ก !"#$
&กก! ก'()ก A Structure of Factors for Selecting a Procurement System Influencing Performance of Construction Projects by Analyzing Structural Equation Modeling
ก ก
ก ก !"#$ก%%#&'ก", ก#&
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
กกก!)*
+,-.',(//&(ก !0 &!' กก! '!&ก!'1!, 2 ก)-3-ก!4 2ก)กก!4
2กก!4 .กก*1!,
!"ก !"#$&กก! ,,.
,ก'!,5),, *1กก กก! ) ! !,,) ก ! ก, ,*+,-.ก&ก6,&
ก!' !"#$&กก! ,, ,',' -7(6,&
ก!'กก)-*1 ')ก 5 ''+,ก& '),&
9.ก9)9ก))ก!,', 96 ก'ก'/& ก กก! ก,,&3-3ก'(, (1)
& ก ) (2) '&
!"#$&กก! "ก'(5),,
*)!& ก<, 4 ก7!,,ก '/, 2ก9=&"3กก/,ก!
)&"3ก)4 (35%) 2ก9=&กก!)
-,ก=()'4 (25%) 2ก9=&&ก4 (21%) 2ก9=&"34 (19%) !
"#$&กก!*,, !0 , 2'1, ,'4 (26%) 2'1,,4 (21%) 2'+'4
(21%) 2',4 (14%) 27=D4 (10%) )
2'7!,4 (8%) . ,1!'6,),' กกกกก!*ก
&ก !5
(), ""'*+,$'%, กก-$%, ก&"".$ก%, /0#1
Abstract Procurement systems show contractual relationship amongst all parties in completing construction projects. Examples of the systems are /design-bid- construction system0, /design and construction system0 or /construction management system0. The selection of any system affects the performance of construction projects.
Accordingly, many researchers suggest factors for selecting a procurement system for procuring the construction projects. Yet, these factors are still different, which reflects a lack of developing such a structure influencing performance of construction projects. Therefore, the
research was aimed to develop such a structure. The research method used a questionnaire with 5-point Likert scale to survey opinions from owners or their representatives in consultant and design-build companies about the importance level of each factor for selecting any procurement system. After that, the data were analyzed to:
(1) confirm the selection factors and (2) find the level of influence of the structure of factors having on performance of construction projects. The result shows that all the factors can be divided into 4 groups with their weight of relative importance, namely: /characteristics of construction project managers and designers0 (35%), /characteristics of projects and environmental situations0 (25%), /characteristics of owners0 (21%) and /characteristics of contractors0 (19%). This groups influence performance of construction projects in terms of /time certainty0 (26%), /cost certainty0 (21%), /speed0 (21%), /complexity0 (14%), /quality level0 (10%) and /flexibility0 (8%). This structure provides a basis for developing an approach for owners to select an appropriate procurement system.
Keywords Factor, Procurement System, Construction Project, Structural Equation Modeling, Performance.
1. ,
""ก'*+,$'%ก &!2 ""#3' $ $ ก - 4 #3 ก3 % $ ก "
ก"กก , -, $$ก'5 ก#.ก ก$$ก"" กก-$% ก5%/
".ก '5ก'., $&-,$ก ก-$%$ก&ก#3ก3%$ - %$ก /6%$$ก"" /6%"%ก-$% /6%"%"&ก-$% &+$
/6%"%"&กก-$% ก%-ก ก-$%$$ก&-,#3 ก -ก#.5&%ก'6(""$
""ก'*+,$'%#3 ก -ก - 7""""(
&+$ก$$ก""-(6-ก-$%9 7""$$ก""
%$ก"ก-$% 7""$$ก""$::&+$$-9 7"""&กก-$%9 &+$ 7"""&ก ก-$%9 ($'$ -""$-<'%5 [1]) 5
!ก#3<( <-""ก'*+,$'%""5''#3'#3
!5%<'%ก"#กก ',2ก&#-<'%#.
ก().&"'+$ก6(""$""ก'*+,$'
%#3&ก"กก-$% $-- Ng et al. [2]
<'%. 10 ().&"'+$ก6(""$""'*+,$'
%', 79 7+3$3'%9 7+3$3'%
9 7+'&-9 7"/'$"9 7*"*%$9 7'"@9 7ก'ก&ก339 7ก -'%9 7%$#ก"%$#9 Skitmore and Marden [3] <'%. 8 ()', 79 7-$9 7+'&-9 7'"@9 7
*"*%$9 7ก&ก339 7"/'$"9 7ก-'%9 Cheng et al. [4] <'%. 8 ()
%ก ', 79 7-$9 7+'&- 7'"@9 7*"*%$9 7ก&ก339 7"/'$"9 7ก-'%9 Luu et al. [5] <'%
.()#3$# -$ก'+$ก""'*+,$'%'
"-()$$ก(B 3 ก-() +$ (1) 7ก$%$
! ( 9 *23 ( ก $ " '% () - $ + $ 7("ก9 7(@#$$ก%$9 7ก#.
9 7ก#.@5 %"(9 7ก@$
ก9 7<%5 -$$ก$+39 7 5#3
%<(--9 (2) 7ก$ก9 (ก$"() -$', 7'ก9 7(@#$9 7(@#ก ก-$%9 7()3&%9 7$#35&%"ก&+$$#3
#69 7$#3 %$ก5&%9 7$#3 (&'9 (3) 73'%$@$ก9 (ก$"'%() -$', 7ก-5 '9 7ก/6%"%ก-$%9 7ก
#9 7ก'9 7/ก#"ก"กE""9 7/ก#" -$ก+$9 Alhazani McCaffer [6] <'%' ก$"$&-()#3ก3ก"""'*+,$'
% 6 ก-()+$ 7กก9 7@ '9 7 %$ก$/6%"&/6%$$ก""9 7(@#$%$9 7$ก#3$$ก""5&%%$9 7%$ก.&'$ก
$$ก""ก-$%5#%$!39 #3 -$ %$ก$
%$ก5 4 '% +$ 79 79 7@9 7 %$ก#3<(9 '().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'
%#3 ก -ก#.5&%+$ก<'%""'*+,$'%#3 ก -ก
%""'*+,$'%#3 ก -ก$# -$/0#1
$กก-$%#3 ก -ก ',2ก&#-
<'%#.ก2กก3ก"()#3"-,!2/0#1$ก ก-$% - Cho et al. [7] <'%.()#3"-,/0#1
$กก-$%', 7-ก-$%9 7ก-$%9 7@9 72$5$%$9 Yang et al. [8] <'%
5% 4 ()#3"-,/0#1$ก-$%+$ 7/9 7-5%-9 7@9 ($'@9 Meng [9] <'%5%
()#3"-,/0#1$กก-$% ', 79 79 7@9 Eriksson et al. [10] 2ก!2 ก"ก($""'*+,$'%ก#3 (#@ #3-/ก#" -$/0#1$ก ก-$%'5%()#3"-,/0#1$ก', 7-5%-9 79 7@9 7/ก#" -$3'%$9 7@'%$ก#.9 7 ก9
กก#"#ก#3ก3%$% % "-ก
<'%.().&"ก'+$ก""'*+,$'
%ก()#3"-,!2/0#1$ก ก-$% -<-5''5&%&-().&"
'+$ก""'*+,$'%ก#3$# -$/0#1
$กก-$% ', ,-&+3$
%$().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%
ก#3/ -$/0#1$ก
2. 'ก'
ก,5%""$"!+3$.'&ก3ก"
'".:$().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%
กกก- $-#3("กก#.#3ก3%$
ก"""ก'*+,$'%ก - #3(2กก กก %$ก #3-5ก '5&+$
%5""'*+,$'%ก ''".:#3 ก.&' -()+$ 1 !2 5 (5: '".:$() ,6ก 4: '".:$(),6 3: '"
.:$(),(ก 2: '".:$
(), 3. 1: '".:$(), 3.ก &+$<- .:) *23, $ก()""$"!
',
1) #"#ก#3ก3%$[1-10]
2) ก$"'ก3ก"%$().&"
'+$ก""'*+,$'%ก#3$# -$
/0#1$กก-$%"+,K$
ก#3<'%#"#
3) %""$"! ก$"'
4) #'$"""$"!ก"/6%#3("ก . 5 5'% +,$& (Content validity) $
""$"! +3$&()3&+$("(""$"!
5&%ก"' ('ก2,
5) #'$"""$"!5'% %$
()(Construct validity) '5%-&$
Kendall (The Kendall;s tau_b Correlation Coefficient) *23 /ก&-&$ Kendall ( #3 1) "- ()#ก()ก"()$+3 '-#ก ()#32, -$ก'+$ก""'*+,$
'%ก [11]
6) #'$"-+3$!+$$ก (Reliability) '5%- Cronbach;s Alpha '- Cronbach;s Alpha #3"-,- ก-+3$!+$กก- 0.7 [12] ',5 ,- Cronbach;s Alpha #-ก" 0.78 '- ก#35%'()-+3$!+$<'%
7) ก""""$"! '""$"!#3-$$ก<(
. 110 ' <'%"ก $"" 96 ' '(B 87.27%
'#3ก- $-#3<'% $"""$"!,(B/6%#3#.
5"##3(2ก$$ก"". 81 (84%) /6%#3
#.5"#$$ก""ก-$%. 15 (16%) *23 Babbie [13] .-$ ก $"ก"#3<'%
กก- 70% !+$-'ก
8) &%$6 3 , $', (1) +%() 'ก&$(ก$"+ (Confirmatory Factory Analysis, CFA) $'"#3&23 (1st Order CFA) '%(ก Amos (2) +%()'ก
&$(ก$"+ (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA) $'"#3$ (2nd Order CFA) '%
(ก Amos &,.&ก.:ก- ,.&ก!'!$ (Regression weight) (3) &
"".$ก% (Structural Equation Modeling, SEM) $%().&"'+$ก
""'*+,$'%ก#3$# -$/0#1$
กก-$%'%(ก Amos
3. "ก'
3.1 กก
กกก !!
+3$+!6ก %$$%() #3<'%
ก$"'ก<% 'กO#35%5ก#'$"-
%().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%ก
$'%$ก"%$6ก [14-15] ', (1) -'"
-(B$<, p > 0.05 (2) -<, CMIN/DF < 3 (3) -''$'%$, GFI %5ก% 1 (4) -'ก$-Q3ก.$$ก(- '+3$, RMSEA < 0.08
ก&3'%#ก-() ก$"' 4 ก- +$ 7ก$%$ก9 7ก$
กก-$%!ก'%$9 7ก$
/6%"&9 7ก$/6%'กก/ก-$%$
/6%$$ก""9 (กS-#กก-()/-กO% % -$#.
ก&$(ก$"+$'"#3&23 +3$+
&-ก-() *23"-- p = 0.095 *23 กก- 0.05, CMIN/DF = 1.108 *23%$ก- 3, GFI = 0.870 *23
%5ก% 1, RMSEA = 0.043 *23%$ก- 0.08 (กS-/- กO% % (6(#3 1) &ก,#.ก&$(ก$"
$'"#3$ +3$+%() /ก
& (6(#3 2) *23"-- p = 0.388 *23กก- 0.05, CMIN/DF = 1.033 *23%$ก- 3, GFI = 0.887 *23%5ก% 1, RMSEA = 0.018 %$ก- 0.08 *23/-กO#,&' '-
%$()#3<'%2,$'%$ก"%$6 ก
กก&$(ก$"+$'"#3$ (6(#3 1) "-,.&ก.:$().&"'+$ก""
'*+,$'% ก-()', ( #3 2) 7ก$
/6%'กก/ก-$%$/6%$$ก""9 #-ก" 1.61 (35%) 7ก$กก-$%!ก'%$9
#-ก" 1.13 (25%) 7ก$%$ก9 #-ก" 0.93 (21%) 7ก$/6%"&9 #-ก" 0.86 (19%) *23"-#ก ก-(),.&ก.:5ก%ก#กก-() -,.&ก!'!$$6-&- 0.86 - 1.61 ,.&ก$() -ก-5ก%ก +3$ก-$ 3ก()5 ก-$ 7ก$/6%'กก/ก-$%$
/6%$$ก""9 -,.&ก.:$()$6-&- 0.19 T 0.33 (27% - 46%) ()5ก- 7ก$กก-$%
!ก'%$9 -,.&ก.:$()$6-
&- 0.21 T 0.43 (10% - 21%) ()5ก-$ 7ก
$%$ก9 -,.&ก.:$()$6-
&- 0.22 T 0.45 (17% - 35%) ()5ก-$ก
$/6%"&-,.&ก.:$()$6-&- 0.30 T 0.54 (18% - 33%) ก,.&ก.:'ก- (<'%-
#ก().: -$ก'+$ก""'*+,$'%
กก-$%
3.2 %&ก' กก()&(*+,&-*.
'กก
'ก&"".$ก% (SEM) '%
(ก Amos (6(#3 3) ก/ก& "-- p = 0.413 *23กก- 0.05, CMIN/DF = 1.019 *23%$ก- 3, GFI = 0.856 *23%5ก% 1, RMSEA =
1 -&$ Kendall $#ก()
().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%
กก-$%
%5$"$ก ("ก$%$ก %$ก/(กก (&' %# (@#$%$ก "(ก !5กก.&'$" ก *"*%$$ก .&-#3 ,$กก-$% !5ก#.5& , $$% *+3$5 +'&- -$กก-$% ก<'%"<%5ก%$ +'&- -$ก$$ก"" %5$"$ก ก'ก3 @#Kก @ก-
%5$" $ก 1.000 .330* .061 .038 .232 .096 -.066 .095 .125 .018 -.005 .162 .407** -.068 -.007 -.146 .064
("ก$%$ก .330* 1.000 .280* .074 -.098 .270* .077 .027 -.119 .042 .195 .208 .169 -.113 -.019 -.036 .234
%$ก/(กก(&'
%# .061 .280* 1.000 -.024 -.015 .046 -.096 -.023 .053 .006 .218 .212 -.237 -.015 .140 .011 .002
(@#$%$ก .038 .074 -.024 1.000 .067 -.093 .081 .510** .073 .211 .128 .154 .234 .118 .024 .253 .191
"(ก .232 -.098 -.015 .067 1.000 .075 .141 .144 .282* .259 -.211 .214 .198 .412** .358** .038 .019
!5กก.&'$" ก .096 .270* .046 -.093 .075 1.000 .320* -.035 .301* .351* .143 .161 .038 .226 .283* .016 .201
*"*%$$ก -.066 .077 -.096 .081 .141 .320* 1.000 -.054 .025 .157 -.010 -.045 .250 -.019 .131 .077 0.000
.&-#3 ,$กก-$% .095 .027 -.023 .510** .144 -.035 -.054 1.000 .203 .196 .266 .170 .171 .167 .032 .263 .223
!5ก#.5&, $
$% .125 -.119 .053 .073 .282* .301* .025 .203 1.000 .382** .036 .339* .163 .227 .188 .106 .103
*+3$ 5 .018 .042 .006 .211 .259 .351* .157 .196 .382** 1.000 .091 .272* .165 .255 .210 .176 .356**
+'&- -$กก-$% -.005 .195 .218 .128 -.211 .143 -.010 .266 .036 .091 1.000 .355** .045 .169 .102 .278* .300* ก<'%"<%5ก%$ .162 .208 .212 .154 .214 .161 -.045 .170 .339* .272* .355** 1.000 .206 .152 .139 .087 .221 +'&- -$ก$$ก"" .407** .169 -.237 .234 .198 .038 .250 .171 .163 .165 .045 .206 1.000 -.114 .030 .004 .143
%5$" $ก -.068 -.113 -.015 .118 .412** .226 -.019 .167 .227 .255 .169 .152 -.114 1.000 .441** .274* .019
ก'ก3 -.007 -.019 .140 .024 .358** .283* .131 .032 .188 .210 .102 .139 .030 .441** 1.000 -.005 .077
@#Kก -.146 -.036 .011 .253 .038 .016 .077 .263 .106 .176 .278* .087 .004 .274* -.005 1.000 .251
@ก- .064 .234 .002 .191 .019 .201 0.000 .223 .103 .356** .300* .221 .143 .019 .077 .251 1.000
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
3 1 ก&$(ก$"+$'"#3&23$%().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%ก'%(ก Amos
3 2 ก&$(ก$"+$'"#3$$%().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%ก'%(ก Amos
3 3 ก&"".$ก% (SEM) $%().&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%ก#3$# -$/0#1$กก-$%'%(ก Amos
2 ,.&ก.:$()กก&$(ก$"
+$'"#3 2
3 '"$#$()#3"-,/0#1$ก ก-$%กก&"".$ก%
0.014 *23%$ก-0.08*23/-กO#,&'&-
"".$ก %$(),$'%$ก"%$6 ก '%$().&"'+$ก""ก '*+,$'%$# -$/0#1$กก-$%5 '% -46 '%%$'"$#( #33)', 7+3$3'%9(26%)7+3$3'%9(21%)
79(21%) 7*"*%$9(14%) 7'"@9
(10%)7+'&-9(8%)
4. 7"ก'
, !(+3$%$() .&"'+$ก""'*+,$'%#3$# -$/0#1$
กก-$% /ก&$(ก$"+$'"
$ !"-$$ก(B 4 ก-()%$,.&ก .:', 7ก$/6%'กก/ก-$%
$/6%$$ก""9 (35%) 7ก$กก-$%
!ก'%$9 (25%) 7ก$%$ก9 (21%) 7ก$/6%"&9 (19%) &<'%-() 7ก$/6%'กก/ก-$%$
/6%$$ก""9 .'".:6' $(B- /6% $"
""$"!&- +'&- -$ก$$ก""$
/6%$$ก"" %5$" $ก!2
!5ก'ก3$%$ก .:$-ก -$/0#1$กก-$%
'Q'%-ก-$% /ก&'"
$#$%().&"ก'+$ก""
'*+,$'%ก 'ก&"".$ก
%#3 -$/0#1$กก-$% (SEM)
"-(B 6 '%', 7+3$3'%9 (26%) 7 +3$3'%9 (21%) 79 (21%) 7*"*%$9 (14%) 7'"@9 (10%) 7+'&-9 (8%) &
-()#3"-,/0#1$กก-$% 7+3$3 '%9 '"$#6' & /#3(B<(<'%+$
/6% $"""$"!+3$-.:6-
!%กก-$% #3/<%&+$ก- /#.5&%%$ก!#./(ก
().&"'+$ก""
'*+,$'%ก
,.&ก
!'!$
,.&ก .: (%$) ก9=&"3กก/,
ก!)"3ก)
1.61 35
%5$$" ก 0.19 27
ก'ก3 0.19 27
+'&- -$ก$$ก"" 0.33 46 ก9=&กก!)
-,ก=()'
1.13 25
"(ก 0.30 14
!5กก.&'
$" ก
0.43 21
*"*%$$ก 0.21 10 .&-#3 ,$กก-$% 0.40 19
@#Kก 0.34 16
@ก- 0.41 20
ก9=&&ก 0.93 21
%5$" $ก 0.25 19 ("ก$%$ก 0.37 29 %$ก/(กก
(&' %#
0.22 17
(@#$%$ก 0.45 35
ก9=&"3 0.86 19
!5ก#.5
&, $$%
0.54 33
*+3$ 5 0.45 28
+'&- -$กก-$% 0.30 18 ก<'%"<%5ก%$ 0.34 21
()#3"-,/0#1$
กก-$%
,.&ก
!'!$
'"
$# (%$)
+3$3'% 1.25 26
+3$3'% 1.01 21
1.00 21
*"*%$ 0.70 14
'"@ 0.46 10
+'&- 0.40 8
กก-$%<'% /#3<%&+$<'%2, *23
%$(),-5&%%$ก+$ก5%""
'*+,$'%ก<'%&ก"กก-$%ก 32, .&"/6%#35#3#. -$!.
%()#3<'%ก,<((B"".$
.&" '5'+$ก""'*+,$'%ก5&%<'%
""ก'*+,$'%#3'#3'.&"กก-$% -$<(
5. ก
[1] A. Chantemduang and J. Pongpeng, IA common process for selecting a construction-project delivery system,J in Proc. the 4th International Conference on Engineering, Project and Production Management (EPPM 2013), pp. 15-24.
[2] S. T. Ng, D. T. Luu and S. E. Chen, IDecision criteria and their subjectivity in construction procurement selection,J The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, vol. 2, pp. 70-80. [3] R. M. Skitmore and D. E. Marsden, IWhich procurement system,J
Construction Management and Economics, vol. 6, pp. 71-89, 1988.
[4] S. Cheng, T. Lam, Y. Wan and K. Lan, IImproving objectivity in procurement selection,J Journal of Management in Engineering, vol.
7, pp. 132-139, 2001.
[5] D. T. Luu, T. Ng and S. E. Chen, IFormulating procurement selection criteria through case-based reasoning approach,J Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, vol. 19, pp. 269-276, 2005.
[6] T. Alhazni and R. McCaffer, IProject procurement selection model,J Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 126, pp.
176-184, 2000.
[7] K. Cho, T. Hong and C. Hyun, IEffect of project characteristics on project performance in construction projects based on structural equation model,J Expert Systems with Applications, vol.36, pp.
10461-10468, 2009.
[8] L. Yang, J. Chen and H. Wang. IAssessing impacts of information technology on project success through knowledge management practice,J Automation in Construction, vol.22, pp.182-191, 2012.
[9] X. Meng, IThe effect of relationship management on project performance in construction,J International Journal of Project management, vol. 30, pp.188-198, 2012.
[10]P.E. Eriksson and M. Westerberg, Effects of cooperative procurement procedures on construction project performance: A conceptual frameworkJ, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 29, pp. 197-208, 2011.
[11] (#1K, ,
ก#&: fgh$fi ,. 2546.
[12] SPSS, SPSS Training Series, Brisbane: IT Service in QUT, 2001.
[13]E. Babbie, The Practice of Social Research, (5th ed.), Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing, 1989.
[14] # (j , ก !" SPSS Amos, ,#3 13, ก#&: $. $. , , ('ก, 2555.
[15] ก 6, ก #$" SPSS Amos, ก%&
&: *$'63, 2554.