Pocock, J B; Liu, L Y and Kim, M K (1997) Impact of management approach on project interaction and performance. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 123(4), pp. 411-418. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
It has long been believed that improving project integration directly improves project performance. There has been a lack of quantitative research to directly support or negate this belief. This paper presents a method for approximating project integration, and demonstrates the impact of improved interaction on project performance. An earlier work developed a method for measuring an individual project's "degree of interaction" (DOI). Degree of interaction scores are calculated and compared for 38 projects, divided into traditional and alternative project approaches. The alternative projects have significantly higher average DOI scores than do traditional projects, indicating that they provide better opportunities for interaction. Project performance of alternative projects is better than that of traditional projects. The following four indicators of project performance are measured: cost growth, schedule growth, number of contract modifications, and modifications due to design deficiencies. The impact of improved interaction on objective performance measures is validated by studying 209 completed projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | contract modification, performance measure, integration, quantitative research, project performance, schedule growth, interaction |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, behavioral psychology, project controls, organizational analysis, project management theory and practice, contract management, performance measurement |
| Topics: | Time Control, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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