Using Incentives for Collaborative, Not Confrontational, Project Data Updating

Updating is not a one-man job. Collaborative updating, where suppliers and project managers work together as partners as opposed to simply contractually related parties, is often tricky to nail down. This sometimes leads to suppliers not participating in dataflows as much as they could have. But suppliers are a valuable source of important project data regarding the project’s supply chain, the status of materials and prefabricated components, and the requirements on site for supplies that are in transit.
As a result, their participation in project dataflows is paramount. Geometrid has often found that lack of an easy process to collaborate on (that doesn’t require any additional investment from supply chain partners) and a lack of good incentives to participate in the process are the key barriers to integrating all stakeholders in dataflows and workflows effectively.

Any effective tracking process must therefore succeed in inviting and integrating willing and reliable suppliers. Different firms employ different tactics to secure this depending on the suppliers and relationships with them: ranging from explicit monetary incentives to implicit brownie points given (or taken away) based on supplier cooperation with a new tracking regime.  

But resistance can also be internal when it’s not external. Lindner had to balance both of these when setting up its own improved tracking process. Internal resistance centred on intimidation due to the upgrading of technology and aversion to digital solutions. Overcoming internal resistance was simpler since Lindner had more control over the adoption process. This control facilitated an adoption track based on motivation, compulsory adoption, and training.

Read more about this in this case study here.

External resistance, primarily from suppliers, centred on a lack of incentive to engage in reporting or tracking work (scanning QRs etc.) that was beyond the standard mandate of producing and delivering ordered elements and goods. Lindner overcame this with a combination of incentives and disincentives: incentives included monetary compensation as well as looking on the supplier favourably for future projects; disincentives included looking unfavourably upon suppliers for future projects. 

Get your free whitepaper from Geometrid on how you need to be thinking about your internal process development and upgrading to stay competitive!