Yang, L; Lv, X and Zhao, X (2024) Coping with abnormal organizational behaviors in complex project based on network attack theory. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(9), pp. 3773-3800. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Abnormal behaviors such as rework, backlog, changes and claims generated by project organizations are unavoidable in complex projects. When abnormal behaviors emerge, the previously normal state of interactions between organizations will be altered to some extent. However, previous studies have ignored the associations and interactions between organizations in the context of abnormal organizational behaviors (AOBs), making this challenging to cope with AOBs. As a result, the objective of this paper is to explore how to reduce AOBs in complex projects at the organizational level from a network perspective. Design/methodology/approach: To overcome the inherent limitations of a single case study, this research integrated two data collection methods: questionnaire survey and expert scoring method. The questionnaire survey captured the universal data on the influence possibility of AOBs between complex project organizations and the expert scoring method got the influence probability scores of AOBs between organizations in the case. Using these data, four organizational influence network models of AOBs based on a case were developed to demonstrate how to destroy AOBs networks in complex projects using network attack theory (NAT). Findings: First, the findings show that controlling AOBs generated by key organizations preferentially and improving the ability of key organizations can weaken AOBs network, enabling more effective coping strategies. Second, the owners, government, material suppliers and designers are identified as key organizations across all four influence networks of AOBs. Third, change and claim behaviors are more manageable from the organizational level. Practical implications: Project managers can target specific organizations for intervention, weaken the AOBs network by applying NAT and achieve better project outcomes through coping strategies. Additionally, by taking a network perspective, this research provides a novel approach to comprehending the associations and interactions between organizations in the context of complex projects. Originality/value: This paper proposes a new approach to investigating AOBs in complex projects by simultaneously examining rework, backlog, change and claim. Leveraging NAT as a novel tool for managing the harmful effects of influence networks, this study extends the knowledge body in the field of organizational behavior (OB) management and complex project management.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | abnormal organizational behaviors; complex projects; network; network attack theory; questionaire survey; case study |
| Index terms: | project organization, survey, rework, strategy, questionnaire, methodology, project manager, case study, designer, project outcome, organizational behaviour, owner, coping, interaction, complex project |
| Subjects: | organizational theory, research methods, management, behavioral psychology, sociology, business, project completion, data collection methods, profession, strategic project management, operations management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy |
| 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