Climbing the pyramid of megaproject social responsibility: Impacts of external stakeholders and project complexity

Ma, H; Lv, K; Zeng, S; Lin, H and Shi, J J (2022) Climbing the pyramid of megaproject social responsibility: Impacts of external stakeholders and project complexity. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148(11): 04022116, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Megaproject social responsibility (MSR) has received a great deal of attention from both academics and practitioners. However, as a very broad and complex concept, MSR requires an in-depth investigation of its components, driving forces, and contingent factors. Thus, this study aims to explore the climbing process across different levels of MSR from the perspectives of external stakeholders and project complexity. This study first establishes a pyramid framework for analyzing the different components and levels of MSR by leveraging stakeholder theory. Then, drawing upon attention- and capability-based views, theoretical development and empirical analyses are carried out to validate the influence of external stakeholders on participating organizations' MSR and the moderating effects of project complexity. Using a set of survey data from Chinese megaprojects, the empirical findings demonstrate that the positive influence of external stakeholders and the negative moderating effect of project complexity become salient when ascending the pyramid of MSR. The value of this study lies in the way in which it considers the climbing process based on a hierarchical framework of MSR. The theoretical framework and empirical findings offer both project managers and policy makers with new insights into how to govern the diverse social responsibility issues in megaproject construction and management.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: external stakeholders; megaproject; project complexity; pyramid; social responsibility
Index terms: project manager, social responsibility, external stakeholder, practitioner, investigation, survey, drawing, megaproject, project complexity
Subjects: strategic project management, health safety and environment, technical documentation, profession, practitioner, data collection methods, sociology, organizational theory
Topics: Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Design Practice, Project Management, Health and Safety
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

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