Since the late 1990s many Australian state, territory and federal governments have utilised Alliance Contracting as the project delivery structure for complex infrastructure projects.
December 2012 – December 2013
The Alliance Association of Australasia (now incorporated into Infrastructure Partnerships Australia)
Consolidated results from three previous studies of alliancing undertaken in 2008, 2010 and 2012 based on 60 case study alliances (two of these from New Zealand) are re-analysed in this report as a longitudinal study of alliancing. Those results are supplemented by reflections and insights from several parallel alliancing studies recently undertaken by the researchers. Principal findings indicate that alliancing generally provides advantages over other project procurement forms.
This report provides a state of the art reflection of alliancing. Our analysis provides considerable evidence of success in using this form of infrastructure procurement with the majority of alliances delivering highly successful results. While the pace of alliancing has slackened in recent years, along with a general decline in construction infrastructure activity, Australasia remains a world leader in alliancing. This leading role is evidenced by interest in the Australasian experience of alliancing by those engaged in alliances in Finland, The Netherlands and the UK. The report provides a historical view over a critical period of construction investment in infrastructure in Australasia that should be of interest to researchers and practitioners, project owners and non?owner project participants engaged in alliances.
Alliance managers consistently commented that alliancing requires sophisticated team engagement and collaboration with a considerable degree of hands?on involvement by the project owner’s representative. The alliancing approach is one in which all participants need to be committed to exercise far higher levels of relational competencies than business?as?usual (BAU) procurement approaches Structural alliance components that define alliance relationships include: requirements for within and between team behavioural protocols; transparency and accountability; and incentivisation arrangements.
This report consolidated data and made a holistic analysis of alliancing from the three individual project and program alliance reports conducted in 2008 (Blismas and Harley, 2008), 2010 (Mills and Harley, 2010) and 2012 (Walker and Harley, 2013). It provides insights into the findings also informed by our research into a range of alliancing studies that RMIT has undertaken since 2000.
Professor Derek Walker, Dr James Harley and Professor Anthony Mills
Host institution: RMIT University