See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/356657893

Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a

design decision framework

Article in Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing · November 2021

DOI: 10.1007/s12652-021-03610-1

CITATIONS READS

33 6,752

3 authors, including:

Ferda Özdemir Sönmez Salar Ahmadisheykhsarmast

Imperial College London Middle East Technical University
29 PUBLICATIONS 165 CITATIONS 12 PUBLICATIONS 339 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Salar Ahmadisheykhsarmast on 16 December 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-021-03610-1

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases

and a design decision framework
Rifat Sonmez1 · Ferda Özdemir Sönmez2 · Salar Ahmadisheykhsarmast1

Received: 26 May 2021 / Accepted: 18 November 2021

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
Blockchain presents a novel technology for improving existing paradigms in a wide span of domains, including project
management. In this paper, we first review the state of the art blockchain use cases in project management to reveal the
current status of blockchain research and to identify the blockchain application domains in project management. We then
present a framework based on the review results, to guide implementers and researchers on blockchain design decisions about
privacy, transparency, decentralization, blockchain type, and platform decisions, which are unique for a particular project
management domain. The review results indicate that blockchain includes a variety of unique properties simultaneously, and
presents multiple contributions for management of projects. However, technical blockchain design decisions are crucial for
maximizing the benefits of the blockchain systems. The proposed novel framework enables a structured methodology for
resolving crucial technical design decisions for maximizing the benefits of blockchain systems in project management and
the review provides directions to the new blockchain research.

Keywords Blockchain technology · Project management · Design decision framework

1 Introduction the blockchain. Developments in the blockchain technology

have led to the discovery of smart contracts, which are com-
In recent years, blockchain has emerged as a revolutionary puterized protocols whose execution is guaranteed through
technology and has received interest across a wide span of a code that runs on the decentralized blockchain. A smart
sectors (Hughes et al. 2019). Blockchain was originally contract enables automated execution of contract clauses
developed to record transactions across a peer-to-peer net- without requiring any trusted intermediaries.
work of computers (nodes). In a blockchain, the transactions The unique features of blockchain enables major
are recorded on a distributed ledger, which are secured using advantages for development of decentralized applications
a cryptographic proof. New transactions are added to the (Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez 2020). Blockchain
blockchain according to a decentralized consensus protocol. presents serious disruptions to the traditional business pro-
The decentralized consensus protocol, which enables execu- cesses, which is mainly based on centralized architectures
tion of transactions without the need of a central authority, is requiring trusted third parties (Casino et al. 2019). In par-
one of the major innovations of the blockchain technology. ticular, smart contract technology promise a major potential
In a blockchain, data is held on all of the nodes at the to reshape conventional industry and business processes as
same time, which eliminates a single point of failure. Dis- they can decrease administration and service costs, improve
tributed storage of the ledger through cryptographic proof efficiency, and enhance trust among stakeholders by provid-
and decentralized consensus protocol ensures the security of ing a decentralized trustless automated system (Zheng et al.
2020).
* Rifat Sonmez The applications of blockchain for financial services
[email protected] (Ali et al. 2020), construction (Li et al. 2019, Hunhevicz
and Hall 2020), operations and supply chain (Wamba
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical and Queiroz 2020), energy (Poptawski and Szczypior-
University, 06531 Cankaya, Ankara, Turkey
ski 2018), manufacturing (Kawaguchi 2019), government
2
Institute for Security Science and Technology, Imperial (Ølnes et al. 2017), and public sectors (Warkentin and
College, London, UK

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 R. Sonmez et al.

Orgeron 2020) were included in the previous research. Har- The blockchains can be classified as public, consortium,
gaden et al. (2019) provided insights into the adoption of and fully private blockchains (Buterin 2015). In public
blockchain technology in the construction industry. Hewav- blockchains, anyone can participate in the consensus pro-
itharana et al. (2019) sought to identify how blockchain cess and the blockchain is usually made publicly available
can address purchase management, contract management, to ensure the transparency, accessibility, and stability of the
asset and inventory management, finance management and transactions. Consortium blockchains on the other hand,
subcontractor management in the construction industry. enable only a number of few permissioned nodes to par-
Kim et al. (2020) mentioned the potential of blockchain to ticipate in the consensus. In fully private blockchains, the
improve project management practices. However, very lim- new blocks are usually verified and added by only one node.
ited research has focused on the state-of-the-art of block- Hence, private blockchains are centralized, and consortium
chain applications in project management. Hence, within blockchains are partially decentralized. The right to read the
this context, the first objective of this paper is to fill this gap, blockchain may be public or restricted in consortium and
and to provide a systematic review and analysis of the state- private blockchains.
of-art blockchain research in project management, mainly Blockchain enabled development of smart contract tech-
focusing on the use cases. Along with the review, a tax- nology, which was first proposed by Szabo (1996). Smart
onomy of blockchain applications is identified and contribu- contracts are computerized transaction protocols that
tions of blockchain in project management are determined. implement the terms of a contract. Once a smart contract
The design of the blockchain system is among the key is deployed on the decentralized blockchain, it cannot be
technical factors impacting adoption of blockchain technolo- modified or cancelled by anyone. The agreed terms are auto-
gies (Janssen et al. 2020). The second objective of the paper matically executed by the smart contract without requiring a
is to present a decision framework based on the review find- third party. Hence, smart contracts enable a trustful system
ings, to guide implementers and researchers on technical for guaranteed execution of contract terms, which present
design decisions for maximizing the benefits of blockchain a major potential to eliminate or reduce some of the issues
applications in project management. Along with the review that prevents successful completion of projects such as; dis-
and the framework, future research directions are suggested trust, fraud, and lack of transparency (Ahmadisheykhsarmast
to enhance adoption of blockchain in the project manage- et al. 2020). Blockchain and smart contracts also provide
ment domain. an efficient and secure alternative for project information
management.

2 Blockchain and smart contracts 3 Systematic literature review

Blockchain, which was originally introduced as a peer-to- The first objective of this paper is to perform a systematic
peer electronic cash system (Nakamoto 2008), is a distrib- review of the blockchain use cases in project management
uted database that is formed of a growing chain of records to identify the blockchain application domains, to determine
called blocks. Blockchain provides a globally consistent and contributions of blockchain in project management, and to
secure database and is secured by cryptographic proof. In form a basis for the framework. In this section the systematic
a blockchain, the nodes reach to an agreement on the new literature review methodology is described along with the
blocks through a decentralized consensus protocol. Once the initial findings of the review.
agreement is reached, the new blocks are broadcasted to the
nodes. Hence, all the nodes has always have the latest copy 3.1 Review methodology
of the blockchain in nearly real-time.
The most well known consensus protocol is the Proof-of- The systematic review methodology of Tranfield et al.
Work (PoW) in which nodes compete to solve a moderately (2003) is used as it presents a process that was mainly devel-
hard, but trivial-to-verify problem. The node that wins the oped for the management domain. The review methodology
competition is rewarded with incentives such as cryptocur- consists of three main stages; (1) planning the review, (2)
rencies (digital currency), after 51% or more nodes verify conducting the review and, (3) reporting and dissemination.
the solution. In recent years, Proof-of-Stake (PoS) protocol In the planning stage, first the scope of review is defined to
was proposed as an efficient, fast, and inexpensive consen- assess the relevance and size of the literature, and to specify
sus alternative. A PoS blockchain can achieve consensus the subject area. In this paper, the scope of review is defined
through a process in which each node can participate as a as the blockchain use cases in project management. Hence,
validator, according to the amount of the cryptocurrency it the keywords “blockchain” and “project management” are
holds (Buterin and Griffith 2017). identified for the search. The planning stage also requires

13
Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision…

development of a review protocol which is a crucial part cases were classified into the defined categories based on
of the systematic review to achieve a scientific, replicable, the review results. In the thematic analysis the text of the
and transparent process and to minimize the bias through an publications were examined to identify common themes on
exhaustive literature search (Tranfield et al. 2003). the project management knowledge areas and properties and
In the review protocol, three electronic, academic data- advantages of blockchain applications. Use cases were ana-
bases namely, Web of Science, Scopus, and ScienceDirect lyzed to determine the potential contributions of blockchain
were included. These databases provide complementary for project management. Finally, a framework is developed
bibliographic information of majority of the academic pub- based on the review findings to enable a structured method-
lications related to project management including journals, ology for resolving crucial technical design decisions during
books, and conference proceedings. All of the journal arti- implementation of blockchain systems in project manage-
cles, technical notes, discussions, books, book chapters, and ment. The research methodology is presented in Fig. 1.
conference proceedings were selected from the search results
without any publication time limit. Publications that do not 3.2 Identification and collection of use cases
include a specific use case in project management were not
included. In the review stage, the academic databases Web of Science,
Content analysis was employed to analyze the text in an Scopus, and ScienceDirect were searched using the com-
organized manner and to identify the patterns in the cur- bined keyword of “blockchain” and “project management”.
rent body of knowledge. The content analysis comprised of Thirty-four publications were identified from the Web of
descriptive analysis and category analysis of the use cases. Science database, 384 from Scopus, and 119 from Science-
The descriptive analysis included general information of Direct. However, majority of these publications consisted of
the selected sources. Categories were identified and the use duplicates and studies that are not related to the blockchain

Fig. 1  Research methodology

13
 R. Sonmez et al.

applications in project management. Conceptual studies that on the procedure proposed by Casino et al. (2019), was used
did not include a specific use case that is related to project to identify the categories and sub categories for the block-
management were also removed. Hence, a total of only 30 chain application domains in project management. Casino
publications were included according to the review protocol. et al. (2019) identified the main categories and sub catego-
Two of the publications included two different use cases, ries for general applications of blockchain. The general cat-
therefore 32 use cases were identified as shown in Fig. 1. egories included; financial, integrity verification, govern-
The methods used in the selected publications were clas- ance, internet of things, healthcare management, privacy
sified in four groups; (1) case study, (2) conceptual, (3) and security, business and industrial applications, educa-
framework, and (4) system. Case studies investigated the tion, data management, and miscellaneous applications. In
application of blockchain in project management using a this research main categories and sub categories that are
real-life example, and conceptual studies presented con- specific to blockchain applications in project management
cepts or ideas for the application of blockchain in project are identified.
management. In this research, a framework is defined as a Three main categories were determined based on the
context that presents a structure for a blockchain application. analysis of the reviewed literature, which were: informa-
Whereas, a system is defined as a blockchain application tion management (IM), payments (PY), and contract man-
formed from organized collection of parts that are highly agement (CM). Twenty-two use cases focused on solely to
integrated. All of the publications included at least one use information management and four case studies only included
case within the project management domain. payments domain. Three use cases included both payments
and contract management, two included both information
3.3 Descriptive analysis management and contract management, and one use case
focused on all three domains.
The publications included in the review consisted of one Eleven sub categories were identified for the application
book chapter, one discussion, eight conference proceedings, domains as follows: (1) supply chain management, (2) life
and 20 journal articles. The literature reviewed included one cycle management, (3) design, (4) environmental sustaina-
publication from food sciences and transportation sectors, bility, (5) quality management, (6) research management, (7)
two publications from information technology and research bidding, (8) financial transactions, (9) progress monitoring,
and development (R&D) sectors, three from energy, logis- (10) progress payments and, 11) security of payments. The
tics and manufacturing sectors, and 15 publications from sub categories life cycle management, design, environmen-
the construction sector. The methods of the publications tal sustainability, research management, bidding, progress
consisted of three conceptual studies, four case studies, monitoring were included for the use cases which solely
six systems, and 17 frameworks. The majority (17) of the focused on the information management category, and the
publications were published in 2020, nine in 2019, two in remaining sub categories were included for the use cases
2021 and two in 2018. The results of the descriptive analysis that are concentrating to multiple categories as shown in
indicate that majority of the blockchain applications (80%) Fig. 2. The numbers that are given in parentheses are the
in project management consist of conceptual studies, case numbers of use-cases classified under each sub category.
studies, and frameworks. Only few research has developed Seven use cases focused on the supply chain management
systems to reveal the real potentials of blockchain in pro- under the category information management as shown in
ject management. The publication year of the studies reveal Table 1. These use cases included an integrated blockchain
that the blockchain adoption in project management is at and distributed data storage model (Kawaguchi 2019), a
its very early stages. However, blockchain applications in smart contract design for logistics management (Yang et al.
project management are receiving increasing attention. The 2019), a blockchain architecture for project deliveries (Helo
construction industry is currently the leading sector in terms and Shamsuzzoha 2020), a blockchain and IoT framework
of considering the blockchain for the project management for supply chain network optimization (Kadadevaramth et al.
related tasks. On the other hand, majority of the sectors 2020), a blockchain based tracing anti-counterfeiting plat-
that use project management are also showing interest in form for supplier evaluation (Liu et al. 2020), a conceptual
blockchain.. framework for adoption of blockchain in construction supply
chains (Tezel et al. 2020), and a framework for improving
3.4 Taxonomy of blockchain applications in project supply chain information management in precast construc-
management tion (Wang et al. 2020)..
The sub category life cycle management ranked second
The 32 identified use cases were used to determine and ana- within the information management main category with
lyze the blockchain application domain categories in project four use cases; a single shared-access building information
management. An application-oriented classification based model (BIM) for whole asset life cycle uses (the first use

13
Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision…

Fig. 2  Main and sub categories

of use cases

Information Management
Supply chain management (7)
Life cycle management (4) Financial
Design (2) transactions (1)
Environmental sustainability (2) Quality Contract Management
Quality management (2) management (1)
Research management (2)
Bidding (1)
Financial transactions (1)
Progress monitoring (1)
Progress
Payments
(1)

Progress Payments (2)

Security of Payments (1)

Payments
Financial transactions (1)
Security of payments (1)
Supply chain management (1)
Progress payments (1)

Table 1  Use cases focusing solely to information management

Sub category (no.) Blockchain use case

Supply chain management (1) A data storage model (Kawaguchi 2019), an information management scheme (Yang et al. 2019), a pilot
system (Helo and Shamsuzzoha 2020), a blockchain and IoT framework (Kadadevaramth et al. 2020), an
anti-counterfeiting platform (Liu et al. 2020), a conceptual framework (Tezel et al. 2020), and a framework
for precast construction (Wang et al. 2020)
Life cycle management (2) A single shared-access BIM model (Li et al. 2019, first use case), a blockchain-aided BIM model (Liu et al.
2019), a blockchain and IoT based smart product-service (Li et al. 2021), and a framework for power com-
munication assets (Zhang et al. 2020)
Design (3) A framework for automating the design review process (Nawari and Ravindran 2019), and a blockchain
process for cladding design (Yang et al. 2020, first use case)
Environmental sustainability (4) A communication model for sustainable power investments (Poptawski and Szczypiorski 2018), and a frame-
work for green logistics (Tan et al. 2020)
Quality management (5) A system for managing quality information (Sheng et al. 2020), and a quality traceability framework (Zhang
et al. 2020)
Research management (6) A platform for information management of research projects (Lee and Yoon 2019), and a framework for food
sciences research management (Machado et al. 2020)
Bidding (7) A framework for secure online bidding (Sarfaraz et al. 2021)
Financial transactions (8) A platform to control and track financial transactions (Elghaish et al. 2020)
Progress monitoring (9) A platform for information management of research and development projects (Lee et al. 2020)

13
 R. Sonmez et al.

case in Li et al. 2019), a blockchain-aided BIM model for et al. 2020) and information management of research and
design coordination and collaboration in building life cycle development projects (Lee et al. 2020).
management (Liu et al. 2019), a blockchain and IoT based Each of the four use cases that focused solely to the pay-
smart framework for life cycle information management of ments category had different sub-categories as shown in
prefabricated housing construction (Li et al. 2021), and a Table 2. These use cases included a robotics process auto-
blockchain mechanism for life cycle management of power mation case study of a large technology firm within the
communication assets (Zhang et al. 2020). There were two financial transactions sub category (Carden et al. 2019),
use cases within the each sub categories of design, envi- a framework for blockchain based project bank accounts
ronmental sustainability, quality management, and research (second use case in Li et al. 2019) within the security of
management, under the category information management. payments sub category, a case study involving procure-
Nawari and Ravindran (2019) proposed a blockchain and ment of an equipment (Yang et al. 2020, second use case)
BIM framework for automating the design review process, within the supply chain management sub category, and a
and Yang et al. 2020 (in the first use case) presented a case conceptual design of a blockchain based payment system
study for blockchain integrated design of external clad- (Hamledari and Fischer 2021) within the progress pay-
ding for an apartment. Blockchain based smart contracts ments sub category. Three use cases were related to both
for sustainable power investments (Poptawski and Szczypi- payments and contract management categories. Luo et al.
orski 2018), and a blockchain-based framework for green (2019) presented a smart contract framework for automating
logistics (Tan et al. 2020) were the use cases within the sub construction progress payments, and Ye and König (2021)
category environmental sustainability. Sheng et al. (2020) proposed a framework for automated billing using BIM and
developed a system for construction quality information smart contracts within the progress payments sub category.
management and Zhang et al. (2020) proposed a quality Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez (2020) developed a
traceability framework for prefabricated buildings. The use decentralized application (DApp) for security of payment
cases under the information management category within of construction contracts within the security of payments sub
the research management sub category consisted of two category. There were two use cases involved with both infor-
platforms designed for information management of research mation management and contract management. Gürcan et al.
projects (Lee and Yoon 2019) and research management of (2018) presented a decentralized system for trusted energy
food sciences projects (Machado et al. 2020). There was only performance contracts within the financial transactions sub
one use case within each of the bidding, financial transac- category, and Abbas et al. (2020) suggested a blockchain
tion, and progress monitoring sub categories of the informa- knowledge-sharing platform for the maintenance of roll-
tion management main category. These use cases included a ing stock within the quality management sub category. The
framework for secure online bidding (Sarfaraz et al. 2021), final use case was related to all three categories and was in
and platforms for controlling financial transactions (Elghaish

Table 2  Use cases that are not focusing solely to information management
Category Sub category (no.) Blockchain use case

PY Financial transactions (8)

A case study of robotics process automation (Carden et al. 2019)
Security of payments (10)A framework for automated project bank accounts (Li et al. 2019, second
use case)
Supply chain management (1) A case study involving procurement of an equipment (Yang et al. 2020,
second use case)
Progress payments (11) Design of an automated payment system (Hamledari and Fischer 2021)
CM and PY Progress payments (11) A framework for construction payment automation (Luo et al. 2019) and a
BIM and smart contract framework for automated billing (Ye and König
2021)
Security of payments (10) A DApp for for security of payment of construction contracts (Ahmad-
isheykhsarmast and Sonmez 2020)
IM and CM Financial transactions (8) A prototype DApp for trusted energy performance contracts (Gürcan et al.
2018)
Quality management (5) A blockchain-led knowledge-sharing platform (Abbas et al. 2020)
IM, PY and CM Progress payments (11) A model that enables selective-transparency in payment records (Das et al.
2020)
IM Information management, PY payments, CM contract management

13
Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision…

the progress payments sub category, which consisted of a 3.6 Project management knowledge areas
blockchain-based framework for securing progress payments in blockchain research
(Das et al. 2020).
The review of the use cases based on the category and sub A project management knowledge area is a set of concepts,
category classifications reveal that the application of block- terms, and activities that make up a professional project
chain technology in project management has been used for management field, or area of specialization. In PMBOK
many different purposes across several industries. A major- Guide (2017) ten project management areas are specified as;
ity of use cases has focused on solely information manage- integration management, scope management, schedule man-
ment (68.8%), while few adopted blockchain for payments agement, cost management, quality management, resource
and contract management. At the sub category level, supply management, communications management, risk manage-
chain management (25.0%) was the most studied area fol- ment, procurement management, and stakeholder manage-
lowed by progress payments (15.6%), life cycle management ment. A thematic analysis of is performed to determine the
(12.5%), financial transactions (9.3%), quality management project management areas that are included in the project
(9.3%), environmental sustainability (6.3%), design (6.3%), management blockchain research.
research management (6.3%), security of payments (6.3%), The results of the thematic analysis reveal that the block-
and bidding (3.1%). chain research in project management involved all of the
project management areas. Communications management is
3.5 Properties and advantages of blockchain included in 80% of the publications, which is followed by the
in project management stakeholder (70%), cost (67%), procurement (53%), quality
(33%), and schedule (30%) management areas. The project
A thematic analysis of the reviewed publications is per- management areas; risk (20%), resource (17%), integration
formed to determine the properties and advantages of block- (10%), and scope management (10%) are included in fewer
chain. The common properties of blockchain are identified publications.
as; security, transparency, reliability (trustworthiness),
decentralization, immutability, traceability, authenticity, 3.7 Main contribution areas of blockchain
real-time, and self-execution. On the other hand, the pub- for project management
lications indicate that use of blockchain is leading to fol-
lowing advantages; builds trust, eliminates the need for a In thematic analysis, the common themes for properties
third party, enhances communication, reduces disputes and and advantages of blockchain was identified by text search.
conflicts, prevents fraud, provides a single source of truth, However, some of the publications highlighted contribu-
guarantees execution of contract clauses, acts as a proof for tions of blockchain for project management with specific
digital documents, eliminates bureaucracy, and decrease use case examples. These specific case examples are ana-
ambiguity. The frequencies of the occurrence of proper- lyzed to identify the potential contributions of blockchain
ties and advantages of blockchain that are identified in the for management of projects. The use case analysis revealed
reviewed publications are shown in Fig. 3. that the perceived contributions of the blockchain for project
management fall in to four main groups namely; (1) building
trust, (2) enhancing communication, (3) reducing disputes
and claims, (4) preventing fraud.
The analysis of use cases indicate that blockchain presents
a major potential for contributing to management of projects

Decreases ambiguity (2)

Self enforceability (15) Eliminates bureaucracy (2)
Real-time (15) Proof for digital documents (4)
Authenticity (17) Guaranteess execution of contracts (4)
Traceability (18) Provides a single source of truth (6)
Immutability (18) Prevents fraud (7)
Decentralization (19) Reduces disputes and conflicts (10)
Reliability (23) Enhances communication (13)
Transparency (25) Eliminates the need for a third party (16)
Security (25) Builds trust (19)

Fig. 3  Properties and advantages of blockchain in project management

13
 R. Sonmez et al.

in various aspects. In this section the main contributions of communications between the project participants. The high-
the blockchain for project management are discussed. lighted contributions of the blockchain in the reviewed use
cases for enhancing communications include promotion of
3.7.1 Building trust information sharing (Li et al. 2019), reduction of the pos-
sibility of tampering (Yang et al. 2020), access to identical
The importance of trust among the project participants for data that is verified by a consensus (Poptawski and Szczypi-
achieving project success, particularly for mega-projects, has orski 2018), and creation of a single source of truth (Haml-
been emphasized extensively in the project management lit- edari and Fischer 2021).
erature in recent years (Cerić et al. 2020). Despite its impor-
tance, development of trust is regarded as a major challenge 3.7.3 Reducing disputes and claims
for management of inter-organizational projects (Maurer
2010). Blockchain, with its unique simultaneous proper- The contributions of blockchain to enhance trust and com-
ties of security, transparency, reliability, decentralization, munication among the project stakeholders are expected
immutability, traceability, authenticity, real-time, and self- to reduce the disputes and claims that are related to these
execution provides a major opportunity for building trust issues. However, the highlighted contributions of blockchain
among project stakeholders. Building trust was identified in use cases for reducing disputes and claims were not lim-
as the most cited advantage of the blockchain technologies ited to only those associated with enhanced trust and com-
in the selected publications and was also the top highlighted munication. The blockchain is stated to facilitate resolving
contribution of blockchain among the use cases reviewed. disputes regarding precast components, as it enables tracking
The contribution of blockchain for building trust was the operation details in the precast construction use case
emphasized in the use cases for all application categories. (Wang et al. 2020). Similarly, the potential of blockchain
Yang et al. (2019), Helo and Shamsuzzoha (2020), and to reduce disputes caused by inaccurate documenting of
Tan et al. (2020) mentioned that blockchain establishes non-conformances was emphasized in the pile inspection
trust among the stakeholders for logistics management as use case (Sheng et al. 2020). The contributions of smart
it provides immutability, traceability, and transparency. contract enabled automated systems for eliminating disputes
Lee and Yoon (2019) presented a trust based information and claims that are related to payments were highlighted in
project platform based on the blockchain technology. Inte- Li et al. (2019) and Yang et al. (2020).
gration of blockchain with the BIM models for enhancing
trust between parties was emphasized by Tezel et al. (2020) 3.7.4 Preventing fraud
and Li et al. (2019). Elghaish et al. (2020) and Abbas et al.
(2020) highlighted that blockchain-based information shar- Fraud and corruption may seriously affect the efficiency
ing platforms can be used for sharing critical asset informa- of projects and can be cause major project cost overruns
tion in a transparent manner to enhance trust between stake- (Aguilar et al. 2000). Corruption worsens both cost and
holders. Hamledari and Fischer (2021) presented a different time performance and is a crucial phenomenon within the
perspective and stated that blockchain reduces the need for context of project management, particularly in public pro-
trust. Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez (2020) devel- jects and megaprojects (Locatelli et al. 2017). Develop-
oped a decentralized application to show how blockchain ment of anticorruption strategies is crucial for preventing
and smart contracts could enable a secure, and trustworthy fraud and corruption and eliminating project failures as a
platform for security of payments of construction contracts, result of this problem (Le et al. 2014). Blockchain enables
without requiring trusted intermediaries such as lawyers or a novel strategy for preventing fraud and corruption with
banks. Finally, Gürcan et al. (2018) underlined the potential its security, transparency, decentralization, immutability,
of blockchain for improving the trust between the client and traceability, and self-execution properties. Smart contracts
the service provider. empower control of financial and non-financial assets by an
automated code that runs on the decentralized blockchain.
3.7.2 Enhancing communications Hence, decentralized smart contracts could be used to elimi-
nate or reduce human control of financial assets to prevent
Poor communications among project stakeholders leads to fraud and corruption. The benefits of blockchain for prevent-
confusion, misunderstandings, and conflicts among pro- ing fraud were emphasized in the reviewed publications and
ject stakeholders (Wu et al. 2017), and may result in a pro- also in the specific use cases. The use case examples include
ject failure. Blockchain not only provides a powerful and an anti-counterfeiting platform for supplier evaluation (Liu
secure alternative for peer to peer communication, but also et al. 2020), a quality information management system to
enables a trusted and real-time single source of truth to reduce possibility of upload of fraudulent data (Sheng et al.
eliminate confusions and misunderstanding for enhancing 2020), and an energy performance contracts prototype that

13
Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision…

has a potential to prevent malicious manipulation of contract Among the reviewed use cases, eleven uses cases
terms (Gürcan et al. 2018). included the information of the type of the blockchain along
with the platform suggested or used. The selections of the
use cases that specified the type of the blockchain and the
4 A Design decision framework platform are summarized in Table 3. Five use cases used
for blockchain applications in project or proposed consortium blockchains, four public, and two
management private blockchains.

Despite the fact that blockchain includes several properties 4.2 Selection of the blockchain platform
simultaneously and presents a major potential for improving
the management of projects, the properties and advantages Once the type of the blockchain is determined, the next
of the blockchain applications depend on technical design crucial decision for the blockchain design is the selection
decisions including; privacy, transparency, decentralization, of the platform that the application will be developed. Few
type of the blockchain, and the blockchain platform used to studies presented methodologies for selection of blockchain
develop the blockchain system. In this section based on the platforms. In a recent study, Nanayakkara et al. (2021) pre-
review findings, a design decision framework is presented sented a methodology for selection of a blockchain platform
to guide implementers and researchers on these blockchain to develop an enterprise system in which permissionless
design decisions for maximizing the benefits of blockchain blockchain platforms were eliminated and only one platform
applications in project management. is recommended for development of enterprise systems with-
out considering the trade-offs between decentralization ver-
4.1 Selection of the blockchain type sus control, and transparency versus privacy. The technical
decision framework presented in this research has a different
The key properties that defines the type of the blockchain are focus. The objective of the proposed framework is to enable
the decision mechanism for the blockchain permissions and selection of the most adequate platform for a particular pro-
the ownerships. If the blockchain is public than no permis- ject management application, hence the framework enables
sion is needed and there is no ownership, on the other hand selection of different platforms for different applications.
for private and consortium type of blockchains, the com- In this section popular public, private and consortium
pany or consortium running (owning) the blockchain has the blockchain development platforms are evaluated in terms of
control and can easily change the rules of the blockchain, their advantages and disadvantages for project management
revert transactions, modify balances or smart contract codes, applications. Since majority of the blockchain applications
etc. This control mechanism decreases the level of decen- in project management require automated transaction proto-
tralization, but enables control of the blockchain activities cols that are executed on the blockchain, only the platforms
to some extent, hence brings flexibility (Buterin 2015). But
on the other hand along with decentralization; transparency,
reliability, immutability, authenticity, and self-execution
properties of public blockchains are not fully guaranteed in
Decentralization

permissioned private and consortium blockchains. However,

permissioned blockchains present an efficient and low cost Public
alternative particularly for organizations that seek privacy.
Public, private, and consortium blockchains were devel-
oped based on similar concepts. However, there are major
differences among their purposes and properties, hence Privacy Transparency
Hybrid
selection of the most adequate blockchain type for a par-
Consortium
ticular application is an important decision for maximiz-
ing the benefits of the desired blockchain. Decentralization
Centralization

versus control, transparency versus privacy are some of the

trade-off that needs to be considered as shown in Fig. 4. Private
Hybrid blockchains, which leverage both public and private
blockchain infrastructures are proposed in recent years, to
enable blockchain applications that include a fully decentral-
ized part, but at the same time, provide efficiency along with
privacy (Desai et al. 2019). Fig. 4  The impact of blockchain type decision on decentralization
and privacy

13
 R. Sonmez et al.

Table 3  Blockchain type and development platform recommended or used in the use cases
Use case Area–sub area Method Type Platform

Helo and Shamsuzzoha (2020) IM-1 System Public Ethereum

Wang et al. (2020) IM-1 System Consortium Hyperledger fabric
Yang et al. (2020) (first case) IM-3 Case study Private Hyperledger fabric
Nawari and Ravindran (2019) IM-3 Framework Consortium Hyperledger fabric
Sheng et al. (2020) IM-5 System Consortium Hyperledger fabric
Machado et al. (2020) IM-6 Conceptual Consortium Hyperledger fabric
Elghaish et al. (2020) IM-8 Framework Consortium Hyperledger fabric
Yang et al. (2020) (second case) PY-1 Case study Public Ethereum
Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez (2020) CM&PY-10 System Public Ethereum
Abbas et al. (2020) IM&CM-5 System Private Hyperledger fabric
Das et al. (2020) IM, PY & CM-11 Framework Public Ethereum

that support development of smart contracts are included in (Eoslflare 2021). Market capitalization is an important factor
the evaluations, blockchains that are mainly used for cryp- for applications requiring large payments. For example, for
tocurrency transactions are not considered. a smart contract system that requires cryptocurrency pay-
ments for multi-billion mega construction projects, if market
4.2.1 Public blockchain development platforms capitalization of the cryptocurrency is not sufficient, a large
amount of buying demand of cryptocurrency by the project
Ethereum, Cardano, and EOSIO are among the top block- owner may lead to rapid appreciation of the cryptocurrency
chain platforms based on their technical maturity and popu- against fiat currencies, similarly a large amount of selling
larity within the developing community (Zheng et al. 2020), demand of cryptocurrency by the contractor may result in a
as well as, their suitability for decentralized smart contract rapid depreciation of the cryptocurrency against fiat curren-
development (Garriga et al. 2020). In recent years, several cies (Ahmadisheykhsarmast and Sonmez 2020).
alternative platforms that support development of smart Despite its several advantages Ethereum platform has few
contracts are proposed. However, very limited publications disadvantages. The confirmation time (the time that a trans-
evaluated the technical maturity, popularity, performance, action is appended to the blockchain) and transactions cost
and transactions costs of these new blockchain platforms. for the Ethereum blockchain is reported to be significantly
Hence, only Ethereum, Cardano, and EOSIO public block- higher than those of the EOSIO blockchain (Garriga et al.
chain platforms are considered in this research. 2020, Mokdad and Hewahi 2020). Cardano blockchain pre-
Among the top public blockchain platforms Ethereum sents an alternative to Ethereum blockchain, however the
has been the only choice for all of the four public use cases, confirmation time and transaction costs for Cardano is also
as shown in Table 3. This dominance is mainly due to the higher than those of EOSIO (Garriga et al. 2020). Hence,
maturity and popularity of the Ethereum as being the first particularly for applications requiring fast and low cost
blockchain platform enabling smart contracts (Li et al. 2021) transactions, EOSIO platform may provide a better solution,
and also due to the fact that it provides a powerful smart con- although it is not as mature and popular as the Ethereum
tract engine which has been designed very generically and platform.
leaves many application options open and that can basically
be used as a universal platform for any type of application 4.2.2 Private, consortium and hybrid blockchain platforms
(Valenta and Sandner 2017; Keller et al. 2018; Mor et al.
2021; Fang et al. 2021). The popularity of the Ethereum In recent years, Hyperledger Fabric has been the common
blockchain also provides availability and diversity of the choice for development of private and consortium block-
development resources and community support (Ahmad- chain applications, which can also be observed in the use
isheykhsarmast and Sonmez 2020; Mokdad and Hewahi cases reviewed. All of the use cases, which consisted of five
2020). Ethereum has the biggest market capitalization consortium and two private blockchains, adopted or recom-
among the three blockchains, which is particularly important mended Hyperledger Fabric. Nanayakkara et al. (2021) per-
for applications requiring large payments. The current mar- formed a comparison of seven blockchain platforms (which
ket capitalization of Ethereum is $398.3 Billion (Etherscan did not include Ethereum) that support permissioned net-
2021), Cardano (ADA coin) is $72.4 Billion (Cardanoscan works, and recommended Hyperledger Fabric for develop-
2021), and EOS (cryptocurrency of EOSIO) is $4.5 Billion ing an enterprise system. One of the main advantages of

13
Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision…

Hyperledger Fabric is that is utilizes general-purpose com- maximize the benefits of the blockchain while minimizing
monly used programming languages, such as Java. How- its disadvantages for a specific project management applica-
ever, this advantage comes with the disadvantage that these tion. The perceived properties and advantages of the block-
languages were not originally designed for coding smart chain along with its contributions to the project management
contracts and may present risks that developers do not need are considered in the proposed framework. The framework
to consider when using specific smart contract languages, considers the decisions related to decentralization, privacy,
such as Solidity of the Ethereum platform (Yamashita et al. flexibility, transparency, efficiency, transaction costs, use of
2019). While the original Ethereum blockchain is a public common programming languages, maturity of the block-
blockchain, it is possible to create private or consortium chain platform, market capitalization of the cryptocurrency
blockchains using the Ethereum platform (Buterin 2015). used, and the need for a powerful smart contract engine.
Ethereum platform also enables development of hybrid plat- The framework identifies the main category of the project
forms in which a private or consortium blockchain is inte- management application and considers the decisions related
grated with a public blockchain (Desai et al. 2019). In this to a particular category namely; information management,
research only the Hyperledger Fabric and Ethereum plat- payments, and contract management.
forms are considered for private and consortium blockchains The framework starts with the determination of whether
as literature includes numerous studies on the limitations the application requires cryptocurrency transactions, as
and advantages of these two popular blockchain platforms shown in Fig. 5. If the application requires cryptocurrency
(Pongnumkul et al. 2017; Hao et al. 2018; Yamashita et al. transactions, the main domain category is determined as
2019; Monrat et al. 2020; Panwar and Bhatnagar 2020). payments. In the payments category, only public blockchain
The main limitation of the Ethereum platform for pri- and hybrid blockchain platforms are considered, as only pub-
vate and consortium blockchain applications is its perfor- lic platforms enable cryptocurrency transactions currently.
mance against Hyperledger Fabric (Pongnumkul et al. 2017; The first decision for the payments category is made accord-
Hao et al. 2018; Monrat et al. 2020; Panwar and Bhatna- ing to privacy requirement. If privacy is required, Hybrid-
gar 2020). The experiments conducted by Pongnumkul Ethereum platform is selected. If privacy is not required, the
et al. (2017) revealed that Hyperledger Fabric consistently next decision of the payments category is about the size of
outperforms Ethereum across three performance metrics the transactions. If the application will be used to make large
which are execution time, latency and throughput. Hao et al. cryptocurrency transactions, Public-Ethereum platform is
(2018) assessed the performance of consensus algorithms recommended due to its large market capitalization of Ether.
of Ethereum and Hyperledger Fabric and made the conclu- If the application will not be used to make large transactions,
sion that Hyperledger’s consensus algorithm outperforms a selection is made between the Public-EOSIO (efficiency
Ethereum’s algorithm in terms of average throughput and and low transaction costs) or Public-Ethereum (maturity and
average delay. The performance analysis results of Monrat powerful smart contract engine) platforms.
et al. (2020) which was based on the throughput and latency The framework next considers guaranteed execution of
evaluation metrics, illustrate that Hyperledger Fabric per- contract conditions. Although smart contracts can also be
forms better than Ethereum in permissioned platform. Simi- coded with private and consortium blockchains, only public
larly, Panwar and Bhatnagar (2020) performed performance blockchains guarantee execution of smart contracts, as the
analysis of Ethereum and Hyperledger Fabric private block- company or consortium running the blockchain can easily
chain platforms with changing amount of transactions and modify the smart contracts. However, in public blockchains,
revealed that Hyperledger Fabric achieves higher throughput once a smart contract is deployed on the blockchain it cannot
and a low-level latency as compared to Ethereum and also, be modified and execution of smart contracts are guaranteed.
Hyperledger provides a less execution time than Ethereum If the application requires guaranteed execution of contract
as the number of transactions increase. Despite the fact that conditions, the main domain category is determined as the
Hyperledger Fabric enables a higher efficiency, its diversity contract management. In the contract management category,
and availability of the development resources and as well the first decision is made on the privacy requirement. If the
as its powerful smart contracts engine makes Ethereum an contract management application requires privacy, a Hybrid-
adequate alternative also for private and consortium smart Ethereum platform is recommended as this hybrid option
contract blockchain applications, particularly for the applica- could guarantee execution smart contracts along with pri-
tions that are not seeking a high performance. vacy. If privacy is not required a selection is made among
the properties of efficiency and low transaction costs (Pub-
4.3 Decision framework lic-EOSIO), or maturity and the need for a powerful smart
contract engine (Public-Ethereum).
A decision framework is developed based on the findings In the proposed framework, if the application does not
of the review. The main objective of the framework is to require cryptocurrency transactions or guaranteed execution

13
 R. Sonmez et al.

Efficiency and low

Pubic - EOSIO
transaction costs

Efficiency and low Maturity and a poweful Pubic -

No
costs versus smart contract engine Ethereum
maturity?

Are there large

No Yes- Large market capitalization
payments?
Transparency

Tranparency Consortium -
Efficiency and general
Hyperledger
programming languages
Fabric
Is privacy needed? Yes -Decentralization Hybrid -
and privacy Ethereum
No
Efficieny versus Maturity and a poweful Consortium -
Yes- Main area is Payments maturity? smart contract engine Ethereum
Yes

Are Is guaranteed
cryptocurrency execution of Yes- Main Area is
No Is privacy needed?
transactions contract conditions Contract Management Private -
required? required? Efficiency and general
Hyperledger
programming languages
Fabric

Efficieny versus Maturity and a poweful Private -

No- Main area is Information Management Decenteralized governance Ethereum
maturity? smart contract engine

Govrnance type?
Consortium governance

Centeralized governance

Fig. 5  Blockchain decision framework for project management applications

of contract conditions, the main domain category is identi- 5 Conclusions and future research
fied as information management. The first decision for the directions
information management category is made based on the level
of decentralization required for the application. If full decen- The contribution of this paper for research and practice is
tralization is required to guarantee transparency, reliability, two-fold. The paper first provides a systematic literature
immutability, traceability, authenticity, and self- execution review, develops a taxonomy of blockchain application
properties; decentralized governance should be selected. The domains, and identifies major contributions of blockchain
next decision for an information management application in project management. Based on the findings the paper
that requires decentralized governance is on the level of pri- than presents a blockchain decision framework for maxi-
vacy. The proposed framework includes a hybrid blockchain mizing the benefits of blockchain applications for project
alternative which enables fine tuning of the decentralization management.
and privacy properties for a specific application. Hence, if The analysis of the use cases indicate that the unique and
a part of the application requires fully decentralization and novel properties of blockchain enables a major potential for
privacy is also needed, Hybrid-Ethereum platform should building trust, enhancing communications, reducing dis-
be used. When full transparency is preferred together with putes and claims, and preventing fraud in project manage-
full decentralization, a selection is made between the Public- ment particularly in the information management, payments,
EOSIO or Public-Ethereum. If consortium level governance and contract management application domains. However,
is more suitable for the information management applica- the properties and advantages of blockchain for a particu-
tion, the decision is made based on the properties of con- lar application depend on the technical decisions. A frame-
sortium platforms. Consortium- Hyperledger should be used work is presented based on the review results for making the
when efficiency and use of general programming languages optimal blockchain and platform selection decisions during
are required. Consortium-Ethereum should be selected when development of project management applications. The pro-
a mature platform with a powerful smart contract engine posed framework can guide implementers and researchers
is required. In some blockchain applications in information on technical design decisions including privacy, transpar-
management, central control and full flexibility may be pre- ency, decentralization, blockchain type, and platform selec-
ferred instead of decentralization, hence a selection should tion decisions in development of blockchain systems for a
be made among Private-Hyperledger and Private-Ethereum particular domain.
platforms. Despite the fact that blockchain present numerous
properties simultaneously and has an unique potential for

13
Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision…

contributing to management of projects in different aspects, Aguilar M, Gill J, Pino L (2000) Preventing fraud and corruption in
the review results reveal that blockchain applications in pro- World Bank projects. A guide for staff. World Bank, Washington
Ahmadisheykhsarmast S, Sonmez R (2020) A smart contract system
ject management is at its early stages. The current blockchain for security of payment of construction contracts. Autom Constr
applications mainly focus on the information management, 120:103401. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​autcon.​2020.​103401
with few emphasis in payments and contract management Ahmadisheykhsarmast S, Sönmez FÖ, Sonmez R (2020) Smart con-
domains. Majority of the blockchain publications in pro- tracts for contract management: a retention payment system. In:
Blockchain for cybersecurity and privacy, 1st edn. CRC Press,
ject management research consist of conceptual studies, Boca Raton
case studies, and frameworks, only very few has developed Ali O, Ally M, Dwivedi Y (2020) The state of play of blockchain
systems. Hence, there is a major gap in research focusing technology in the financial services sector: a systematic literature
development of blockchain systems in project management, review. Int J Inf Manag 54:102199. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijinf​
omgt.​2020.​102199
particularly in the area of decentralized applications. Buterin V (2015) On public and private blockchains. https://​blog.​
Decentralized project bidding systems that are controlled ether​eum.​org/​2015/​08/​07/​on-​public-​and-​priva​te-​block​chains/.
by the blockchains is a potential area for future research. Accessed 26 Sept 2020
The whole project bidding process could be presented as Buterin V, Griffith V (2017) Casper the friendly finality gadget. ArXiv
Preprint ArXiv. Retrieved from http://​arxiv.​org/​abs/​1710.​09437
a smart contract deployed on a decentralized public block- Cardanoscan (2021) Cardano blockchain explorer. Retrieved 3 Oct
chain, which will eliminate human interference during bid- 2021, from https://​carda​noscan.​io/. Accessed 3 Oct 2021
ding. Decentralized project bidding systems would provide Carden L, Maldonado T, Brace C, Myers M (2019) Robotics process
full transparency, build trust among the bidding participants, automation at TECHSERV: an implementation case study. J Inf
Technol Teach Cases 9(2):72–79. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​20438​
and could eliminate or reduce fraud in project bidding. 86919​870545
Integration of blockchain with artificial intelligence is Casino F, Dasaklis TK, Patsakis C (2019) A systematic literature
another potential area for future research in project man- review of blockchain-based applications: current status, classifi-
agement. Decentralized decision support systems that are cation and open issues. Telemat Inform 36:55–81. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​tele.​2018.​11.​006
based on blockchain and artificial intelligence would provide Cerić A, Vukomanović M, Ivić I, Kolarić S (2020) Trust in megapro-
a trusted and transparent alternative for improving the deci- jects: a comprehensive literature review of research trends. Int J
sion making process in different domains of project manage- Proj Manag. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijpro​man.​2020.​10.​007
ment. One particular example is a decentralized application Das M, Luo H, Cheng JC (2020) Securing interim payments in con-
struction projects through a blockchain-based framework. Autom
for dispute resolution. The application could include an arti- Constr 118:103284. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.a​ utcon.2​ 020.1​ 03284
ficial intelligence part which is coded as a smart contract and De Schepper S, Dooms M, Haezendonck E (2014) Stakeholder dynam-
deployed on the public blockchain. The autonomous and ics and responsibilities in public–private partnerships: a mixed
independent decentralized application for dispute resolution experience. Int J Proj Manag 32(7):1210–1222. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​ijpro​man.​2014.​01.​006
would provide an efficient, trusted and transparent alterna- Desai H, Kantarcioglu M, Kagal L (2019) A hybrid blockchain archi-
tive and could enable stakeholders to resolve disputes before tecture for privacy–enabled and accountable auctions. In: 2019
going for expensive and inefficient alternatives. IEEE international conference on blockchain (blockchain), IEEE,
Blockchain applications in project management is at its pp 34–43. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​block​chain.​2019.​00014
Elghaish F, Abrishami S, Hosseini MR (2020) Integrated project deliv-
very early stages, however it is receiving increasing atten- ery with blockchain: an automated financial system. Autom Con-
tion. The review results reveal that a wide range of sectors in str 114(March):103182. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​autcon.​2020.​
project management domain is showing interest for adopting 103182
the blockchain for different purposes. Blockchain not only Eosflare (2021). https://​eosfl​are.​io. Accessed 3 Oct 2021
Etherscan (2021) Ether total supply and market capitalization chart.
provides a novel technology for enabling major contribu- https://​ether​scan.​io/​stat/​supply. Accessed 3 Oct 2021
tions to management practice, but also presents a new and Fang W, Jia X, Jia W (2021) Research and implementation of medi-
interesting research area for achieving decentralized project cal information protection and sharing based on blockchain. In:
management. International conference on artificial intelligence and security,
Springer, Cham, pp. 437–449. https://​link.​sprin​ger.​com/​chapt​
er/https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-​030-​78612-0_​35. Accessed 3
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen- Oct 2021
tary material available at https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/s​ 12652-0​ 21-0​ 3610-1. Garriga M, Palma SD, Arias M, Renzis A, Pareschi R, Tamburri A
(2020) Blockchain and cryptocurrencies: a classification and
comparison of architecture drivers. Concurr Comput Pract Exp
33(8):e5992. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​cpe.​5992
References Gurcan O, Agenis-Nevers M, Batany Y-M, Elmtiri M, Le Fevre F,
Tucci-Piergiovanni S (2018) An industrial prototype of trusted
Abbas Y, Martinetti A, Moerman J-J, Hamberg T, van Dongen LAM energy performance contracts using blockchain technologies. In:
(2020) Do you have confidence in how your rolling stock has been 2018 IEEE 20th international conference on high performance
maintained? A blockchain-led knowledge-sharing platform for computing and communications; IEEE 16th international confer-
building trust between stakeholders. Int J Inf Manag 55:102228. ence on Smart City; IEEE 4th international conference on data
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijinf​omgt.​2020.​102228

13
 R. Sonmez et al.

science and systems (HPCC/SmartCity/DSS). https://​doi.​org/​10.​ models and practical use cases. Autom Constr 102:288–307.
1109/​HPCC/​Smart​City/​DSS.​2018.​00222 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​autcon.​2019.​02.​005
Hamledari H, Fischer M (2021) Role of blockchain-enabled smart con- Li CZ, Chen Z, Xue F, Kong XTR, Xiao B, Lai X, Zhao Y (2021) A
tracts in automating construction progress payments. J Legal Aff blockchain- and IoT-based smart product-service system for the
Dispute Resolut Eng Constr 13(1):4520038. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ sustainability of prefabricated housing construction. J Clean Prod
1061/​(asce)​la.​1943-​4170.​00004​42 286:125391. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2020.​125391
Hao Y, Li Y, Dong X, Fang L, Chen P (2018) Performance analy- Liu Z, Jiang L, Osmani M, Demian P (2019) Building Information
sis of consensus algorithm in private blockchain. In: 2018 IEEE Management (BIM) and Blockchain (BC) for sustainable building
intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), IEEE, pp 280–285. https://​ design. Inf Manag Framew Electron 8(7):724. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
ieeex​plore.​ieee.​org/​stamp/​stamp.​jsp?​tp=​&​arnum​ber=​85005​57. 3390/​elect​ronic​s8070​724
Accessed 3 Oct 2021 Liu A, Liu T, Mou J, Wang R (2020) A supplier evaluation model based
Hargaden V, Papakostas N, Newell A, Khavia A, Scanlon A (2019) on customer demand in blockchain tracing anti-counterfeiting
The role of blockchain technologies in construction engineer- platform project management. J Manag Sci Eng. https://​doi.​org/​
ing project management. In: 2019 IEEE international conference 10.​1016/j.​jmse.​2020.​06.​001
on engineering, technology and innovation (ICE/ITMC), IEEE, Locatelli G, Mariani G, Sainati T, Greco M (2017) Corruption in public
pp 1–6. https://​ieeex​plore.​ieee.​org/​abstr​act/​docum​ent/​87925​82. projects and megaprojects: there is an elephant in the room! Int
Accessed 3 Oct 2021 J Proj Manag 35(3):252–268. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijpro​man.​
Helo P, Shamsuzzoha AHM (2020) Real-time supply chain—a block- 2016.​09.​010
chain architecture for project deliveries. Robot Comput Integr Luo H, Das M, Wang J, Cheng JCP (2019) Construction payment
Manuf 63:101909. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​rcim.​2019.​101909 automation through smart contract-based blockchain framework.
Hewavitharana T, Nanayakkara S, Perera S (2019) Blockchain as a pro- In: 36th International symposium on automation and robotics in
ject management platform. In: Proceedings of the 8th World con- construction, Banff, Canada, pp 1254–1260. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
struction symposium, Colombo, Sri Lanka, pp 137–146. https://​ 22260/​ISARC​2019/​0168
doi.​org/​10.​31705/​WCS.​2019.​14 Machado TB, Ricciardi L, Oliveira MBP (2020) Blockchain technology
Hughes L, Dwivedi YK, Misra SK, Rana NP, Raghavan V, Akella for the management of food sciences researches. Trends Food Sci
V (2019) Blockchain research, practice and policy: applications, Technol 102:261–270. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​tifs.​2020.​03.​043
benefits, limitations, emerging research themes and research Maurer I (2010) How to build trust in inter-organizational projects:
agenda. Int J Inf Manag 49:114–129. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ the impact of project staffing and project rewards on the forma-
ijinf​omgt.​2019.​02.​005 tion of trust, knowledge acquisition and product innovation. Int
Hunhevicz JJ, Hall DM (2020) Do you need a blockchain in construc- J Proj Manag 28(7):629–637. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijpro​man.​
tion? Use case categories and decision framework for DLT design 2009.​11.​006
options. Adv Eng Inform 45:101094. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ Mokdad I, Hewahi NM (2020) Empirical evaluation of blockchain
aei.​2020.​101094 smart contracts. Decentralised Internet of Things. Springer, Cham,
Janssen M, Weerakkody V, Ismagilova E, Sivarajah U, Irani Z (2020) pp 45–71. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-​030-​38677-1_3
A framework for analysing blockchain technology adoption: inte- Monrat AA, Schelén O, Andersson K (2020) Performance evaluation
grating institutional, market and technical factors. Int J Inf Manag of permissioned blockchain platforms. In: 2020 IEEE Asia-Pacific
50:302–309.https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijinf​omgt.​2019.​08.​012 conference on computer science and data engineering (CSDE),
Kadadevaramth RS, Sharath D, Ravishankar B, Kumar PM (2020) A IEEE, pp 1–8. https://​ieeex​plore.​ieee.​org/​stamp/​stamp.​jsp?​tp=​&​
review and development of research framework on technological arnum​ber=​94113​80. Accessed 3 Oct 2021
adoption of blockchain and IoT in supply chain network optimiza- Mor P, Tyagi RK, Jain C, Verma DK (2021) A systematic review and
tion. In: International conference on mainstreaming block chain analysis of blockchain technology for corporate remittance and
implementation (ICOMBI), IEEE settlement process. In: 2021 Fourth international conference
Kawaguchi N (2019) Application of blockchain to supply chain: flex- on computational intelligence and communication technologies
ible blockchain technology. Proc Comput Sci. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ (CCICT), IEEE, pp 121–128. https://​ieeex​plore.​ieee.​org/​docum​
1016/j.​procs.​2019.​12.​166 ent/​95149​30. Accessed 3 Oct 2021
Keller T, Kessler N (2018) Yet another blockchain use case—the label Nakamoto S (2008) Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system.
chain. In: 2018 IEEE 15th international conference on e-business Decentralized Business Review, 21260. https://​www.​debr.​io/​artic​
engineering (ICEBE), IEEE, pp 187–194. https://​ieeex​plore.​ieee.​ le/​21260-​bitco​in-a-​peer-​to-​peer-​elect​ronic-​cash-​system
org/​stamp/​stamp.​jsp?​tp=​&​arnum​ber=​85926​48. Accessed 3 Oct Nanayakkara S, Rodrigo MNN, Perera S, Weerasuriya GT, Hijazi AA
2021 (2021) A methodology for selection of a blockchain platform to
Kim K, Lee G, Kim S (2020) A study on the application of block- develop an enterprise system. J Ind Inf Integr 23:100215. https://​
chain technology in the construction industry. KSCE J Civ Eng doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jii.​2021.​100215
24(9):2561–2571. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12205-​020-​0188-x Nawari NO, Ravindran S (2019) Blockchain technologies in BIM work-
Le Y, Shan M, Chan APC, Hu Y (2014) Overview of corruption flow environment. In: Computing in civil engineering, pp 343–352
research in construction. J Manag Eng 30(4):02514001. https://​ Ølnes S, Ubacht J, Janssen M (2017) Blockchain in government: bene-
doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(asce)​me.​1943-​5479.​00003​00 fits and implications of distributed ledger technology for informa-
Lee E, Yoon Y (2019) Trusted information project platform based on tion sharing. Gov Inf Q 34(3):355–364. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
blockchain for sharing strategy. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Com- giq.​2017.​09.​007
put. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12652-​019-​01421-z Panwar A, Bhatnagar V (2020) Analyzing the performance of data
Lee E, Yoon Y, Lee GM, Um TW (2020) Blockchain-based perfect processing in private blockchain based distributed ledger. J Inf
sharing project platform based on the proof of atomicity consen- Optim Sci 41(6):1407–1418. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​02522​667.​
sus algorithm. Tehnički vjesnik 27(4):1244–1253. https://​hrcak.​ 2020.​18090​95
srce.​hr/​242328 PMBOK Guide (2017) A guide to the project management body
Li J, Greenwood D, Kassem M (2019) Blockchain in the built environ- of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (Sixth Edition). Project
ment and construction industry: a systematic review, conceptual

13
Blockchain in project management: a systematic review of use cases and a design decision…

Management Institute (PMI). pmi.​org/​pmbok-​guide-​stand​ards/​ Warkentin M, Orgeron C (2020) Using the security triad to assess
found​ation​al/​pmbok. Accessed 3 Oct 2021 blockchain technology in public sector applications. Int J Inf
Pongnumkul S, Siripanpornchana C, Thajchayapong S (2017) Per- Manag 52:102090
formance analysis of private blockchain platforms in varying Wu G, Liu C, Zhao X, Zuo J (2017) Investigating the relationship
workloads. In: 2017 26th International conference on computer between communication-conflict interaction and project success
communication and networks (ICCCN), IEEE, pp 1–6. https://d​ oi.​ among construction project teams. Int J Proj Manag 35(8):1466–
org/​10.​1109/​icccn.​2017.​80385​17 1482. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijpro​man.​2017.​08.​006
Poptawski PK, Szczypiorski K (2018) Blockchain-based smart con- Yamashita K, Nomura Y, Zhou E, Pi B, Jun S (2019) Potential risks
tracts for sustainable power investments. In: 2018 Second world of hyperledger fabric smart contracts. In: 2019 IEEE Interna-
conference on smart trends in systems, security and sustainability tional workshop on blockchain oriented software engineering
(WorldS4), London, UK: IEEE, pp 1–8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​ (IWBOSE). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​iwbose.​2019.​86664​86
World​S4.​2018.​86115​77 Yang P, Yang X, Li J (2019) Intelligent contract design based on block
Sarfaraz A, Chakrabortty RK, Essam DL (2021) A tree structure-based chain in logistics management. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng
improved blockchain framework for a secure online bidding sys- 612(3):032003. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1088/​1757-​899x/​612/3/​032003
tem. Comput Secur 102:102147. https://​www.​scien​cedir​ect.​com/​ Yang R, Wakefield R, Lyu S, Jayasuriya S, Han F, Yi X, Chen S (2020)
scien​ce/​artic​le/​pii/​S0167​40482​03042​0X?​via%​3Dihub Public and private blockchain in construction business process
Sheng D, Ding L, Zhong B, Love PE, Luo H, Chen J (2020) Construc- and information integration. Autom Constr 118:103276. https://​
tion quality information management with blockchains. Autom doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​autcon.​2020.​103276
Constr 120:103373. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.a​ utcon.2​ 020.1​ 03373 Ye X, König M (2021) Framework for automated billing in the con-
Szabo N (1996) Smart contracts: building blocks for digital markets. struction industry using BIM and smart contracts. In: Proceedings
EXTROPY 16(18):1–11 of the 18th international conference on computing in civil and
Tan BQ, Wang F, Liu J, Kang K, Costa F (2020) A blockchain-based building engineering, Springer, Cham, pp 824–838. https://​doi.​
framework for green logistics in supply chains. Sustainability org/​10.​1007/​978-3-​030-​51295-8_​57
12(11):4656. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su121​14656 Zhang J, Li Y, Zhao M, Zhang C, Ma J (2019) Application of block
Tezel A, Papadonikolaki E, Yitmen I, Hilletofth P (2020) Preparing chain technology in power information asset lifecycle manage-
construction supply chains for blockchain technology: an inves- ment. In: 2019 2nd International conference on information sys-
tigation of its potential and future directions. Front Eng Manag tems and computer aided education (ICISCAE). https://​doi.​org/​
7(4):547. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s42524-​020-​0110-8 10.​1109/​icisc​ae484​40.​2019.​221577
Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for Zhang Z, Yuan Z, Ni G, Lin H, Lu Y (2020) The quality traceability
developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means system for prefabricated buildings using blockchain: an integrated
of systematic review. Br J Manag 14(3):207–222. https://​doi.​org/​ framework. Front Eng Manag 7(4):528–546. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
10.​1111/​1467-​8551.​00375 1007/​s42524-​020-​0127-z
Valenta M, Sandner P (2017) Comparison of Ethereum, Hyperledger Zheng Z, Xie S, Dai H-N, Chen W, Chen X, Weng J, Imran M (2020)
Fabric and Corda. https://w ​ ww.s​ emant​ icsch​ olar.o​ rg/p​ aper/C
​ ompa​ An overview on smart contracts: challenges, advances and plat-
rison-​of-​Ether​eum%​2 C-​Hyper​ledger-​Fabric-​and-​Valen​ta-​Sandn​ forms. Future Gener Comput Syst 105(4):475–491. https://​doi.​
er/​9f4f8​0c8e5​96b70​ec8e2​324f4​4ede1​5c48c​147b5. Accessed 3 org/​10.​1016/j.​future.​2019.​12.​01
Oct 2021
Wamba SF, Queiroz MM (2020) Blockchain in the operations and sup- Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
ply chain management: benefits, challenges and future research jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
opportunities. Int J Inf Manag 52:102064. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​ijinf​omgt.​2019.​102064
Wang Z, Wang T, Hu H, Gong J, Ren X, Xiao Q (2020) Blockchain-
based framework for improving supply chain traceability and
information sharing in precast construction. Autom Constr
111:103063. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​autcon.​2019.​103063

13

View publication stats