Duva, M (2022) A multi-level and in-depth analysis of AEC project networks: Topology, social influence, and intervention. PhD thesis, Michigan State University, USA.
Abstract
Architectural, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) project teams comprise a diverse set of individuals and organizations that work under pressure to execute a project. Efficient collaboration and integration are vital to generating and conveying the necessary expertise for optimized solutions and project performance. However, the transient and fragmented nature of the AEC teams poses a challenge to collaborate efficiently and impacts the project performance adversely. This dissertation examines the project networks that allow actors to create and channel expertise that can be used to enhance project outcomes including sustainability for AEC projects. To achieve the study goal, longitudinal data are collected from an AEC project team with more than 1000 team members. The data are analyzed using mixed methods and Social Network Analysis (SNA). This research consists of three main independent but interwoven parts: (1) Part 1 examines the topology and evolution of AEC project team collaboration networks that facilitates expertise flows for optimal sustainability outcomes; (2) Part 2 examines social influence mechanisms and how individuals change knowledge-sharing behaviors in project networks; and (3) Part 3 develops an intervention protocol for AEC project teams to find appropriate solutions for network constraints and improve knowledge transfers for optimized project performance. The study’s main contribution to the body of knowledge is providing a holistic and systematic evaluation of AEC project networks with special consideration to their dynamic and multi-level characteristics to improve the project outcomes, particularly sustainability. First, project networks have unique needs that cannot solely be explained with network metrics. This study fills the gap by explaining desirable network topologies and how to achieve them for enhanced project outcomes. Second, the study establishes a social influence model to understand conformity and influence processes in project networks and enable the diffusion of necessary behaviors for better project performance. Finally, the study provides an intervention framework for AEC teams in selecting and assigning experts in projects as well as managing team communications and networks in a dynamic manner during project delivery for better system functioning and resilience.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Mollaoglu, S and Zhao, D |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; integration; network analysis; project delivery; project performance; project team; social network analysis; sustainability |
| Index terms: | project team, network topologies, project delivery, dissertation, project performance, project outcome, mixed method, network analysis, topology, body of knowledge, knowledge transfer, collaboration, evolution, integration, social network analysis, project network |
| Subjects: | project delivery, data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, organizational analysis, management, project management theory and practice, project planning, environmental science, knowledge management, project completion, research dissemination and communication, networking, research methods, geometry and topology |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Information Management, Research Practice, Sustainability, Procurement, Project 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