Deep, S; Gajendran, T; Jefferies, M and Jha, K N (2025) Defining the attributes of power and dependence in general contractor and subcontractor project-based relationships: Understanding the subcontractor's perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(10): 04025149, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In general, a contractor and subcontractor's relationship is governed by standard contractual forms. This can result in conflicts and lead to negative outcomes because of power imbalances. From the extant literature, it was identified that research to date has focused on the general contractor's perspective with limited focus on subcontractor challenges, which demonstrates a gap in the body of knowledge. Therefore, the study aims to define the attributes of power and dependence in the general contractor and subcontractor relationship from the subcontractor's viewpoint. A questionnaire survey was developed to explore the subcontractor's perspective, and 212 responses from subcontractors based in Australia were found suitable for analysis. Partial least-squares structural equation modeling based on effect size (ES) was used for hypothesis testing. It was identified that clarity of procurement decisions (ES=0.340), market structure (ES=0.194), and market competition (ES=0.180), were the antecedents of power. Furthermore, it was also validated that commercial importance (ES=0.339) and market reputation (ES=0.241) are antecedents of dependence. The study defines the attributes of power and dependence and provides guidelines for practitioners to use in the creation of partnerships.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | partial least-square structural equation modeling; subcontractors tendering and contracting; supplier relationship; supplier selection |
| Index terms: | general contractor, structural equation modelling, survey, body of knowledge, subcontractor, practitioner, competition, questionnaire, partnership, Australia, testing, procurement decision |
| Subjects: | knowledge management, professional practice, practitioner, market analysis, Geography, data collection methods, statistical analysis, procurement strategy, partnership management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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