Liu, T; Chong, H Y; Zhang, W; Lee, C Y and Tang, X (2022) Effects of contractual and relational governances on BIM collaboration and implementation for project performance improvement. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(6): 04022029, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Both contractual and relational governances affect building information modeling (BIM) collaboration and implementation (BCI) to improve project performance. However, the mechanism by which these governances and their interaction influence BCI remains undetermined. Considering transaction cost economics and social exchange theories, this study aimed to investigate the extent of the effect of contractual and relational governances and their interactions on improving BCI. We developed a series of hypotheses and a questionnaire to achieve the aims of the study. The partial least-squares structural equation modeling was applied to analyze the cause-effect relationship arising from the hypotheses. The results show contractual and relational governances affect BCI positively. Contractual governance, which consists of monitoring elements in safeguarding provisions, positively affect BCI and project performance. However, there is no effect found for safeguarding provisions that define the rights of parties in the contract. The study also reveals that contractual governance does not influence relational governance in BCI. This research provides new insights to project managers on the use of effective governance mechanisms to deliver BIM-enabled megaprojects for improving project performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modeling collaboration and implementation; contractual governance; partial least-squares structural equation modeling; project performance; relational governance |
| Index terms: | building information modelling, project manager, governance, social exchange theory, interaction, implementation, monitoring, project performance, structural equation modelling, transaction cost, megaproject, collaboration, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, financial analysis, behavioral psychology, information systems, social theory, project management theory and practice, management, contractual arrangements, strategic project management, control systems, profession, data collection methods, business |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Site Management, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management, Governance, Procurement, Roles and Professions |
| 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