Phua, F T T (2005) Determining the relationship between fee structure and project performance between firms: An empirical study based on institutional and task environment perspectives. Construction Management and Economics, 23(1), pp. 45-56. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Construction firms, under the influence of different dynamic institutional and task environment forces, are likely to have differing perceptions about the determinants of project performance. To test this proposition, this study uses institutional and task environment frameworks to investigate specifically the relationship between fee structure and project performance across different construction firms. Despite anecdotal evidence suggesting that such a relationship exists, empirical results based on data collected from 398 construction firms in Hong Kong did not support this assertion. However, by further modelling the differences across firms, the results indicate that firms on the whole regard other task environment factors as more important to project performance compared to institutional factors. Based on follow-up interviews, suggestions as to why this may be the case point to the fact that firms feel they can exercise greater business control on the capitalization, enhancement, and management of various task environment resources than they can on institutional ones. The paper concludes by highlighting the need for researchers to be cognizant of the benefits of integrating both task environment and institutional factors and understand how they affect project performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | fee; hierarchical regression modelling; institutional factors; project performance; task environment factors |
| Index terms: | empirical study, project performance, modelling, determinant, Hong Kong, exercise, evidence, interview, regression modelling, construction firm |
| Subjects: | analytical methods, health behaviours and lifestyles, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, risk assessment, organization, statistical analysis, Geography, project management theory and practice, research methods |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Risk 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