Han, Y; Shen, J; Zhu, X; An, B and Bao, X (2024) Interaction mechanisms of interface management risks in complex systems of high-speed rail construction projects: An association rule mining-based modeling framework. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(5), pp. 2101-2127. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to develop an interface management risk interaction modeling and analysis methodology applicable to complex systems in high-speed rail construction projects, reveal the interaction mechanism of interface management risk and provide theoretical support for project managers to develop appropriate interface management risk response strategies. Design/methodology/approach: This paper introduces the association rule mining technique to improve the complex network modeling method. Taking China as an example, based on the stakeholder perspective, the risk factors and significant accident types of interface management of high-speed rail construction projects are systematically identified, and a database is established. Then, the Apriori algorithm is used to mine and analyze the strong association rules among the factors in the database, construct the complex network, and analyze its topological characteristics to reveal the interaction mechanism of the interface management risk of high-speed rail construction projects. Findings: The results show that the network is both scale-free and small-world, implying that construction accidents are not random events but rather the result of strong interactions between numerous interface management risks. Contractors, technical interfaces, mechanical equipment, and environmental factors are the primary direct causal factors of accidents, while owners and designers are essential indirect causal factors. The global importance of stakeholders such as owners, designers, and supervisors rises significantly after considering the indirect correlations between factors. This theoretically explains the need to consider the interactions between interface management risks. Originality/value: The interaction mechanism between interface management risks is unclear, which is an essential factor influencing the decision of risk response measures. This study proposes a new methodology for analyzing interface management risk response strategies that incorporate quantitative analysis methods and considers the interaction of interface management risks.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | association rule mining; complex network; high-speed rail projects; interface management risk; risk interaction |
| Index terms: | risk response, construction project, methodology, interface management, network modelling, construction accident, quantitative analysis, environmental factor, China, railway construction, project manager, owner, complex system, database, designer, mining, risk response strategy, risk factor, supervisor, modelling, interaction |
| Subjects: | environmental science, data analysis and analytics, analytical methods, profession, business, practitioner, networking, occupational health and safety management, data management, sociology, geotechnical engineering, environmental hazards, behavioral psychology, systems engineering, research methods, civil engineering, production management, Geography, financial risk |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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