Human management control systems on construction firms amidst COVID-19

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to endure in the construction industry. While many businesses worldwide have adapted to working from home or home-based offices, this is impractical in this sector as building activity is conducted on-site, which creates difficulties for employees in adapting to the post-pandemic setting.

OBJECTIVE:

This article analyzes how the pandemic has changed and affected construction firms’ human management control systems dimensions. We addressed, amidst the pandemic, how work is being performed and its effects on employees and businesses.

METHODS:

In this analytical research, we used chain referral sampling to perform an in-depth interview study with top administrators of different construction firms in Colombia, and we used inferential statistics for our data analysis.

RESULTS:

Results showed potential sources of low efficiency and minimal control of resources, including lack of communication with employees, lack of recognition systems, centralized decision-making, and disconnection between business objectives and financial requirements.

CONCLUSIONS:

Construction firms must ensure workers understand the project goals adequately and be empowered to make on-site decisions provided a training program is offered. Organizations ought to connect their strategic business goals with financial requirements; these must be regularly updated and modified as the economic and labor force scenario evolves.

Keywords

Human management control systems COVID-19 construction industry communication

Milton Soto-Ferrari is an Associate Professor in the Department of Marketing and Operations at the Scott College of Business at Indiana State University. His research interests include business and healthcare analytics, supply chain management, and logistics. His recent publications are related to management, healthcare analytics, and forecasting policies.

Odette Chams-Anturi is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Economic Science, Universidad de la Costa (Colombia). Her research interests are supply chain management, organizational learning, innovation, and ambidexterity. She has worked in public and private companies of mass consumption and healthcare entities. His recent publications are related to innovation and organizational learning.

1 Introduction

Due to the acute COVID-19 pandemic, the construction sector worldwide faces great uncertainty [1] as the impact of COVID-19 on the labor force has been considered more severe than other global economic crises [2 –4]. Globally, more than 80% of workers have been affected, with more than 220 million jobs lost and global labor income expected to decrease by more than 8% [5]. Nations have adopted containment measures and economic support policies, such as added unemployment benefits and salary subsidies, to diminish the pandemic effects [3]. While slowly the restrictions were lifted, the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has brought an unprecedented influence on business sectors.

The preceding government measures implemented to control the spread of the virus, including travel restrictions, border control, and workplace closure, have brought social and economic consequences, primarily in costs, revenue, and profit [6]. During COVID-19, the shutdown of businesses forced employees to move instantly from workspace locations to home offices [7]. In contrast, society has adjusted, including well-being plans and comprehensive health safety policies now focused on this new context of teleworking [8]; however, some work sectors faced difficulties adapting to these new settings [9]. The construction industry is a case in point since working from home, or home-based offices may not be practical, as building activity is conducted on-site [10].

Countries worldwide confronted different construction labor scenarios with similar adverse outcomes to their economies during the pandemic that continues to prevail. In this sense, developing countries (DCs), especially those in Latin America, face more substantial financial challenges, given their relatively low economic conditions. These have difficulties in construction projects because of multiple aspects, including but not limited to poor planning, project execution with implementation inexactitudes, cost overruns, issues with meeting schedule and quality thresholds, and in many cases, high levels of government corruption [11]. Because of the timing of the last pandemic informed, the Spanish flu, in 1918, there are no significant reports of outbreaks’ economic consequences in DCs, specifically in Latin America.

Doing a semi-parallel with other critical disruptive events in the region, [12] studied the relationship between accumulation, productivity, and economic growth in Latin America after the financial external debt crisis in 1982 [13]. While the situation was unrelated to a pandemic, and this upheaval cannot be considered an epidemic per se, its economic effects and outcomes at the time were similar to those nowadays after the COVID-19 outbreak in the region. According to this study evaluation, during these periods, a relatively small increase in the importance of machinery and equipment in capital formation and a significant decrease in construction projects was found in Latin American countries. The crisis meant a substantial increase in people not working, as hours worked per person had fallen in most countries. Interestingly, the study concluded that economic growth could be resumed by moving towards the production frontier through the better utilization of installed capacity and the labor force with a minor accumulation effort.

Inferring those mentioned above and focusing on the construction industry sector, there are multiple managerial tools to ensure better utilization of the labor force and the capacity to achieve business objectives [14 –18]. This investigation centers on one of these managerial tools: Human Management Control Systems (HMCS), derived from the Management Control Systems (MCS) theory. HMCS in the construction sector refers to the strategies and processes used to manage, motivate, and monitor the performance of employees in construction companies. This approach can include performance evaluations, training programs, communication systems, and compensation and reward systems. HMCS, as part of the MCS body, aims to align the objectives and actions of employees with the overall strategy and goals to ensure that employees are productive and motivated. Effective HMCS is crucial for the success of construction businesses, as they help build a strong, encouraged, and competent workforce that procures a better utilization of the available resources to increase productivity.

Worldwide construction firms might have the leverage to sustain the aforementioned post-COVID-19 effects; given their financial reserves, however, this is a complex task for the industry in Latin America, specifically in countries such as Colombia, given their relatively modest economic conditions and high corruption perception [5, 19]. In Colombia, the construction sector is one of the most prominent in the region. It is one of the primary employment generators. There is a constant effort to raise awareness and educate individuals about the industry’s importance in the country’s growth. However, in Colombia, as in most DCs, no unified methodologies or approaches are focused on evaluating standard measures of HMCS practices. Specifically, there are no mechanisms to quantify the improvement of capacity and resource utilization in achieving the business objectives given the current post-pandemic context.

This research aims to study and analyze the critical components of HMCS performance of residential construction businesses by designing a complete assessment in one of Colombia’s major cities, Barranquilla. The study addresses various control systems factors that cause business performance fluctuations. It focuses on analyzing how the pandemic has changed and affected construction workplaces. In this article, we address how work is being performed amidst the post-pandemic—eventually indicating the difficulties the labor force faces in the construction work and how to manage them to improve productivity and motivation. An interview study with 11 high-role executives from construction firms was conducted to develop the investigation. Executives responded to a planned 33-question assessment based on research by [20 –22] that focused on the evaluation of three essential dimensions of HMCS (i.e., strategic, tactical-operational, and economic).

Besides the elaborated analysis, the broad contribution of this research is to perform a reference methodology to embrace and quantify the HMCS dimensions on construction firms in DCs using the cases from Colombia as a representative of the approach implementation. The current study will add to the growing knowledge of the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated effect on the construction industry’s labor force. This paper’s structure contemplates the literature review about HMCS dimensions and the background of the construction sector during the COVID-19 pandemic. Follow up by the study methodology, the study’s results, the discussion of the recommendations based on the outcomes, and the article’s conclusion.

2 Literature review

2.1 Human Management Control Systems (HMCS)

HMCS is an interdisciplinary field of study part of the MCS body of knowledge that emphasizes the design, implementation, and evaluation of control systems in organizations with a focus on people. HMCS draws on theories and concepts from management, psychology, sociology, and organizational behavior to understand how individuals and groups influence control systems’ design and effectiveness. HMCS aims to develop effective, efficient, and fair control systems while considering employees’ needs, motivations, and behaviors. Some key topics studied in HMCS include performance measurement, goal setting, feedback, incentives, and employee involvement in decision-making [23]. HMCS verifies the degree of fulfillment of the objectives established by organizations during a specific period. Identifying risks preventively allows operational and strategic decision-making and promptly plans corrective actions to achieve the goals. HMCS, in conjunction with MCS, procures the alignment of the objectives and activities of employees with the overall strategy and goals, ensuring that employees are productive and motivated.

HMCS is an integral component of the broader MCS framework. While MCS is concerned with achieving organizational objectives at a strategic level, HMCS focuses specifically on employees’ management, motivation, and performance. This unique focus allows HMCS to address specific challenges related to human resources, such as employee motivation, performance measurement, and involvement in decision-making, thereby adding a crucial factor to the overall effectiveness of MCS. By ensuring alignment between employee actions and organizational strategy, HMCS enhances individual productivity and contributes to realizing strategic organizational goals.

The assessment of MCS, and by extension HMCS, is typically structured around three primary dimensions: (i) strategic, (ii) tactical-operational, and (iii) economic. The strategic dimension refers to the business’s composition, management, and value, providing direction and leadership besides identifying critical success factors for the organization. The tactical-operational dimension focuses on short-term planning and the current operational performance, establishing benchmarks to evaluate essential processes. The economic dimension involves a financial examination and performance evaluation of the organization over a specific period [20 , 23]. These three dimensions define the business’s long-term and short-term goals and allow evaluation of the mechanisms to accomplish the objectives, including financial and employee performance assessments. Further extending this evaluative framework [22] provides a valuation structure by specifying key indicators for construction projects that include four phases from plan conception to the end consumer procurement, comprising; (i) finances, (ii) client satisfaction, (iii) internal processes, and (iv) training and development all within the scope of the three dimensions.

The type of direction in an organization is essential for adopting HMCS. In this sense, [24] considers that the experience of the CEO and planning emphasis influence the strength of its adoption. Since this will procure a good alignment of communication channels and information management, prompting constructive individual behavior and thus increasing organizational commitment [25]. When enabling HMCS, top managers focus their subordinates on strategic issues, sharing information, and engaging them in open discussions.

2.2 HMCS in the construction industry

In previous research, numerous approaches comprise HMCS and MCS implementations in the industry. In the following, a summary with time-ordered implementations involving novel technology and managerial behavior is presented as actual HMCS or MCS-reported practical applications rely upon modern information systems and personnel performance.

Al-Reshaid et al. [26] designed and implemented a web-based application for building projects, allowing technology to control previous stages of long-term construction plans. Similarly, [27] created an internet-linked project management system that generated construction progress report indicators using a defined earned value method. Likewise, [28] developed an implementation using database management to create interfaces for staff. Each employee can get real-time information in this application and make immediate strategic decisions when problems arise, allowing managers to act quickly if necessary. Furthermore, [29] studied the influence of the strategic and economic dimensions on the business’s financial performance by applying a structured survey to Canadian manufacturing companies. Thus designing an application of both financial and strategic control methods.

Langevin and Mendoza [30] studied the ethical behavior of project managers. This research aimed to learn how a based MCS implementation could reduce the amiss performance of administrators and increase its dimensions assessment. According to the investigation, this understanding helps reduce the slack and manipulation of data through organizational commitment and trust in the supervisor. Correspondingly, [31] studied the relationships between dimensions, leadership style, and gender ideology. The study appraises how a leader’s gender values affect leadership style, approach, and business life. Likewise, [32] studied MCS and corporate social responsibility in Japan, exploring how it can support employee motivation and integrate stakeholders’ opinions on implementing decision-making actions.

Martin [33] examined an evolutionary approach to MCS in business dynamics. The revision proposed theoretical and empirical extensions to encourage the exploration of further scientific studies on the design of policies within a company. In the same way, [34] studied MCS to improve the performance of organizations in the public sector. The study shows how the method is associated with achieving organizational objectives. Respectively, [35] studied the positive effect of transformational leadership style on MCS implementations, evaluating levels of control and management employing the dimensions assessment in human service organizations, including construction industries, in Australia.

This review illustrates that while there is a substantial body of recent literature on HMCS and MCS applications, no specific assessments have been conducted in the unique context of the post-COVID-19 environment, nor have they focused explicitly on the construction sector in DCs. Consequently, this work fills two significant gaps in existing knowledge: (1) It presents the first comprehensive analysis of HMCS in the context of the post-pandemic environment, with a specific focus on the construction industry in DCs, particularly Colombia. The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically impacted work practices worldwide, likely affecting how HMCS is implemented in various sectors. Exploring these changes, particularly in a sector as vital as construction in a developing context, offers valuable insights. (2) Given the limited resources and unique challenges organizations face in DCs, we anticipate finding a range of configurations in HMCS practices. We aim to identify and describe these unique combinations of HMCS elements by conducting an interview study. This approach contributes to a more nuanced understanding of how HMCS is realized in diverse contexts, informing better practices and policy decisions.

3 Materials and methods

3.1 Research context: Barranquilla, Colombia

The spread of COVID-19 in the Colombian territory has directly affected productive activities due to the lockdown measures necessary to contain the transmission of the virus. Significant reductions in the commercialization and execution of works have harmed the building industry and other sectors of the national economy [36]. This setting has endured as resource costing and US dollar exchange rates in the country have substantial variability; this is a significant reference point as most raw materials are negotiated with international suppliers. In the years before the pandemic, the building sector had maintained a consistent growth of 13.7%, three times higher than the expected economic growth. Annual investments of 74.5 billion pesos (20.5 million USD) contribute 42.8 billion pesos (11.7 million USD) to the economy, and together with real estate activities, this generates 1.8 million jobs [36].

However, despite the adverse effects of the outbreak, particularly the residential construction sector in Barranquilla, one of Colombia’s principal cities, is expected to increase consistently in this post-pandemic period. Barranquilla is a city located on the northern coast of Colombia. It is the fourth largest city in the country. It is known for its vibrant cultural heritage and its lively atmosphere. In addition to its cultural offerings, Barranquilla is also a hub of commerce and industry, with a thriving port and a well-developed infrastructure. The city is known for its steel production, textiles, and food processing industries, as well as its services sector, which includes finance, insurance, and real estate. Despite its economic growth, Barranquilla has faced several challenges, including high crime levels and poverty. However, the city is working to address these issues. It has significantly invested in urban development and social programs to improve its residents’ lives. The residential construction industry in Barranquilla has seen growth in recent years as the city has experienced increased population and economic development. The demand for housing has risen along with the growth of the city’s economy, creating opportunities for developers and construction companies [37].

Several residential projects have been undertaken in recent years to meet the growing demand for housing in Barranquilla. These projects range from affordable housing developments to luxury communities, offering various income levels and lifestyle options. The city has also made efforts to improve the quality of life for its residents through the construction of new parks, recreational facilities, and transportation infrastructure. In addition to traditional housing options, there has been a growing trend in developing eco-friendly and sustainable residential projects in the city. These projects are designed to minimize environmental impact and provide residents with a healthier and more sustainable living environment. However, it is essential to note that the sector’s growth may be influenced by various factors such as government policies, economic conditions, and market demand.

Specifically, to improve construction competitiveness in the post-pandemic, the city’s local government held multiple meetings and seminars between the Colombian Ministry of Housing and the Construction Regional Board of Directors to discuss the programs and main objectives of the sector. There were also plans about the goals to achieve, including residential improvement. Additionally, workshops were held with the Minister of Housing representatives, the local Secretariat of Planning and Infrastructure, constructors, banks, and curators to discuss topics such as the problems that restrict building activity, difficulties in procedures, irregularities in the liquidation of the tax registration, and continuity of the residential rate subsidies. Through socialization, contractors knew the details and recommendations for regulating the government residential rate subsidies, and emphasis was placed on the procedures, collection rates, and credit monitoring for the purchasing requirements [36]. This program is an important initiative that is helping to address the affordable housing shortage in Colombia and improve the quality of life for many families and serves as a model for how the public and private sectors can work together to address critical social issues.

These facts, including recent literature support, draw our focus on the significance of HMCS as a potential achievement in improving construction business practices issues that emerged due to COVID-19 in the city and country.

3.2 Participants and procedure instruments

We conceived an interview study instrument to collect data from primary sources to offer empirical support for studying HMCS in the residential construction sector in Barranquilla, Colombia. In the wake of COVID-19, leading administrators had to shift their traditional administration approach to managing in alternative modes. Therefore, the data collection was centered on top administrators (i.e., managers or directors) from residential construction businesses. Our intention was not to create a generic survey but to develop a deeper understanding and assessment of HMCS in the construction industry. An interview study involves in-depth, one-on-one discussions with individuals about a specific topic or set of issues. We aimed to gain a deeper understanding of the interviewed individuals’ experiences, perspectives, and thoughts. Our study objectives were related to the context of this pandemic shift and its current effects on the labor force and business.

We approached participants through the Colombian Chamber of Construction (Camacol). As the association about organizations related to the construction business’s value chain in Colombia, Camacol [38] was an appropriate resource for locating potential participants. Given the sensitivity of the topic and the need for participants to share confidential information, we used a chain referral approach to mitigate potential biases. The study concentrated on top administrators managing multiple residential on-site projects. We initially contacted 30 chief administrators, 11 (i.e., 37%) of whom agreed to participate in the interview. Participants were thoroughly briefed about the study objectives and invited to join the examination without any restrictions. While both HMCS and MCS were considered during our study, our main interest in this research was the human aspect within these control systems.

For our data collection, we drew from the comprehensive body of knowledge pertaining to MCS, but our principal focus remained on the human elements within these systems. Based on the evidence collected, our goal was to identify, report, and quantify gaps in the three critical areas of HMCS and MCS dimensions. For simplicity and to reflect our study’s emphasis, we will primarily refer to HMCS throughout the rest of this document. Please note that when we mention HMCS, it implies the inclusion of the broader MCS as an integral part of the study. This streamlined approach should enhance readability without compromising the concentration of our research.

The collected information was processed using descriptive analytics and statistical techniques such as ANOVA and post hoc tests to estimate performance indicators. The ultimate aim was to maximize business operations, employee motivation and productivity, and resource control. Our analysis led to recommendations for corrective measures to enhance labor force performance and satisfaction, keeping in line with the business’s financial goals.

Additionally, participants were informed about the voluntary nature of the research and that they could participate and withdraw at any time. The study’s purpose was highlighted during the data collection process, and confidentiality and anonymity of the responses were ensured. The instrument contained information on the workplace, labor force, and COVID-19 effects. Each interview took between 3 and 4 hours, and we requested to perform an on-site tour of the projects to observe the ongoing developments and the labor force in their activities. Some participants were asked to interview for multiple days to ensure the completeness of the responses to the questions and requests.

3.3 Interviews structure

Data from the interviews were collected using an online repository and shared directly with participants during the on-site interviews. To ensure standardization, we designed a 33-question evaluation based on the research by [20 –22]; and the related study presented in [39]. Fundamentally, the evaluation divides the three dimensions: (i) strategic, (ii) tactical-operational, and (iii) economic, into a set of systematized questions that aim to estimate a comprehensive rating measure for the HMCS dimensions and their performance within the organization. While this investigation addresses a unique issue and was conducted autonomously, it was prompted by and built upon the structure of [39], enriching the broader discussion of HMCS implementation in DCs. Table 1 presents the arrangement and organization of the questions, with specific Likert scale values assigned to the questions as denoted.

Table 1
Interview questions: Typified with the HMCS dimensions

Dimension Items Scale

Strategic Q1. The company has a defined mission, describing what it does, how it does it, and why.Q2. The company has described in its vision how it sees itself within the next few years. Q3. The company has a series of established values within its organizational culture. Q4. In developing strategic planning, analytical tools are used to create strategic diagnoses. Q5. The objectives of the company and the strategies to achieve them have been previously defined. Q6. The company has a strategic map or a system similar to a balanced scorecard. Q7. All company levels know the mission, vision, and balanced scorecard if any. Q8. The management, support, and operational teams generate their action plans according to what is defined in the balanced scorecard or a general indicator. Q9. Periodic follow-ups are developed to review the key performance indicators defined in the strategic planning. Q10. Multiple evaluation methods measure the fulfillment of the goals or objectives (indicators). Q11. Corrective or improvement actions are performed according to the results obtained in reviewing the fulfillment of the goals or objectives. Q12. Management and senior executives promote ownership of strategic planning throughout the organization. Q13. The company has a stimulus or incentive program that promotes the achievement of the objectives. Q14. The company uses analytical tools to identify its critical competitive factors. Q15. Internal regulations and company conduct codes are part of its internal policy. Q16. The company has defined policies for designing and complying with its strategic planning. Q17. There are resource allocation systems for the operation of the company, its functional areas, and the projects to be executed. Q1-Q5, Q7-Q17Likert Scale1: “Strongly disagree”; 2: “Disagree”; 3: “Neither agree nor disagree”; 4: “Agree”; 5: “Strongly agree” Q65: “Yes”; 1: “No.”

Tactical - Operational Q18. The decision-making process is decentralized in the company. Q19. The organization has identified the fundamental processes of its value chain. Q20. Internal processes are constantly evaluated to procure efficiency and effectiveness. Q21. The company works on the potential of people through training, assigning goals, strengthening relationships, and creating an internal leadership culture. Q22. Meetings are scheduled between leaders and their teams to monitor the planning and make joint decisions. Q18-Q29Likert Scale1: “Strongly disagree”; 2: “Disagree”; 3: “Neither agree nor disagree”; 4: “Agree”; 5: “Strongly agree” Q29Likert Scale5: “Select all four stages”; 3: “Select two or three stages”; 1: “Select one or none stages”

Q23. The functional area leaders communicate their overall results to their teams.

Q24. Senior management meets with the leaders of the functional areas to review the planning results and define joint strategies to achieve the objectives. Q25. The company defines the annual budget and controls the internal budget for each functional area. Q26. The functional areas define their profitability projections and monitor the results achieved periodically. Q27. There is a system of indicators to monitor the management in developing the projects. Q28. For projects, there are defined activities for supervision and control of processes within a plan or system that guarantee their management or implementation. Q29. The projects developed by the company are based on a measurement system of indicators related to multiple stages (select all that apply): Stage I. Design / Planning, Stage II. Execution / Construction, Stage III. Sale / Delivery, and Stage IV. Customer Satisfaction.

Economic Q30. From its financial perspective, the company uses the following indicators (select all that apply): (1) Liquidity index, (2) Debt index, (3) Return on equity, (4) Return on assets, (5) Interest coverage ratio, (6) Working capital, and (7) Total operating assets. Q31. Within its financial perspective, the company uses the following reports (select all that apply): (1) a balance sheet, (2) an income statement, (3) a statement of changes in equity, (4) a statement of changes in financial position, and (5) a statement of cash flows. Q32. The company performs a sensitivity analysis on the results obtained from the financial reports for decision-making. Q33. The company performs risk analysis on the results obtained from the financial reports for decision-making. Q30Likert Scale5: “Select between five or seven indicators”; 3: “Select between three and four indicators”; 1: “Select between two and none indicators.” Q31Likert Scale5: “Select four or five reports”; 3: “Select three reports”; 1: “Select between two and none reports.” Q32-Q33Likert Scale1: “Strongly disagree”; 2: “Disagree”; 3: “Neither agree nor disagree”; 4: “Agree”; 5: “Strongly agree”

Dimension	Items	Scale
Strategic	Q1. The company has a defined mission, describing what it does, how it does it, and why.Q2. The company has described in its vision how it sees itself within the next few years. Q3. The company has a series of established values within its organizational culture. Q4. In developing strategic planning, analytical tools are used to create strategic diagnoses. Q5. The objectives of the company and the strategies to achieve them have been previously defined. Q6. The company has a strategic map or a system similar to a balanced scorecard. Q7. All company levels know the mission, vision, and balanced scorecard if any. Q8. The management, support, and operational teams generate their action plans according to what is defined in the balanced scorecard or a general indicator. Q9. Periodic follow-ups are developed to review the key performance indicators defined in the strategic planning. Q10. Multiple evaluation methods measure the fulfillment of the goals or objectives (indicators). Q11. Corrective or improvement actions are performed according to the results obtained in reviewing the fulfillment of the goals or objectives. Q12. Management and senior executives promote ownership of strategic planning throughout the organization. Q13. The company has a stimulus or incentive program that promotes the achievement of the objectives. Q14. The company uses analytical tools to identify its critical competitive factors. Q15. Internal regulations and company conduct codes are part of its internal policy. Q16. The company has defined policies for designing and complying with its strategic planning. Q17. There are resource allocation systems for the operation of the company, its functional areas, and the projects to be executed.	Q1-Q5, Q7-Q17Likert Scale1: “Strongly disagree”; 2: “Disagree”; 3: “Neither agree nor disagree”; 4: “Agree”; 5: “Strongly agree” Q65: “Yes”; 1: “No.”
Tactical - Operational	Q18. The decision-making process is decentralized in the company. Q19. The organization has identified the fundamental processes of its value chain. Q20. Internal processes are constantly evaluated to procure efficiency and effectiveness. Q21. The company works on the potential of people through training, assigning goals, strengthening relationships, and creating an internal leadership culture. Q22. Meetings are scheduled between leaders and their teams to monitor the planning and make joint decisions.	Q18-Q29Likert Scale1: “Strongly disagree”; 2: “Disagree”; 3: “Neither agree nor disagree”; 4: “Agree”; 5: “Strongly agree” Q29Likert Scale5: “Select all four stages”; 3: “Select two or three stages”; 1: “Select one or none stages”
		Q23. The functional area leaders communicate their overall results to their teams.
		Q24. Senior management meets with the leaders of the functional areas to review the planning results and define joint strategies to achieve the objectives. Q25. The company defines the annual budget and controls the internal budget for each functional area. Q26. The functional areas define their profitability projections and monitor the results achieved periodically. Q27. There is a system of indicators to monitor the management in developing the projects. Q28. For projects, there are defined activities for supervision and control of processes within a plan or system that guarantee their management or implementation. Q29. The projects developed by the company are based on a measurement system of indicators related to multiple stages (select all that apply): Stage I. Design / Planning, Stage II. Execution / Construction, Stage III. Sale / Delivery, and Stage IV. Customer Satisfaction.
Economic	Q30. From its financial perspective, the company uses the following indicators (select all that apply): (1) Liquidity index, (2) Debt index, (3) Return on equity, (4) Return on assets, (5) Interest coverage ratio, (6) Working capital, and (7) Total operating assets. Q31. Within its financial perspective, the company uses the following reports (select all that apply): (1) a balance sheet, (2) an income statement, (3) a statement of changes in equity, (4) a statement of changes in financial position, and (5) a statement of cash flows. Q32. The company performs a sensitivity analysis on the results obtained from the financial reports for decision-making. Q33. The company performs risk analysis on the results obtained from the financial reports for decision-making.	Q30Likert Scale5: “Select between five or seven indicators”; 3: “Select between three and four indicators”; 1: “Select between two and none indicators.” Q31Likert Scale5: “Select four or five reports”; 3: “Select three reports”; 1: “Select between two and none reports.” Q32-Q33Likert Scale1: “Strongly disagree”; 2: “Disagree”; 3: “Neither agree nor disagree”; 4: “Agree”; 5: “Strongly agree”

The assessment structure covers aspects of the strategic dimension (Q1 to Q17), followed by inquiries related to the tactical-operational dimension (Q18 to Q29), and concludes with respondents considering questions on the economic dimension (Q30 to Q33). Specifically, we aim to evaluate long-term planning and decision-making within the strategic dimension. This evaluation includes the goals, formulations, policies, and strategies to implement systems that monitor progress toward the organization’s objectives. In the tactical-operational dimension, our focus is on short-term planning and execution, with control systems in place to monitor and manage day-to-day activities, allocate resources, and coordinate the efforts of various departments and teams. For the economic dimension, we aim to evaluate the use of control systems to monitor and manage costs and budgets. This valuation includes using budgeting and accounting systems to track spending, monitor performance, and make decisions based on financial information.

4 Data analysis and results

The findings of this research are initially presented as descriptive statistics, summarizing each HMCS dimension and firm. These summary statistics are then further explored using inferential statistical methods for deeper analysis. We begin the assessment results breakdown with the overall results of the interview questions, followed by the firm’s overall empirical performance. Figure 1 presents the rank-ordered average results and their respective standard deviations for the questions disseminated by dimension. The results show that Q10 and Q13 are the lowest-ranked in the strategic dimension. These questions pertain respectively to the use of multiple evaluation methods to measure the fulfillment of goals or objectives and the presence of a stimulus or incentive program that promotes the achievement of these objectives. Within the tactical-operational dimension, the lowest score belongs to Q18, which inquires whether the decision-making process is decentralized in the company. Finally, for the economic dimension, Q31 received the lowest rating. This question asks about the utilization of various financial reports.

Fig. 1

Overall results for interviews questions.

Table 2 summarizes the average results and associated standard deviations from the questionnaire for each HMCS dimension. Here, descriptive statistics reveal that the strategic dimension registers the highest average overall performance (4.28). The tactical-operational dimension (4.11) and, notably, the economic dimension (3.82) yield relatively lower scores. Figure 2 harmonizes this valuation and offers two perspectives on the data: (1) the overall rank-ordered rating of each firm and (2) the collective average valuation of the HMCS dimensions. Upon analysis of performance per firm, F4 outperforms with a peak score of 5, whereas F9 trails with the lowest score of 1.97.

Table 2

HMCS dimensions overall results

No	Firm ID	Rank-position participant	Strategic	Tactical operational	Economic	Overall (Std)
1	F1	Vice general manager	4.35 (1.46)	4.75 (0.62)	3.5 (1)	4.39 (1.2)
2	F2	Director	4.24 (0.66)	3.25 (1.06)	3 (1.41)	3.73 (1.04)
3	F3	Site manager	4.71 (0.69)	4.75 (0.87)	5 (0)	4.76 (0.71)
4	F4	Operations director	5 (0)	5 (0)	5 (0)	5 (0)
5	F5	Director	4.06 (0.75)	4 (0.6)	3 (1.41)	3.91 (0.84)
6	F6	Site manager	3.88 (0.78)	3.5 (0.67)	3.75 (1.5)	3.73 (0.84)
7	F7	Manager	4.71 (0.77)	4.75 (0.62)	4 (1.15)	4.64 (0.78)
8	F8	Projects director	4.59 (0.51)	4.5 (0.67)	4 (2)	4.48 (0.83)
9	F9	Manager	2.41 (1.46)	1.42 (0.51)	1.75 (0.96)	1.97 (1.21)
10	F10	General manager	4.59 (0.51)	4.5 (0.67)	4 (2)	4.48 (0.83)
11	F11	Director	4.59 (0.71)	4.83 (0.39)	5 (0)	4.73 (0.57)
Overall (Std)			4.28 (1.06)	4.11 (1.2)	3.82 (1.47)

Fig. 2

Overall HMCS dimensions rating.

In our assessment, we presume each dimension contributes an equal proportion (33.3%) to the overall HMCS performance. This assumption implies that if a firm fully meets the requirements in a specific dimension, it would contribute its maximum proportion (33.33%) to the overall performance. Figure 3 depicts the percentage of dimension completion per firm, specifically illustrating its contribution to the overall HMCS performance (ranging from 1% to 33.3%) and the completion rate within the dimension itself (ranging from 1% to 100%). From the aggregate data across all firms, we observe that the strategic dimension exhibits the highest completion rate at 85.60% (of a possible 100%), which translates to 28.50% (of a possible 33.3%) of the total HMCS performance. Conversely, the economic dimension records the lowest completion rate at 76.40%, corresponding to just 25.50% of the overall performance.

Fig. 3

Overall HMCS performance proportional to completion.

A two-way ANOVA was conducted to evaluate the association between firms and the HMCS dimensions. This analysis examines whether the average performances (measured through the questions’ results) across the various dimensions and firms are the same. According to the results displayed in Table 3, both ‘Dimension’ and ‘Firm’ were statistically significant, as their p-values were less than the chosen significance level of 0.05.

Table 3

ANOVA results

Variable	Df	Sum Sq	Mean Sq	F-value	p-value*
Dimension	2	342	171.1	3.772	0.024
Firm	10	13163	1316.3	29.020	<0.00001

^*p-values with a P < 0.05 threshold for significance.

The ‘Dimension’ variable had a p-value of 0.024. This finding suggests that at least one of the HMCS dimensions (strategic, tactical-operational, or economic) significantly affects the performance indicators. This result denotes that the performance results differ significantly across these three dimensions. The ‘Firm’ variable had a p-value of less than 0.00001, which means that the performance also significantly differs across the firms under study. This outcome indicates that the performance varies from one firm to another. These findings are critical as they validate the relevance of both the firm and the dimension in assessing performance within the context of HMCS. They highlight that individual firm characteristics and the specific HMCS dimensions significantly influence the performance indicators. Based on the significant ANOVA results, a Tukey post-hoc test was conducted. This test is used to make pairwise comparisons between the levels of the significant factors (in this case, the ‘Dimension’ and ‘Firm’) to ascertain precisely where the differences lie. The post-hoc test results would help us understand more granular details like which specific dimensions perform better than others and which specific firms outperform or underperform compared to others.

The Tukey post-hoc test is a multiple comparison procedure used to determine which groups are significantly different from each other after a significant result in an ANOVA test. The Tukey test calculates a critical difference (known as the Tukey HSD or Honest Significant Difference) for each pairwise comparison based on the distribution of the studentized range statistic, which accounts for the number of means being compared and the variability within the groups. The test involves comparing the absolute difference between each pair of means to the critical difference to determine which are significantly different. In the evaluation, if zero falls in the range of the difference determined by a lower and an upper bound. We conclude that there is no significant difference between the compared pairs. The resulting p-value will be larger than the threshold value (fail to reject the null of equal means) set in the evaluation. If zero does not fall in the interval range, the p-value will be less than the threshold (reject the null of equal means).

Table 4 presents Tukey’s pairwise significant results (p-value <0.05) from the firms’ comparisons. Figure 4 illustrates the Tukey results for the dimensions (i.e., S: Strategic, T: Tactical-Operational, and E: Economic), denoting the only significant difference in this pairwise analysis is between the strategic (S) and the economic (E) dimensions.

Table 4

Tukey results for firms

Pair	HSD	Lower bound	Upper bound	p-value^*
F2-F1	–7.2	–12.5	–1.9	0.0007
F5-F1	–6.2	–11.5	–0.9	0.0083
F6-F1	–7.8	–13.0	–2.5	0.0002
F9-F1	–16.7	–22.0	–11.4	<0.0001
F2-F10	–6.9	–12.2	–1.7	0.0013
F5-F10	–5.9	–11.2	–0.6	0.0142
F6-F10	–7.5	–12.8	–2.2	0.0003
F9-F10	–16.4	–21.7	–11.1	<0.0001
F2-F11	–9.2	–14.5	–3.9	<0.0001
F5-F11	–8.2	–13.5	–2.9	<0.0001
F6-F11	–9.8	–15.1	–4.5	<0.0001
F9-F11	–18.7	–24.0	–13.4	<0.0001
F3-F2	9.9	4.6	15.2	<0.0001
F4-F2	12.1	6.8	17.4	<0.0001
F7-F2	8.6	3.3	13.9	<0.0001
F8-F2	6.9	1.7	12.2	0.0013
F9-F2	–9.5	–14.8	–4.2	<0.0001
F5-F3	–8.9	–14.2	–3.6	<0.0001
F6-F3	–10.5	–15.7	–5.2	<0.0001
F9-F3	–19.4	–24.7	–14.1	<0.0001
F5-F4	–11.1	–16.4	–5.8	<0.0001
F6-F4	–12.7	–18.0	–7.4	<0.0001
F9-F4	–21.6	–26.9	–16.3	<0.0001
F7-F5	7.6	2.3	12.9	<0.0001
F8-F5	5.9	0.6	11.2	0.0142
F9-F5	–10.5	–15.8	–5.2	<0.0001
F7-F6	9.2	3.9	14.5	<0.0001
F8-F6	7.5	2.2	12.8	0.0003
F9-F6	–8.9	–14.2	–3.6	<0.0001
F9-F7	–18.1	–23.4	–12.8	<0.0001
F9-F8	–16.4	–21.7	–11.1	<0.0001

^*p-values with a P < 0.05 threshold for significance.

Fig. 4

Tukey results for HMCS dimensions.

From the Tukey post-hoc test results, it is evident that there are significant differences in HMCS performance among various pairs of firms. The test reveals a significant disparity in several pair comparisons, with a p-value of less than 0.05 in each case, indicating that these differences are statistically significant and unlikely due to chance. Results show that corrective recommendations for HMCS performance primarily need to ascertain the economic dimension for most firms since this is the lowest in both the completion and contribution and, more importantly, is significantly different from the strategic dimension (see Fig. 4). This inference implies that strategic management is unconnected to firms’ economic approaches. Counteractive practices must also consider essential strategic and tactical-operational combinations in specific cases, as shown predominantly for firms F2, F5, F6, and notably F9 (see Table 4), as their negative HSD values indicate. These need to focus also on addressing capacity utilization and labor force supervision.

5 Discussion and recommendation plan

COVID-19 has significantly impacted our personal and professional life. Earlier held general perceptions of construction sites’ personal and capacity management have been challenged notoriously in DCs such as Colombia. Therefore, this research aimed to explore how this major shift affects how work is performed on-site amidst the pandemic based on HMCS dimensions—eventually indicating the labor force’s difficulties and how to address them in the construction workplace. This study thoroughly refers to various economic factors and personnel interventions for higher productivity in the current work format of construction projects in a primary city of Colombia, Barranquilla. At the same time, one of the objectives of personnel interventions is to work sharper but not more challenging for higher productivity. The advantage of HMCS approaches is that the procedure allows matching the objectives of the business with proper personnel management of employees and installed capacity. We are the first to develop this type of study using extensive interviews with top management on-site in this subject matter.

According to the data analysis, most firms’ HMCS economic dimension assessments returned the lowest scores. This study initially proposed general correction measures using the data collected in this area. Overall, Q31 presents the lowest valuation; this question refers to the firms’ utilization of financial reports, including balance sheets, income statements, changes in equity, financial position reports, and cash flow accounts. Most firms selected between one to three types of reports since these are essential for functioning. However, extenuating conditions such as the one during the post-COVID-19 require a higher level of control and monitoring of financial resources as these are crucial assets to business survival. We recommended incentivizing the use of financial reports (as described in the question) to achieve a higher level of control over the financial resources.

The HMCS economic evaluation focuses on assessing the level of financial monitoring embraced within the firms. The economic-financial states’ research and analysis are relevant for determining the condition of available resources, operating costs, and credit needs [20 , 23]. In this perspective, Q30 is the subsequent question with the lowest score within this dimension. This inquiry focused on the financial indicators of the firms, including liquidity and debt indexes, return on equity, return on assets, interest coverage ratio, working capital, and total operating assets. As a general recommendation for the economic dimension, firms should emphasize improving the design, utilization, evaluation, and control of the depicted critical financial reports and indicators since these are fundamental to adequately managing the available resources.

While evaluating the tactical-operational dimension, the analysis identified pivotal issues related to Q18 and Q21. These refer to the decentralized decision-making process and the firm’s influence on individual behavior and organizational commitment. If day-by-day operational practices are heavily centralized timely decisions can take longer to execute and thus affecting the efficiency of the operation [24, 28]. The study found that most firms remain comprehensively centralized in all decision-making procedures, thus influencing the labor force’s individual behavior and organizational commitment as operational staff members and managers might not be considered successful internal and external contributors to the operation.

As part of the recommendations in this dimension, the critical improvements should focus on decentralizing project activities and discussing operational plans with managers and the based labor force. To improve organizational commitment, leading firm directors ought to communicate and engage their subordinates in strategic and tactical-operational issues [40 –43]. Consequently, a weak communication thread between top management and other employees results in incomprehension, time overruns, and other related issues. As communication is interacting with others by conveying a message, good communication involves effectively communicating the statement that the concerned recipients understand [44], which must be a substantially critical attribute in the management shift consequence of the pandemic.

In the strategic dimension, the examination identified issues related to using indicators and analytical tools to evaluate the completion of the goals (Q10 and Q14) and stimulus or incentive programs for personnel to achieve the objectives (Q13). For this case, restrictions in terms of budget and investment in information systems for DCs affect the follow-up of activities performed by employees and the consecution of financial incentives or comprehensive training programs. While these budget limitations are certain for DCs, incentive programs or indicators assessments do not necessarily mean significant investments. Issues with the learning curve and lack of skilled personnel, high implementation cost, the reluctance of other stakeholders, lack of collaborative work processes and modeling standards, interoperability, and lack of legal/contractual agreements considerably affect the strategic goals [45]. We recommended implementing short-term indicators (such as recalling the number of days or hours taken to perform a significant activity on-site) to evaluate the completion of project goals and incentive programs that conduct internal recognition of the labor force. These do not necessarily need to translate into monetary compensation but could also include another valid acknowledgment form (e.g., diploma, certificate) to encourage employees’ commitment and, therefore, productivity.

The findings of this study show that there is a potential opening for improvement in construction settings. HMCS training helps lower extenuating working circumstances for employees and top on-site management. Enhancing HMCS dimensions knowledge can play a vital role in empowering the labor force to mitigate the current pandemic’s strong negative impact on the industry. In our data analysis, communication with employees about long and short-term plans in conjunction with centralized decision-making was identified as critical to construction firms’ endurance; then, increased communication awareness is required to empower workers to make positive changes in their work environment. As the pandemic continues to impact the scopes of work and life and it causes disturbances for workers around the globe, there is a compelling case that better and more prolific workplaces will not only benefit workers’ well-being but may also be financially beneficial to organizations [7]. Providing improved support for their employees and incentives could reduce downtime and, in turn, increase productivity and capacity utilization.

Considering the ongoing post-pandemic setting and its continual nature, the present study recommends that construction firms benefit from this study if they follow these few tactical suggestions: 1) Strengthen internal business communication through a plan to promote and disseminate strategic direction, values, and corporate governance policies to the labor force. 2) Design an incentive program related to compliance with the indicators, promoting participation, and proposals to improve business processes. 3) Define a schedule and monitor indicators in short-term strategic planning. 4) Identify the critical success factors with a market study aimed at the external customer. 5) Include indicators to monitor operational and procedural results within the firm’s dashboard. 6) Identify staff training needs and design a training plan. 7) Impact on decentralized decisions when there is greater confidence in employees’ thinking and organizational culture. 8) Review and analyze the importance of implementing additional financial indicators. 9) Perform financial, sensitivity, and risk analyses that provide a holistic view of the organization for decision-making.

While we provided general assessments during the implementation, it is necessary to translate these recommendations into a plan of action for construction firms in DCs, specifically in Colombia, as the objective is to offer effective corrective plans that can be applied on-site and that encompass the overall organization including administrators and employees satisfaction. To exemplify the nature of the project’s development in the city, we were provided tours on-site of current projects. We collected some visual evidence of these in the firms; this evidence, in conjunction with the results from the interviews, allowed us to design an action plan focused on addressing the labor force and installed capacity to improve productivity on-site. Figure 5 presents the organigram plan disseminated by strategies and recommended actions for the firms. The program facilitates the translation of management recommendations given HMCS dimensions performance.

Fig. 5

HMCS plan.

6 Concluding remarks

The present study shows in depth the practical assessment in terms of appropriate HMCS management of employees and installment in construction firms in DCs, specifically in Colombia. Numerous potential sources of low efficiency and minimal control of resources were identified, including lack of communication with employees, lack of recognition systems, centralized decision-making, and disconnection between long and short-term objectives with the financial requirements of the business. Construction firms must ensure workers understand the project goals adequately and be empowered to make on-site decisions. In addition, organizations should link their strategic business goals with the economic requirements of the current post-pandemic context.

In general, the construction industry of DCs has long-standing issues and cost overruns that were intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the effect of organizational structure and HMCS influencing these overruns have been neglected in construction firms. Given the results of this study, it can be inferred that top management support-related features strongly influence minimizing the pandemic’s effects on Colombia’s residential construction firms. Top management should provide adequate support and strong communication to technical and operational staff members and convey activities for efficient and practicable goals. Strict financial indicators and reports need to intensify economic control.

In the evolving field of research combining the COVID-19 post-pandemic context with HMCS, our study emerges as an innovative stride, aiming to set the foundation for in-depth explorations into HMCS applications in DCs. Our work is one of the few investigations that underline the significance of the challenges of the construction sector’s labor force in the aftermath of the pandemic. We believe our study carries unparalleled importance for construction firms. It can potentially be a pivotal influence in transforming the form in which management is conducted on-site in construction projects.

Author contributions

CONCEPTION: Chams-Anturi and Soto-Ferrari

METHODOLOGY: Soto-Ferrari

DATA COLLECTION: Chams-Anturi

INTERPRETATION OR ANALYSIS OF DATA: Soto-Ferrari

PREPARATION OF THE MANUSCRIPT: Soto-Ferrari, Chams-Anturi

REVISION FOR IMPORTANT INTELLECTUAL CONTENT: Soto-Ferrari and Chams-Anturi

SUPERVISION: Soto-Ferrari

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the participants in this interview study who collaborated enormously with their time and dedication to answer the questions.

References

Iqbal

, Ahmad

, Waqas

, Abrar

. COVID-19 pandemic and construction industry: Impacts, emerging construction safety practices, and proposed crisis management. Brazilian J Oper Prod Manag. 2021;18(2):1–17.

Breman

. The pandemic in India and its impact on footloose labour. Indian J Labour Econ. 2020;63(4):901–19.

Jha

, Kumar

. Labour in India and the COVID-19 Pandemic. Indian Econ J. 2020;68(3):417–37.

Robb

, Kang

, Stephens

. The effects of dynamism, relational capital, and ambidextrous innovation on the supply chain resilience of US firms amid COVID-19. Oper Supply Chain Manag Int J. 2022;19(1):1–16.

ILO. COVID-19 and the world of work: Impact and policy responses. 2021. Available from: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/—dcomm/documents/briefingnote/wcms_767028.pdf

Montoya-Torres

, Muñoz-Villamizar

, Mejia-Argueta

. Mapping research in logistics and supply chain management during COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Logist Res Appl. 2021;26(4):421–41.

Ahmed

, Qamar

, Soomro

. Ergonomic work from home and occupational health problems amid COVID-19. Hum Syst Manag. 2022;41(5):535–51.

Khanchel

. Measuring innovative practices for workplace safety, health and well-being in Tunisia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hum Syst Manag. 2022;41(2):211–20.

, Lim

, Zhang

. Women workforce in construction during the COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and strategies. Constr Econ Build. 2021;21(4):38–59.

10.

Ogunnusi

, Hamma-Adama

, Salman

, Kouider

. COVID-19 pandemic: The effects and prospects in the construction industry. Int J Real Estate Stud. 2020;14(2):120–8.

11.

Amoah

, Berbegal-Mirabent

, Marimon

. Making the management of a project successful: Case of construction projects in developing countries. J Constr Eng Manag. 2021;147(12):04021166.

12.

Hofman

. Economic growth and performance in Latin America. Ser Reformas Econ. 2000;54:1–44.

13.

Musgrove

. The economic crisis and its impact on health and health care in latin america and the caribbean. Int J Heal Serv. 1987;17(3):411–41.

14.

Shank

, Govindarajan

. Strategic cost management: The new tool for competitive advantage. Simon and Schuster. 1993.

15.

Kaplan

, Norton

. The strategy-focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Harvard Bus Press. 2001.

16.

Chams-Anturi

, Soto-Ferrari

, Gomez

, Escorcia-Caballero

, Romero-Rodriguez

, Casile

. A comprehensive business process management application to evaluate and improve the importations practices on big-box stores. Oper Supply Chain Manag. 2022;15(2):164–73.

17.

Liviu

, Sorina

, Radu

. Strategic control and performance measurement systems. Ann Univ Oradea, Econ Sci Ser. 2008;17(4):189–94.

18.

Bohórquez

. Strategic and organizational control systems. Critics and chanllenges. Rev Ciencias Estratégicas. 2011;19(26):307–22.

19.

Transparency International. Corruption perception index. 2021. Available from: www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021/index/col

20.

Simons

. Levers of control. How managers use innovative control systems to drive strategic renewal. Bost Harvard Bus Sch Press. 1995.

21.

Nogueira

, Hernández

, Negrín

. Control de gestión: Dimensiones y diagnostico permanente. Rev Ing Ind. 2002;24(1):28–33.

22.

Caballero

. Sistema de control de proyectos de construcción de vivienda usando indicadores clave. Tesis Dr Univ Cataluña, España. 2016.

23.

Nogueira

, López

, Medina

, Hernández

. Balanced scorecard in an engineering construction company. Rev Ing Construcción. 2014;29(2):201–14.

24.

Davila

, Foster

. Management control systems in early-stage startup companies. Account Rev. 2007;82(4):907–37.

25.

Gómez-Ruiz

, Naranjo-Gil

, Álvarez-Dardet

. Management control system use and team commitment. Work Pap, Univ Pablo Olavide. 2011;1–34.

26.

Al-Reshaid

, Kartman

, Tewari

, Al-Bader

. A project control process in pre-construction phases: Focus on effective methodology. Eng Constr Archit Manag. 2005;12(4):351–72.

27.

, Moselhi

, Alkass

. Internet-based database management system for project control. Eng Constr Archit Manag. 2006;13(3):242–53.

28.

Pellicer

, Pellicer

, Catalá

. An integraed control system for SMEs in the construction industry. Rev la Construcción. 2009;8(2):4–17.

29.

Henri

, Journeault

. Eco-control: The influence of management control systems on environmental and economic performance. Accounting, Organ Soc. 2010;35(1):63–80.

30.

Langevin

, Mendoza

. How can management control system fairness reduce managers’ unethical behaviours? Eur Manag J. 2013;31(3):209–22.

31.

Efferin

, Frisko

, Hartanto

. Management control system, leadership and gender ideology: A study of an Indonesian construction company. J Account Emerg Econ. 2016;6(4):314–39.

32.

Hosoda

. Management control systems and corporate social responsibility: Perspectives from a Japanese small company. Corp Gov Int J Bus Soc. 2018;18(1):68–80.

33.

Martin

. An evolutionary approach to management control systems research: A prescription for future research. Accounting, Organ Soc. 2020;86:101186.

34.

Felício

, Samagaio

, Rodrigues

. Adoption of management control systems and performance in public sector organization. J Bus Res. 2021;124:593–602.

35.

Chen

, Jiao

, Harrison

. Transformational leadership and management control systems in human service not-forprofit organizations. Financ Account Manag. 2022.

36.

Camacol. Informe de Gestión 2019–2020. Camacol. 2020. Available from: https://camacol.co/sites/default/files/descargables/InformedeGestión2019-2020.pdf

37.

Fedesarrollo. Centro de Investigación Económica y Social. 2021. Available from: https://www.fedesarrollo.org.co/

38.

Camacol. Directorio de Afiliados. Camacol. 2022. Available at: https://camacolatlantico.org/directorio-de-afiliados/

39.

Soto-Ferrari

, Chams-Anturi

. EcoMCS: A project management application through management control systems for residential construction firms in Colombia. Oper Supply Chain Manag. 2023;16:254–64.

40.

Bedford

. Management control systems across different modes of innovation: Implications for firm performance. Manag Account Res. 2015;28:12–30.

41.

Speklé

, Van Elten

, Widener

. Creativity and control: A paradox. Evidence from the levers of control framework. Behav Res Account. 2017;29(2):73–96.

42.

, Baird

, Schoch

. The moderating effect of organisational life cycle stages on the association between the interactive and diagnostic approaches to using controls with organisational performance. Manag Account Res. 2015;26:40–53.

43.

Chams-Anturi

, Gomez

, Escorcia-Caballero

, Soto-Ferrari

. Assessing organizational behavior: A case study in a colombian retail store. Ibima Bus Rev. 2020;1–12.

44.

Irfan

, Malik

, Khel

. Effect of factors of organizational structure influencing nonphysical waste in road projects of developing countries. Eng Constr Archit Manag. 2020;27(10):3135–53.

45.

Olanrewaju

, Chileshe

, Babarinde

, Sandanayake

. Investigating the barriers to building information modeling (BIM) implementation within the Nigerian construction industry. Eng Constr Archit Manag. 2020;27(10):2931–58.