Alqershy, M T; Shi, Q and Anbar, D R (2025) Analysing the interplay of isomorphic pressures, perceived benefits and top management support on social responsibility performance of Belt and Road megaprojects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(6), pp. 4074-4099. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to investigate the factors influencing the social responsibility performance of Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) megaprojects. Specifically, it examines the role of isomorphic pressures and the joint influence of perceived benefits and top management support on megaproject social responsibility performance (MSRP). Design/methodology/approach: Drawing from institutional theory, social exchange theory, and top management literature, this study established a conceptual model featuring eleven hypotheses. Subsequently, a questionnaire survey was administered to collect data from 238 actively engaged participants in BRI megaprojects. Structural Equation Modelling was utilised to analyse the data. Findings: The empirical findings indicate that mimetic and coercive pressures positively influence MSRP. Perceived benefits and top management support significantly enhance MSRP. Moreover, perceived benefits and top management support partially mediate the effects of coercive and mimetic pressures. However, when it comes to normative pressures, their impact on MSRP is solely channelled through the support of top management. Originality/value: This study is one of the early endeavours to explore the factors influencing the social responsibility performance of BRI megaprojects. It sheds light on the interplay between external pressures and internal factors in shaping social responsibility efforts in these projects. These findings are of particular significance for BRI actors and stakeholders, offering guidance for enhancing social responsibility strategies within the context of BRI megaprojects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bri; isomorphic pressure; megaproject social responsibility; perceived benefits; top management support |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, top management, methodology, megaproject, social responsibility, survey, drawing, strategy, modelling, social exchange theory, institutional theory |
| Subjects: | social theory, management, sociology, data collection methods, technical documentation, health safety and environment, research methods, analytical methods, strategic project management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety |
| 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