Social networks and construction teams: Literature review

Kereri, J O and Harper, C M (2019) Social networks and construction teams: Literature review. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(4): 03119001, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

From the relational contract approaches currently emphasized in construction, researchers have noted that there is enough evidence pointing toward social psychological theories of team formation. Building on a theoretical framework, this paper analyzes social, construction, and team formation literature through a comprehensive literature review. Findings reveal that construction teams form as small worlds out of clusters that emerge either through contractual, professional, task, or trade relationships, which strongly supports the proposed theoretical framework for social networks in construction. This paper contributes to the body of knowledge by bringing together three diverse theories of team formation, social network, and collaborative teams into construction engineering and management research while at the same time identifying gaps and areas for future research. In addition, this study reveals that fragmented construction teams are characterized by clusters, and resources are constrained from one cluster to the other. As such, construction teams lack bridging ties necessary to reduce social distance between members, an area that has received limited attention from researchers.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction teams; relationships; social factors; social networks
Index terms: social factor, evidence, construction team, literature review, body of knowledge, social network, management research, construction engineering
Subjects: engineering methods, research design and methodology, knowledge management, data analysis and analytics, evaluation and assessment methods, sociology, project delivery
Topics: Project Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice
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