Guo, W; Lu, W and Kang, F (2023) Combining transaction characteristics and governance mechanisms to suppress opportunism in construction projects: Qualitative comparative analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(10), pp. 4914-4932. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The understanding of how to mitigate opportunism in construction projects is still limited and conflicting. The complexity of causalities and interdependence among antecedents of opportunism (transaction characteristics and governance mechanisms) is the major obstacle to current research. This study takes a holistic perspective to explore the different combinations of conditions that lead to high opportunism and low opportunism in project management. Design/methodology/approach: Through 2 phases of the interview and questionnaire survey, the 91 valid survey data were collected from the buyer–seller relationships in construction projects and analyzed by adopting fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Findings: A single transaction characteristic is rarely sufficient to explain opportunism, and combinations of different transaction characteristics and governance mechanisms (performance ambiguity, asset specificity, buyer's requirement certainty, informal control, and formal control) have different effects on opportunism. In the case of extremely unsatisfactory transaction characteristics, even the combination of formal and informal control cannot prevent high opportunism. The combination including low-formal control and high-asset specificity easily leads to high opportunism. Besides, performance ambiguity is a vital factor in mitigating high opportunism or achieving low opportunism. Originality/value: Previous studies have always addressed the role of one or some factors independently and separately. This study is one of the first to explore the different combinations of conditions that result in high opportunism and low opportunism in project management based on transaction costs economics and agency theory.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction projects; fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis; governance mechanisms; opportunism; transaction characteristics |
| Index terms: | asset specificity, governance, interdependence, project management, survey, qualitative comparative analysis, opportunism, transaction cost, interview, complexity, agency, questionnaire, methodology, construction project |
| Subjects: | research methods, project management theory and practice, economic concepts, production management, sociology, organizational analysis, systems engineering, financial analysis, business, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Governance |
| 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