IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i2p1592-d1035293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applicability of Integrated Project Delivery Principles Based on a Measurement Model in China

Author

Listed:
  • Tingting Mei

    (School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Wuhan Institute of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Zeng Guo

    (School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Peng Li

    (School of Entrepreneurship, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Kaixian Fang

    (School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Wuhan Institute of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China)

  • Shuda Zhong

    (School of Resources& Safety Engineering, Wuhan Institute of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China)

Abstract

This paper explores a novel approach to clarify the applicability of the Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) principles in a certain region or country which has a specific cultural background, the paper further promotes the effective application of IPD principles. The method of combining qualitative and quantitative analysis is adopted, incorporating scientometric analysis, questionnaire survey, qualitative analysis, and a measurement model. On the basis of 310 sample data collected from various practitioners and researchers in China’s construction industry, the measurement models of IPD applicability analysis on the average level of sample (ALS) and the best level of sample (BLS) are established, respectively. The results show that these measurement models are essentially consistent with the composition of the conceptual model, including project performance, contractual principles, collaboration-related principles, behavioral principles, and catalysts. Thus, this paper provides a scientific and methodological basis for how to effectively apply the IPD principles. This study sheds light on project delivery system research in two aspects: it proposes a new idea to study the applicability of IPD principles and lays a foundation for the future quantitative study on the impact mechanism of IPD principles on project performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Tingting Mei & Zeng Guo & Peng Li & Kaixian Fang & Shuda Zhong, 2023. "Applicability of Integrated Project Delivery Principles Based on a Measurement Model in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1592-:d:1035293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1592/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1592/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henry Kaiser, 1970. "A second generation little jiffy," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 35(4), pages 401-415, December.
    2. Yanchao Du & Hengyu Zhou & Yongbo Yuan & Hong Xue, 2019. "Exploring the Moral Hazard Evolutionary Mechanism for BIM Implementation in an Integrated Project Team," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-28, October.
    3. Anne Boomsma, 1985. "Nonconvergence, improper solutions, and starting values in lisrel maximum likelihood estimation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 229-242, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tingting Mei & Zeng Guo & Peng Li & Kaixian Fang & Shuda Zhong, 2022. "Influence of Integrated Project Delivery Principles on Project Performance in China: An SEM-Based Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Andrea C Vial & Janine Bosak & Patrick C Flood & John F Dovidio, 2021. "Individual variation in role construal predicts responses to third-party biases in hiring contexts," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-28, February.
    3. Siwarit Pongsakornrungsilp & Pimlapas Pongsakornrungsilp & Theeranuch Pusaksrikit & Pimmada Wichasin & Vikas Kumar, 2021. "Co-Creating a Sustainable Regional Brand from Multiple Sub-Brands: The Andaman Tourism Cluster of Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-23, August.
    4. Bangyi Yan & Shiguang Ni & Xi Wang & Jin Liu & Qianjing Zhang & Kaiping Peng, 2020. "Using Virtual Reality to Validate the Chinese Version of the Independent Television Commission-Sense of Presence Inventory," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, May.
    5. Christoph, Inken B. & Roosen, Jutta & Bruhn, Maike, 2006. "Willingness to pay for genetically modified food and non-food products," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21303, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Chetan Doddamani & M. Manoj, 2023. "Analysis of the influences of built environment measures on household car and motorcycle ownership decisions in Hubli-Dharwad cities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 205-243, February.
    7. Marcin Chlebus, 2014. "One-day prediction of state of turbulence for financial instrument based on models for binary dependent variable," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 37.
    8. Faheem Ahmed & Luiz Fernando Capretz, 2011. "A business maturity model of software product line engineering," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 543-560, September.
    9. Libin Yang & William Rea & Alethea Rea, 2015. "How much diversification potential is there in a single market? Evidence from the Australian Stock Exchange," Working Papers in Economics 15/07, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    10. Ben-Shahar, Danny & Golan, Roni, 2014. "Real estate and personality," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 111-119.
    11. Cortés-Sánchez, Julián David & Grueso, Merlin Patricia, 2017. "Factor analysis evaluation of Schein's career orientation inventory in Colombia," OSF Preprints jf5nq, Center for Open Science.
    12. Yuan, Ke-Hai & Chan, Wai, 2008. "Structural equation modeling with near singular covariance matrices," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(10), pages 4842-4858, June.
    13. Belén Casales Morici, 2022. "Strategic corporate entrepreneurship practices in financial services firms: the role of organizational factors," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(9), pages 1-26, September.
    14. Francisco Rejón-Guardia & Juán Sánchez-Fernández & Francisco Muñoz-Leiva, 2011. "Motivational Factors that influence the Acceptance of Microblogging Social Networks: The µBAM Model," FEG Working Paper Series 06/11, Faculty of Economics and Business (University of Granada).
    15. Julia Morgan & Casey Canfield, 2021. "Comparing Behavioral Theories to Predict Consumer Interest to Participate in Energy Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-17, July.
    16. Ye, Shi & Chen, Qun & Tang, Yi, 2023. "Anger between bus drivers and passengers or among passengers: Development of a bus passenger anger scale (BPAS) and a bus driver anger scale (BDAS)," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    17. Alessandro Bitetto & Paola Cerchiello & Charilaos Mertzanis, 2021. "A data-driven approach to measuring epidemiological susceptibility risk around the world," DEM Working Papers Series 200, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    18. Sabrina Oktaria Sihombing,, 2017. "Predicting intention to share news through social media: An empirical analysis in Indonesian youth context," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center, vol. 13(4), pages 468-477, October.
    19. Giorgio Calcagnini & Francesco Perugini, 2019. "A Well-Being Indicator for the Italian Provinces," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 149-177, February.
    20. Shashi & Rajwinder Singh & Piera Centobelli & Roberto Cerchione, 2018. "Evaluating Partnerships in Sustainability-Oriented Food Supply Chain: A Five-Stage Performance Measurement Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1592-:d:1035293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.