Nikolov, A (2022) Exploring pathways for improving the supply chain integration of infrastructure projects. PhD thesis, University of Warwick, UK.
Abstract
Supply chain integration (SCI) has been proposed as one mechanism through which customer, main contractor and suppliers' interests may be aligned in construction. This study aims at depicting how SCI can be improved in construction. Specifically, the study explores the practices underpinning SCI, the pathways that focus integration efforts and the expected outcomes from SCI, positioning SCI as a key enabler towards value realisation in construction supply chains (SCs). Achieving integration is particularly challenging for a construction SC, characterised by non-repetitive projects. In the light of this challenge, several studies suggest specific practices and pathways for the achievement of higher levels of integration in construction. A comprehensive framework creating a synthesis of the different practices and pathways towards improving SCI in the construction sector has yet to be developed and validated. The lack of a systematic view in the application of SCI in construction has impeded the diffusion of a value-driven approach in construction projects and delayed the transition to an integrated SC. The study explores the effects of four integration pathways (actors, flows, processes and technologies) to identify the pathways of actors and flows as value-driving to improved SCI in construction. These pathways are supplemented by practices focused primarily on improving the relational integration between SC actors. In addition, the study identifies the role of the pathway of integrating processes and activities in various construction projects towards a set of outcomes realising value in construction projects. This thesis adopts a two-phase research design. Phase 1 applies a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) method towards synthesis in a conceptual framework for improving SCI in construction. Phase 2 applies a Delphi method towards building a systematic empirical investigation of the conceptual framework using qualitative and quantitative enquiry. This choice of methodology is suitable both for theory conceptualisation in a nascent stage, as is the case for this study, and theory building and testing. The Delphi method leads to a more complete and comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon investigated and its practical adoption in industry. The study extends current knowledge by developing a conceptual framework for improving SCI in construction. Knowledge from the quantitative Delphi investigation reveals the relationships between practices, pathways and the resultant outcomes. The novelty of this study is in demonstrating SCI as key enabler to value realisation. Several avenues for future research emerge from these contributions.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction sector; construction phase; integration; systematic literature review; construction supply chain; construction project; infrastructure project; supplier |
| Index terms: | repetitive project, systematic literature review, conceptual framework, main contractor, relational integration, construction project, theory building, testing, construction supply chain, Delphi method, construction phase, supply chain integration, methodology, integration, infrastructure project, construction sector, investigation, research design |
| Subjects: | professional practice, theoretical framing, data collection methods, organizational analysis, industry analysis, data science, supply chain integration, infrastructure and transport systems, production management, research evaluation and metrics, research methods, construction logistics, research design and methodology, project delivery, practitioner |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Project Management, Supply Chain Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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