Taylor, J E; Levitt, R and Villarroel, J A (2009) Simulating learning dynamics in project networks. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(10), pp. 1009-1015. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In this paper we develop a multiagent simulation model to explore the impact of learning dynamics on the productive implementation of innovations in project networks comprised of designers and contractors. Though researchers generally agree that when firms form into networks they will gain access to new knowledge, the question of learning beyond the firm at the boundaries between firms or at the level of the project network itself remain less explored. We simulate the impact of task interdependence and relational instability on learning in project networks comprised of multiple specialist firms. We find that relational instability in project networks slows learning and task interdependence moderates the impact of increasing relational instability on network productivity rates. The findings have significant implications for interorganizational learning theory. The simulation results provide insights into appropriate firm-level and project network-level strategies for change.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | change management; organizations; productivity; simulation |
| Index terms: | learning theory, productivity, designer, project network, interdependence, boundaries, strategy, interorganizational, dynamics, change management, implementation |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, learning theory, systems engineering, management, organizational analysis, business, property law, project planning, profession |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Procurement, Business Strategy, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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