Inayat, A; Melhem, H and Esmaeily, A (2015) Critical success factors in an agency construction management environment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(1): 06014010, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This study aims at differentiating construction project critical success factors based on organizational backgrounds of project participants: contractor, construction manager (owner representative), and design firms. Construction professionals from diverse locales were asked to rate a list of 53 potential factors for the objectives of schedule, budget, and quality, and additionally compare the objectives for overall project success. The set of 53 factors was enriched by eliminating 13 factors that could not prove their statistical significance for even one of schedule, budget, or quality performances for any of the three organizations. Commissioning the 40 significant factors, an analytical hierarchy process was used to determine organization-based factor rankings for overall project success. Spearman's test on rankings of the 40 significant factors for overall project performance results in a highest level of correlation between the managers and contractor personnel (rs=0.54), followed by that between the managers and the designers (rs=0.50), and a least correlation between the contractor personnel and the designers (rs=0.19). Hence for successful project implementation, professional construction managers have an edge over the designers in supervising the contractors.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; construction projects; critical success factors; organizational backgrounds; organizational issues; project perceived success; spearman's test |
| Index terms: | owner, construction project, construction professional, project performance, agency, commissioning, designer, organizational issue, design firm, implementation, analytical hierarchy process, manager, critical success factor, quality performance, project success, personnel, construction manager |
| Subjects: | professional development, business, profession, contractual arrangements, practitioner, control systems, production management, sociology, project delivery, management, project management theory and practice, decision-making and optimization, completion |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Organizational Design, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Project Management, Procurement, Quality Management, Information 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