随着项目越来越复杂，关注供应链成为保证项目成功的一项至关重要的活动。权力和信任在供应链中起到非常重要的作用，因而得到了较长时间的研究。有研究表明，权力和信任在某种程度上是相互关联的，权力的使用通常会影响信任。本论文旨在更多地了解如何在基于项目的供应链中将权力用作建立信任的有效媒介，从而提高合作伙伴之间的整体协作有效性。为了检验在基于项目的供应链中权力和信任是否显著影响协作有效性，本论文首先进行了文献回顾，并据此提出了5个假设。使用语言的版本和作为集成开发环境，对26个测量项目和7个构念进行验证性因子分析，以验证所提出的假设。使用SPSS 27.0 进行了部分效度验证。问卷调查的样本量为116人，有效回复率为61.38%。结果表明，非中介权力（由专家、信息和参照权力形成）与基于项目的供应链中的信任和整体协作有效性正相关。同时，中介权力（由强制权力、奖励权力和法律权力形成）在信任与整体合作有效性之间没有显著关系。最后，将本研究的结果与以前的研究进行了比较，讨论了本研究的局限性，对未来研究提出了若干建议。
As projects become more complex over time, focusing on their supply chain becomes a crucial activity for their success. Power and trust have long been studied in supply chain research, as they play an important role in the supply chain’s success. There is research indicating that power and trust are somehow interrelated, and the use of the former usually leads to the other. This thesis intends to understand more about how power can be used as an effective medium of building trust in project-based supply chains, and therefore, increase the overall collaboration effectiveness between partners.To test whether power and trust have a significant impact on collaboration effectiveness of project-based supply chains, a literature review was done, where 5 hypotheses were proposed. The hypotheses were tested using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with 26 measurement items and 7 constructs using R version 4.1.2 and RStudio as the Integrated Development Environment (IDE). Additional validity tests was done using SPSS version 27.0. Sample size was 116 individuals completing the web survey with a 61.38% completion rate. The results indicate that non-mediated power (formed by expert, information, and referent power) is positively related to trust and overall collaboration effectiveness in project-based supply chains. Meanwhile, mediated power (formed by coercive, reeward, and legal legitimate power) did not show a significant relation between trust and overall collaboration effectiveness.At the end of this thesis, the findings from this study are compared with previous studies. The limitations of this study are discussed along with suggestions for future research.
