4.6 Review

Critical Review of Collaborative Working in Construction Projects: Business Environment and Human Behaviors

Journal

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT IN ENGINEERING
Volume 26, Issue 4, Pages 196-208

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000025

Keywords

Collaboration; Collaborative working; Construction projects; Literature review

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NNSFC) [70801023]
  2. National Center of Technology, Policy and Management, Harbin Institute of Technology [htcsr06t05]
  3. Development Program for Outstanding Young Teachers in the Harbin Institute of Technology [HITQNJS.2007.027]
  4. Postdoctoral Foundation of the Harbin Institute of Technology, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University [1-ZVIV]
  5. Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China [PolyU 5264/06E]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The changing business environment characterized by tense competitiveness and wide global links requires construction organizations to establish effective and efficient interorganization collaborative management systems. Collaborative working (CW), as a new term and especially as a working model, is emerging for improving performance and enhancing competitiveness by responding to the changing environment in construction. This research presents the definition of CW underpinned by the principle of collaboration. Through a thorough literature review of selected papers from the well-known academic journals in construction management, the business environment and human behavior are identified as two key areas which impact the performance of CW in construction projects. Critical reviews on these areas are presented by focusing on different subcategories in each area to investigate the state of the art and trends of CW in construction projects. Some limits of research and practice on CW in construction projects are discussed and future research directions are recommended.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available