Sacks, R and Harel, M (2006) An economic game theory model of subcontractor resource allocation behaviour. Construction Management and Economics, 24(8), pp. 869-881. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Periodic review and adjustment of resource allocations to construction projects is critical for subcontractors to maintain profitability under traditional unit price or lump sum contracts. Project managers strive to control subcontractors in an effort to meet budgets and schedules; subcontractors often work on multiple projects simultaneously and strive independently to allocate resources to those projects where they perceive that they will bring maximum utility. An economic game theory model is proposed as a foundation for understanding the behaviour of subcontractors in allocating resources to projects. The model describes the influence of the degree of reliability of the planned schedule on subcontractors' and project managers' behaviours under traditional unit price contracting. Unreliable plans undermine efforts to promote cooperative behaviour.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision making; game theory; lean construction; partnering; resource allocation; subcontracting |
| Index terms: | subcontracting, project manager, partnering, resource allocation, profitability, game theory, lean construction, cooperative behaviour, subcontractor, construction project, decision-making |
| Subjects: | production management, decision analysis, building construction, partnership management, practitioner, organization, profession, resource management, decision models, economic analysis, psychology |
| Topics: | Site Management, Organizational Design, Supply Chain Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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