Zong, H; Wang, G and Cao, D (2025) Collaborative networks between contractors and subcontractors for infrastructure development: A comparative study of national quality award projects in China. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(2), pp. 1074-1096. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: As the foundation of social and economic development, infrastructure development projects are characterized by large initial investment, high technical requirements and thus generally delivered through complex contractor–subcontractor collaboration chains. This study aims to characterize the complexity of collaborative networks between contractors and subcontractors for infrastructure development through comparing the structural characteristics and the formation mechanisms of contractor–subcontractor collaborative networks for the following two different types of infrastructure: public works (PWCN) owned and operated by government agencies, and public utilities (PUCN) owned and operated by nongovernment agencies. Design/methodology/approach: Based on the method of stochastic actor-oriented models and the longitudinal dataset of National Quality Award Projects in China during 2001–2020, this study compares how the structural characteristics of project-based collaborative networks between contractors and subcontractors for the two types of projects are different and how related micro-mechanisms, including both structure-based endogenous network effects and attribute-based exogenous homophily effects (institutional, organizational and geographical homophily), collectively underpin the formation of the networks. Findings: The empirical results provide evidence that while the two networks are both characterized by relatively low levels of network density, PWCN is more globally connected around a minority of superconnected contractors as compared with PUCN. The results further reveal that compared with PUCN, the formation of PWCN is more significantly related to the structure-based anti in-isolates effect, suggesting that PWCN is more open for new entrant subcontractors. With regard to the attribute-based homophily effects, the results provide evidence that while both significantly and positively related to the effects of organizational (same company group) and geographical homophily (same location), the formation of PWCN and PUCN is oppositely driven by the institutional homophily effect (same ownership type). Originality/value: As an exploratory effort of using network perspective to investigate the formation mechanisms of contractor–subcontractor relationships in the infrastructure development domain, this study contributes to a network and self-organizing system view of how contractors select subcontractors in different types of infrastructure projects. The study also provides insights into how contractor–subcontractor collaborative relationships can be better manipulated to promote the development of complex infrastructure in different contexts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contractor–subcontractor collaboration; infrastructure projects; partner selection; project-based collaborative networks; stochastic actor-oriented models |
| Index terms: | infrastructure project, public work, comparative study, self-organizing, ownership, minority, density, partner selection, low level, China, agency, dataset, complexity, subcontractor, methodology, collaboration, evidence, public utility, infrastructure development, economic development, government agency |
| Subjects: | research design and methodology, management, economics, data management, partnership management, sociology, measurement and scaling, infrastructure and transport systems, administrative law, systems engineering, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner, analytical methods, economic development, research methods, Geography, infrastructure engineering |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Legal Issues, Ethics, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Organizational Design |
| 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