Jin, H; Qu, X; Liu, B and Liu, C (2024) Examining the success drivers and barriers of modular building projects using qualitative comparative analysis. International Journal of Construction Management, 24(6), pp. 601-609. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Compared to traditional construction methods, it is expected that modularization can achieve a faster, cheaper and more sustainable delivery and, as a result, should have a higher chance of project success. However, it is not unusual that modular projects fail to achieve the project objectives and stakeholders' expectations. The failure of modular construction projects makes researchers and industry practitioners wonder whether the causal configurations for modular project success and failure are different from other types of construction projects. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by exploring the combinatorial impact of success drivers and barriers on project outcomes using qualitative comparative analysis, with a specific focus on modularization practices in the building sector. The data matrix, which summarises project information of 31 cases, is imported into analysis software, fsQCA 3.0, to test the multiple conjunctural causations for modular building project success and failure. The analysis results confirm that the success drivers and barriers interactively and collectively influence project outcomes of modular buildings. The most commonly involved success drivers and barriers are discussed in detail. This research will serve as a valuable reference for building sector practitioners and facilitate the effort to improve the success rate of modular building projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | modularization; multiple conjunctural causation; project success; qualitative comparative analysis |
| Index terms: | qualitative comparative analysis, modular construction, construction project, practitioner, configuration, body of knowledge, modular building, project success, traditional construction, project outcome, modularization |
| Subjects: | research methods, project management theory and practice, production management, building construction, systems engineering, heritage and conservation, project completion, practitioner, knowledge management |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Engineering Principles |
| 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