This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Given the economic situation in many countries, governments have found it increasingly difficult to fully finance projects of significant size. The implementation of such large projects implies increasing the combined intervention of public authorities, private partners and sponsors. According to the European Commission (2003, p.4), "Recent years have seen a marked increase in cooperation between the public and private sectors for the development and operation of infrastructure for a wide range of economic activities".
Thus, through the concept of project in Public Private Partnerships (PPP), the government has the ability to launch major projects. Unlike "traditional" contracts, the private partner must take responsibility for the design, financing, construction, operation and maintenance of the facility to transfer the public partner. PPP projects "are growing in use and acceptance as an alternative and effective method to mobilize additional financial resources and benefits from private sector efficiencies" (European Commission, 2003).
The concept of PPP project represents a good opportunity for private sector to participate in development of large project and the possibility of realizing large profits. It is therefore of paramount importance that leading organisations in the construction industry are aware of the critical factors that enable successful PPP projects. According to Lim and Mohamed (1999), Critical Success Factors (CSFs) are the circumstances that influence the outcomes of a project, facilitating or impeding its success. Indeed, a number of researches have been addressed by focusing both on partnership and projects success (Nielsen, 2007). However, few analyses have been performed on the subject of CSFs influencing projects focused on the organisation of the private sector within PPP projects. The purpose of the research is to explore two case studies in order to identify and analyse the CSFs in relation to the organisation established by EIFFAGE in PPP projects.
1.2 Aims of Research
The aim of this research is to identify and analyse the influence of Critical Success Factors related to the organisation of Public Private Partnership's projects. The anticipated outcome is to add to existing knowledge of CSFs in PPP project and to establish a guideline of CSFs for EIFFAGE in order to manage successfully PPP projects in France.
1.3 Research Questions
The research questions are presented below:
How the private sector is organised in PPP projects?
What are the Factors that are critical to the success of PPP projects in terms of organisation structure?
The objectives are the following:
Review the background of PPP projects in France (in the literature review).
Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of PPP projects in light of theory and experience (in the literature review).
Identify factors that are critical to the success of PPP projects (in the literature review).
Identify factors that are critical to the success of organisation in PPP projects (in the literature review).
Identify and analyse factors that are critical to the success in relation to the organisation set up by EIFFAGE in PPP projects (through the interviews and documents via the two case studies).
Make recommendations of CSFs for the organisation of EIFFAGE in PPP projects.
1.5 Scope and Limitations
The two case studies of the thesis will rely on completed projects such as a project under operation the "Viaduc de Millau" (Millau Viaduc) and a project under construction the "Stade de Lille" (Lille Stadium).
Theses case studies were selected since they have been completed or are underway by the company EIFFAGE. Moreover, the choice relies on this type of PPP project because they are almost identical (in size) in order to compare them and identify CSFs. The researcher needs to compare the results and findings of CSFs from the literature with those from case studies.
The major limitation of the study is that it is confined to two case studies. This thesis will rely solely on projects in France that are either under construction or in operation by the company EIFFAGE. The case studies are designed to answer to the research question and the scope of the study will be limited only to the organisation established by EIFFAGE in PPP projects.
Moreover, it is important to highlight that the perspectives of the research are to successfully manage PPP projects and mainly improve the Organisation of EIFFAGE in PPP projects and as such, only interviews with representatives of stakeholders from the private sector will be conducted.
The limits of validity of the study and the results are characterized by the following conditions:
Projects managed by EIFFAGE.
Projects of similar size (large scale > 300 million of euros).
Complex project (technically, financially, legally, interfaces, synergy ...).
Source projects for their economic development regions.
Key projects for the company.
Completed projects "recently" (from 2001 to present).
Projects in France.
1.6 Research Methodology
According to Hart (2005, p.153), "the search and the review of the literature is a critical evaluation, analysis and synthesis of existing knowledge relevant to your own research problem". The review of the literature will identify which success factors in terms of organisation have been previously acknowledged from public and private perspectives.
This research adopts a qualitative approach with semi-structured interviews through two case studies. The qualitative method is appropriate when the research topic has not been studied for a particular group (Creswell, 2003; Morse, 1991).
Semi-structured interviews will be conducted to discuss about lessons learned from two PPP projects and identify CSFs. Furthermore, it will also allow checking the validity of the CSFs identified from the literature review. As noted by Hart (2005, p.356) "interviews are an obtrusive method which can generate substantial in depth qualitative information usually from a small number of respondents".
According to Rudestam and Newton (2007, p.110) "a semi-structured interview is more formal than the unstructured interview in that there are a number of specific topics around which to build the interview".
1.7 Data Collection
Firstly, the data collection is based on a review of literature within text book, journals and conference papers to form a basis of knowledge and to support the investigation and analysis. Two projects of similar size managed in France by EIFFAGE are selected for the thesis. Interviews will be held with sample of a selected number of stakeholders that are representative of the projects to discuss about the results and collect data in order to identify and analyse CSFs for PPP projects.
The analysis of the research questions will be achieved in light of the following areas:
Identification of CSFs: This stage involves a review of the literature related to CSFs of PPP projects.
Interviews, identification and/or validation of CSFs (primary data): This stage involves interviewing representatives of stakeholders (project team, client representative, project manager, consultants, contractors ...) in order to identify CSFs and discuss about the reasons of the choices.
Collection of information and/or data (secondary data): This stage involves gathering relevant and accurate information related to each major stage of the project from two case studies completed by EIFFAGE from articles and documents.
Analysis of information and/or data of the CSFs: This stage involves an analysis of the CSFs in relation to the organisation set up by EIFFAGE in PPP projects. For the next steps, some modification and adaptation will probably occur after the first interviews.
1.8 Ethical Considerations
"Ethical behaviour is vital. Researchers are guests in their subjects' private worlds and must protect their subjects from embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, reduced standing in their community, or risks to their employment" (Marrelli, 2007; Stake, 2005).
"Ethics is concerned with the attempt to formulate codes and principles of moral behaviour". (Hart, 2005; May, 2001). That's why, it is important to note that the information and data considered for the research will be drawn from the public (political ...) and private stakeholders of the projects (client, architect, consultant, contractors ...).
Equally important, the collection of information must be rigorously conducted and organized to avoid any biased information. Thus, the interview will be semi-structured and prepared in advance.
1.9 Structure of Research
The first chapter is the introduction of the thesis including the justification and the aims of the research, the research questions, the objectives, the research methodology and outcome and finally the structure of the research.
The second chapter is the literature review which aims to understand the concepts that have been already been developed on this topic.
The third chapter explains the methodological approach for the research. It also justifies the methods using theory and also outlines the procedure.
The fourth chapter is the presentation of the findings from interviews and documents of the case studies.
The last chapter presents the research undertaken and the conclusion and eventually recommends future research directions.
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter seeks to explore literature which is related to research questions and to analyse the literature appropriately. The review will comprise of Partnership, Public Private Partnerships and Critical Success Factors in PPP projects. The aim of this review is to identify gaps, justify the questions being asked and show some relevance of topic to the field of project management.
Since PPP have been introduced into the construction industry, numerous studies have been done on the subject. Indeed, these studies have been conducted to identify the main aspects of PPP projects to improve their implementation (Tang, Shen et al., 2010; Li et al, 2005b; Erridge and Greer, 2002; Grimsey and Lewis, 2002).The PPP concept has been extensively implemented in the 1990s, but private investment in public infrastructure has started in the 18th century in Europe such as the concession contract which has provided water drinking in Paris.
Rich and developing countries tend to use increasingly the PPP approach (Ng, Wong et al., 2012; Takim et al., 2009; McQuaid, 2000). According to Winch (2000), PPPs' were heavily used in the United Kingdom (UK) with the setting of the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) since 1997. The participation of the private sector for the development of facilities includes the design, financing, construction, ownership and / or operation (Tang, Shen et al., 2010; Akintoye et al., 2003b; 2003a). The concept of PPP can relieve pressure on the public sector budget by injecting resources from the private sector, and therefore increasing resources and improving profitability, (Ng, Wong et al., 2012; Cheung, Chan & Kajewski, 2009; Medda, 2006; Kernaghan, 1993; Kouwenhoven, 1993).
According to Tang, Shen et al. (2010), the benefits of various aspects of PPP can include:
"Enhanced partnership between the public sector and the private sector (e.g. Erridge and Greer, 2002; Ysa, 2007; Zhang and Kunaraswamy, 2001a; Zhang et al., 2002; Zhang, 2004a, b).
Better risk management (e.g. Grimsey and Lewis, 2002; Li et al., 2005a; Shen et al., 2006).
Clearer government policies (e.g. Ball and Maginn, 2005; Hart, 2003).
Revealed critical success factors (e.g. Li et al., 2005b).
Improved maturation of contract (e.g. Ho, 2006; Tranfield et al., 2005).
More appropriate financial analysis (e.g. Akintoye et al., 2003a, b; Norwood and Mansfield, 1999; Huang and Chou, 2006; Saunders, 1998)".
Difficulties raised from PPP include also high costs, complex negotiation, and conflicting objectives among the project participants (Li, Akintoye et al., 2005; Akintoye et al., 2001a). Nonetheless, many PPP projects in the world are considered as successful, and CSFs have become a subject for studies (Li, Akintoye et al., 2005; Jefferies et al., 2002; Qiao et al., 2001; Keene, 1998).
The development of PPP in the world creates a critical need for improved practices by developing a guide to identify and analyse the critical factors that are decisive to the success of PPP projects (Zhang, 2005).
Various Case studies were conducted to investigate the factors that contribute to the success of PPP projects (Ng, Wong et al., 2012; Zhang, 2005; Jefferies, Gameson and Rowlinson, 2002). Most of the success factors identified in the literature are related to PPP in general, but few researches on CSFs related to the organisation of PPP project.
2.2 Public and Private Partnership (PPP)
2.2.1 Definition and principles of Partnership
Partnership is defined as "coalitions between two or more firms, either formal or informal, who share compatible goals, acknowledge a level of mutual interdependence, and are formed for strategic reasons" (Tayeb, 2001, p. 23). As noted by Fasel (2000, p.4) partnership is defined as "in order to thrive or even survive in today's business environment most organisations are finding that collaboration across organisational boundaries is necessary".
In the field of project management in construction, the emphasis is usually regarding the project and the organisation (Soderlund, 2004, p.183) but culture is also an important factor which contributes to the partnership of projects. For example, in PPP, the public sector and private sector have their own style of management and this can lead to misunderstandings (Ruuska and Teighland, 2009). That is why, many companies and Organisations tend to seek more effective ways to manage projects successfully.
As noted by Akintoye et al. (2003), PPP is a contract between a public authority and the private sector where resources and risks are shared in order to develop a public service in a long term. "The principal aim of a PPP for the public sector is to achieve value for money in the services provided while ensuring that the private sector entities meet their contractual obligations properly and efficiently" (Jefferies, 2006; Grimsey and Lewis, 2002).
The National Council for PPP in the United States defines a PPP as a "contractual arrangement between a public sector agency and a for-profit private sector developer, whereby resources and risks are shared for the purpose of delivery of a public service or development of public infrastructure" (Li and Akintoye, 2003; United Nations Development Programme, 2005; cited in Tang, Shen et al., 2010).
PPP can avoid recurrent defects associated with traditional contracts such as high construction costs, operational inefficiencies, poor design and dissatisfaction of local people (Alinaitwe, 2011; Mustafa, 1999). The use of PPP is interesting for the government because it can transfer risks to the private consortium involved in the project, but it requires a profit incentive to the private sector (Alinaitwe, 2011; Grimsey and Lewis, 2002). PPP allows the public sector to transfer risks to the private sector better placed to manage them.
By integrating the private sector's knowledge, expertise and capital, PPP can develop infrastructure, local economy, reduce costs, increase construction and operation efficiencies, and improve public service quality (Alinaitwe, 2011; Yuan et al., 2009).
Ghobadian et al. (2004) explains that the private sector will understand public client requirements public over time and offer better facilities thanks to its skills, technology and knowledge (cited in Esther, Albert et al., 2009).
2.2.3 Types of PPP
NCPPP (2000) and MMA (1999) divided PPP into several types (cf. table in appendix) according to building and facilities of the projects.
Table 1Â : Type of PPP and summaries (MMA, 1999; NCPPP, 2000)
In order to understand the objectives of the research and the two cases studies, a focus will be on Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT or "Concession") for the "Viaduc de Millau" and on Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain-Transfer (DBFOMT or "Contrat de Partenariat) for the "Stade de Lille" (table 1). These are partnership arrangement in which the public sector (French authority) allows to the private sector (EIFFAGE) to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the service over a period of time. The private sector will collect toll from the users of the public for the BOT and a toll from the public partner for the DBFOMT so that they can make their capital and profit. When the contract is finished according to the agreement, the facility is transferred to the public partner.
2.3 PPP in France
France has a long tradition of concessions increasing sharply during the second half of the twentieth century. More recently, France has become one of the fastest growing markets in the world for PPP "with payment by the public partner." As shown in the table 2, the practice of PPP has gradually made â€‹â€‹its way to France in the1990s. Then, PPP increased significantly with the new legislation passed in 2004, which introduced the "Contrat de Partenariat" (Contract Partnership). So far, more than 200 PPP contracts have reached the stage of financial closing for a total investment value of over 12 billion â‚¬ (EPEC, 2012).
Table 2: Key milestones in the development of PPP in France (adapted from EPEC, 2012)
PPP contracts can be used in almost all economic sectors (transport, health, justice, education, sportsâ€¦) either from the state or local authorities.
According to the MAPPP (2012), the number of PPP should continue to increase in the near future, especially prisons, courthouses and universities. The French market of PPP has obtained good results so far despite the financial crisis and its future performances will be largely driven by the ability to respond to a number of key challenges, in particular on the financing of projects.
2.3.2 The various PPP contracts in France
The table 3 compares the two types of PPP contracts against traditional public works contracts.
Table 3Â : Type of PPP in France (adapted from MAPPP, 2012)
The Contrat de Partenariat et Equivalents (CPE or "contract partnership and equivalents") is a category including 4 forms of PPP arrangements (CPE = CP + BEA + BEH + AOT). This includes the Contrat de Partenariat (CP or "contract partnership"), the Bail Emphytéotique Administratif (BEA or "administrative lease"), the Bail Emphytéotique Hospitalier (BEH or "hospital lease"), the Autorisation d'Occupation Temporaire (AOT or "authorization of temporary occupation") with or without a Location avec Option d'Achat (LOA or "Rental with Purchase Option).
The main motivation of the Ordinance of 2004 on the PPP was to fill in the gap for public contracting authorities between traditional procurement and public service delegations (concessions) involving payment by the user. This Ordinance has created the CP, defined its scope and its three criteria of use which are complexity, emergency and favourable balance (EPEC, 2012).
The public service delegation (DSP) is based on the postulate user-pays. The most common forms of DSP are concession (for works and services). All the contracts (CP, BEA, BEH, AOT and DSP) mentioned above are described in appendix.
2.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of PPP
2.4.1 Advantages of PPP
The advantages of partnership between the public sector and the private sector are listed below:
"Transfers risk to the private partner.
Caps the final service costs.
Reduces public sector administration costs.
Reduces public money tied up in capital investment.
Solves the problem of public sector budget restraint (Akintoye et al., 2001).
Non-recourse or limited recourse public funding.
Reduces the total project cost.
Accelerates project development.
Saves time in delivering the project.
Benefits local economic development (HM Treasury, 2000).
Transfers technology to local enterprises.
Facilitates creative and innovative approaches (Birnie, 1999; Government of Nova Scotia, 2000).
Enhances government integrated solution capacity (Sohail, 2000)" (Bing, Akintoye et al., 2005).
2.4.2 Disadvantages of PPP
According to Bing, Akintoye et al. (2005), the disadvantages of partnership between the public sector and the private sector are listed below:
"Threatened by lack of experience and appropriate skills (Morledge and Owen, 1998; Ezulike et al., 1997).
Leads to higher direct charges to users.
Imposes excessive restriction on participation.
High participation costs are incurred (Ezulike et al., 1997; Saunders, 1998; Birnie, 1999).
High risk relying on private sector.
Confusion can arise over government objectives and evaluation criteria.
May lead to high project costs (Ezulike et al., 1997; Birnie, 1999; Public Services Privatization Research Unit, 2000).
Lengthy delays caused by political debate (Infrastructure Journal, 2001a, b).
Much management time is spent in contract transaction (Ezulike et al., 1997).
Lengthy delays can arise in negotiation.
Reduces project accountability.
Offers fewer employment opportunities" (Bing, Akintoye et al., 2005).
2.5.1 Organisation structure
In project management, the structure of the organisation and people who belong to this structure are important. This organisation allows defining the roles and levels of decision-making and operation of project management (APM, 2006).
In traditional projects, some difficulties can lead to issues of quality, time and budget but PPP can be an alternative approach to manage project with effectiveness, open communication and trust (Larson, 1995; Glagola and Sheedy, 2002; Tang et al., 2006; cited in Carol and Sang Ok, 2008).
The figure1 (adapted from Tang et al., 2006) represents the comparison between the relations in traditional project and those in PPP. The top part is the traditional relationship where a public entity enters into a contract with an architect (or Engineer Consultant) who design the facility and then with a contractor who carry out the work according to the plans of the architect (Carol and Sang Ok, 2008).
The lower part is the PPP which typically employs a consortium or Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to provide the design and construction of public services (Brown, 1999). A number of studies have concluded that structured partnering "can save money and time and promote trust and communication" (Crowley and Karim, 1995; Krizan, 1998; Chan et al., 2001; Petersen and Murphree, 2004; USDOT, 2006; cited in Carol and Sang Ok, 2008).
Figure 1: Comparison of traditional and PPP relationships (adapted from Tang et al., 2006; cited in Carol and Sang Ok, 2008).
According to Dixon, Pottinger et al. (2005), PPP construction projects typically comprise three main parties (Figure 1). These are:
the Awarding authority or public sector;
the Special Surpose Vehicle (SPV) or private consortium;
the Third party Funders or banks and sponsors.
The Awarding authority relies on PPP to accomplish "Value From Money" (VFM) with the transfer of risks to the private sector (Fox and Tott, 1999; Dixon, Pottinger et al., 2005). The Awarding authority specifies its requirement of the project and the SPV has to design and deliver the desired outcomes. The SPV should transfer the maximum of risks to sub-contractors in order to generate profits and access better to third party funding. The Third party funders such as equity and bank loans aim to make a profit from their investment in the project (Dixon, Pottinger et al., 2005; Fox and Tott, 1999).
There are a number of key differences between PPP and traditional projects. The different interests of stakeholders and corporate culture can cause differences in the method of work and project management (J A M Reijniers, 1994).The table 4 summarise the differences in interest according to the public and private sector:
Table 4Â : Interest of public and private sectors in PPP (J A M Reijniers, 1994)
Regarding the organisation, there are also differences between the public and private sectors as follows in project management approach, risk management, decision-making and opinion on the time factor (J A M Reijniers, 1994). Due to the differences, tensions or conflicts could arise during the implementation of the project. Thus, it is paramount for the private sector to be aware of the SFs to prepare and manage effectively PPP projects and avoid failures or surprises.
2.6 Success Factors (SFs) in PPP projects
2.6.1 Success Criteria
It is essential to identify criteria for success or failure in order to understand and judge the success of a partnership (Cookies-Davis, 2002). Muller and Turner (2007, p. 299) point out that project success criteria is "the measures by which we judge the successful outcome of a project; these are dependent variables which measure project success".
It has been argued by Gido and Clements (1999) that the human aspect is a key aspect of success for project. Furthermore, APM (2006, p. 19) define success as "the satisfaction of stakeholder needs and is measured by the success criteria as identified and agreed at the start of the project". Young (2000) suggests that the word success is based on measurable elements like the stakeholders requirements.
The criteria for project success are often related to the principle of "The Iron Triangle" that is to say, the cost, time and quality results (Yu, Flett and Bowers, 2005). On the other hand, De Wit (1998) affirms that the success criteria should be on the accomplishment of the objectives of stakeholders even if the time, cost and quality are an important part of project control.
2.6.2 CSFs in General
The term "critical success factors" (CSFs) was introduced by Rockart (1982). The method of CSF involves some factors that significantly contributes to, and is critical to the success of a project. Therefore, it is necessary to begin by identify the factors that influence the success of the project to avoid failures. According to Toor and Ogunlana (2009), many studies have been conducted to explore the CSF in general construction projects (Fortune and White, 2006; Phua and Rowlinson , 2004; Chua et al, 1999; Egbu, 1999; Savindo et al, 1992; Pinto and Slevin, 1988; Ashley et al., 1987) design-build (Chan et al, 2001; Ng and Mo, 1997; Songer and Molenaar, 1997) and Public Private Partnerships (Li et al, 2005; Zhang, 2005; Jefferies et al, 2002; Tiong, 1996).
As noted by Jefferies (2006), a number of authors have identified CSFs in PPP project, the following list attempts to summarise these:
"Developed legal and economic framework (Tiong, 1990).
Favourable inflation, exchange and interest rates (Tiong, 1990).
Financial capability and support (Tiong et al., 1992).
Technical innovation (Tiong et al., 1992).
Appropriate risk allocation (Grant, 1996).
Avoiding delays and cost overruns (Tiong and Alum, 1997).
Comprehensive feasibility study (Keong et al., 1997).
Existing infrastructure (Keong et al., 1997).
Political stability and support (Keong et al., 1997).
Local partner(s) (Salzmann and Mohamed, 1999).
Shared authority (Kanter, 1999).
Technical innovationÂ (Tiong et al., 1992)".
A number of researches have been addressed by focusing both on partnership and projects success (Nielsen, 2007). However, few analyses have been performed on the subject of CSFs influencing projects focused on the organisation of the private sector within PPP projects.
2.6.3 CSFs related to Organisation
The identification of CSFs plays an important role throughout the project lifecycle. Even if there are different views on the CSFs, many studies emphasize the importance of the human factor for the success of a project (Chuan Low, 2006; cited in Toor and Ogunlana, 2009). Consequently, from the design phase, the project team must be aware of the CSFs in order to prioritize critical issues related to the implementation of the project (Boynton and Zmud, 1984; Clarke, 1999; cited in Toor and Ogunlana, 2009).
"CSF are vital for managers engaging in improvement of their organisation, as they will indicate how much progress is being made in particular areas" (Jefferies, 2006; McCabe, 2001). A review of literature on factors that are critical to the success of project under PPP has been carried out. The Table 5 provides a summary of research for SFs related to organisation of PPP projects.
Table 5Â : Success factors in terms of Organisation in PPP projects
According to the table 5, a number of authors have identified common factors they consider critical to the success: good governance; entrepreneurship and leadership; strong private consortium, commitment and responsibility; transparency and communication (figure 2).
Figure 2: Success Factors related to Organisation in PPP projects
22.214.171.124 Good governance
According to Bult-Spiering and Dewulf (2006, p.1), "to understand PPP we need to understand Governance". Good governance is important for the success of PPP in terms of developing projects. Decision makers play a key role in PPP organisation and development (Mustafa, 1999; cited in Li, Akintoye et al., 2005). The governance has an impact on the final responsibility for delivering the project (NHS, 1999; cited in Li, Akintoye et al., 2005). In UK, many stakeholders from public and private sector consider that the governance is good in PFI projects (NAO, 2001b; cited in Li, Akintoye et al., 2005).
High capabilities in management such as the right decision at the right time are considered critical for the success of PPP by the owner (Abednego and Ogunlana, 2006). Indeed, "effective governance of project management ensures that an organisation's project portfolio is aligned to the organisation's objectives, is delivered efficiently and is sustainable" (APM, 2006).
126.96.36.199 Entrepreneurship and leadership
It has been argued by Tiong (1996) that in PPP projects, "entrepreneurship can be defined as the pursuit of opportunities beyond the financial and technical resources that the entrepreneur currently possesses". For instance, BOT projects such as the Shajiao powerplant in China, Sydney Harbour tunnel project in Australia, the Channel Tunnel in the United Kingdom/France and Hong Kong's Eastern Harbour Crossing projects were won and undertaken by entrepreneurs (Tiong, 1996).
In PPP, an entrepreneur must take calculated risks. According to Tiong (1995a; 1996), a consortium able to win a concession must accept the risks and provide safeguards to manage them. In traditional projects, the risks of delays and additional costs are often the responsibility of the public sector. However, in PPP projects, the SPV takes charge of these risks and therefore must be organized to manage them with the aim of minimize impacts (Tiong, 1996).
A project manager must be supported by the Steering Committee by providing the necessary resources because he is responsible for the proper conduct of the project and the motivating of teams. In addition, he has to cultivate good relations with the public partner to earn it trust and must have high qualities in terms of negotiations (Tiong, 1996).
188.8.131.52 Strength of Consortium
A strong partnership is essential in the consortium to win a PPP. Accordingly, the consortium should be composed with multidisciplinary teams which have skills in different field including techniques but also financial strength. Indeed, the members of the consortium should be able to bear and manage the large development costs during the project life cycle (Tiong, 1996).
A strong consortium has the professional and personal characteristics as follows (Tiong, 1996; Pierce, 1989):
ability to analyze risks;
effective negotiation strategy;
global vision and determination to succeed;
avoidance of potential conflicts of interest between different members within the consortium (Tiong, 1996; Pierce, 1989).
The research of skills and assets from various backgrounds is vital in the composition of a project team to examine the several studies such as preliminary environmental impact, traffic studies, design, planning, etc. This multidisciplinary team should be trained from the tender of the project and consists of highly qualified professionals (Tiong, 1996; Turner, 1989).
According to Jefferies et al. (2002), a strong consortium must have a wealth of expertise, extensive experience and high level of reputation (Li, Akintoye et al., 2005). According to Birnie (1999), the large and well organised construction companies have won the majority of PFI contract in UK. For this reason, private companies who intend to participate in PPP projects should identify and analyse the strengths and weakness of other members to form a synergy in the consortium (Li, Akintoye et al., 2005).
184.108.40.206 Commitment and responsibility
Li, Akintoye et al., (2005) affirm that "the commitment and responsibility of stakeholders are essential for successful PPP/ PFI projects". The National Audit Office (NAO, 2001b) notes that it is crucial to manage the relationship for the success of a PPP project. All members of the consortium should commit their best resources (financial, human, etc.) to the partnership project (Li, Akintoye et al., 2005).
According to UN-ESCAP, two characteristics of a good project team could have an impact in commitment and responsibility (Abednego and Ogunlana, 2006):
Participation needs to be informed and organized by all stakeholders.
Accountability, that is to say all members are responsible to those who will be affected by its decisions or actions.
During the implementation of PPP project, the transparency is essential for the client. The transparency in the negotiation implies that the private sector manages its communication, a clear basis for decision-making and an open consultation while keeping responsibility for all decisions in relation with the public sector (Li, Akintoye et al., 2005; NAO, 2001a).
Abednego and Ogunlana (2006) describe transparency such as "information must be freely available and directly accessible to those who will be affected by the decisions". The transparency within the private consortium should also be necessary in order to strengthen the trust between partners.
Many partnerships may not succeed because "little attention is paid to maintain close working relationships and interpersonal connections that unite the partner organisations" (Weitz and Jap, 1995; cited in Sue and Tony, 2006). Thus, an effective communication must be established within the consortium to avoid conflicts between partners (Jain, 1987; cited in Sue and Tony, 2006). In PPP contracts, human aspect is a critical factor especially in relations between the different stakeholders. The management of the communication in PPP projects must be taken into account even if it takes time and efforts.
Some authors indicates "that organisations will function better if communication is open, if relationships are based on mutual understanding and trust, if relationships are co-operative rather than competitive, if people work together in teams, and if decisions are reached in a participative way" (Huczynski and Buchanan, 2001; cited in Sue and Tony, 2006).
The potential difficulties to an effective communication can arise from differences of power, gender, physical environment, language or cultural diversity (Sue and Tony, 2006).
According to Kanter (1999), the strengthening of cooperative relations is due to proactive exchange of information. In addition, the management of communication is useful and there must be awareness from partners for the project's success (Mohr and Nevin, 1990; cited in Sue and Tony, 2006). The CSFs identified by the owner for a PPP project are the coordination between the relevant parties, the diffusion of correct information and communication process (Abednego and Ogunlana, 2006).
2.7 Summary of the Literature Review
The literature has addressed the concerns outlined in the initial introduction and a list 6 of CSFs was proposed at the end of this chapter by considering the most relevant aspects that affect the success of PPP projects.
Differences about success factors were discussed regarding the project in general and in terms of organisation, including an understanding of the meaning of success. It seems that the organisation structure is the key to success in providing project, but that does not mean to ignore the effect of partnership and understand the process of the project.
Similarly, the investigation in this field has shown that the term success does not necessarily imply the project implementation entirely in the "iron triangle", but also in delivering the expectations and requirements of all stakeholders of the project.
According to Zhang (2005), participants of PPP are confronted to various issues since these arrangements are complex and involve numerous risks and uncertainties over a long term, a multitude of stakeholder and lack of experience and expertise to manage such contracts.
In addition, the development of PPP in France has raised a number of criticisms, in particular from architects and small and medium enterprises due to the domination of large companies to win these contracts. The difficulties encountered on some PPP projects have also strengthened these criticisms. Although the French practice of PPP is still relatively young, PPP projects seem to have been mostly delivered as expected. Indeed, according to the EPEC (2012), a recent study suggests that 80% of PPP projects have seen their construction completed within the deadline. In 90% of cases, the overrun of budget of the public authority is less than 3% (MAPPP, 2011; cited in EPEC, 2012).
As a result of this literature review, the researcher found that there is a gap in the organisation structure of PPP projects in France regarding the project's success. Therefore, the researcher will focus to fill this gap by identify and analyse CSFs in PPP projects.