From diversity to social value: insights from infrastructure project professionals

The magnitude of infrastructure projects is substantial, with an estimated $79 to $94 tri, roughly 3.5% of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP), expected to be invested globally in infrastructure projects over the next two decades (Locatelli et al., 2023). The concept of social value and its creation through infrastructure projects has sparked enormous attention, as these projects make significant contribution to society beyond their economic benefits (Babaei et al., 2023; Gidigah et al., 2022). Today, infrastructure projects are increasingly expected to deliver not only just functional output but also broader social value benefiting the communities they impact (Eskerod and Ang, 2017; Vuorinen and Martinsuo, 2019). Infrastructure projects have the potential to shape the social landscape by extending both tangible and intangible benefits that go beyond the physical infrastructure itself (Watts et al., 2021).

Social value can encompass many elements, including “welfare of the society, quality of life, effects on public health, accessibility to facilities, impacts on demographics and housing, effects on vulnerable groups, preservation of cultural heritage, national pride, community cohesion, promotion of active transportation” (El-Gohary et al., 2006, p. 601). This broad understanding reflects a shift from focusing solely on project outputs to considering outcomes and long-term impacts on societal welfare. Social value creation is the process in which organizations and individuals proactively contribute to society’s well-being by engaging in ethical conducts, socially beneficial policies and business practices that drive positive social change (Farag and McDermott, 2015).

While social value is widely promoted in infrastructure policy and industry discourse, there remains limited understanding of how professionals involved in project delivery perceive its meaning, significance and enabling conditions. The literature on social value presents various definitions and interpretations, resulting in a complex and ambiguous understanding of what constitutes social value in infrastructure and construction projects (Gidigah et al., 2022). As such, existing literature exhibits a definitional challenge of conceptualizing social value. Choi (2014) proposed that social value is a complex concept because of its intricacy and subjective nature and involves multiple perspectives. There are multiple interpretations for social value from the perspective of who is interpreting (Russel, 2013; Watts et al., 2021). Moreover, how social value is defined and interpreted in a specific context has major implications on how the social value is realized (Hietschold et al., 2023). Therefore, as proposed by Gidigah et al. (2022) and considering definitional complexity and perceptual variation in the understanding of social value, this research focuses on how infrastructure project professionals perceive social value and the mechanisms by which they believe it is created. Previous studies, such as those by Gidigah et al. (2022) and Opoku and Guthrie (2018), explored the conception and understanding of social value within the construction industries in Ghana and the UK, respectively. This study aims to fill an existing gap by examining the perceptions of Australian infrastructure project professionals regarding social value. By exploring these professionals’ views, this research provides new insights into the perceived enablers and conditions through which social value is understood and delivered in practice.

Examining the perceptions of project professionals such as project managers, engineers, designers and community engagement specialists is critical, as their comprehension of social value influences their decision-making, prioritization and operationalization with regards to gaining social value through infrastructure projects instead of relying on the achievement of direct primary benefits from projects alone. This study is not based on observed delivery outcomes or direct measures of social value creation. Rather, it seeks to understand how professionals interpret and articulate the potential for team-level factors, such as diversity, to contribute to the creation of social value. Without appropriate understanding of social value achieved through projects, professionals may not be able to recognize social value creation and fail to integrate it into project planning and execution. We argue that a lack of understanding of social value will lead to failure of social value creation, as recently Daniel and Pasquire (2019) demonstrated that there is a lack of awareness of social value creation in construction and infrastructure management literature. It is important to clarify that this study does not examine participants’ own diverse characteristics or how their identities shape their responses. Rather, we explore how infrastructure professionals perceive the role of team-level diversity, including professional backgrounds, cultural perspectives and lived experience, influencing the perceived creation of social value in infrastructure delivery.

One of the keys to create social value is to form a project team which is diverse in nature (Kenter et al., 2019). In line with this, we argue that the diversity of project teams is perceived by professionals to have a significant impact on advancing social value, as diverse project teams bring varying viewpoints, experiences, expertise, cultural, professional and socioeconomic perspectives, which leads to greater innovation, problem-solving, decision-making and social value creation. While prior studies have examined frameworks and models for delivering social value in infrastructure (e.g. El-Gohary et al., 2006; Daniel and Pasquire, 2019), our aim is not to evaluate those processes but to understand how project professionals interpret the enabling role of team diversity in the creation of social value. This perception-based approach offers practice-grounded insights that complement existing process-focused research.

We posit that diversity in project teams fosters stronger social cohesion through improved trust, collaboration and mutual understanding between the project team and the community. As a result, infrastructure projects are better aligned with the community’s needs, ensuring that the outcomes deliver broader social, economic and cultural benefits, thereby creating long-lasting social value (Bailey et al., 2022). To empirically investigate the proposed argument, this research seeks to examine how diversity of project teams is perceived to contribute to social value creation in infrastructure projects.

For the purpose of this research, we adopted the definition proposed by El-Gohary et al. (2006, p. 601), which encompasses a broad spectrum of aspects contributing to the well-being of society. On the other hand, diversity is “the representation, in one social system of people with distinctly different group affiliations of cultural significance” (Cox, 1994, p. 5). Diversity involves individuals with diverse characteristics, including gender, race, ethnicity, age (Bailey et al., 2022) and varying levels of identities, perspectives and training (Hattery et al., 2022). In this research, a diverse project team can be defined as a group of individuals with distinct professional skills, experiences, cultural backgrounds and ethnicity who collaborate within the framework of a specific infrastructure project to create benefits that contribute to the well-being of society in the creation of social value (Hattery et al., 2022).

A thorough examination of social value literature in project studies reveals that how infrastructure project professionals understand social value requires exploration. While recent studies (Babaei et al., 2023; Caron et al., 2024; Di Maddaloni et al., 2025; Gidigah et al., 2022) investigate social value through community engagement or procurement, few have explored how project team diversity is perceived to shape value creation at the team level. Moreover, existing studies often focus on diversity at the leadership or board levels (Arayakarnkul et al., 2022; Fernández et al., 2022). Despite the recognition that diverse teams improve project outcomes (Wu et al., 2019), their perceived contribution to creating social value within infrastructure projects remains underexplored (Clegg et al., 2024). Therefore, this study sets out to explore infrastructure project professionals’ understanding of social value and how they perceive team diversity enabling its creation. The research addresses the following questions:

To interpret these perceptions, we adopt social capital theory (SCT) (Coleman, 1988), which provides a framework for understanding how relationships, trust and networks function as enablers of social value. SCT helps explain how diversity is seen to contribute to social value creation through relational mechanisms, such as bonding within teams, bridging across communities and linking with institutional stakeholders. The theory thus allows us to unpack how project professionals conceptualize diversity as a source of relational capital that enables more inclusive, socially responsive outcomes.

This paper contributes to theory and practice by (1) offering new empirical insights into project professionals’ perceptions of social value and its connection to team diversity, (2) applying SCT to interpret how project team diversity shapes social value outcomes and (3) identifying practical implications for building more socially responsive project teams.

Infrastructure projects are particularly effective in generating social value (Flyvbjerg, 2014; Klein and Aubry, 2017; Siva and Gajendran, 2023)). They create lasting impact on society (Di Maddaloni et al., 2025; Locatelli et al., 2017) through their influence on public health and well-being (Starbird et al., 2019), public access to amenities (Lucas, 2012) and sense of identity (Alexander and Hamilton, 2015). This wide-ranging and nonfinancial benefit for communities represents social value (Lowe et al., 2018), delivering long-term public benefit for multiple stakeholders that is considered important for economic and environmental outcomes (Allenby and Richards, 1999; Doloi, 2018; Gurmu et al., 2022). The increasing emphasis on generating social value through infrastructure projects stems from growing stakeholder expectations and various legislative measures (Locatelli et al., 2023; Martinsuo et al., 2019). Additionally, the collective agreement among United Nations members to adopt Sustainable Development Goals has amplified the significance of achieving social value (Leal Filho et al., 2022). This growing focus on social value makes it critical to understand how project team composition can enhance social value creation. Importantly, a distinction must be made between the social value delivered directly through infrastructure and the “additional” social value achieved through project team decisions and actions (Watts et al., 2021). While traditionally the focus was on benefits from infrastructure assets themselves, recognizing the role of project teams in social value creation highlights the importance of team composition and diversity in maximizing social outcomes (Dobson et al., 2020; Watts et al., 2021).

Social value in infrastructure and construction projects has received global attention (Awuzie et al., 2018; Ojuri et al., 2023; Pavón et al., 2024). Previous studies have demonstrated to incorporate social value in infrastructure project delivery (Opoku and Guthrie, 2018; Petersen and Kadefors, 2016). However, the way project professionals understand, perceive and interpret social value in projects remains a subject of inquiry (Gidigah et al., 2022). Project professionals’ understanding of social value is central to how it is prioritized and enacted in project contexts, influencing how it is integrated into planning, decision-making and delivery. Meanwhile, there are numerous interpretations of social value (Daniel and Pasquire, 2019), and the interpretation is dependent on the definer and contextual factors (Hietschold et al., 2023). This indicates that the subjective and contextual nature of social value may lead to its varying interpretation among project professionals, which results in influencing its integration in projects.

Existing social value literature revealed various definitions and interpretations of social value, which yielded complexity in what comprises social value in infrastructure projects. Halloran (2016) defined social value as soft non-tangible and nonfinancial outcomes. The impacts of tasks on the environment were referred to as an intangible outcome. This definition was closely related to what was presented by Farag and McDermott (2015). They interpreted social value as “soft non-financial benefits” on individual and community well-being. However, the authors did not seem to explain “soft intangible outcome” and “soft non-financial benefits” at an adequate level which can lead to speculation and ambiguity. Nonetheless, social value seems to be linked to community well-being, which is a subjective and contextual notion differing largely between communities. Cao (2020) provided a definition closely following Halloran’s (2016) connotation of social value with the addition of “non-financial” aspect highlighting that social value refers to the positive value generated through human actions aimed at supporting disadvantaged and marginalized groups, with the goal of fostering positive social change for the wider community. Again, Cao (2020) fell short of discussing the types of human actions. Furthermore, this definition is set apart from other definitions, as it focuses only on disadvantaged and marginalized communities. However, collectively these definitions show that social value revolves around improving the well-being of broader communities.

Harlock (2014) indicates the social value as the additional environmental, social and economic advantages a local community gains beyond the delivery of the physical infrastructure. Closely following the definition of Harlock (2014) and considering the urgency of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Opoku and Guthrie (2018) and Daniel and Pasquire (2019) delineated social value as the impact of the triple bottom line (TBL) – economic, social and environmental – on community members. These authors elucidated social value as additional environmental and economic benefits projects offer to individuals of the community. However, the nature of impacts – positive or negative – was not highlighted in the explanation. In aligned with the definition provided by Opoku and Guthrie (2018), Jain et al. (2020) classified social value as action-driven, outcome-driven, sustainability-driven and pluralism-driven. Action-driven social value entails the primary focus on people in contrast to economic and environmental aspects. Radicalistic and pragmatist outcomes are the categories of outcome-driven social value. Radicalistic social value is associated with building trust and relationships with society. On the other hand, Jain et al. (2020) defined pragmatist outcome-driven social value as an intangible measure of social impact. The sustainability-driven social value conforms with the explanation of Harlock (2014) and Opoku and Guthrie (2018).

Reflecting on the above discussion, it is imperative that there is no universally agreed definition of social value. The discussion implies subjectivity involved in the interpretation of social value. It is a complex notion which is difficult to define because of complexity and subjectivity (Hietschold et al., 2023). Russel (2013) argues that social value can be interpreted in many ways, but the focus should be on who is interpreting and in which context.

Recently, Gidigah et al. (2022) conceptualized and understood social value qualitatively from the perspective of procurement officer, works engineer and quantity surveyor in the Ghanaian construction industry. Similarly, Opoku and Guthrie (2018) defined social value by adopting the Social Value Act 2012 in the UK’s housing sector. By utilizing a critical literature review approach, Daniel and Pasquire (2019) presented the status quo of social value in construction projects. This suggests the perspectives of project professionals in the context of Australian infrastructure projects have achieved little investigation, thus necessitating the bridge of the gap through this research.

Project team diversity has been recognized as critical for improving project outcomes, boosting team performance and contributing to project success (Ellis et al., 2022; Ma et al., 2024). Diverse teams benefit from multiple perspectives and viewpoints, which collectively contribute to more effective problem-solving and decision-making (Pavez et al., 2022). This diversity of thoughts and experiences is particularly valuable when projects aim to create social value for diverse communities. The project management literature suggests that diverse teams bring divergent perspectives that encourage innovative solutions to complex problems (Ma et al., 2024). By drawing on varied backgrounds and experiences, these teams are better equipped to understand and address complex social needs. Diverse teams are more inclined toward a “learning and integration” approach, which uses differences as a foundation for co-creating knowledge and developing solutions that serve broader social interests (Ely and Thomas, 2001). Organizations that actively promote diversity can better harness its benefits, leading to improved team dynamics and creativity (Vedres and Vásárhelyi, 2023).

Prior empirical research has focused primarily on the impact of team diversity at the board level in infrastructure projects (Bin Mahmoud et al., 2024; Ma et al., 2022). While board diversity has been linked to improved organizational social sustainability (Ponomareva et al., 2022), social capital theory suggests that project team diversity, encompassing a broader range of backgrounds, can directly enhance social value creation. Beji et al. (2021) highlight that diverse educational and ethnic backgrounds contribute to improved social outcomes, though this potential remains largely untapped at the team level in infrastructure projects.

This review reveals several important gaps that this research addresses. While the importance of team diversity is well recognized in project management literature, its role in the perceived creation of social value within infrastructure projects remains underexplored (Babaei et al., 2023; Fujiwara et al., 2022; Locatelli et al., 2023). Additionally, social capital theory offers a valuable lens for interpreting how project team diversity may contribute to social value, particularly enabling trust, shared understanding and stakeholder alignment. By focusing on professionals’ perceptions, this research advances understanding of how diversity is seen to influence the conditions for social value creation, thus offering a novel conceptual and empirical contribution to the intersection of project studies, diversity and social value scholarship.

We draw on social capital theory (Coleman, 1988; Putnam et al., 1994) to provide a theoretical base for investigating how project team diversity is perceived to influence the creation of social value in infrastructure projects. Social capital is defined as a multidimensional resource that is generated through interpersonal interactions and refers to the structure and quality of social relationships, from which individuals, social groups, organizations and the broader society can benefit (Coleman, 1988; Sarracino and Mikucka, 2017). This research adopts Coleman’s (1988) conceptualization of social capital as a public good that emerges from people’s relationships and networks, as this definition aligns with examining how diverse project teams can leverage relationships to create social value. The central proposition of social capital theory is that social relationships matter, they represent valuable resources developed through social networks that lead to the development and accumulation of social value (Claridge, 2018; Lin, 2002). This provides a theoretical basis for understanding how diverse project teams can build and utilize different forms of social capital – structural (connections among people), relational (trust) and cognitive (shared goals and values) (Claridge, 2018) in order to enable perceived social value creation in infrastructure projects. Rather than examining how social value is delivered in practice, our study focuses on how infrastructure professionals perceive the diverse project teams contribute to the relational and social conditions (such as trust, cohesion and legitimacy) that enable social value to be created. This perception-based lens complements process-focused research by providing insights grounded in practitioners’ lived experiences and views.

The theory suggests that resources built on network ties, knowledge, information sharing and shared values such as trust and reciprocity, can facilitate better cooperation and collective action (Amoako-Gyampah et al., 2021). In the context of infrastructure projects, this manifests as diverse teams leveraging their different perspectives, social networks and cultural insights to better engage with communities and understand local needs. Social capital theory thus helps explain the perceived links between project team diversity and the potential for social value creation.

Building on this theoretical foundation, understanding social value itself is critical for examining how team diversity can enhance its creation. Social value is a complex and multifaceted concept that varies depending on the context, specific situations and audiences it applies to (Watts et al., 2021). Rather than having a single universal definition, social value is interpreted differently by various stakeholders (Watts et al., 2021), highlighting the importance of having diverse perspectives within project teams to understand and deliver social value across different community contexts. The multiple definitions and measurements of social value reflect how organizations prioritize different aspects based on their unique circumstances, stakeholder perspectives, specific activities, and prioritized outcomes (Russel, 2013; Wood and Leighton, 2010). Some researchers define it as “soft non-financial impacts/benefits,” while others consider it an investment toward individual and community well-being (Gidigah et al., 2022). This divergence in conceptualization further emphasizes why diverse project teams may be better positioned to understand and deliver various forms of social value.

An important distinction exists between how temporary versus permanent organizations approach social value. Temporary organizations like infrastructure projects typically focus on immediate short-term benefits like local employment or community engagement during the project’s duration (Bakker, 2010; Bredin and Soderlund, 2006). This temporal aspect highlights the need for project teams that are able to quickly build connections with and understand local community needs, that diverse teams may be better equipped to achieve. In contrast, permanent organizations may define social value more broadly, considering long-term impacts on broader communities, ongoing relationships with stakeholders and continuous contributions to social and environmental well-being (Elkington and Rowlands, 1999; Freeman and McVea, 2005; Li et al., 2024). The measurement and evaluation of social value may also vary between temporary and permanent organizations based on their distinct timelines, goals and stakeholder expectations (Turner and Müller, 2003). Further, the context and audience for social value assessment may influence how temporary and permanent organizations define and prioritize social value elements, leading to differences in their approaches to creating and measuring social value.

This study adopted a qualitative research approach, which is suitable for research that is exploratory and interpretive in nature (Mani et al., 2016). Our aim was to explore project professionals’ perceptions of social value and how they understand the role of project team diversity in enabling social value creation in infrastructure projects. Accordingly, semi-structured interviews were selected as the most appropriate method to generate rich, contextualized insights through in-depth conversations (Saunders et al., 2016; Tumpa and Naeni, 2025). This format allowed researchers to pose consistent core questions to all participants while also probing for deeper meaning and clarification (Adams, 2015).

A purposive sampling strategy was adopted to target infrastructure professionals with relevant experience in community engagement, social sustainability, stakeholder management and social value initiatives. Purposive sampling enables the selection of individuals most likely to yield insightful data aligned to the research aim (Kelly et al., 2010). Participants were recruited from diverse roles within the Australian infrastructure sector, identified through the authors’ professional networks and LinkedIn (Sauer et al., 2024). Invitations were sent to 81 potential participants. A total of 33 interviews were conducted between April and July 2024. Data saturation, the point at which no new themes or codes emerged, was achieved after 33 interviews. As Guest et al. (2006) observe, saturation often occurs within the first 12 interviews, but we extended data collection to ensure robust thematic development. As Mason (2010) notes, qualitative insight is shaped more by data richness than sample size. Of the 33 interviews, the first six interviews were initially used as pilot interviews to refine the interview guide. Revisions included eliminating redundant or ambiguous questions and adapting the format to fit within a one-hour timeframe. The remaining 27 interviews were analyzed in depth.

Table 1 provides the demographic information of the 27 interviewees. An interview guide was collaboratively developed to ensure consistency in approach. It included questions about participants’ roles, experience in the infrastructure sector, diversity in their teams and their perceptions of how project team diversity influences social value creation (see  Appendix). All interviews were conducted via Zoom and lasted between 45 and 60 min. Video recordings facilitated interaction and transcription (de Villiers et al., 2022). Figure 1 illustrates the interview protocol and data collection workflow, including pilot testing and interview procedures.

Data analysis followed an inductive thematic approach inspired by Gioia et al. (2013), which integrates both participant-derived terms and researcher-driven concepts. We adopted a four-stage process: (1) Familiarization – reading transcripts and listening to recordings to gain deep understanding of the phenomenon; (2) Inductive coding – using NVivo to identify relevant text segments without automated tools, enhancing contextual interpretation. Literature was set aside during this phase to minimize coding bias; (3) First- and second-order analysis – mapping participant terms (first order) to researcher-defined categories (second order), leading to aggregate themes (Gioia et al., 2013) and (4) Theme refinement – 74 codes were clustered into six sub-themes, three aligned with RQ1 and three with RQ2. Initially, 74 codes were identified after analyzing 27 interview transcripts. While coding, the focus was on how project professionals understanding of social value and how project team diversity contributes to creating it. The coding process was iterative, allowing for code refinement and pattern identification across transcripts (see Figure 2 for a diagram of the analysis process).

Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the final data structure, illustrating how first-order codes (participant terms) were grouped into second-order themes and then synthesized into aggregate dimensions. Figure 3 presents the three second-order themes related to RQ1: (1) social value extends beyond infrastructure itself, (2) social value encompasses upskilling, training and education and (3) social value means creating job opportunities. These themes were supported by first-order codes such as “transforming communities,” “investing in local education” and “opening employment pathways for immigrants, ex-offenders, and women.” Collectively, these data reflect project professionals’ multidimensional understanding of social value. Figure 4 presents the second set of themes aligned with RQ2, exploring how team diversity enables social value creation. The second-order themes include: (1) leveraging diverse perspectives to enhance social value creation, (2) strengthening social value by including local people in project teams and (3) creating social value through community representative project teams. First-order codes included “utilizing team diversity to understand local norms,” “engaging with communities effectively” and “developing trust and relationships through diversity.” These findings show how diversity in project teams supports inclusive engagement and context-sensitive project outcomes.

The trustworthiness of sub-themes was maintained using credibility strategies. Member checking was conducted through discussion among the authors (Nowell et al., 2017). Any disagreement was resolved through collective deliberation. A record of the collected data was maintained in Microsoft Excel to improve the transparency and consistency of the process, thus achieving an audit trail of qualitative data.

This section presents the findings of RQ1: project professionals’ perceptions of social value; and RQ2: their perceptions of project team diversity in creating social value in infrastructure projects.

The interview data revealed that project professionals’ understanding of social value as an outcome of infrastructure projects resulted in three sub-themes: (1) social value extends beyond the infrastructure itself, (2) social value encompasses upskilling, training and education and (3) social value means creating job opportunities. According to the interview participants, social value goes beyond just delivering the physical infrastructure (such as a bridge, building or facility), leaving long-term societal impacts. This reflects a shift in focus from physical asset delivery to relationship building, knowledge sharing and enabling future community development, aligning with the tenets of social capital theory. In addition, there is a strong consensus among the participants that social value encompasses upskilling, empowering individuals and enhancing their capabilities. Finally, social value entails providing job opportunities to a broad range of individuals, including abled, disabled, disadvantaged and women, highlighting the significance of diversity in creating meaningful social value. These three perspectives represent cognitive, structural and relational dimensions of social capital, as they reflect the importance of shared knowledge, connectedness and mutual trust in achieving lasting social outcomes. Taken together, the results provide a holistic view of social value, prioritizing both individual empowerment and community well-being. These three sub-themes are discussed below in detail.

The interview participants perceive social value as extending beyond merely delivering the physical infrastructure itself to the community, emphasizing that in infrastructure projects, social value encompasses much more than delivering the infrastructure alone. Social value is about the legacy the project leaves behind through transforming people’s lives. Social value entails providing meaningful contributions to uplifting the community. This broader interpretation links closely to structural social capital, where the infrastructure serves as a foundation for building networks, trust and collaborative relationships within and across communities.

According to the interviewees, social value can be served when the facility is considered from users’ perspectives, ensuring community members feel welcome and safe. A few participants considered that providing safety through infrastructure projects is core to creating social value. The interviewees contend that final deliverables (infrastructures) should be accessible to everyone to generate social value for the wider community. The product should be user-friendly to everyone, ensuring that no one feels left behind in the community.

This conceptualization of social value aligns with the idea of cognitive social capital, where shared values such as equity and inclusion shape design decisions that resonate with community needs.

Most participants signified that social value implies providing opportunities such as apprenticeships, traineeships and cadetships to young individuals to gain valuable skills and knowledge. Organizations involved in medium-to-large-scale projects can provide opportunities for the young population and train them to become valuable assets. This may address the talent shortage in the industry. This provides entry opportunities to industry, a way to career progression and empowers them to contribute effectively to infrastructure projects. Some tier-one organizations have already taken these initiatives to create social value through upskilling and traineeships.

By nurturing a diverse pipeline of talent through apprenticeships, traineeships, and cadetships, infrastructure projects contribute to social cohesion. These initiatives promote diversity within the workforce, address equity gaps, and create opportunities for underrepresented groups to thrive in the infrastructure sector. These learning pathways also build bonding and bridging social capital, strengthening internal workforce ties while connecting with diverse community stakeholders.

A few participants indicated that many education opportunities for local people are arranged while undertaking projects which are perceived to be a means of enhancing social value. P9 explained where project team members in remote areas played with the local kids who were not necessarily in education. Engagement with these kids boosted their dream to study and pursue STEM careers. This is a voluntary act that goes way beyond just delivering the infrastructure. Project teams get an opportunity to impact society through these infrastructure projects, thus contributing to delivering social value.

All interviewees collectively agreed that infrastructure projects offer substantial employment opportunities to the community. These projects aim to create economic independence, improve the financial situation and provide sustainable employment opportunities. The impacts of sustainable jobs on people’s livelihoods are powerful. They can uplift social value by providing job opportunities to the local community and offering employment prospects to new immigrants, ex-offenders, refugees and asylum seekers. These opportunities provide them with great benefits to change their well-being. These groups of people struggle to get opportunities to enhance their sustenance. Projects can add enormous benefits to improving their well-being.

A few participants suggested that social value through infrastructure projects can be enhanced by incorporating women in trade jobs. Trade is mainly a male-dominated industry. Welcoming women into the workforce provides them with financial independence and societal advancement. Women can gain economic stability and career growth by participating in trade jobs. Financial independence improves their quality of life and advances their decision-making abilities. Finally, infrastructure projects generate social value by offering job opportunities to the non-disabled and people with disabilities. This opportunity has a profound impact on their livelihoods. The employment opportunities provide them with economic independence, contribute to their families and break societal barriers and stereotypes about disability. Several social enterprises in Australia provide employment opportunities to disabled people, significantly improving social value generation.

This finding foregrounds the importance of structural social capital, particularly through institutional mechanisms that connect underrepresented groups with long-term economic participation.

Three sub-themes emerged from the interview data to address the second research question: influence of project team diversity on social value creation in infrastructure projects. The sub-themes included: (1) leveraging diverse perspectives to enhance social value creation, (2) strengthening social value by including local people in project teams and (3) creating social value through community representative project teams. These sub-themes are discussed below in detail, demonstrating how diversity in a project team can enhance social value creation in infrastructure projects. We interpreted these sub-themes using social capital theory, particularly its dimensions of structural, relational and cognitive capital, which helped us explain how team diversity fosters trust, connection and shared understanding with the community.

All the interviewees communally reported that diversity in project teams provides a wide range of benefits that positively impact social value generation. Project team members from diverse professionals and cultural backgrounds can bring new ideas, different perspectives and viewpoints to the team, which otherwise would not be considered. Project team members with varying professionals and cultural backgrounds possess numerous skill sets, knowledge bases, and ways of approaching problems. In a diverse team, individuals learn from each other and share different life experiences, contributing to the social outcomes’ richness.

Some organizations embrace refugees as engineers working in a different country, promoting cultural and ethnic diversity in project teams. Project professionals from various social backgrounds have a variety of perspectives on board as they adopt different methods and ideas. Diversity on project teams challenges the status quo of the projects and achieves a better outcome as they come from various walks of life. In addition to generating multiple ideas, diverse project teams can resonate well with the community, which is a mixture of people from different cultural, ethnic, professional and socioeconomic backgrounds. Given that Australia is a multicultural country, diversity is critical to understanding the needs of the distinct community, resulting in creating improved social value outcomes.

Diversity on the project team offers different solutions to a single problem. Having multiple views on a unique problem opens doors for innovation which is ultimately effective for delivering better social outcomes.

Almost all interviewees revealed that project teams in infrastructure projects should be as reflective of the communities as possible in which the project is being built to create social value for the community. A diverse project team with the reflection of the community, consisting of individuals from various cultural, ethnic and social backgrounds helps address the community’s needs. The inclusion of local representatives in a project team strengthens structural social capital by improving community networks, participation and information flow with the community and develop social ties. The developed network and social ties between the project team and community enhance the potential to access resources and information. A project team without the engagement and participation of local individuals may not understand the local norms, values and practices. Having a project team that can understand the diverse community promotes and delivers better outcomes with maximum social value. This will eventually ensure effective project outcomes and project sustainability.

If locals are absent from the project team, optimum outcomes on social value cannot be achieved through projects. This will warrant that projects are responsive to the community’s expectations and effective stakeholder engagement. Collectively, including a diverse project team reflecting the community ensures better social value creation for the varied community. Therefore, the interviewees advocated that in order to create social value, diversity in the project team is a key.

Furthermore, most interviewees suggested the significance of including Aboriginal people in infrastructure projects to create social value. Their perspectives and viewpoints are critical in delivering social value. Their involvement in projects promotes cultural preservation, respect, community engagement and reconciliation. This leads to more accepted, supported and beneficial infrastructure for Aboriginal communities, fostering trust and positive relationships. When the local community (Aboriginal people members) is involved in decision-making, relational social capital (trust) and structural social capital (social networks) are built between project teams and the community, enhancing cooperation and long-term support for the project. The interviewees agreed that to engage with the Aboriginal community to successfully generate social value, a project team member must bring cultural understanding and offer meaningful contributions.

For projects on Aboriginal land, including Aboriginal people on the project team is critical. Otherwise, Aboriginal property may be destroyed, which is very sacred to them, thus destroying the social value derived from the projects. An individual from a non-Aboriginal background may need help understanding the significance of Aboriginal culture and need to pay more attention. Therefore, to continue project work, incorporating Aboriginal people on the team is essential, which will help the project team understand cultural sensitivity.

Interviewees widely discussed the presence of diversity in project teams as a requirement to capture the needs of communities, thus contributing to elevating social value. If the project team has individuals from multiple backgrounds (representation of cultural and regions affiliations as much as possible), they can connect better to the community to cater to the broader community’s needs. Cognitive social capital is built upon shared values, beliefs and mutual understanding among individuals, facilitating effective collaboration and collective action. In infrastructure project teams, the presence of a team member who shares the same religious and cultural background as the local community can significantly contribute to the development of cognitive social capital.

A diverse project team may likely to be a representation of the community, which ensure a smooth community consultation and engagement. As infrastructure projects are to deliver on community needs, they must be consulted to understand what they want. Suppose that need is misaligned or has not been defined in appropriate consultation. In that case, a lot of capital, money and resources are wasted on delivering assets that are not adopted by the community. Listening to the community is critical, and to listen to the community, project teams should be diverse, reflecting the community in order to have active listening. A diverse project team contributes to active listening, effective community engagement and consultation, leading to enriching social value creation.

Having someone on the team from a similar background can help achieve better social outcomes, as it is easier to carry out project work with less hassle and community obstructions. Community rage and frustration are common phenomena when the project work hampers people’s day-to-day lives. According to the interviewees, if the project team has an individual from a similar background, they can better manage the community as they develop a sense of trust and positive relationships. They also get an opportunity to share their feelings and experiences with the team, as they can connect with the community better and build rapport.

According to many interviewees, diversity on the project team with community representation is useful for familiarizing the team with the community. This representation helps the project team schedule project tasks in a way that can be a win-win for both the project team and the community. This ultimately results in diminishing negative societal impacts and improving social value. When a project team includes individuals with common cultural or religious values, they naturally bring a deeper understanding of community values, traditions and expectations into the project. This shared identity fosters a sense of trust and alignment between the project team and community stakeholders, reducing potential misunderstandings and resistance. P10 outlined an example where they explained how understanding the community culture assisted them in scheduling project tasks less disturbingly.

Similarly, not everyone in the community speaks the same language and does not understand English, especially elderly migrants. On the other hand, it is essential to contact the community to update them on the critical project activities. If the project team has someone who can speak the same language as them, it is beneficial to connect with the community and avoid many difficulties in the project. If the community is on the same page as the project team, it is easier for the community to realize social value. Shared backgrounds contribute to a common language and symbolic understanding that facilitates effective communication. Through the analysis of project team dynamics, the data revealed that the inclusion of individuals from shared religious or cultural backgrounds within project teams can foster the promotion of shared meaning, common goals and mutual trust. This, in turn, strengthens stakeholder relationships and enhances the likelihood of delivering socially sustainable infrastructure outcomes.

This research inquired into infrastructure project professionals’ perceptions of social value and how project team diversity contributes to creating social value. While previous study, such as Gidigah et al. (2022) and Opoku and Guthrie (2018) investigated the conception and understanding of social value within the Ghanaian and UK construction industry, respectively, this study sought to first understand Australian infrastructure project professionals’ perceptions of social value. Recognizing that social value is inherently subjective and context-dependent, it was essential to establish how projects professionals perceive and define it in the context of Australian infrastructure project before examining how project team diversity is perceived to contribute to its creation.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study has qualitatively explored the views of social actors (project professionals) involved in infrastructure projects regarding social value. This highlights the concept’s subjective and elusive nature, making it difficult to provide a clear-cut definition or explanation (Hietschold et al., 2023). While previous studies acknowledge that social value can be interpreted in various ways, none have examined the perspectives of such a wide range of distinct social actors within a single study, making the conceptualization of social value both broad and grounded in professional practice. This new insight contributes to the ongoing global discussion about how social value is understood and operationalized, particularly by those directly responsible for project outcomes.

Consistent with the previous research, infrastructure project professionals perceive social value as extending well beyond the mere construction of physical assets (Harlock, 2014). They describe it as encompassing additional financial and nonfinancial benefits, such as employment, training, skills development, business creation, improved welfare and environmental protection, gained by individuals or communities through the execution of infrastructure project contracts (Burke and King, 2015; Reid and Loosemore, 2017; Troje, 2023). These perceptions reinforce the multidimensional nature of social value while also highlighting the lack of a shared definition across the industry.

Social capital theory posits that value is not solely derived from tangible resources but also from the networks, trust and social norms that bind people together (Coleman, 1988). Applied here, it helps interpret how project professionals understand social value as emerging from relationships and community benefits, not just physical outputs. This extends prior conceptualizations of social value to include relational and communal outcomes. Importantly, professionals appear to draw on elements of structural, relational, and cognitive social capital in their narratives, trust, collaboration, shared goals and networks, which deepen the understanding of how social value is perceived to be generated. While social value is linked to broader sustainability frameworks (e.g. triple bottom line), our findings suggest that project professionals do not explicitly use these frameworks to articulate their views. Instead, they focus on tangible socioeconomic outcomes, indicating a practical rather than theoretical orientation toward value creation. This has implications for policy and practice, especially in how social value is accessed and communicated across stakeholder groups.

Diversity in the project team has been widely linked to innovation and performance (Yi et al., 2017), yet its role in enabling social value, particularly from the perspective of project professionals, is less explored. This study addresses this gap by examining how project professionals perceive the connection between team diversity and social value creation.

Participants associated diverse teams with broader skill sets, lived experiences and cultural competencies that facilitate inclusive decision-making. These perceptions align with previous research but extend it by showing how professionals believe diversity shapes engagement with community needs and enhances value delivery for underrepresented groups (Won et al., 2021). Drawing from studies including Fernandes et al. (2023); Garcia et al. (2022); Liedtka and Ogilvie (2011), professionals viewed diversity as critical to creative problem solving and meaningful community participation (Caron et al., 2024). Social capital theory provides a useful interpretive lens, explaining how diversity supports the development of structural (networks), relational (trust) and cognitive (shared values) capital between project teams and communities. Professionals perceived these forms of capital as essential to delivering lasting social value. This perspective offers a novel contribution by linking internal team composition to external value outcomes, bridging a conceptual gap in the literature.

Figure 5 illustrates a conceptual framework where an interpretive alignment between inductively arrived themes and relevant dimensions of social capital theory is proposed. Its theoretical significance lies in showing how diverse teams are perceived to generate social value through social capital mechanisms. This includes not only improving planning and engagement but also fostering longer-term community trust, inclusion and well-being. Thus, the figure suggests an integrative model: one that demonstrates the perceived pathway from diversity, through social capital, to value creation. Importantly, while perceptions were generally positive, some participants acknowledged risks such as tokenism or the superficial use of diversity for reputational gain, aligning with critiques in the literature. There was limited discussion about potential drawbacks such as reduced team efficiency, increased coordination costs or decision-making delays, which are important considerations in project environments. Future research could examine these trade-offs more systematically, particularly in resource-constrained or time-sensitive infrastructure projects.

This research makes significant contributions to theory, research and practice. From a theoretical standpoint, this study makes a notable contribution by explaining the findings through the social capital theory. It highlights how project team diversity can enhance social value formation in Australian infrastructure projects, offering new insights into how diverse teams foster networks, trust, shared understanding and norms that ultimately drive social value. The social capital theory has been widely applied in organizational studies, in particular, to explain team performance (Oh et al., 2004), knowledge sharing (Lee et al., 2015), creativity (Chen et al., 2008) and relationship-based advantages (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998). However, its integration into the social value discourse in infrastructure projects remains limited.

This study advances social capital theory by demonstrating how structural, relational and cognitive social capital emerge in infrastructure settings, particularly through diverse project teams. Diverse project teams promote structural capital by expanding network ties that align with community demographics, cognitive capital by aligning team norms and values, and relational capital by developing trust and reciprocity, essential for meaningful engagement (Fuentes et al., 2019). These social capital mechanisms help project teams form stronger connections with communities, ensuring that intended social value is not only realized but also inclusive and relevant. For instance, participants described how including local and Indigenous team members improved community trust, enabling earlier and more meaningful engagement and contributing to outcomes such as targeted employment programs or tailored service delivery (Troje, 2023). This nuanced application of social capital theory extends its scope into infrastructure contexts, where social impact is increasingly prioritized.

While research on project team diversity often focuses on leadership or board-level representation (Terjesen et al., 2009) and its impact on team performance (Wu et al., 2019), its role in creating social value remains underexplored (Di Maddaloni and Sabini, 2022; Smyth and Vanclay, 2017). This study addresses this gap by demonstrating how project team diversity contributes to social value creation. It does so by bringing varied perspectives, engaging deeply with marginalized stakeholders, fostering a sense of belonging and promoting shared values and beliefs (Vuorinen et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2024). These outcomes are enabled through the development of social capital between the project team and both internal and external stakeholders (Loosemore and Lim, 2017).

Practically, this study provides guidance for infrastructure project-based organizations seeking to enhance social value through inclusive team composition and engagement practices. Three key recommendations are proposed. First, intentional recruitment of diverse teams, including representation from local and Indigenous communities, to enhance cultural sensitivity, trust-building and alignment with local values. Strategic recruitment, supported by organizational mandates and potentially reinforced through government policy, can improve the legitimacy and responsiveness of projects (Ghanbaripour et al., 2023). Second, embedding diversity into team-building culture, supported by training in cultural competence, inclusive collaboration and conflict resolution. This includes reframing social value as a core goal of infrastructure delivery, beyond traditional cost, time and scope metrics and enabling teams to understand how to enact social value on the ground (Fang et al., 2018). Third, promoting meaningful community engagement alongside team diversity to ensure that social capital is co-developed with communities. Early engagement can prevent misalignment between project outputs and community expectations, a risk that persists in many large-scale projects (Di Maddaloni and Sabini, 2022).

Together, these findings emphasize the need to move from transactional project delivery toward more inclusive and socially responsive infrastructure development. Building social capital in temporary organizations requires intentional strategies, as these settings lack the continuity and institutional memory found in permanent organizations. This shift reflects a more holistic and long-term vision of project success, grounded in community well-being and equity.

Underpinned by social capital theory, this research adopted an exploratory qualitative approach to investigate how infrastructure project professionals perceive social value and the impacts of project team diversity on creating social value through infrastructure projects.

The findings show that delivering social value is a critical component of infrastructure projects. However, social value is not just limited to successfully completing the project and delivering to the community, but it also encompasses many other associated advantages such as commitment to improving the well-being of the community through upskilling, training and education opportunities and job opportunities for abled, disabled, minorities and disadvantaged individuals. Infrastructure projects organizations are actively working to provide greater benefits to the community so that the legacy lasts way after the project is completed.

Project team diversity enriches the social value outcomes by providing a broad spectrum of perspectives, which improves decision-making processes. Diverse viewpoints assist the project team to open channels for innovation and contribute to addressing the needs of communities in a more authentic way, thus boosting social value. The findings highlighted the need for including the local community in the project teams to understand sensitivities of the culture, recognize local challenges and expectations of the community that can enable achievement of social value. Having local community representation helps build trust between the project team and community and designs project deliverables which meet their priorities. Finally, project teams with different background can better represent the community’s demographics and create a strong tie, thus enhancing project outcomes and social value.

While this study offers a positive outlook on embracing project team diversity, it is imperative to highlight that a lack of diversity in a team is a persistent challenge in construction and infrastructure projects (Baker et al., 2025; Karakhan et al., 2021). Despite its merits, many project-based organizations still suffer from adopting diversity in its full swing. Some of the key challenges include resistance to change, conscious and unconscious biases, lack of stringent and effective strategies, dearth of application of established initiatives and dysfunctional culture (Choi et al., 2022; Karakhan et al., 2021; Lekchiri and Kamm, 2020; Naoum et al., 2020). While the investigation of these barriers is out of the research scope, addressing the challenges is linked to social value creation through infrastructure projects. If diversity initiatives and applications are not rooted in the strategy of project-based organizations, the creation of social value may be compromised and jeopardized.

Being the first study which investigates social value in the context of infrastructure project team diversity, this study opens avenues for future research. As only project management professionals from infrastructure projects were interviewed in this study, this may have limited our understanding of the nuances of project team diversity and creation of social value. Future research may investigate the perspectives of policymakers to unpack how diversity is enforced via the regulatory framework. Community leaders and representatives can also add value to this investigation. In addition, this research adopted a qualitative research method and a mixed-method approach (such as quantitative–qualitative) could offer more generalizable findings (Di Maddaloni and Sabini, 2022). Future research studies may consider using a mixed-method research design for a broader and more robust understanding of the phenomena. Although this research shows that embracing project team diversity can create social value for the affected community, the barriers and enablers to do so were not discussed in this research due to its scope. Further, this study did not examine potential operational or managerial drawbacks of team diversity, such as potentially reduced efficiency, coordination complexity or increased project costs, which have been noted in literature on permanent organizations. These aspects merit future investigation in temporary, project-based settings to assess under what conditions diversity supports or hinders project outcomes.

Finally, this research was conducted in the Australian context. All interviewees were based in Australia, which further reduces the generalizability of the findings. Future studies could be undertaken in different geographical contexts to gain more insights into the findings. We anticipate that the findings may be different in developing nations.

In addition, this research advocates for diversity as an operational and strategic asset in infrastructure projects, suggesting that diverse project teams are better equipped to create and deliver social value. Organizations can enhance social capital within project teams by embedding diversity as a core value, ultimately producing infrastructure that resonates with and benefits diverse communities. Traditional cost-benefit analyses often consider stakeholder consultation and assessments of social impacts; however, this consideration and approaches typically operate within the pre-defined regulatory and economic constraints. Embedding diversity into project teams may ensure integrating diverse viewpoints in the decision-making process. A key downside of conventional stakeholder engagement is its prioritization of dominant economic metrics and immediate financial returns, thus overlooking long-term social benefits. By embracing diversity in decision-making through project teams, infrastructure project can obtain better social value, leading to sustainable outcomes. These contributions highlight the project diversity’s role as essential to both project success and fulfilling the social responsibility inherent in large-scale infrastructure initiatives.

1. How do infrastructure project professionals understand social value as an outcome of infrastructure projects?

2. How can project team diversity facilitate the creation of social value in infrastructure projects?

1. Could you please briefly introduce yourself, including your current role, time in the role, and any previous experience in infrastructure?

2. Could you please describe the current infrastructure project you are working on: the type, size in $value and # of staff, location.

3. What are the key sustainability objectives and deliverables for your infrastructure project?

4. Do sustainability objectives and deliverables include social value objectives?

5. What is your understanding of social value in the context of infrastructure projects?

6. What examples of social value could you provide from your project?

   • Main questions (connection between social value and project team diversity)

7. Do you think project team diversity (i.e. diverse group of employees) is related to achieving social value in infrastructure projects?

8. Do you think project team diversity strategies and practices are related to/have impact on achieving social value in infrastructure projects?

9. How do you see social value connected to project team diversity in infrastructure projects?

10. How can social value be delivered through project team diversity strategies and practices in infrastructure projects?

11. What are some drivers and barriers for delivering social value through project team diversity? What are some examples?

12. How can social value be delivered through project team diversity throughout the project lifecycle?

13. How committed do you see organizations to bringing social value through diversity in infrastructure projects?

1. Would you like to add something which we did not discuss?

2. Do you have any questions before we close off the interview?