Martin, H; Lewis, T M and Fifi, J (2014) Centralized versus decentralized construction project structure: easing communication difficulties. International Journal of Construction Management, 14(3), pp. 156-170. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Construction managers appear to be in danger of losing control of their projects. The problem is not that they have misjudged the demands created by an increasingly complex technical and economic environment or even that they have failed to develop strategies to address the new challenges, rather it is being suggested that the key issue is poor communication. Further, because project structure has an impact on the flow of communication within the team, an inappropriate management structure may be a major contributor to communication 'resistance' and hence to project inefficiencies. In addition, construction projects often end in conflict when the agreed contracted communication modes, often in a written form, are not followed. Prior research has focused on developing an optimal organizational structure without standardizing communication and failing to connect the derived structure with organization theory. The impact of centralized and decentralized project structure on written communication resistance between hierarchical levels of projects was therefore examined. To evaluate the communication resistance for a project structure, a comparison of communication channels between 30 project participants at different levels was undertaken using the analytical hierarchy process. The trend model was used to construct the activity relationship matrix, which is based on the frequency and combination of interactions amongst participants. The total resistance index for each derived structure was determined, and the decentralized neoclassic organization structure was deemed optimal with the lowest total resistance index. This strongly supports the theory that decentralized organizational structures have less communication resistance than centralized ones.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; communication; organization design; organization structure |
| Index terms: | interaction, analytical hierarchy process, construction manager, construction project, organizational structure, strategy |
| Subjects: | production management, management, decision-making and optimization, behavioral psychology, sociology, profession |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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