Teng, Y; Li, X; Wu, P and Wang, X (2019) Using cooperative game theory to determine profit distribution in IPD projects. International Journal of Construction Management, 19(1), pp. 32-45. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) mode is regarded as an effective project delivery method that could achieve the consensus project goals by a collaborative team. However, the number of projects using IPD remains small, partly because of the lack of a fair incentive scheme. The purpose of this paper is to develop a fair profit distribution scheme among stakeholders of IPD projects. This study uses cooperative game theory as the method for analyzing profit distribution among the designer, construction contractor, owner and BIM consultant. The Shapley value is used as the solution to the cooperative game theory because it can assess the marginal contribution of each stakeholder to the coalition. In addition, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation (FCE) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) are used to assess the risk levels of each stakeholder to modify the profit distribution based on the marginal contribution. A modified Shapley value model, which includes four categories of risk factors, i.e. operation, economic, profit and market risks, was established in this study. The results show that the modified Shapley value can help establish a fair profit distribution scheme for the IPD projects. Practitioners are also encouraged to focus on information sharing to reach the full potential of IPD.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modelling; cooperative game theory; IPD; profit distribution; shapley value |
| Index terms: | designer, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation, project delivery, integrated project delivery, game theory, risk factor, building information modelling, construction contractor, owner, practitioner, information sharing, profit |
| Subjects: | practitioner, sociology, economic analysis, decision models, contractual arrangements, decision-making and optimization, information systems, data exchange, project delivery, environmental hazards, profession |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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