Gunduz, M and Elsherbeny, H A (2020) Critical assessment of construction contract administration using fuzzy structural equation modeling. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(6), pp. 1233-1255. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: This paper covers the development of a multidimensional contract administration performance model (CAPM) for construction projects. The proposed CAPM is intended to be used by the industry stakeholders to measure the construction contract administration (CCA) performance and identify the strengths and weaknesses of the CCA system for running or completed projects. Design/methodology/approach: The research design follows a sequential mixed methodology of qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. In the first phase, contract administration indicators were collected from relevant literature. In the second phase, an online questionnaire was prepared, and data were collected and analyzed using the crisp value of fuzzy membership function, and structural equation modeling (SEM). The fuzzy set was chosen for this study due to the presence of uncertainty and fuzziness associated with the importance of several key indicators affecting the CCA performance. Finally, SEM was used to test and analyze interrelationships among constructs of CCA performance. Findings: The data collected from 336 construction professionals worldwide through an online survey was utilized to develop the fuzzy structural equation model. The goodness-of-fit and reliability tests validated the model. The study concluded a significant correlation between CCA performance, CCA operational indicators, and the process groups. Originality/value: The contribution of this paper to the existing knowledge is the development of a fuzzy structural equation model that serves as a measurement tool for the contract administration performance. This is the first quantitative structural equation model to capture contract administration performance. The model consists of 93 Construction Contract Administration(CCA) performance indicators categorized into 11 project management process groups namely: project governance and start-up; team management; communication and relationship management; quality and acceptance management; performance monitoring and reporting management; document and record management; financial management; changes and control management; claims and dispute resolution management; contract risk management and contract closeout management.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contract administration; contract project management; contract project success factor; contract risk assessment; fuzzy set; structural equation model |
| Index terms: | team management, survey, performance monitoring, structural equation modelling, performance indicator, contract closeout, questionnaire, contract risk management, construction project, methodology, fuzzy set, dispute, research design, governance, project success, financial management, contract administration, project management, resolution, key indicator, construction contract, contract risk assessment, structural equation model, presence, relationship management, project management process, construction professional |
| Subjects: | research methods, monitoring and control systems, performance management, management, professional development, contract management, project management theory and practice, production management, conflict resolution, statistical analysis, decision-making and optimization, business, contract type, research design and methodology, data collection methods, dispute resolution, practitioner, project delivery, economic analysis, environmental science |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy, Procurement, Governance, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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