Unlocking Organizational Success: A Systematic Literature Review of Superintendent Selection Strategies, Core Competencies, and Emerging Technologies in the Construction Industry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I suggest accepting the paper. 

Author Response

Comments 1: The authors of the paper “Unlocking Organizational Success: A Systematic Literature Review of Superintendent Selection Strategies, Core Competencies, and Emerging Technologies in the Construction Industry” present a highly relevant topic, addressing an essential aspect of the future construction sector, namely the qualification of supervisory personnel. The paper has the potential to create a sector-wide multiplier effect, which is why we recommend that the authors highlight this aspect in the abstract.

Response 1: Thank you for your insightful comment and kind suggestions.  We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comments.

Revised “Abstract” (Line 17-35 Page 1):

An organization's success depends on its ability to attract and retain skilled personnel. Superintendents play a critical role in overseeing project sites in the construction industry and can adapt to the increasingly complicated requirements of modern construction projects. This study examines traditional and modern personnel selection methods to determine effective tactics, essential competencies, and emerging trends regarding supervisory personnel. The research methodology follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework. First, the study examines traditional and modern selection methods used by organizations and engineering firms to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic and assist in selecting appropriate staff recruitment procedures. Second, the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were reviewed to identify superintendent selection approaches and competencies, over the period January 2000 to September 2024. A total of 22 relevant papers were analyzed. Superintendent selection processes included questionnaires (57%), interviews (26%), literature reviews (14%), and data-driven AI tools (3%). Forty competency criteria were identified, with the top five being knowledge, communication skills, leadership, health and safety expertise, and commitment. As a result, novel approaches employing Industry 4.0 technologies, including virtual reality (VR), wearable sensing devices (WSDs), natural language processing (NLP), blockchain, and computer vision, are recommended. These findings support a better understanding of how best to identify the most qualified supervisory personnel and provides enhanced methods for evaluating job applicants.

 

Comments 2: The concepts, citations, and references are appropriately mentioned. For instance, the authors state that “Sackett et al. [12] analyzed a broader range of personnel selection methods compared to Schmidt and Hunter [13].” The research methodology is well-documented, particularly as the authors adhere to the PRISMA framework (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), as well as a bibliometric analysis based on international scientific data.

Response 2: We sincerely thank the reviewer for the valuable and constructive feedback.

 

Comments 3: The results are presented both descriptively and graphically, using tables and figures, emphasizing “traditional and contemporary personnel selection methods to identify effective strategies, key competencies, and future trends.” However, following this analysis, we suggest that the authors also highlight their original scientific contributions to the specialized literature.

Response 3: Thanks to the professional comments that point out this problem. The authors hope the following modifications would answer your doubts. The related section has been revised from lines 83 to 96 on page 2:

Thus, this study aims to fully identify superintendents' roles. This research first identifies various personnel selection methods used across most industries and engineering fields, thereby offering a general understanding of personnel selection methods. This prepares the ground in order to investigate the subject more comprehensively in regards to appropriate employee selection methods. Second, it evaluates superintendent selection methods in the construction industry in order to assess their effectiveness by comparing them with previously identified selection approaches. Third, it analyzes the competency criteria used to evaluate the proficiency of superintendents. This is crucial because superintendents' responsibilities differ from those of engineers and project managers. Identifying these competency criteria assists in properly prioritizing and implementing superintendents' training strategies; a matter ignored in current research. It is important to note that this research does not compare the competency criteria of superintendents with those of project managers or other engineers in the construction sector. Future studies could explore such comparisons.

 

Comments 4: The conclusions underline that “the evaluation of these factors is typically performed through subjective expert assessments or self-reporting by supervisors, both of which may be criticized for their inherent bias.” Furthermore, the authors link the research findings to the construction industry, providing the study with an applied focus. Nevertheless, we recommend that the authors also discuss the study’s limitations and propose future research directions.

Response 4: Thanks for your valuable suggestions. We have made the necessary revisions.

Revised “6. Conclusions” from lines 544 to 550 Page 23:

However, this research has limitations. It does not compare superintendents' competency criteria with project managers or other engineers in the construction sector. Future studies could explore these comparisons. Additionally, there is an opportunity to investigate training strategies to enhance superintendents' core competencies. As a result, the findings reported in this study can be expected to assist researchers, managers, and the HR function of construction firms in achieving stronger outcomes in recruiting qualified superintendents, which is predicated on the success of construction firms.

 

Comments 5: We congratulate the research team for the topic studied, as well as for the work carried out, and suggest revision according to the recommendations mentioned above.

Response 5: We are grateful to the reviewer for their thorough evaluation and encouraging, constructive feedback. As a final point, the English language of the paper has been edited by Dr. Igor Martek, a native English speaker and one of our authors, who currently works as a Senior Lecturer at Deakin University in Australia. We hope that the revisions have effectively addressed the reviewer’s concerns.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors of the paper “Unlocking Organizational Success: A Systematic Literature Review of Superintendent Selection Strategies, Core Competencies, and Emerging Technologies in the Construction Industry” present a highly relevant topic, addressing an essential aspect of the future construction sector, namely the qualification of supervisory personnel. The paper has the potential to create a sector-wide multiplier effect, which is why we recommend that the authors highlight this aspect in the abstract.

The concepts, citations, and references are appropriately mentioned. For instance, the authors state that “Sackett et al. [12] analysed a broader range of personnel selection methods compared to Schmidt and Hunter [13].”

The research methodology is well-documented, particularly as the authors adhere to the PRISMA framework (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), as well as a bibliometric analysis based on international scientific data.

The results are presented both descriptively and graphically, using tables and figures, emphasizing “traditional and contemporary personnel selection methods to identify effective strategies, key competencies, and future trends.” However, following this analysis, we suggest that the authors also highlight their original scientific contributions to the specialized literature.

The conclusions underline that “the evaluation of these factors is typically performed through subjective expert assessments or self-reporting by supervisors, both of which may be criticized for their inherent bias.” Furthermore, the authors link the research findings to the construction industry, providing the study with an applied focus. Nevertheless, we recommend that the authors also discuss the study’s limitations and propose future research directions.

We congratulate the research team for the topic studied, as well as for the work carried out, and suggest revision according to the recommendations mentioned above.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

We did not identify any major aspects related to the academic style of writing in English.

Author Response

Comments 1: The authors of the paper “Unlocking Organizational Success: A Systematic Literature Review of Superintendent Selection Strategies, Core Competencies, and Emerging Technologies in the Construction Industry” present a highly relevant topic, addressing an essential aspect of the future construction sector, namely the qualification of supervisory personnel. The paper has the potential to create a sector-wide multiplier effect, which is why we recommend that the authors highlight this aspect in the abstract.

Response 1: Thank you for your insightful comment and kind suggestions.  We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comments.

Revised “Abstract” (Line 17-35 Page 1):

An organization's success depends on its ability to attract and retain skilled personnel. Superintendents play a critical role in overseeing project sites in the construction industry and can adapt to the increasingly complicated requirements of modern construction projects. This study examines traditional and modern personnel selection methods to determine effective tactics, essential competencies, and emerging trends regarding supervisory personnel. The research methodology follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework. First, the study examines traditional and modern selection methods used by organizations and engineering firms to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic and assist in selecting appropriate staff recruitment procedures. Second, the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were reviewed to identify superintendent selection approaches and competencies, over the period January 2000 to September 2024. A total of 22 relevant papers were analyzed. Superintendent selection processes included questionnaires (57%), interviews (26%), literature reviews (14%), and data-driven AI tools (3%). Forty competency criteria were identified, with the top five being knowledge, communication skills, leadership, health and safety expertise, and commitment. As a result, novel approaches employing Industry 4.0 technologies, including virtual reality (VR), wearable sensing devices (WSDs), natural language processing (NLP), blockchain, and computer vision, are recommended. These findings support a better understanding of how best to identify the most qualified supervisory personnel and provides enhanced methods for evaluating job applicants.

 

Comments 2: The concepts, citations, and references are appropriately mentioned. For instance, the authors state that “Sackett et al. [12] analyzed a broader range of personnel selection methods compared to Schmidt and Hunter [13].” The research methodology is well-documented, particularly as the authors adhere to the PRISMA framework (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), as well as a bibliometric analysis based on international scientific data.

Response 2: We sincerely thank the reviewer for the valuable and constructive feedback.

 

Comments 3: The results are presented both descriptively and graphically, using tables and figures, emphasizing “traditional and contemporary personnel selection methods to identify effective strategies, key competencies, and future trends.” However, following this analysis, we suggest that the authors also highlight their original scientific contributions to the specialized literature.

Response 3: Thanks to the professional comments that point out this problem. The authors hope the following modifications would answer your doubts. The related section has been revised from lines 83 to 96 on page 2:

Thus, this study aims to fully identify superintendents' roles. This research first identifies various personnel selection methods used across most industries and engineering fields, thereby offering a general understanding of personnel selection methods. This prepares the ground in order to investigate the subject more comprehensively in regards to appropriate employee selection methods. Second, it evaluates superintendent selection methods in the construction industry in order to assess their effectiveness by comparing them with previously identified selection approaches. Third, it analyzes the competency criteria used to evaluate the proficiency of superintendents. This is crucial because superintendents' responsibilities differ from those of engineers and project managers. Identifying these competency criteria assists in properly prioritizing and implementing superintendents' training strategies; a matter ignored in current research. It is important to note that this research does not compare the competency criteria of superintendents with those of project managers or other engineers in the construction sector. Future studies could explore such comparisons.

 

Comments 4: The conclusions underline that “the evaluation of these factors is typically performed through subjective expert assessments or self-reporting by supervisors, both of which may be criticized for their inherent bias.” Furthermore, the authors link the research findings to the construction industry, providing the study with an applied focus. Nevertheless, we recommend that the authors also discuss the study’s limitations and propose future research directions.

Response 4: Thanks for your valuable suggestions. We have made the necessary revisions.

Revised “6. Conclusions” from lines 544 to 550 Page 23:

However, this research has limitations. It does not compare superintendents' competency criteria with project managers or other engineers in the construction sector. Future studies could explore these comparisons. Additionally, there is an opportunity to investigate training strategies to enhance superintendents' core competencies. As a result, the findings reported in this study can be expected to assist researchers, managers, and the HR function of construction firms in achieving stronger outcomes in recruiting qualified superintendents, which is predicated on the success of construction firms.

 

Comments 5: We congratulate the research team for the topic studied, as well as for the work carried out, and suggest revision according to the recommendations mentioned above.

Response 5: We are grateful to the reviewer for their thorough evaluation and encouraging, constructive feedback. As a final point, the English language of the paper has been edited by Dr. Igor Martek, a native English speaker and one of our authors, who currently works as a Senior Lecturer at Deakin University in Australia. We hope that the revisions have effectively addressed the reviewer’s concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

“Unlocking Organizational Success” provides a systematic review of engineering literature related to superintendent selection. The review is comprehensive, substantively sound, and largely well written.  However, there are a couple minor edits that would benefit the review prior to publication.

 

In line 278 the paper states that non-engineering related papers were excluded.  However, the focus on engineering papers is not stated in the title, abstract, or introduction. The scope of the paper should be made clear at the beginning. 

 

Line 280 states that “On closer inspection, 18 more papers were omitted.” One what grounds were these omitted?  

 

The overuse of bullet points on pages 2 and 3 distract from the flow. This is reinforced by the fact that some bullet points are explanations, and some are single words.  The use of numbered paragraphs on pages 5-6, however, is beneficial to the flow.

 

Line 291 should say “Over 50%” instead of “50%”.

 

Excellent use of figures and tables.

 

I hope you find these comments useful. 

Author Response

Comments 1: “Unlocking Organizational Success” provides a systematic review of engineering literature related to superintendent selection. The review is comprehensive, substantively sound, and largely well written.  However, there are a couple minor edits that would benefit the review prior to publication.

Response 1: We appreciate your insightful and encouraging comments. We have carefully considered the feedback and made corrections based on the reviewer’s suggestions.

 

Comments 2: In line 278 the paper states that non-engineering related papers were excluded.  However, the focus on engineering papers is not stated in the title, abstract, or introduction. The scope of the paper should be made clear at the beginning. 

Response 2: Thank you for your great attention and proper suggestion. It is mentioned in the abstract and introduction, from lines 17 to 35 on page 1 and 83 to 96 on page 2.

 

Comments 3: Line 280 states that “On closer inspection, 18 more papers were omitted.” One what grounds were these omitted?  

Response 3: We appreciate your feedback and have worked to address this point from lines 327 to 330 on page 9.

18 more papers were omitted after assessing the introduction's context, examining figures and tables, reading the conclusion to summarize key findings and contributions, and skimming the methods and results sections to understand the main findings quickly.

 

Comments 4: The overuse of bullet points on pages 2 and 3 distract from the flow. This is reinforced by the fact that some bullet points are explanations, and some are single words.  The use of numbered paragraphs on pages 5-6, however, is beneficial to the flow.

Response 4: Thank you very much for your helpful suggestion. We have made the corrections on pages 3 and 4.

 

Comments 5: Line 291 should say “Over 50%” instead of “50%”.

Response 5: Thank you very much for your thorough and detailed review. This issue has been corrected in lines 340 and 341 on page 10.

 

Comments 6: Excellent use of figures and tables. I hope you find these comments useful. 

Response 6: We are grateful to the reviewer for their thorough evaluation and encouraging, constructive feedback. We hope that the revisions have effectively addressed the reviewer’s concerns.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study is judged to have progressed well, but some areas must be supplemented.

 

In the introduction, it is necessary to strengthen the research focus by presenting the existing research's necessity and limitations in more detail. By clearly describing the limitations of existing research, the differentiation and necessity of this study should be emphasized.

 

 

Strengthening the comparison and analysis of each methodology in the theoretical background is necessary. In addition, comparisons between the approaches covered and specific case studies should be supplemented.

 

 

 

In the research method, increasing the specificity of the literature search process and selection criteria is necessary to increase the diversity and reliability of the data.

 

 

The conclusion should clearly present the theoretical and practical implications. In addition, the study's limitations should be clearly described to provide the direction of subsequent analyses.

Author Response

Comments 1: This study is judged to have progressed well, but some areas must be supplemented.

Response 1: The authors thank the reviewer for the recognition and sincerely appreciate the valuable comments. We have made efforts to correct the issues you pointed out.

 

Comments 2: In the introduction, it is necessary to strengthen the research focus by presenting the existing research's necessity and limitations in more detail. By clearly describing the limitations of existing research, the differentiation and necessity of this study should be emphasized.

Response 2: Thanks to the professional comments that point out this problem. The authors hope that the following modifications address your concerns.

Revised “1. Introduction” (Line 39-96 Page 1 & 2):

The most valuable asset of any company is its human capital. The success of an organization is significantly linked to its ability to attract and retain high-quality human resources. The challenge, however, is exacerbated by the increasing globalization of commercial activities and recruitment of requisite skills. A clear need for comprehensive academic research on effective personnel selection methods is evident [2,3]. This is particularly the case in respect of the construction sector, which is critical to infrastructure development, growing the national GDP, and generating employment [4]. Construction superintendents stand out in today's market as it is they that can adapt to the increasingly complicated requirements of modern projects [5]. Their approach to leadership notably impacts the quality and success of construction projects [6, 7]. The superintendent, also known as the site supervisor, is the supervising engineer on construction sites and the client's resident representative. They are primarily accountable for three key objectives: 1) ensuring the punctual completion of projects, 2) reducing rework and waste, and, 3) obviating the necessity for revisions [8]. Construction superintendents are further responsible for interpreting and analyzing plans, producing reports, adhering to quality standards, engaging in mediation proceedings, and ensuring compliance with safety regulations [9]. The general distinction between superintendents and project managers is that superintendents typically maintain an ongoing presence on construction sites and thus handle day-to-day operations, while project managers oversee projects more remotely.

The successful outcome of infrastructure programs is highly contingent on the recruitment of appropriately qualified individuals able to conduct construction inspections. Skill gaps, pay disparities, and company culture, increasingly present as significant challenges to project outcomes. Such factors detract from a firm’s ability to attract and retain qualified inspectors. This is especially the case within state transportation agencies and consultant inspection companies [10]. The shortage of skilled construction inspectors, compounded by the difficulties of sourcing, hiring, and developing well-trained personnel, pose additional risks to the quality of construction projects [11]. Moreover, despite the pivotal role of supervisors, there is a lack of research that clarifies the exact competencies required in the proper executing of project supervisory duties [11]. The building inspection sector, confronted with personnel shortages and professional development challenges, must prioritize the identification and cultivation of critical capabilities required of these roles [11]. Similarly, effective supervision is vital in overseeing construction labor duties, with construction site supervisors functioning as links between workers and employers [12]. Research has pointed out the need to enhance labor supervision by acquiring new skills that enable supervisors to manage worksite operations more effectively [12]. Manoharan et al. [12] emphasize that the identification of essential supervisory competencies is paramount if worker productivity in developing countries is to be raised. For example, site supervisors connect senior management with on-site workers, assuring construction workers' work practice compliance and safety [13]. Nevertheless, research concerning construction industry personnel has predominantly concentrated on delineating the competencies of project managers [14]. Superintendents, by contrast, though essential within the middle management hierarchy and pivotal in mediating safety initiatives, continue to be overlooked.

Thus, this study aims to fully identify superintendents' roles. This research first identifies various personnel selection methods used across most industries and engineering fields, thereby offering a general understanding of personnel selection methods. This prepares the ground in order to investigate the subject more comprehensively in regards to appropriate employee selection methods. Second, it evaluates superintendent selection methods in the construction industry in order to assess their effectiveness by comparing them with previously identified selection approaches. Third, it analyzes the competency criteria used to evaluate the proficiency of superintendents. This is crucial because superintendents' responsibilities differ from those of engineers and project managers. Identifying these competency criteria assists in properly prioritizing and implementing superintendents' training strategies; a matter ignored in current research. It is important to note that this research does not compare the competency criteria of superintendents with those of project managers or other engineers in the construction sector. Future studies could explore such comparisons.

New added references:

[4] Quashie R, Fugar FDK, Antwi-Afari P, Thomas Ng S. Evaluating the key competency skills of construction professionals for the attainment of circular construction in developing economies. Cleaner Production Letters. 2024; 6: 100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clpl.2024.100060

[5] Wang Y, Cheng K. Expected Competencies of Construction Management Graduates Working in China. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology. 2022; 13(1): 16-24. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijimt.2022.13.1.915

[10] National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (NCHRP) RESEARCH REPORT 1027. Guide to Recruiting, Developing, and Retaining Transportation Infrastructure Construction Inspectors. The National Academies Press. 2023; Washington DC. USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/26878

[11] Tummalapudi M, Harper CM, Elliott J. Technical Competencies for Transportation Construction Inspection Workforce Development. Construction Research Congress. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784485293.01

[12]. Manoharan K, Dissanayake P, Pathirana C, Deegahawature D, Silva R. Investigating and determining the crucial construction site supervisory competencies influencing the effectiveness of building construction project activities. International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. 2024; 6(1): 43-63. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIEOM-02-2023-0015

[13] Al-Bayati AJ, Karakhan AA, Alzarrad A. Quantifying the Mediating Effect of Frontline Supervisors on Workers’ Safety Actions: A Construction Safety Culture Focus. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction. 2024; 29(3): 04024025. https://doi.org/10.1061/PPSCFX.SCENG-151

 

Comments 3: Strengthening the comparison and analysis of each methodology in the theoretical background is necessary. In addition, comparisons between the approaches covered and specific case studies should be supplemented. 

Response 3: We appreciate the reviewer's insightful remarks. In section 2, the authors sought to uncover diverse personnel selection procedures employed across other industries and compare these with superintendent selection strategies and their level of development in the construction sector. A summary of this section has been added to address the reviewer's concerns. 

Revised “2.4. Summary of hiring approaches” (Line 267-289 Page 7 & 8):

Institutions typically employ various personnel selection methods influenced by the specific characteristics and requirements of the position. Each approach possesses intrinsic benefits and drawbacks, indicating that no universally applicable approach is appropriate for every circumstance. Innovative personnel selection techniques can improve the recruitment process's efficiency, accuracy, and attractiveness.

Employers must meticulously assess these procedures to guarantee equity, dependability, and authenticity. They must concentrate on choosing suitable procedures for certain roles, comprehend the advantages and disadvantages of novel selection methods, and recognize potential dangers that, if inadequately managed, could result in legal, social, ethical, or personal repercussions.

Additional investigation is required into individual differences—such as personality, EI, age, and race—and their impact on judgments of fairness [40]. Other areas worthy of investigation include the use of personal data, the influence of AI on work-force diversity, the correlation between business ethics and AI, and the empirical vali-dation of ML prediction models in practical settings.

It is important to emphasize that the human element remains crucial in personnel recruitment and the use of modern and advanced techniques [37,42]. The selection of candidates should not depend solely on biographical data and automated systems; it must also involve human decision-making [23].

This section indicates that personnel selection procedures across industries can be classified into three categories: traditional, modern, and MCDM approaches, as illustrated in Figure 1.

 

Comments 4: In the research method, increasing the specificity of the literature search process and selection criteria is necessary to increase the diversity and reliability of the data.

Response 4: Thanks for your insightful comment. We have revised it throughout the manuscript.

Revised “3.1. Search Process:” (Line 293-313 Page 8 & 9):

Scopus and Web of Science are two essential databases for researchers. They cover a broad spectrum of scientific disciplines [43-46] and aggregate a substantial collection of peer-reviewed scientific publications that meet quality standards. Researchers may utilize these platforms to assess the influence of publications, identify seminal studies, and enhance search strategies. They provide a substantial amount of metadata. Publishing in prestigious journals is impossible without the citation standards that are in place. These standards evaluate research findings and encourage academic collaboration on a worldwide scale. Because of the utilization of these databases, the accessibility, dependability, and quality of scientific research are all improved [47,48]. Thus, the literature retrieved from both were examined. In addition, a search was conducted on Google Scholar using specific studies identified from backward and forward searches of publications obtained from the original database searches. Consequently, a comprehensive literature review was conducted on selection approaches and required competencies in engineering, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) [49]. The following keywords were used for the search process:

("Superintendent" or "Construction superintendent" or "Supervisors" or "Site supervisor" or "Supervisor engineer" or "Resident engineer" or "Supervision") AND ("Personnel selection" or "Selection" or "Recruitment" or "Human resource management" or "HRM" or "Human resource selection") AND ("Construction" or "Construction Industry" or "Construction sites" or "Construction sectors" or "Buildings")

New added references:

[47] Martín-Martín A, Orduna-Malea E, Delgado López-Cózar E. Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison. Scientometrics. 2018; 116: 2175–2188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2820-9

[48] Martín-Martín A, Orduna-Malea E, Thelwall M, Delgado López-Cózar E. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of Informetrics. 2018; 12(4): 1160-1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002

 

Comments 5: The conclusion should clearly present the theoretical and practical implications. In addition, the study's limitations should be clearly described to provide the direction of subsequent analyses.

Response 5: Thanks for your valuable suggestions. We have made the necessary revisions.

Revised "6. Conclusions" (Line 499-550 Page 22 & 23):

The construction industry contributes a substantial portion of most countries' gross domestic product (GDP) [4, 90-92]. However, this sector’s workforce is plagued by subpar efficiency, compounded by a higher incidence of accidents, low profitability, increased cost overruns, and, indeed, higher project failure rates. Therefore, finding the right management expertise to run projects undertaken by project superintendents is critical to improving the sector's performance outcomes. 

How then are the most capable human resources to be found? This study initially examined many conventional and contemporary employee selection methods across multiple industries. Of the several established methods, structured interviews, job knowledge exams, biodata evaluations, work samples, and cognitive ability tests traditionally exhibit the highest levels of validity. Moreover, an examination of the newer MCDM methodologies revealed that the dominant techniques employed in fuzzy and non-fuzzy scenarios were AHP, TOPSIS, and ANP, while the BWM method is a recently created MCDM strategy utilized in a restricted number of research investigations.

Nevertheless, as the literature reveals, neither traditional nor more modern and complex methods are faultless. The missing ingredient is human factors that impact decision-making. Consequently, the utilization of psychological-social theories for their potential benefits is indicated.

Considering the importance of the role of superintendents, which was fully stated in the previous sections, this research extensively searched the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases to identify studies addressing superintendents' selection strategies and associated competencies. The search spanned the years January 2000 to September 2024. Twenty-two publications were found to speak to the issue and were analyzed. The primary methods used by construction superintendents to identify competencies were questionnaires (57%), interviews (26%), literature studies (14%), and data-driven AI-based tools (3%). The literature analysis yielded forty competency criteria for site supervisors. The competencies were categorized into two distinct groups: hard and soft skills. The top five competency criteria consistently referenced regarding superintendents include knowledge, communication skills, leadership, health and safety abilities, and commitment. Moreover, the most recent competency criteria post-2020 were EI and cognitive ability. Furthermore, secondary essential skills were identified as claim management, proficiency in computers and new technologies, aptitude in decision-making and problem-solving, job experience, an understanding of ethical issues, stress management, report writing, and education. In short, construction superintendents must possess extensive soft and hard skills.

Currently, the prevalent approach is that assessment of these factors is typically undertaken through the subjective evaluation of experts or the self-reporting of super-visors, both of which can be faulted for their subjective bias. On top of this, extensive studies have not evaluated the quantitative measurement of a superintendent's necessary soft skills. In moving the recruitment process forward, as indicated by the literature, this study proposed innovative methods utilizing Industry 4.0 technologies such as VR, WSDs, NLP, blockchain, and Computer vision to overcome the current complex nature of the construction industry. Such additional innovations are expected to augment the current practice recruitment process and enhance objectivity in personnel selection.

However, this research has limitations. It does not compare superintendents' competency criteria with project managers or other engineers in the construction sec-tor. Future studies could explore these comparisons. Additionally, there is an opportunity to investigate training strategies to enhance superintendents' core competencies. As a result, the findings reported in this study can be expected to assist researchers, managers, and the HR function of construction firms in achieving stronger outcomes in recruiting qualified superintendents, which is predicated on the success of construction firms.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf