractors 
become  more  aware  of  and  understand  the 
principles  of  collaborative contracting  and  how 
they should act under the different circumstances. 
This   could   be   a   part   of   the    relationship 
development process, which is a core driver for a 
successful relationship contract (Davis, 2004). 
 
 
Secondly, it is very important to have realistic 
project goals. As interviewees commented: 
 
 

"Unrealistic project goals were detrimental to 
the relationship between project team 
members. Unrealistic project goals were 
responsible for the adversarial behaviours of 
project participants." (from interview notes) 

 
 
Accordingly, it is suggested that realistic project 
goals and objectives be established and 
maintained and that they be reviewed and reset if 
they become unachievable. 

 
 

18   The Australian Journal of Construction E<onomicsand Building [Vol6, No 2) 



 

Thirdly, the co-location of the whole project team 
on site is conducive to achieving effective and 
efficient communication.   These merits were 
verified at the National Museum project in 
Canberra.   In the Adelaide project, this was not 
achieved until later in the construction program 
when key representatives of the architect were 
co-located on site with the managing contractor. 
Even this partial co-location was recognized as 
an important contributing factor to successful 
completion  by all interviewees.   They stressed 
that "co-location of the design team with the 
construction team facilitates an integrated 
approach to issue resolution and identification of 
design and construction opportunities." 

 
 

"There was an acceleration of attending to 
information request, of design change 
implementation and a wider ownership of the 
design changes." (DAIS 2001) 

 
 

Fourthly, similar selection criteria should also be 
considered when appointing consultants. In this 
project, all consultants were already appointed 
before the contractors  were chosen.   No explicit 
criteria cover the collaborative capabilities of the 
consultants when they are engaged. It is 
suggested  that  the  client  should  also consider 
this  when selecting  consultants.   This  ensures 
that the consultants are prepared to work in a 
collaborative  setting. Similarly, they  will  be 
entitled to be 'qualified' selection panel members 
responsible to assess the collaboration and 
cooperation capabilities of the managing 
contractor and sub-contractors. 

Fifthly,  more  resources and  commitments  from 
the client are required for the success of 
relationship contracting projects.     Other 
participating parties also need to invest resources 
in the very early stages of the project.  This will 
result in better profit returns because the whole 
project team has a better understanding of the 
project. 
 
 

"... (the client) needs to put more upfront but 
less in at the end, because upfront (the 
clients)   are   doing   positive   things   about 
building teams, and understanding project 
objectives and how (the clients) will do 
business, whereas in the traditional setting at 
the end (the clients) are fighting the claims." 
{The Public Works Committee 2000) 

 
 
The final lesson involves the role of the project 
management  consultant.     Traditionally, the 
project manager manages the whole project on- 
behalf of the client.   This hierarchical structure 
does not seem to be compatible  with the 
integrated team  structure  which  is  usually 
adopted in relationship contracting projects.   It is 
suggested that project management consultants 
(project  managers)  need  to change  their  roles 
and  responsibilities  in  order  to  be  more 
compatible with the structure of relationship 
contracting projects. 
 
 
The  number  of  interviewees  that  agreed  with 
each learned lesson is illustrated in Figure 4. 

 
 
 

.-- .-- .-- 
 
 
 
 

..j. 4 .;;., 

.---  .--   
 
1 Elosbng of subcultures 
2 Reahstlc project goals 
3.Ca-locatlon of the whole project team 

g   3 

J= := i"' = = I= 
4 S1mrlar selecbon cntena applied for 
appom!lng consultants 
5More resources and commr!menis requr reo 

.. 2 
] 

....,  1 
§ 

6 Role of the project management consultant 

z  0 
2 3  4 5  6 

 
Lessons l earned 

 
Figure 4: Lessons learned from the ACC EXT project 



The Australian Journal of Construction Economi<Sand Building (Vol6, No 2) 1 29 - 

 

 
CONCLUSIONS   

REFERENCES   

 
 
 

As the first project to be procured via relationship 
contracting in South Australia, the Adelaide 
Convention  Centre    Extensions   project    has 
achieved optimum outcomes. The facility was 
available   for   the   pre-scheduled   International 
Wine  Conference  on  the  31st  Aug  2001. The 
result of each project objective was generally 
better than the agreed benchmark. At completion 
there were no disputes with the managing 
contractor. There was a genuine involvement in 
design, construability and innovation b the 
subcontractors. The project team was unan1mous 
in its assessment that the collaborative contract 
approach was a significant contributor to these 
successes. 

 
 

The lessons learned from this project can be 
applied to future projects; however there is still 
room for further improvement. 

 
 

The research raised some issues regarding 
subcontractors  e.g. the  established  project 
culture stopped at the subcontractor level and it 
was very important to choose the 'right' sub- 
contractors. This research did not look at 
participants at the sub-contractor level. Future 
research is required to fill this gap. 

 
 
 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS              
 
 
 

The authors would like to acknowledge the 
contributions from the industry professionals by 
attending the interviews and providing project 
documents. For reasons of confidentiality  their 
names cannot be listed. 

 
 

Similarly  the authors would like to acknowledge 
Mr. PaulSchlosser  and Mr. Gary Dare for their 
assistance  in  providing  the   work  in  progress 
photographs and other project doc ments ?f the 
Adelaide Convention Centre Extens1ons proJect. 

 
 

The authors also would like to acknowledge Dr. 
Peter  Davis's    valuable    comments   on    the 
relationship development and management in 
construction projects. 

'$3.3bn boon for the state'2005, The Advertiser, p. 
28. 
 
Australian Constructors Association. 1999, 
Relationship contracting : optimising project 
outcomes, The Association, Sydney, N.S.W. 
 
Australia National Audit Office 2001, Contract 
Management: Better Practice Guide, Canberra, 
ACT, Australia. 
 
Carr, J & Exton, D 2004, 'Lyell McEwin Health 
Service Redevelopment Stage A: Case study', 
paper presented at the Clients Driving Innovation 
International Conference 2004, 25- 27 October 
2004,Surfers Paradise, Australia. 
 
Christensen, D. and Walker, D. H. T. 2004. 
'Understanding the Role of ''Vision" in Project 
Success', Project Management Journal. vol. 35, 
no.3, pp.39-52. 
 
Davis, P.R.(2004) 'Relationship Development in 
Construction Partner Selection',COBRA 2004, 
The international construction research 
conference of the Royal Institution of Chartered 
Surveyors,7-8 September 2004, Leeds 
Metropolitan University. 
 
Davis, P.R. (2006) 'Relationship Development in 
Project Alliances', Presentation in the Austral an 
Institute of Project Management (AIPM) Semmar, 
5 May 2006, Perth, Australia. 

 
Department for Administrative and Information 
Services (DAIS) 2001, Adelaide Convention 
Centre Extensions  project Completion  Report, 
unpublished,  Adelaide, South Australia. 

 
Egan, J 1998, Rethinking construction  : the report 
of the Construction  Task Force to the Deputy 
Prime Minister, John Prescott, on the scope for 
improving the quality and efficiency of UK 
construction, Dept. of the Environment Transport 
and the Regions, London. 

 
Latham, M 1994, Constructing the Team, HMSO, 
London. 

 
Lynn, G. S. 1999. 'An Exploratory Study of 
Project Vision: Its Components and Impact on 
Innovation Success', International Journal of 
Innovation Management. vol.3, no.1, pp. 91-110. 

 
Lynn, G. S. and Akgun, A. E. 2001. 'Project 
Visioning: Its components and impact on new 
product success', The Journal of Product 

 
 
 

30   The Australian Journal of Construction Economia and Building [Vol6, No 21 



 

Innovation Management. vol.18,no.6,pp.374- 
387. 

 
Quick, R 2002, 'Introduction  to Alliancing and 
Relationship Contracting', paper presented at the 
QLS/BAQ Symposium 2002 - Session K, 
Construction Law, Queensland, Australia,02 
March 2002. 

 
Ross, J 2001, Introduction  to Project Alliancing 
(on Engineering  and Construction Projects), 
viewed 12 Oct 2005, 
<http://www.fletcherconstruction.co.nz/article.php 
?article  id=103>. 

 
Royal Commission into the Building and 
Construction Industry 2002,Overview of the 
Nature and Operation of the Building and 
Construction Industry, 
<http://www.royalcombci.qov.au/>. 

 
Rawlinson,S & Cheung, FYK 2004,'A Review of 
the Concepts and Definitions of the Various 
Forms of Relational Contracting', paper 
presented at the International Symposium of the 
CIB W92 on Procurement Systems: "Project 
Procurement for Infrastructure Constuction", 7-
10 
January, 2004, Chennai, India. 

The Public Works Committee  1999a, Adelaide 
Convention Centre Extension: Final Report, 
Adelaide, South Australia. 
 
The Public Works Committee 1999b, Agency 
Submission to The Public Works Committee of 
The Parliament of South Australia for the 
proposed Extensions to Adelaide Convention 
Centre, updated July 1999, viewed October 2005, 
<http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/committees/do 
cuments/PublicWorks/public documents/Reports 
/Arts.%20Culture.%20Sport.%20Tourism/Report 
%20105%20- 
%20Adelaide%20Convention%20Centre%20ExV 
Agency%20Submission. pdf>. 
 
The Public Works Committee 2000, Official 
Hansard Report on the Adelaide Convention 
Centre Extensions project, 17 May 2000, Old 
Parliament House, Adelaide, South Australia. 
 
Walker, DHT, Hampson, K & Peters, R 2002, 
'Project alliancing vs project partnering: a case 
study of the Australian National Museum Project', 
Supply Chain Management: An International 
Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 83- 91. 
 
Walker, D. H. T. and Hampson, K. D. 2003. 
Procurement Strategies: A Relationship  Based 
Approach.Oxford  Blackwell 

http://www.fletcherconstruction.co.nz/article.php
http://www.royalcombci.qov.au/
http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/committees/do
http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/committees/do