1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. The Literature Review

2.1.1. An Overview of Procurement Management in Multinational Engineering EPC Projects

The growing complexity of global engineering EPC projects has rendered good procurement management increasingly vital. These projects necessitate a diverse array of materials and equipment, encompassing fundamental construction supplies as well as specialized machinery and maintenance components [8]. Procurement management is essential for linking the design and construction phases, guaranteeing that the project is operational and proceeds seamlessly [9]. Nonetheless, the substantial costs associated with procurement, along with dependence on external suppliers and logistics providers, often render this factor more challenging to man-age than other project elements, particularly due to extended lead times [10,11]. The incorporation of bespoke components in EPC projects exacerbates the complexities of inventory and procurement management [12,13]. Consequently, procurement optimization is essential for enhancing overall project efficiency [14,15]; nevertheless, it presents challenges such as intricate coordination, diverse stakeholder engagement, and the potential for delays and cost overruns resulting from process overlaps [16].

A recent study emphasizes various strategies to address these procurement challenges. Proposed techniques include integrating parallel engineering [17], employing lean building procedures [18], and forming strategic partnerships [19]. The primary recommendations encompass streamlining procurement processes, selecting reliable suppliers [8], including downstream stakeholders early in upstream activities [20,21], restructuring workflows, and employing advanced information technology. To mitigate procurement uncertainties and enhance supply chain integration [22], it is essential to develop robust inter-organizational communication, coordination, and collaboration, along with implementing incentive contracts and risk assessment models. These strategies aim to optimize procurement methods, increase efficiency, and effectively manage the inherent complexities of EPC project management.

Considering the complex nature of procurement management in international engineering EPC projects, it is essential to tackle these difficulties using the previously outlined strategies. As the intricacy of these undertakings’ advances, the incorporation of sophisticated approaches and technology becomes essential. Utilizing digital tools for real-time tracking and predictive analytics can substantially improve procurement efficiency and decision-making. Furthermore, utilizing data-driven in-sights to predict demand and enhance inventory management might alleviate certain conventional hazards linked to custom components and prolonged lead times [23].

2.1.2. Stakeholder Management

When stakeholders are not well defined, the phrase “network of relationships” is frequently used to describe the complex, non-linear, and iterative dynamics of stakeholder interactions in construction projects [24]. Conventional analyses often focus on internal and contractual relationships and analyze stakeholder interactions from a two-dimensional perspective, typically involving only two parties [25]. However, the interactions inside a project are inherently more complex [26]. With the ability to map and understand the intricate web of contacts, social network analysis has become a vital tool for managing potential stakeholder relationships [27].

Figure 2.1. A network that shows how studies on stakeholder management occur together.

Figure 2.1. A network that shows how studies on stakeholder management occur together.

Furthermore, the application of advanced network analysis techniques aligns with the broad sustainability goals of encouraging open and cooperative project environments. These approaches make it easier to develop strong and adaptable stakeholder engagement plans, which are necessary to achieve long-term project success and sustainability. Social network analysis provides insights that are essential for promoting more sustainable and equitable project outcomes, as environmental and social concerns become more and more prioritized in projects.

2.1.3. Supply Chain Integration

The important terms “chain partner,” “management practice,” and “chain flexibility” are prominently displayed in Figure 2.2 and 2.3, suggesting a strong emphasis on cooperative and flexible management practices in supply chains. The terms “integration,” “modelling,” “information,” and “cycle” indicate a focus on the systematic and cyclical characteristics of supply chain operations.

Figure 2.2. Co-occurring network for supply chain integration research.

Figure 2.2. Co-occurring network for supply chain integration research.

Figure 2.3. Network of coauthors on supply chain integration studies.

Figure 2.3. Network of coauthors on supply chain integration studies.

The proximity of the terms “speed,” “robustness,” and “flexibility” may signify the significance of responsiveness and resilience in supply chain management. The inclusion of “agile supply chain strategy,” “transparency,” and “accountability” indicates an emphasis on contemporary, dynamic, and responsible supply chain practices. The col-or gradient from yellow to blue signifies the period from 2005 to 2020, with blue phrases indicating more recent entries. This signifies the evolution of conversations or the aspects that have gained prominence throughout time.

Comprehensive studies have shown the substantial impact of supply chain integration on improving organizational efficiency and market positioning [28]. Building on fundamental studies by Stock et al. [29] and Wood [30], it is evident that successful integration can enhance profitability and strengthen competitive positioning. This necessitates the creation of uninterrupted communication lines across organizational and functional divisions.

A thorough examination of the integration tactics used by 322 multinational manufacturing companies is given by Fohlich et al. [31], who identified five important strategies: internal, boundary, supplier, customer, and external integration. Their findings indicate that companies employing comprehensive integration strategies that connect suppliers and customers realize the most substantial performance enhancements [32]. Olhager et al. [33] investigated supply chain management techniques in 128 Swedish manufacturing firms, emphasizing supply chain architecture, integration, and stakeholder communication [34]. Despite the acknowledged significance of collaboration, numerous organizations continue to exhibit unsatisfactory performance, suggesting that although the advantages of integration are increasingly recognized, substantial potential for additional enhancement persists.

In summary, supply chain integration confers substantial competitive advantages by augmenting organizational skills, expanding flexibility, and promoting innovation. The strategic advantages of these synergies may not always be immediately apparent but provide significant long-term value.

2.2. Methodological Approach and Data Analysis

2.2.1. Social Network Analysis Insights

Social Network Analysis (SNA) clarifies stakeholder relationship structures and enables the assessment of network resilience. Through the assessment of the net-work’s resilience, organizations can pinpoint potential vulnerabilities and formulate plans to fortify these aspects. This is essential for preserving continuity and stability amidst disturbances, especially in intricate EPC projects characterized by significant interdependencies among stakeholders. Improving network resilience via specific initiatives helps guarantee that the supply chain remains operational and adaptive during emergencies.

The optimization of partnerships and strategic alliances throughout the supply chain is another area where SNA is applied. By identifying pivotal influencers and central nodes, companies can deliberately connect with these entities to enhance joint initiatives and utilize their impact. This strategic involvement can foster robust relationships and enhance collaboration, which is crucial for attaining project objectives and promoting innovation in EPC projects.

2.2.2. Research Object and Project Situation

The study selected the top ten Chinese international contractors from the ENR250 list for investigation, specifically focusing on four major international engineering EPC (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction) project contractors. These con tractors operate across regions including Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Oceania, and are involved in sectors such as energy, building construction, municipal pro-jects, road and bridge construction, and mining. The research targeted management personnel with extensive experience in international engineering EPC projects and procurement.

Field surveys were conducted with headquarters management staff, while online surveys targeted overseas project management personnel. A total of 130 questionnaires were distributed, yielding 117 valid responses and a response rate of 90%. The following sections provide detailed insights into the survey subjects and the projects under investigation.

In the realm of EPC (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction) projects, the surveyed individuals predominantly occupy roles closely associated with procurement activities. Notably, over 34% of respondents are directly involved in procurement. Over the past five years, the average number of international EPC projects each respondent has participated in stands at 1.79. This data reflects a well-aligned distribution of roles among the respondents and indicates their substantial experience in managing international EPC projects.

The survey encompasses 45 EPC projects across 23 countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and Oceania. This geographic distribution closely mirrors the international business spread discussed in Chapter One, with a focus on regions highlighted by the “Going Global” initiative and the Belt and Road Strategy. Such distribution underscores the representativeness and relevance of the survey, reflecting the overall engagement of Chinese enterprises in international EPC projects.

The analysis of the 117 survey respondents was conducted using social network analysis methodologies. This approach allows for a comprehensive examination of the relationships and interactions among the participants, shedding light on the net-work dynamics and collaboration patterns within the context of EPC projects. By applying social network analysis, we can gain deeper insights into the structural and relational aspects of the respondents’ professional engagements, further elucidating the roles and connections that influence their involvement in international EPC pro-jects. This analysis will facilitate a more nuanced understanding of the interrelationships and collaborative frameworks that underpin the management and execution of these projects.

2.2.3. Analyzing Stakeholder Connectivity and Interaction through UCINET Software

This study utilizes advanced analytical approaches with UCINET software to rigorously analyze quantitative data obtained from extensive surveys, building upon the first analysis of stakeholder interactions. This research employs an integrative strategy that amalgamates diverse analytical methodologies to provide a comprehensive knowledge of the interactions and dynamics among stakeholders within the network.

The data collection process was meticulously designed to ensure robustness and representativeness, incorporating both field surveys and online questionnaires. The study examined prominent Chinese international contractors from the 2023 ENR250 list, engaging management specialists from four major EPC firms across several sectors and geographical areas. Of the 180 issued surveys, 117 valid replies were obtained, resulting in a response rate of 65%. The response rate indicates significant participation from essential industry stakeholders, hence ensuring data trustworthiness.

The outcomes of the social network analysis are depicted in a comprehensive diagram that delineates the collaborative links and interactions among stakeholders. Figure 2.5 illustrates a detailed representation of the network structure, emphasizing the relationships between the general contractor and many stakeholders. Each red dot in the diagram signifies one of the 117 research subjects, with the dot’s size denoting intermediate centrality, which reflects the stakeholder’s impact within the network. The position of the dot indicates its significance, while the distances between dots represent the level of similarity among stakeholders. This representation is crucial for recognizing key participants and comprehending their functions inside the network.

The study also delineates clusters within the network, wherein groupings of stakeholders have robust intra-group connections and diminished inter-group interactions. These clusters may indicate specialized sub-networks characterized by unique collaboration patterns and communication flows. Comprehending these clusters is essential for customizing stakeholder engagement tactics and enhancing overall network cohesion.

Furthermore, the study emphasizes the necessity for adaptive stakeholder management strategies that respond to the changing dynamics of the global engineering environment. As projects get more intricate and international, the capacity to adeptly manage and utilize stakeholder connections is crucial for attaining project success and sustainability.

To sum up, the utilization of UCINET for social network analysis offers valuable perspectives on the complex network of connections among stakeholders in the global EPC contracting industry. The results highlight essential elements of collaborative dynamics, stakeholder centrality, and network structure, which are vital for effective project implementation. These insights provide theoretical contributions and practical direction, enabling practitioners with actionable techniques to effectively navigate the difficulties of global EPC projects. Future research may investigate the long-term im-plications of stakeholder relationships on project outcomes, enhancing our comprehension of network dynamics and performance.

From the figure2.4, the social network map not only identifies significant nodes and their relative importance but also elucidates the structure of inter-stakeholder interactions. Examining these relationships facilitates the recognition of collaborative tendencies and the identification of potential bottlenecks or places of resistance within the network. By acknowledging these dynamics, project managers may deliberately mitigate vulnerabilities and cultivate robust partnerships, ultimately enhancing overall project coherence and efficiency.

Figure 2.4. Stakeholder Collaboration Networks.

Figure 2.4. Stakeholder Collaboration Networks.

The graphic elucidates the influence of stakeholder centrality on project performance. Key stakeholders, positioned centrally within the network, frequently contribute significantly to the success of projects. Comprehending their influence and interactions with other stakeholders helps inform the creation of focused engagement initiatives. This guarantees that essential stakeholders are appropriately utilized to support project objectives and address any disputes.

Figure 2.5. Enlarged Visualization of Stakeholder Collaboration.

Figure 2.5. Enlarged Visualization of Stakeholder Collaboration.

The stakeholder network diagram has been deliberately streamlined to sharpen the analytical emphasis and improve interpretability. This improvement enables a clearer representation of the fundamental collaborative links and interactions inside the network, hence permitting a more accurate understanding of the core dynamics.

Consequently, Figure 2.5 depicts the optimized configuration of stakeholder collaboration, highlighting a diminished complexity in the network architecture. This enhanced visualization emphasizes the key links and interactions, providing a clearer comprehension of the essential stakeholder relationships and their impact on project outcomes. The simplification highlights essential collaborative patterns, offering significant insights into the strategic interactions and operational efficiencies within the stakeholder network.

Based on intermediate centrality criteria, Table 2.1 provides a comprehensive ranking of stakeholder cooperation by methodically grouping stakeholders by their prominence and connectedness within the collaborative network. This table facilitates a detailed examination of stakeholder influence, illustrating how key actors contribute to and shape network dynamics. Analyzing the intermediate centrality of stakeholders allows us to pinpoint individuals in pivotal roles within the network, hence offering insights into their potential influence on project results.

Table 2.1. Metrics of Intermediary Centrality in Promoting Stakeholder Collaboration.

Table 2.1. Metrics of Intermediary Centrality in Promoting Stakeholder Collaboration.

Stakeholder	Intermediate centrality	Ranking
Cooperate with group headquarters	615.742	1
Cooperate with construction parties	584.654	2
Cooperate with domestic equipment and material suppliers	556.251	3
Cooperate with the designer	539.057	4
Cooperate with domestic supplier	537.365	5
Cooperate with installation service provider	507.989	6
Cooperate with foreign equipment and material suppliers	506.173	7
Cooperate with foreign main material supplier	503.481	8
Work with consulting engineers	488.688	9
Work with logistics providers	482.999	10
Cooperate with the owner	470.269	11
Cooperate with domestic customs authorities	461.882	12
Cooperate with foreign customs departments	423.144	13
Cooperate with Chinese contractors in the same overseas market	419.306	14

The rankings in Table 2.1 provide a useful framework for comprehending the hierarchical organization of stakeholder connections. Stakeholders with elevated centrality ratings frequently assume crucial roles in enhancing communication, decision-making, and resource distribution. Identifying these principal actors enables project managers to concentrate their engagement strategies on the most significant stakeholders, so ensuring that their requirements and expectations are adequately met. This focused strategy enhances stakeholder engagement and aligns it with the project’s strategic objectives.

Table 2.1offers a nuanced perspective that underpins the creation of a more advanced stakeholder management framework, thereby enhancing project outcomes and promoting long-term success.

Upon further examination of stakeholder interactions within the project network, it is clear that intermediary centrality significantly influences the efficacy of procurement processes. The analysis indicates that specific stakeholders demonstrate considerable influence and connection, significantly affecting the entire dynamics of procurement and project execution. This observation underscores the need of comprehending the relational dynamics among diverse stakeholders to refine procurement strategies and improve project outcomes.

The general contractor currently sustains strong ties with various stakeholders and excels in collaboration. Table 2.1 indicates that the group office possesses the highest intermediary centrality score among all stakeholders, signifying its crucial involvement in the network. The significant point size of the group office signifies its considerable impact and pivotal role in expediting procurement operations. The engagement with the group offices substantially modifies the procurement process owing to their rigorous protocols and management frameworks, which guarantee thorough supervision of essential electrical and mechanical systems procurement. The group office, in conjunction with construction firms, local material suppliers, and designers, executes significant intermediary responsibilities, encompassing planning and procurement, so underscoring its vital role in enhancing the efficiency of the procurement process.

The significance of intermediate centrality in enhancing information dissemination and decision-making within the network is paramount. Stakeholders possessing significant intermediary centrality frequently serve as channels for essential information, guaranteeing the efficient distribution of pertinent data and insights throughout the network. This job is crucial for achieving alignment among stakeholders and facilitating the smooth execution of procurement activities in accordance with project specifications. By consolidating essential contacts and information exchanges, these stakeholders improve the overall coherence and efficiency of the procurement process.

The conclusions from the stakeholder network analysis indicate that promoting collaboration among high-centrality stakeholders can produce significant advantages. Collaborative initiatives that prioritize collective problem-solving and resource allocation are expected to enhance procurement results and facilitate project success. This collaborative strategy corresponds with sustainable practices by enhancing resource efficiency and minimizing waste through coordinated initiatives.

2.3. Case Study—Zambian Hydroelectric Project

Figure 2.7. Zambian hydroelectric project.

Figure 2.7. Zambian hydroelectric project.

1.

An overview of the project

In the southern province of Zambia, Zambia E hydropower project is located in Chumo city, with an installed capacity of 2X60MW. The main project consists of infrastructure (owner camp, water supply and power supply system, sewage treatment and line renovation), and permanent works (power station, surge well, switch station) in two parts. The project is an EPC general contract, the owner is a joint venture between Zambia National Power Company and India’s Tata Group, and the total value of the EPC contract is 156 million US dollars. With the completion of the project, Zambia will be able to alleviate its power shortage situation, as well as ex-port electricity to neighboring countries suffering from power shortages.

1.

The key issues in the procurement management

There are several key procurement issues in the Zambia E hydropower project:

• Financing is a problem for owners. It is important for the general contractor to continue working when the owner has financial difficulties and no funds are available, in order to facilitate brand building and ultimately market development.
• A large number of the main materials are selected to be procured locally due to the high transportation costs associated with third country procurement. How-ever, there are few local manufacturers and few suppliers available, for example, only one local cement factory meets the requirements, resulting in fewer local manufacturers and limited supplier options.
• Goods are subject to wide fluctuations in price. Prices of cement, diesel oil and other goods often fluctuate greatly due to a scarcity of local raw materials and fluctuations in exchange rates. The timing of procurement also has an impact on the cost of the goods.

3. Results

Figure 3.1. Procurement management model of internal EPC Project From the perspective of supply chain integration.

Figure 3.1. Procurement management model of internal EPC Project From the perspective of supply chain integration.

4. Discussion

5. Conclusions

References

1. Schoenherr T, Swink M. Revisiting the arcs of integration: Cross-validations and extensions. Journal of Operations Management, 2012, 30(1): 99-115.
2. Lau H S, Lau A H L. The newsstand problem: A capacitated multiple-product single-period inventory problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 1996, 94(1): 29-42.
3. Sahin F, Robinson E P. Flow coordination and information sharing in supply chains: review, implications, and directions for future research. Decision sciences, 2002, 33(4): 505-536.
4. Mentzer J T, DeWitt W, Keebler J S, et al. Defining supply chain management. Journal of Business logistics, 2001, 22(2): 1-25.
5. Cooper M C, Lambert D M, Pagh J D. Supply chain management: more than a new name for logistics. The international journal of logistics management, 1997, 8(1): 1-14.
6. Tang W, Qiang M, Duffield C F, et al. Enhancing total quality management by partnering in construction. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 2009, 135(4): 129-141.
7. Armistead C, Mapes J. The impact of supply chain integration on operating performance. Logistics Information Management, 1993, 6(4): 9-14.
8. Yang J, Shen G Q, Ho M, et al. Stakeholder management in construction: An empirical study to address research gaps in previous studies. International Journal of Project Management, 2011, 29(7): 900-910.
9. O’brien W, J. Construction supply-chain management: A vision for advanced coordination, costing, and control.
10. Workshop, Stanford, California, 1999.
11. Zhang B, Wu D, Liang L, Olson DL. Supply chain loss averse newsboy model with capital constraint. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 2015, 46(5): 646-658.
12. Harju A, Hallikas J, Immonen M, et al. The impact of procurement digitalization on supply chain resilience: Empirical evidence from Finland. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 2023.
13. Manik, D. Impact of supply chain integration on business performance: A review. Jurnal Sistem Teknik Industri, 2022, 24(1): 85-106.
14. Hao F, F. Research on E-Procurement System Based on Supply Chain Management. Management & Technology of SME, 2019.
15. Lopez del Puerto C, Gransberg D D, Shane J S. Comparative analysis of owner goals for design/build projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 2008, 24(1): 32-39.
16. Polancos RV, Seva RR. A risk minimization model for a multi-skilled, multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem with discrete time-cost-quality-risk trade-off. Engineering Management Journal, 2023, 1-17.
17. Zhang X, Van Donk DP, Van der Vaart T. The different impact of inter-organizational and intra-organizational ICT on supply chain performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2016, 36(7): 803-824.
18. Valentinov V, Hajdu A. Integrating instrumental and normative stakeholder theories: A systems theory approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 2021, 168: 15-25.
19. Amirtash P, Parchami Jalal M, Jelodar MB. Integration of project management services for International Engineering, Procurement and Construction projects. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 2021, 11(2): 330-349.
20. Songer A D, Molenaar K R. Project characteristics for successful public-sector design-build. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1997, 123(1): 34-40.
21. Baydemir B, Goksu BB. EPC and EPCM contract models. GSI Articletter, 2021, 25: 70.
22. Yeo K T, Ning J H. Integrating supply chain and critical chain concepts in engineer-procure-construct (EPC) projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2002, 20(4): 254-259.
23. Zhang X, L. Procurement management of international engineering EPC projects based on supply chain integration. Today’s Wealth (Chinese Intellectual Property), 2019.
24. Perkins R, A. Sources of changes in design-build contracts for a governmental owner. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2009, 135(7): 588-593.
25. Liu, Y. The impact of socio-cultural differences on the performance of overseas EPC project supply chain management. Journal of [Chinese Journal], 2022.
26. Lv Y, Shang Y. Investigation of industry 4.0 technologies mediating effect on the supply chain performance and supply chain management practices. Environmental Science & Pollution Research, 2023.
27. Ota M, Srinivasan S, Nandakumar CD. Optimal order quantity by maximizing expected utility for the newsboy model. International Journal of Procurement Management, 2019, 12(4): 410-424.
28. Kaiser H, F. Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1974, 34: 111-117.
29. Sobotka A, Czarnigowska A. Analysis of supply system models for planning construction project logistics. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2005, 11(1): 73-82.
30. Spicer, J. Making sense of multivariate data analysis: An intuitive approach. London: Sage, 2005.
31. Chen J, Y. Discussion on the measures for reducing “two financials” in EPC general contracting projects. Hydropower Station Design, 2024.
32. Young T, L. Successful project management. 2013. [Google Scholar]
33. Shin H, Collier D A, Wilson D D. Partnership-based supply chain collaboration: Impact on commitment, innovation, and firm performance. Journal of Business Logistics, 2019, 40(2): 137-152.
34. Wondirad A, Tolkach D, King B. Stakeholder collaboration as a major factor for sustainable ecotourism development in developing countries. Tourism Management, 2020, 78: 104024.
35. Nikjow M A, Liang L, Sepasgozar S. Engineering procurement construction in the context of Belt and Road infrastructure projects in West Asia: A SWOT analysis. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 2021, 27(2): 04521001.
36. Crespin-Mazet F, Ghauri P. Co-development as a marketing strategy in the construction industry. Industrial Marketing Management, 2007, 36(2): 158-172.
37. Briscoe G, Dainty A. Construction supply chain integration: an elusive goal? Supply Chain Management, 2005, 10(4):319-326.
38. He Bosen. International Engineering Contracting (2nd Edition). China Construction Industry Press, 2007.
39. Leuschner R, Rogers D S, Charvet F F.A Meta-Analysis of Supply Chain Integration and Firm Performance. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2013, 49(2):34-57.
40. Flynn B B, Huo B, Zhao X. The impact of supply chain integration on performance: A contingency and configuration approach. Journal of operations management, 2010, 28(1): 58-71.
41. Eriksson P, E. Partnering in engineering projects: Four dimensions of supply chain integration. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 2015, 21(1): 38-50.
42. Mackelprang A W, Robinson J L, Bernardes E, et al. The Relationship Between Strategic Supply Chain Integration and Performance: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation and Implications for Supply Chain Management Research. Journal of Business Logistics, 2014, 35(1):71-96.
43. Fu Q, Lee C Y, Teo C P. Procurement management using option contracts: random spot price and the portfolio effect. IIE transactions, 2010, 42(11): 793-811.
44. Cao M, Zhang Q. Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 2011, 29(3):163-180.
45. Lawson B, Cousins P D, Handfield R B, et al. Strategic purchasing, supply management practices and buyer performance improvement: an empirical study of UK manufacturing organizations. International Journal of Production Research, 2009, 47(10): 2649-2667.
46. Masi D, Micheli G J L, Cagno E. A meta-model for choosing a supplier selection technique within an EPC company. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 2013, 19(1): 5-15.
47. Yeo K T, Ning J H. Managing uncertainty in major equipment procurement in engineering projects. European Journal of Operational Research, 2006, 171(1):123-134.
48. Songhori M J, Tavana M, Azadeh A, et al. A supplier selection and order allocation model with multiple transportation alternatives. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2011, 52(1-4): 365-376.
49. Peters T Thriving on chaos: Handbook for a management revolution. New York: Knopf,1987.
50. Wang S, Tang W, Li Y. Relationship between owners’ capabilities and project performance on development of hydropower projects in China. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2013, 139(9): 1168-1178.
51. Chew D A S, Yan S, Cheah C Y J. Core capability and competitive strategy for construction SMEs in China. Chinese Management Studies, 2008, 2(3): 203-214.
52. Hazen BT, Bradley RV, Bell JE, In J, Byrd TA. Enterprise architecture: A competence-based approach to achieving agility and firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 2017, 193:566-577.
53. Koc K, Gurgun AP. Stakeholder-associated life cycle risks in construction supply chain. Journal of Management in Engineering, 2021, 37(1):04020107.
54. Kamra J, Mani AP, Sharma M, Joshi S. The Nexus between Green Supply Chain Management and Sustainability Performance in the Past Decade. Sustainability, 2024, 16(17), 7474. [CrossRef]
55. Solari F, Lysova N, Romagnoli G, Montanari R, Bottani E. Insights from 20 Years (2004–2023) of Supply Chain Disruption Research: Trends and Future Directions Based on a Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability, 2024, 16(17), 7530. [CrossRef]
56. Nevskaya MA, Raikhlin SM, Chanysheva AF. Assessment of Energy Efficiency Projects at Russian Mining Enterprises within the Framework of Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 2024, 16(17), 7478. [CrossRef]
57. Deng Z, Shaharudin MR, Shariff SSR, Tseng M-L. Optimal Decisions in an Authorized Remanufacturing Closed-Loop Supply Chain under Dual-Fairness Concerns. Sustainability, 2024, 16(17), 7609. [CrossRef]
58. Sedovs E, Volkova T. Sustainability: Is It a Strategic Management Research Fashion? Sustainability, 2024, 16(17), 7434. [CrossRef]
59. Li J, Yuan P, Liang L, Cao J. Enhancing Supply Chain Resilience in Prefabricated Buildings: The Role of Blockchain Technology in Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous Environments. Buildings, 2024, 14(9), 3006. [CrossRef]