Moradi, S and Kähkönen, K (2022) Success in collaborative construction through the lens of project delivery elements. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 12(6), pp. 973-991. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: The emergence of collaborative delivery models and working practices in construction industry has created a potential area for project success research. Previous studies have addressed success factors of various collaborative delivery models (e.g. alliance and partnering). However, there is currently very limited research-based knowledge concerning core success factors for different collaborative delivery models, exploring the commonalities. Thus, this study aims to conceptualize a success model for collaborative construction projects by identifying and structuring their core success factors through the lens of project delivery elements. Design/methodology/approach: A systematic literature review was conducted, and thematic as well as content analysis of the relevant studies led to the identification of mentioned success factors in the literature for different collaborative delivery models. Then, those common success factors were structured in a model based on factors' relation to project delivery elements. Findings: The obtained results present eight core success factors (e.g. equality, mutual trust and commitment to win–win philosophy) for collaborative construction projects, structured in a model based on their contribution toward project organization, contractual relationships, and operational system in construction project delivery. Moreover, the differences between success factors for traditional and collaborative construction projects are discussed. Originality/value: This study's findings provide insightful theoretical contributions on collaborative construction project success and providing a departure point for future studies based on the discussed differences between success factors of collaborative and traditional construction projects. The findings can be also practically insightful for the project professionals in collaborative construction projects to succeed in managing project organization, contractual relationships, and operational system.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaborative delivery model; construction management; integrated project delivery; project success; success factor |
| Index terms: | content analysis, success factor, traditional construction, project delivery, partnering, methodology, construction project delivery, construction project, project organization, project success, contractual relationship, philosophy, emergence, construction industry, future study, working practice, systematic literature review, integrated project delivery, commitment |
| Subjects: | management, project controls, systems engineering, organizational theory, philosophical studies, health monitoring assessment and metrics, research methods, data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, heritage and conservation, project delivery, production management, contractual arrangements, project management theory and practice, research evaluation and metrics, psychology, contractual relationship, industry analysis, partnership management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Research Practice, Project Management, Health and Safety, Contract Administration, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Time Control, Procurement |
| 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