Harper, C M; Molenaar, K R and Cannon, J P (2016) Measuring constructs of relational contracting in construction projects: The owner's perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(10): 04016053, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Traditional project design and construction delivery is segmental. Researchers and practitioners often cite the separation, or "silo effect," as a reason for poor project outcomes. In response, new forms of integrated contracts have emerged, fostering more collaborative efforts and a focus on successful project outcomes, instead of individual organizational outcomes. Relational contract theory provides a basis for understanding these new integrated forms of agreement through a set of relational contracting norms. This study operationalizes the relational contracting norms designed to measure project integration. The norms and their dimensions were developed through a rigorous construct mapping methodology and then tested, analyzed, and validated with a survey of owners and owners' representatives from 314 completed projects using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The study validates the measures and demonstrates the potential that the measures have to illuminate the nature of relational contracting in construction project teams. The validated scales can be used in future research to better understand when and how contracts influence integration and project performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracting; partnering; project delivery; project teams |
| Index terms: | dimension, project delivery, project team, project performance, owner, contract theory, project outcome, relational contracting, partnering, project design, construction project team, norms, mapping, integration, methodology, construction project, integrated contract, practitioner, survey, confirmatory factor analysis |
| Subjects: | production management, project management theory and practice, research methods, spatial and geospatial analysis, statistical analysis, organizational analysis, partnership management, sociology, practitioner, data collection methods, project completion, contractual arrangements, legal systems, project delivery, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Procurement, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Organizational Design, 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