Tian, Z; He, Q and Wang, T (2025) How to mobilize owner-dynamic capabilities in megaprojects? A tripartite evolutionary game approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(3), pp. 1478-1498. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Currently, many studies have shown an increasing interest in owner-dynamic capabilities (ODCs). Existing studies mainly focus on the dynamic capability basis and capability development within the owner organization, whereas they rarely analyze the capability mobilization within the network of participants in megaprojects. Therefore, this study aims to explain the interaction and evolution of the mobilization strategies of ODCs and the cooperative strategies of other participants. Design/methodology/approach: This study develops a tripartite evolutionary game model to analyze the evolutionarily stable strategy of the owner, the reciprocal participants and the general participants. Results are numerically simulated with a validation case. The asymptotic stability of multiple group strategies is discussed under the replicator dynamic system. Findings: This study suggests that resource complementarity significantly reduces the difficulty of mobilization. Moreover, these strategies are only effective with sufficient ODCs. The results indicate that reciprocal participants are more sensitive to the change in resource complementarity. Originality/value: This study provides strategic guidance for mobilizing ODCs in megaprojects to better embrace uncertainty and stress, contributing to the dynamic capability literature with an evolutionary game approach. And new insight for the study of reciprocity preference in megaprojects is also provided.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | megaproject; owner-dynamic capability; participant network; reciprocity preference; tripartite evolutionary game |
| Index terms: | stability, strategy, megaproject, preference, validation, dynamic capability, methodology, evolution, capability development, owner, evolutionary game, interaction |
| Subjects: | strategic project management, environmental science, behavioral psychology, decision-making and reasoning, research methods, structural engineering, sociology, economic theory, management, professional development |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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