Hosseinian, S M and Jaberi, A (2024) Optimal sharing of construction project outcomes with downstream contracting parties: Principal-agent analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 150(2): 04023156, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Sharing of a project's outcomes drives the contracting parties to closer cooperation. However, subcontracting and sharing with downstream contracting parties (e.g., subcontractor and sub-subcontractor) have received less attention in the construction literature. This paper proposes an optimal multilayer outcome-sharing model for construction contracts between a client and a construction team (e.g., including contractors, subcontractors, and sub-subcontractors), based on existing utility and principal-agent models. A numerical study supports the validity of the proposed model and the paper's propositions. The findings indicate that optimal effort levels by downstream parties result in cost savings for all contracting parties, promoting fair and efficient outcome sharing. Moreover, the study highlights that contracts with risk-neutral downstream contracting parties lead to the most significant cost-saving for the client. The paper's contribution lies in establishing a connection between optimal sharing in upstream layers and downstream layers. The modeling approach is original, with no similar models found in the existing literature.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | optimization; outcome sharing; principal-agent theory; subcontracting |
| Index terms: | modelling, cost saving, construction contract, validity, contracting party, multilayer, subcontracting, construction team, subcontractor, agent, cooperation, construction project |
| Subjects: | contract type, organization, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner, psychology, analytical methods, project delivery, specialized materials and systems, economics, production management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Supply Chain Management, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management |
| 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