Puddicombe, M S (2006) The limitations of planning: The importance of learning. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(9), pp. 949-955. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The ability to create new knowledge is a key to success. This paper explores two facets of the process of knowledge creation and their impact on project outcomes. The first deals with knowledge that is related to learning about the project. It is associated with the arrangement of the planning process, the characteristics of the project, and the behaviors of the project participants. The second type of knowledge creation deals with the project participants' learning about each other. It examines the activities and behaviors that take place early in the project and their affect on the activities that take place during the project. The results raise some provocative questions related to the efficacy of planning. The ability to manage change on an ongoing basis rather than the ability to plan appears to be the key to project management success. The results also suggest that the conditions necessary to manage change evolve over the duration of the project. The planning activities that occur early in the project are important in determining the path of evolution.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | engineering education; knowledge-based systems; organizations; project management |
| Index terms: | project outcome, planning process, knowledge creation, engineering education, project management, duration, evolution, knowledge-based system |
| Subjects: | artificial intelligence, professional education, project controls, knowledge management, project management theory and practice, project completion, environmental science |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Education, Digital Applications, Project Management, Information Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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