PhD Final Thesis April 2013.pdf - Anglia Ruskin Research Online

Thesis Keith Gale 2013• the hypothesis of significant difference in production costs betweenframework agreements and traditional tendering methods due to reducedcompetition was rejected. The results indicated that there was no significantdifference in production costs between the two methods.For H4,• the hypothesis that there was no significant difference between engagementtransaction costs of the two methods was rejected. Engagement costs offramework agreements were found to be significantly lower than discretetraditional projectsFor H5,• the hypothesis that there was no significant difference between performancemonitoring transaction costs of two methods was validated.As with group A, results of t-tests concerning financial viability were not disclosedto participants and the detailed nature of inference is difficult to convey tointerviewees. Instead, a generalised view regarding value was questioned at theinterview stage. For comments concerning financial viability, a supplier explainedthat frameworks do not have significant impact on production cost and that they arestill competitive because:….you’ve got this continuous programming, planning, arrangement and working onboth sides effects is a good environment to achieve that (supplier 08 SJ). Anotherstates ‘clearly the framework suppliers understand what Hampshire requires andhave priced accordingly’ (Estimator of Na supplier).Comments from the interviews with the Hampshire County Council managerssuggested that engagement transaction costs were reduced through frameworkagreements due to standardisation and repetition of contract documentation andcontrol mechanismsConfirmation of statistical results used was achieved as differences in financialviability between the two procurement methods are detected by practitioners in ‘real257