Ho, S P; Lin, Y H; Chu, W and Wu, H L (2009) Model for organizational governance structure choices in construction joint ventures. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(6), pp. 518-530. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Due to the recent trend of utilizing joint ventures (JVs) in construction, construction firms are faced with the challenges in managing construction JVs. Among those challenges, the choice of organizational governance structure has a profound impact on JV performance, but receives little attention. The objective of this study is to investigate the choice of organizational design in construction of JVs and the underlying rationales of the choice. Through the theoretical lens that integrates both cost and resource perspectives, we develop a model that focuses on four major factors for determining governance structure choices, namely, corporate cultural difference, trust, needs for procurement autonomy, and motivation for learning. A case study of eight JVs in the Taiwan High Speed Rail project was conducted to empirically evaluate the proposed model. It is shown that the eight cases studied jointly replicate the linkage between the hypothesized determinants and the governance structure choices and reasonably support the proposed model.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | joint ventures; organizations |
| Index terms: | high speed rail, governance, organizational design, joint venture, case study, linkage, determinant, Taiwan, cultural difference, motivation, construction firm |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, cross-cultural studies, Geography, psychology, organization, business, risk assessment, data collection methods |
| Topics: | International Construction, Human Resources, Organizational Design, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Governance, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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