Zhang, L.; Liu, B.; Ding, T.; Zhang, S. and Fu, Y. (2026) Matching conflict profiles with contractual and relational governance to enhance cooperation in construction projects: Evidence from China. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 33(3), pp. 2606-2624. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – Conflicts frequently occur in construction projects. Matching appropriate contractual and relational governance with conflict features to promote cooperation and thus minimize the negative influences of conflict is an issue that deserves attention. Our study classifies conflict types into task, process and relationship conflict and defines their combinations as conflict profiles. By conceptualizing contractual governance as the complexity of contract provisions and the strictness of contract enforcement and relational governance as trust, our study aims to explore the configurational impacts of conflict profiles and these governance mechanisms on parties' cooperative behaviors. Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire survey was conducted, and 238 valid questionnaires were received. Fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis was performed. Findings – Four configurations produce cooperative behaviors. The combined use of detailed contracts, rigid enforcement and high trust enhances cooperation and such a governance arrangement is not subject to any conflict profile. A relatively low level of conflict requires detailed contracts and high levels of trust. For the conflict profile characterized by high task and process conflict and low relationship conflict, parties can select contractual governance-dominant or relational governance-dominant approaches. Originality/value – Theoretically, our study reveals the matching relationships between conflict profiles and governance mechanisms, enriching the research on conflict profiles in construction projects and the interrelation between contractual and relational governance. Practically, the findings provide project managers guidance for conflict management and selecting governance mechanisms.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | conflict profiles; contract design; contract enforcement; cooperative behaviors; trust |
| Index terms: | low level, governance, relationship conflict, project manager, fuzzy set, enforcement, conflict management, cooperative behaviour, survey, qualitative comparative analysis, configuration, questionnaire, evidence, construction project, methodology, complexity, cooperation, China |
| Subjects: | measurement and scaling, conflict resolution, systems engineering, management, business, profession, data collection methods, decision-making and optimization, research methods, Geography, health safety and environment, production management, psychology, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management, Health and Safety, Governance, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Human Resources |
| 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