Abstract

Lack of innovation and productivity in the construction industry compared to other industries is often explained by the institutionalised roles and fragmented nature of the construction value chain. Closer connections and collaboration (such as strategic partnerships) among architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) companies and across the values chain is often prescribed as a strategy to improve the performance of the construction industry. However, the institutional roles of AEC companies and their archetypical business models serve as important reference points for the sector. How these business models interact, and the friction created when they come in close contact is not well researched and understood. This paper identifies business models archetypes for architect, engineer, contractor and materials supplier based on workshops and interviews with practitioners. Friction is identified in and between the business models of AEC companies engaging in strategic partnerships. The analysis shows that architect archetypes face friction with regard to their profit formula and could benefit from profit sharing. The engineering archetypes face friction in their processes since they have to coordinate with specialists from other companies. Contractor and supplier archetypes face friction in their profit formula since the open books force them to alter business practices.

摘要

与其他行业相比，建筑行业缺乏创新和生产力的原因通常是建筑价值链的制度化角色和分散性质。建筑、工程和施工 (AEC) 公司之间以及整个价值链之间更密切的联系和协作（例如战略合作伙伴关系）通常被规定为提高建筑行业绩效的战略。然而，AEC 公司的机构角色及其典型的商业模式是该行业的重要参考点。这些商业模式如何相互作用，以及它们密切接触时产生的摩擦还没有得到很好的研究和理解。本文为建筑师、工程师、承包商和材料供应商基于研讨会和与从业者的访谈。参与战略伙伴关系的 AEC 公司的商业模式内部和之间存在摩擦。分析表明，建筑师原型在他们的利润公式方面面临摩擦，并且可以从利润分享中受益。工程原型在他们的过程中面临摩擦，因为他们必须与其他公司的专家协调。承包商和供应商原型在他们的利润公式中面临摩擦，因为公开的账簿迫使他们改变商业惯例。分析表明，建筑师原型在他们的利润公式方面面临摩擦，并且可以从利润分享中受益。工程原型在他们的过程中面临摩擦，因为他们必须与其他公司的专家协调。承包商和供应商原型在他们的利润公式中面临摩擦，因为公开的账簿迫使他们改变商业惯例。分析表明，建筑师原型在他们的利润公式方面面临摩擦，并且可以从利润分享中受益。工程原型在他们的过程中面临摩擦，因为他们必须与其他公司的专家协调。承包商和供应商原型在他们的利润公式中面临摩擦，因为公开的账簿迫使他们改变商业惯例。