Ma, Q; Li, S; Teo, P X and Ling, F Y Y (2023) Barriers to adopting integrated project delivery practices. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(9), pp. 4171-4191. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Compared with traditional approaches, integrated project delivery (IPD) improves project performance by enhancing integration. To adopt IPD, however, existing practices need to be changed, which creates barriers to implementation. This study aims to identify the barriers to IPD practices in China and Singapore, whose practitioners show different types and levels of integration experience. Design/methodology/approach: A questionnaire survey was administered to two groups of respondents: Chinese and Singaporean. The data were analyzed using three nonparametric techniques, including Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test, and Spearman rank correlation. Findings: (1) Of 39 possible barriers, 36 were consistently felt by both Chinese and Singaporean practitioners with different backgrounds; (2) The Chinese group perceived more issues to be significant barriers than the Singaporean group; (3) The Singaporean group had more experience than the Chinese group in performing integration in five areas. This lessens some barriers to adopting IPD practices. Originality/value: This study is important because it uncovers barriers to the effective implementation of IPD and shows the importance of certain types and levels of integration experience in overcoming these barriers. The results will be useful to practitioners planning to adopt IPD in China or Singapore.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | barrier; China; integrated project delivery; integration experience; Singapore |
| Index terms: | Singapore, implementation, project performance, survey, integrated project delivery, China, practitioner, questionnaire, methodology, integration |
| Subjects: | Geography, project management theory and practice, research methods, organizational analysis, practitioner, data collection methods, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Procurement, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Organizational Design |
| 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