Chen, Q; Hall, D M; Adey, B T and Haas, C T (2021) Identifying enablers for coordination across construction supply chain processes: A systematic literature review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 28(4), pp. 1083-1113. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Managing stakeholders' reciprocal interdependencies is always a challenging issue. Stakeholders need to find out different ways to communicate information and coordinate material flows during the supply chain processes. Many recent studies have advanced construction supply chain coordination from multiple perspectives. However, the field still lacks a comprehensive analysis to summarize existing research, to explicitly identify all the possible enablers for coordination and to investigate how the enablers can be carried out at the supply chain interfaces. To fill the gap, this study aims to conduct a systematic review in order to examine the relevant literature. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review process was conducted to identify and synthesize relevant publications (published in the past 20 years) concerning the coordination of construction supply chain functions. These publications were coded to link main research findings with specific enabler categories. In addition, how these enablers can be used at the interfaces across supply chain processes was reviewed with an in-depth analysis of reciprocal communications between stakeholders at design-to-production, production-to-logistics and production-to-site-assembly phases. Findings: The coordination enablers were classified into three categories: (1) contractual enablers (including subtopics on relational contracts and incentive models), (2) procedural enablers (including subtopics on multiagent knowledge sharing systems and the last planner system) and (3) technological enablers (including subtopics on linked databases for design coordination, design for manufacturing software platforms and automated monitoring technologies). It was found that interfacing different functions requires a certain level of integration of stakeholders for quick response and feedback processes. The integration of novel contractual forms with digital technologies, such as smart contracts, however, was not adequately addressed in the state of the art. Research limitations/implications: The scope of the systematic review is limited to the static analysis of selected publications. Longitudinal studies should be further included to sharpen the inductions of enablers considering organizational changes and process dynamics in construction projects. Practical implications: Different enablers for coordination were summarized in a concise manner, which provides researchers and project stakeholders with a reinforced understanding of various ways to manage reciprocal interdependencies at different supply chain interfaces. Originality/value: This study constitutes an important input for research on the construction supply chain by illuminating the thematic topic of coordination from inductively developed review processes, which included a holistic framing of the emerging coordination enablers and their use across supply chain functions. Consequently, it closes some identified knowledge gaps and offers additional insights to improve the supply chain performance of construction projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction projects; enablers; information and communication technology applications; supply chain coordination |
| Index terms: | publication, supply chain performance, organizational change, project stakeholder, construction project, platform, state of the art, monitoring, supply chain process, information and communication technology, framing, smart contract, systematic literature review, coordination, integration, methodology, database, digital technology, dynamics, construction supply chain, last planner system, knowledge sharing |
| Subjects: | research methods, construction logistics, sociology, supply chain performance, digital design, control systems, management, project controls, digital technology, data management, business, systems engineering, conceptual models, organizational analysis, knowledge management, production management, computing systems, research evaluation and metrics, research dissemination and communication |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Project Management, Site Management, Supply Chain Management, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here