Lee, C Y; Chong, H Y; Li, Q and Wang, X (2020) Joint contract-function effects on BIM-enabled EPC project performance. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(3): 04020008, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contracting does not promote collaboration and thus may not be suitable for building information modeling (BIM) projects. Joint-contract functions that combine contractual control, coordination, and contingency adaptability may positively influence the performance of these BIM-enabled projects. This study hypothesized that perceived fairness, calculative trust, relational trust, and positive outcomes of distrust influence the relationship between joint-contract functions and BIM-enabled project performance. A total of 252 observations were collected from industry practitioners in EPC oil and gas projects and analyzed using partial least-squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). The results show no direct effect of joint-contract functions on BIM-enabled EPC project performance but do show significant total and indirect relationship effects that are influenced by perceived fairness and relational trust. The findings contribute to construction contracting research by empirically showing how formal contracts focusing on joint-contract functions can influence BIM-enabled EPC project performance. The current findings also shed light on appropriate contract framing for BIM-enabled EPC project stakeholders, an area not explored in the previous literature.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modeling; contingency adaptability; contract functions; control; coordination; distrust; engineering, procurement, and construction; trust |
| Index terms: | building information modelling, direct effect, coordination, oil and gas, project performance, fairness, framing, relational trust, structural equation modelling, adaptability, practitioner, project stakeholder, calculative trust, collaboration |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, factor and component analysis, management, industry analysis, leadership, statistical analysis, information systems, environmental hazards, sociology, practitioner, user focus, conceptual models, psychology |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Human Resources, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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