Developing a temporary multi-organization integration performance index for delivering construction projects in Malaysia

References

• Aapaoja A, Herrala M, Pekuri A, Haapasalo H. 2013. The characteristic of and cornerstones for creating integrated teams. Int J Manag Projects Bus 6(4):695–713.
   Google Scholar
• Alashwal AM, Fong, 2015. Empirical study to determine fragmentation of construction projects. J Construct Eng Manage. 141(7):04015016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anvuur AM, Kumaraswamy MM, Fellows R. 2012. Perceptions of status and TMO workgroup cooperation: implications for project governance. Construct Manage Econ. 30(9):719–737.
   Google Scholar
• Awuzie BO, McDermott P. 2015. A conceptual model for evaluating infrastructure-based temporary multi-organisations. Built Environ Project Asset Manage. 5(1):103–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baiden BK, Price ADF, Dainty ARJ. 2006. The extent of team integration within construction projects. Int J Project Manage. 24(1):13–23.
   Google Scholar
• Bakker, RM, DeFillippi RJ, Schwab A, Sydow J. 2016. Temporary organizing: promises, processes, problems. Org Stud. 37(12):1703–1719.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bresnen M. 2007. Deconstructing partnering in project based organisation: seven pillars, seven paradoxes and seven deadly sins. Int J Project Manage. 25(4):365–74.
   Google Scholar
• Brady SR. 2015. Utilizing and adapting the Delphi method for use in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods. 14(5):1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Bryman A, Bresnen M, Beardsworth AD. 1987. The concept of temporary the system: The case of the construction project. Res Sociol Org Res Ann. 5:253–283.
   Google Scholar
• Buede DM. 2009. The engineering design of systems: models and methods. 2nd ed. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Burke CM, Morley MJ. 2016. On temporary organizations: a review, synthesis and research agenda. Human Relat. 69(6):1235–1258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan APC, Hu Y, Ma L, Shan M. 2016. Improving the outcomes of public drainage projects through NEC3-based relational contracting: Hong Kong case study. J Prof Issues Eng Educ Pract. 142(2):06015003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Che Ibrahim CKI, Costello SB, Wilkinson S. 2013. Development of a conceptual team integration performance index for alliance projects. Construct Manage Econ. 31(11):1127–1142.
   Google Scholar
• Che Ibrahim CKI, Costello SB, Wilkinson S. 2015. Key indicators influencing the management of team integration in construction projects. Int J Manag Projects Bus. 8(2):300–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Che Ibrahim CKI, Rahmat A, Belayutham S. 2017. Ensuring teams integrate better: Views from Malaysian Construction Builders. Proceedings of the CRIOCM 2017 22nd International Conference on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate, Swinburne University of Technology, 20–23 November 2017. Hawthorn, Melbourne, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung SO, Suen HCH, Cheung KKW. 2003. An automated partnering monitoring system—Partnering temperature index. Automat Constr. 12(3):331–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis PR, Jefferies M, Ke Y. 2017. Psychological contracts: framework for relationships in construction procurement. J Construct Eng Manage. 143(8):04017028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Blois M, Lizarralde G, De Coninck P. 2016. Iterative project processes within temporary multi-organizations in construction: the self-, eco-, re-organizing projects. Project Manage J. 47(1):27–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egan J. 2002. Accelerating change. A report by the strategic forum for construction, rethinking construction. London: Rethinking Construction, Construction Industry Council.
   Google Scholar
• Frodell M, Josephson PE, Lindahl G. 2008. Swedish construction clients' views on project success and measuring performance. J Eng Des Technol.. 6(1):21–32.
   Google Scholar
• Hallowell MR, Gambatese JA. 2010. Qualitative research: application of the Delphi method to CEM research. J Construct Eng Manage. 136(1):99–107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanafin S. 2004. Review of literature on the Delphi technique. Dublin: National Children’s Office. https://www.dcya.gov.ie/documents/publications/Delphi_Technique_A_Literature_Review.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Haniff A, Ogunlana SO. 2015. Towards a theory of temporary multi organisations: implications for project success. Engineering Project Organization Conference, June 24–26; Scotland, UK: The University of Edinburgh.
   Google Scholar
• Hu Y, Chan APC, Le Y, Xu Y, Shan M. 2016. Developing a program organization performance index for delivering construction megaprojects in China: fuzzy synthetic evaluation analysis. J Manage Eng. 32(4):05016007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janowicz M, Bakker RM, Kenis PN. 2008. Temporary organizations: the state of the art and distinct approaches toward "temporariness". Paper presented at PMI® Research Conference: defining the future of project management, Warsaw, Poland. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Jin XH, Tan HC, Zuo J, Feng Y. 2012. Exploring critical success factors for developing infrastructure projects in malaysia – main contractors’ perspective. Int J Construct Manage. 12(3):25–41.
   Google Scholar
• Jones C, Lichtenstein BB. 2008. Temporary inter-organizational projects: how temporal and social embeddedness enhance coordination and manage uncertainty. In: Cropper S, Huxham C, Ebers M, Ring PS, editors. The Oxford handbook of inter-organizational relations. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kapogiannis G, Sherratt F. 2018. Impact of integrated collaborative technologies to form a collaborative culture in construction projects. Built Environ Project Asset Manage. 8(1):24–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kokkonen A, Vaagaasar AL. 2018. Managing collaborative space in multi-partner projects. Construct Manage Econ. 36(2):83–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kusuma IC. 2016. The evolution of culture-climate interplay in temporary multi organisations: the case of construction alliancing projects [Ph.D. thesis]. London (UK): The Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management, University College London. http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1476944/13/Illona%20Kusuma% 20Thesis%20 Restrictied%20Version.pdf [accessed 2017 July 14].
   Google Scholar
• Lai KS, Yusof NA, Kamal EM. 2016. Organizational culture of the architectural firm: a case in a developing country. Int J Construct Manage. 16(3):197–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavikka RH, Smeds R, Jaatinen M. 2015. Coordinating collaboration in contractually different complex construction projects. Supply Chain Manage Int J. 20(2):205–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim BTH, Ling FYY, William Ibbs C, Raphael B, Ofori G. 2011. Empirical analysis of the determinants of organizational flexibility in the construction business. J Construct Eng Manage. 137(3):225–237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ling FYY, Khoo WW. 2016. Improving relationships in project teams in Malaysia. Built Environ Project Asset Manage. 6(3):284–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu AMM, Chan IYS. 2017. Understanding the interplay of organizational climate and leadership in construction innovation. J Manage Eng. 33(5):04017021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lizarralde G, De Blois M, Davidson C. 2011a. Relations intra- and inter-organisations for the study of the temporary multi-organisation in construction projects. Int J Project Org Manage. 3(1):57–77.
   Google Scholar
• Lizarralde G, de Blois M, Latunova I. 2011b. Structuring of temporary multi-organizations: contingency theory in the building sector. Project Manage J. 42(4):19–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundin RA, Söderholm A. 1995. A theory of the temporary organization. Scand J Manage. 11(4):437–455.
   Google Scholar
• Luzon B, El-Sayegh SM. 2016. Evaluating supplier selection criteria for oil and gas projects in the UAE using AHP and Delphi. Int J Construct Manage. 16(2):175–183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammed S, Nadkarni S. 2011. Temporal diversity and team performance: the moderating role of team temporal leadership. Acad Manage J. 54(3):489–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molenaar KR, Leicht RM. 2015. Study shows importance of team integration. IQ Magazine Articles, Issue 2. http://www.designbuilddoneright.com/study-shows-importance-of-team-integration/ [accessed 10 August 2017].
   Google Scholar
• Mollaoglu-Korkmaz S, Miller, VD, Sun W. 2014. Assessing key dimensions to effective innovation implementation in interorganizational project teams: an integrated project delivery case. Eng Project Org J. 4(1):17–30
   Google Scholar
• Moore DR, Dainty ARJ. 1999. Integrated project teams’ performance in managing unexpected change events. Team Perform Manage. 5(7):212–222.
   Google Scholar
• Osei-Kyei R, Chan APC. 2017. Developing a project success index for public–private partnership projects in developing countries. J Infrastruct Syst. 23(4):04017028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packendorff J. 1994. Temporary organizing: integrating organization theory and project management. In: Lundin RA, Packendorff J, editors. Proceedings of the IRNOP conference on temporary organizations and project management, March 22–25, Lycksele, Sweden: The International Research Network on Organizing by Projects (IRNOP).
   Google Scholar
• Pearce CL, Conger JA. 2002. Shared leadership: reframing the hows and whys of leadership. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Perera BAKS, Rameezdeen R, Chileshe N, Hosseini MR. 2014. Enhancing the effectiveness of risk management practices in Sri Lankan road construction projects: a Delphi approach. Int J Construct Manage. 14(1):1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Pocock J, Hyun CT, Liu LY, Kim MK. 1996. Relationship between project interaction and performance indicators. J Construct Eng Manage. 122(2):165–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poleacovschi C, Javernick-Will A. 2017. Who are the experts? Assessing expertise in construction and engineering organizations. J Construct Eng Manage. 143(8):04017033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shadid WK. 2018. A framework for managing organizations in complex environments. Construct Manage Econ. 36(4):182–202.
   Google Scholar
• Shariff NJ. 2015. Utilizing the Delphi survey approach: a review. J Nurs Care. 4(3):1000246.
   Google Scholar
• Shan M, Chan APC, Le Y, Hu Y, and Xia B. 2017. Understanding collusive practices in Chinese construction projects. J Professional Issues Eng Educ Pract. 143(3):05016012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stringer J. 1967. Operational research for “multi-organisations'’ Opl Res Q. 18:105–120.
   Google Scholar
• Sourani A, Sohail M. 2015. The Delphi method: Review and use in construction management research. Int J Construct Educ Res. 11(1):54–76.
   Google Scholar
• Tymvios N, Gambatese JA. 2016. Direction for generating interest for design for construction worker safety: a delphi study. J Construct Eng Manage. 142(8):04016024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyssen AK, Wald A, Spieth P. 2013. Leadership in temporary organizations: a review of leadership theories and a research agenda. Project Manage J. 44(6):52–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker DH, Davis PR, Stevenson A. 2017. Coping with uncertainty and ambiguity through team collaboration in infrastructure projects. Int J Project Manage. 35(2):180–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker DHT, Lloyd-Walker BM. 2015. Collaborative project procurement arrangements. Newtown Square (PA): Project Management Institute..
   Google Scholar
• Xia B, Chan APC. 2012. Measuring complexity for building projects: a Delphi study. Eng Construct Architect Manage. 19(1):7–24.
   Google Scholar
• Xue X, Shen Q, Ren Z. 2010. Critical review of collaborative working in construction projects: business environment and human behaviors. J Manage Eng. 26(4):196–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeung JFY, Chan APC, Chan DWM. 2009. Developing a performance index for relationship-based construction projects in Australia: Delphi study. J Manage Eng. 25(2):59–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeung JFY, Chan APC, Chan DWM, Lin LK. 2007. Development of a partnering performance index (PPI) for construction projects in Hong Kong: a Delphi study. Construct Manage Econ. 25(12):1219–1237.
   Google Scholar
• Yong YC, Mustaffa NE. 2012. Analysis of factors critical to construction project success in Malaysia. Eng Construct Architect Manage. 19(5):543–556.
   Google Scholar