Galloway, P D (2006) Comparative study of university courses on critical-path method scheduling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(7), pp. 712-722. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
There is a growing need for project controls on today's construction projects. Delivering a project on time does not mean just signing a contract and hoping that the required contract completion date will be met. More often than not, the majority of today's constructed projects encounter events and/or changes that affect the original plan of executing a project. A key to monitoring a project's progress is a critical-path method (CPM) schedule. However, the methods and techniques of CPM scheduling vary widely on any construction site. In light of this difference, a growing need has emerged for standards for CPM scheduling, a common foundation from which terms, definitions, and applications can be universally understood. In determining what recommendations might be reasonable in establishing scheduling standards, one area to be examined is how CPM scheduling is being taught in the universities. In this examination, the writer conducted a survey of university CPM curriculums in the United States, Europe, and Asia. This paper reflects the findings of this survey focusing on the base guideline of time management as presented by the Project Management Institute's Project management book of knowledge (PMBOK) as compared to how the concepts in the PMBOK are taught in university courses in CPM scheduling in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Data obtained from the study will then provide a basis for recommendations to both industry and academia relative to potential changes which would bring the world closer together in commonality in the area of CPM scheduling.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | curricula; engineering education; scheduling; standards |
| Index terms: | engineering education, comparative study, construction site, project management, construction project, United States, academia, monitoring, project control, time management, survey, Asia, scheduling, Europe |
| Subjects: | regions and continents, physical geography and landforms, research design and methodology, professional education, educational institutions, Geography, production management, operations research, project controls, project management theory and practice, work location, control systems, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Education, Site Management, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Time Control |
| 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