Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of Stakeholder Concerns at Different Times of Construction Projects Using Social Network Analysis (SNA)

  • Research paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Success in the projects will not be achieved without analyzing the key stakeholder concerns. Indeed, against such concerns will result in higher project costs. One of the most important steps in stakeholder management is paying attention to the stakeholders’ concerns and planning how to respond to them. Stakeholders and their concerns change with time throughout execution of projects. The purpose of this research was to identify and analyze stakeholders of road construction projects and their concerns using social network analysis (SNA) method. First, the stakeholders and their concerns were identified and evaluated. Next, using the Net Miner four network software, their concerns were analyzed and assessed at different times of their projects. Finally, the main challenges involving stakeholders were identified and classified in different groups and some strategies were proposed for responding to them. According to the obtained results, the lack of comprehensive environmental studies, the presence of adverse effects of the project performance on the environment and inaccurate estimates of cost, as well as completion time of the project were the major concerns of project stakeholders. In the initiation phase of every project, the challenges were more related to the environmental and political problems affecting the project. In the planning phase, concerns were more related to the selection of appropriate contractors and methods with their sufficient experiences and knowledge in various fields, such as environmental problems and project budgeting, etc. In the execution phase of the projects, foreign policy pressures and sanctions, high inflation, and qualities of observing and implementing the environmental rules and public discontent were among stakeholders’ key challenging concerns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The authors do not wish to share their data. All the necessary data have been mentioned in the paper.

References

  1. Olander S, Landin A (2005) Evaluation of stakeholder influence in the implementation of construction projects. Int J Project Manage 23(4):321–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Clarkson ME (1995) A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Acad Manag Rev 20(1):92–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Park K et al (2019) Project risk factors facing construction management firms. Int J Civ Eng 17(3):305–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-017-0262-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Palikhe S, Kim S, Kim JJ (2019) Critical success factors and dynamic modeling of construction labour productivity. Int J Civ Eng 17(3):427–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-018-0282-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Yang RJ, Shen GQ (2014) Framework for stakeholder management in construction projects. J Manag Eng 31(4):04014064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Olander S (2007) Stakeholder impact analysis in construction project management. Constr Manag Econ 25(3):277–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Oppong GD, Chan AP, Dansoh A (2017) A review of stakeholder management performance attributes in construction projects. Int J Project Manage 35(6):1037–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Phillips R, Freeman RE, Wicks AC (2003) What stakeholder theory is not. Bus Ethics Q 13(4):479–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Freeman RE (2010) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Donaldson T, Preston LE (1995) The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad Manag Rev 20(1):65–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Savage GT et al (1991) Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Acad Manag Perspect 5(2):61–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Elias AA, Cavana RY, Jackson LS (2002) Stakeholder analysis for R&D project management. R&D Manag 32(4):301–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jones TM (1995) Instrumental stakeholder theory: a synthesis of ethics and economics. Acad Manag Rev 20(2):404–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):853–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Olander S, Landin A (2008) A comparative study of factors affecting the external stakeholder management process. Constr Manag Econ 26(6):553–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Yang J et al (2009) Critical success factors for stakeholder management: construction practitioners’ perspectives. J Constr Eng Manag 136(7):778–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yang J et al (2011) Stakeholder management in construction: an empirical study to address research gaps in previous studies. Int J Project Manage 29(7):900–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li TH, Ng ST, Skitmore M (2012) Conflict or consensus: an investigation of stakeholder concerns during the participation process of major infrastructure and construction projects in Hong Kong. Habitat Int 36(2):333–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Huang C-L, Kung F-H (2010) Drivers of environmental disclosure and stakeholder expectation: evidence from Taiwan. J Bus Ethics 96(3):435–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jergeas G, Put JVD (2001) Benefits of constructability on construction projects. J Constr Eng Manag 127(4):281–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bourne L (2011) Advising upwards: managing the perceptions and expectations of senior management stakeholders. Manag Decis 49(6):1001–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Song X et al (2018) Bi-stakeholder conflict resolution-based layout of construction temporary facilities in large-scale construction projects. Int J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-017-0233-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Smith A et al (2017) Linking ecosystem service supply to stakeholder concerns on both land and sea: an example from Guánica Bay watershed, Puerto Rico. Ecol Indic 74:371–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Nalewaik A, Mills A (2015) Project stakeholder concerns and expectations. In PAQS 2015: proceedings of the 19th Pacific association of quantity surveyors congress. 2015. The Conference

  25. Mok KY et al (2017) Investigating key challenges in major public engineering projects by a network-theory based analysis of stakeholder concerns: a case study. Int J Project Manage 35(1):78–94

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Guo H, Li H, Li V (2013) VP-based safety management in large-scale construction projects: a conceptual framework. Autom Constr 34:16–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zeng S et al (2015) Social responsibility of major infrastructure projects in China. Int J Project Manage 33(3):537–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. El-Gohary NM, Osman H, El-Diraby TE (2006) Stakeholder management for public private partnerships. Int J Project Manage 24(7):595–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ogunlana SO (2010) Beyond the ‘iron triangle’: stakeholder perception of key performance indicators (KPIs) for large-scale public sector development projects. Int J Project Manag 28(3):228–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Takayanagi N, Mizutani Y, Loucks DP (2010) Stakeholder consensus building in multiobjective environments. J Water Resour Plan Manag 137(3):293–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Otte E, Rousseau R (2002) Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. J Inf Sci 28(6):441–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Tichy NM, Tushman ML, Fombrun C (1979) Social network analysis for organizations. Acad Manag Rev 4(4):507–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mok KY, Shen GQ, Yang J (2015) Stakeholder management studies in mega construction projects: a review and future directions. Int J Project Manage 33(2):446–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hagedoorn J (2002) Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Res Policy 31(4):477–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pryke SD (2004) Analysing construction project coalitions: exploring the application of social network analysis. Constr Manag Econ 22(8):787–797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ho MF et al (2004) Implementing corporate ethics management and its comparison with the safety management system: a case study in Hong Kong. Constr Manag Econ 22(6):595–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Loosemore M (1998) Social network analysis: using a quantitative tool within an interpretative context to explore the management of construction crises. Eng Constr Archit Manag 5(4):315–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Turner JR (2006) Towards a theory of project management: the nature of the functions of project management. Int J Project Manage 4(24):277–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Johnson G, Scholes K, Whittington R (2008) Exploring corporate strategy: text & cases. Pearson education, London

    Google Scholar 

  40. Prell C, Hubacek K, Reed M (2009) Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 22(6):501–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Rowley TJ (1997) Moving beyond dyadic ties: a network theory of stakeholder influences. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):887–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Chinowsky P, Diekmann J, Galotti V (2008) Social network model of construction. J Constr Eng Manag 134(10):804–812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Li CZ et al (2016) Schedule risks in prefabrication housing production in Hong Kong: a social network analysis. J Clean Prod 134:482–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Yang RJ, Zou PX (2014) Stakeholder-associated risks and their interactions in complex green building projects: a social network model. Build Environ 73:208–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Yang RJ, Zou PX, Wang J (2016) Modelling stakeholder-associated risk networks in green building projects. Int J Project Manage 34(1):66–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran No. 401, 424, Hafez Ave, Tehran, 15914, Iran

    Mohammadhossein Dadpour & Eghbal Shakeri

  2. Department of Construction, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

    Ahad Nazari

Authors
  1. Mohammadhossein Dadpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eghbal Shakeri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahad Nazari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

HA carried out the scientific design and proposed the idea of research, participated in analyzing the findings, and drafted the paper. AE collected the data and participated for analyzing the findings. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eghbal Shakeri.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 10.

Table 10 Demographic table
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dadpour, M., Shakeri, E. & Nazari, A. Analysis of Stakeholder Concerns at Different Times of Construction Projects Using Social Network Analysis (SNA). Int J Civ Eng 17, 1715–1727 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-019-00450-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-019-00450-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation