Zamani, S H; Rahman, R A; Fauzi, M A and Mohamed Yusof, L (2024) Government pandemic response strategies for AEC enterprises: Lessons from COVID-19. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 22(3), pp. 690-717. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: Policymakers are developing government-level pandemic response strategies (GPRS) to assist architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) enterprises. However, the effectiveness of the GPRS has not been assessed. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the interrelationships between GPRS and AEC enterprises. To achieve that aim, the study objectives are to compare GPRS effectiveness between small-medium and large AEC enterprises, develop groupings to categorize interrelated GPRS and evaluate the effectiveness of the GPRS and interrelated constructs. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with 40 AEC industry professionals were carried out, generating 22 GPRS. Then, questionnaire survey data was collected among AEC professionals. In total, 114 valid survey answers were received and analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis H test, normalized mean analysis, factor analysis and fuzzy synthetic evaluation. Findings: Small-medium enterprises have four distinct critical GPRS: “form a special task force to provide support in maneuvering COVID-19,” “provide infrastructure investment budgets to local governments,” “develop employee assistance programs that fit all types of working groups” and “diversify existing supply chain.” Large enterprises have two distinct critical GPRS: “provide help in digitalizing existing construction projects” and “mandate COVID-19 as force majeure.” Eighteen GPRS can be categorized into the following five constructs: “market stability and financial aid,” “enterprise capability management,” “supply chain improvement,” “law and policy resources” and “information and workforce management.” The former two constructs are more effective than other GPRS constructs. Originality/value: This is the first paper that evaluates the effectiveness of GPRS for AEC enterprises, providing new evidence to policymakers for well-informed decision-making in developing pandemic response strategies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | AEC industry; construction project management; COVID-19; organization characteristics; organizational issues; project management; small and medium enterprise |
| Index terms: | employee assistance program, factor analysis, systematic literature review, construction project, strategy, force majeure, organizational issue, construction project management, stability, evidence, questionnaire, interview, effectiveness, mandate, COVID-19, pandemic, decision-making, local government, survey, methodology, infrastructure investment, fuzzy synthetic evaluation, project management |
| Subjects: | business, political science, management, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, administrative law, research methods, health risk and incident analysis, statistical analysis, performance management, research evaluation and metrics, project management theory and practice, decision analysis, production management, structural engineering, mitigation, decision-making and optimization, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Procurement, Governance, Risk Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Human Resources, Contract Administration, Health and Safety, Legal Issues |
| 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