Sha, K (2011) Vertical governance of construction projects: An information cost perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 29(11), pp. 1137-1147. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
A research framework is developed to analyse the vertical governance, or transaction relationships between the client and its first-tier suppliers of construction projects in terms of project procurement route and payment terms. Starting from the particularity of the construction industry, reduced treatments that Williamson used in governance structure analysis are revised, and an assumption of 'second-order transformation' is proposed: as the information gap reaches a given level, and the proportion of specialized knowledge to deal with uncertainty exceeds a certain degree, the approach of selecting the governance structure of construction projects might deviate from the path anticipated by canonical theories. Both uncertainty and information cost are included in the analysis framework, and a principal-agent model is developed to analyse the procurement route and payment terms of construction projects. It is concluded that the information gap and the relative cost coefficient of information are decisive factors that determine the vertical governance structure of construction projects. They determine not only the time when 'second-order transformation' occurs, but also the distribution of 'weak incentive regions'.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracting; governance; information cost; project; transaction cost; uncertainty |
| Index terms: | transformation, governance, construction industry, transaction cost, agent, project procurement, construction project |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, practitioner, business, financial analysis, industry analysis, production management |
| Topics: | Procurement, Governance, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| 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