Chen, L and Manley, K (2014) Validation of an instrument to measure governance and performance on collaborative infrastructure projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(5): 04014006, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Collaborative infrastructure projects use hybrid formal and informal governance structures to manage transactions. Based on previous desktop research, the authors identified the key mechanisms underlying project governance, and posited the performance implications of the governance. The current paper extends that qualitative research by testing the veracity of those findings using data from 320 Australian construction organizations. The results provide, for the first time, reliable and valid scales to measure governance and performance of collaborative projects, and the relationship between them. The results confirm seven of seven hypothesized governance mechanisms, 30 of 43 hypothesized underlying actions, eight of eight hypothesised key performance indicators, and the dual importance of formal and informal governance. A startling finding of the study was that the implementation intensity of informal mechanisms (noncontractual conditions) is a greater predictor of project performance variance than that of formal mechanisms (contractual conditions). Further, contractual conditions do not directly impact project performance; instead their impact is mediated by the noncontractual features of a project. Obligations established under the contract are not sufficient to optimize project performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaborative project; contracting; project governance; project performance; value for money |
| Index terms: | project performance, collaborative project, infrastructure project, implementation, testing, governance, key performance indicator, construction organization, variance, validation, qualitative research, value-for-money |
| Subjects: | evaluation, project management theory and practice, professional development, infrastructure and transport systems, measurement and scaling, research design and methodology, organization, business, project delivery, contractual arrangements, professional practice |
| Topics: | Governance, Procurement, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy, Value Management |
| 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