Adighibe, C; Skitmore, M and Wong, J (2010) The management of transport construction projects: A survey of public sector organisations in Queensland Australia. International Journal of Construction Management, 10(1), pp. 17-33. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Construction procurement organisations in the Australian framework provide broad guidelines on project management in setting benchmark performance measurements and processes for evaluating their projects. Despite this, little has been known in the project management practise in transport construction projects in Australia, in particular Queensland. Questionnaire data from 53 project management practitioners employed in State and City public sector organisations in Queensland,suggested that many practitioners in the public sector have little or a lack of understanding of government regulatory policies, which are used as economic evaluation tools for project options. Public sector project managers perceive socio-economic evaluation tools as inappropriate for public sector projects. The survey results also found conducting risk management analysis, developing a risk register and mitigation of risks were most effective way of managing risk. This study provides an opportunity for the public sector to review and provide training on project management practices and government regulatory policies governing public projects. This will improve project management practitioners' understanding and interpretation of government regulatory policies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; government regulatory policies; project management; Queensland; transport construction project |
| Index terms: | project manager, public sector, Australia, risk management, construction procurement, economic evaluation, project management, option, project management practice, benchmark performance, Queensland, survey, public sector organization, risk register, questionnaire, mitigation, practitioner, construction project, public project |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, risk assessment, profession, contractual arrangements, production management, Geography, infrastructure engineering, financial risk, project management theory and practice, performance measurement, administrative law, financial analysis, decision analysis |
| Topics: | Procurement, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Cost Management, Quality Management, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here