Guo, Z.; Wang, Q.; Jing, H. and Gao, Q. (2026) How to promote the technological innovation cooperation in mega construction projects at the project level? Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 33(5), pp. 3657-3681. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose – Mega construction projects (megaprojects) require technological innovation cooperation (TIC) to address complex construction demands and the interests of multiple stakeholders. Although TIC has been extensively discussed at the firm level, a significant gap remains in understanding megaprojects at the project level. This paper aims to identify TIC's influencing factors and transmission paths and discuss stakeholders' TIC mechanisms at the project level. Design/methodology/approach – Based on case analysis, expert interviews, literature analysis and the Delphi method, this paper identifies the influencing factors of TIC in megaprojects at the project level. A structural system of these influencing factors is constructed by interpretive structural modeling (ISM), developing various mechanisms for TIC from bottom to top. The Matriced' Impacts Croisés Multiplication Appliquée à un Classement (MICMAC) method validates the driving forces and dependencies of the influencing factors, clarifying their roles and positions within the system. Additionally, the TIC mechanism is constructed. Findings – The research findings identify 26 influencing factors categorized into four hierarchical levels: cooperative relationships, cooperative behavior, cooperative performance and technological innovation risks. Regarding direct factors, resource sharing affects goal congruence and communication effectiveness in megaprojects, affecting TIC's satisfaction and trust. Most factors exist in the middle layer, and bridging the upper and lower levels depends on stakeholder collaboration. The root factors in the independent group significantly impact TIC, including policy circumstances, high technical requirements and limited site conditions. Addressing these issues influences improvements in other factors. The development of a digital resource-sharing platform, the enhancement of innovation incentives, the optimization of benefit distribution mechanisms and the improvement of risk-sharing mechanisms are essential for the effective operation of the TIC mechanism. Originality/value – This study contributes to identifying and classifying challenges and opportunities in TIC. It explores transmission paths for enhancing TIC and presents strategies for successfully implementing and delivering megaprojects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | influence factor; ISM; mega construction projects; MICMAC; technological innovation cooperation |
| Index terms: | collaboration, effectiveness, cooperation, strategy, methodology, cooperative behaviour, interview, megaproject, satisfaction, platform, Delphi method, interpretive structural modelling, influencing factor, construction demand, technological innovation, construction project |
| Subjects: | management, research methods, digital design, data collection methods, project delivery, performance management, market analysis, data analysis and analytics, strategic project management, risk assessment, psychology, production management, innovation and technology management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Risk Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Quality 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