Dossick, C S and Sakagami, M (2008) Implementing web-based project management systems in the United States and Japan. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(3), pp. 189-196. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper reports on results of research conducted at the University of Washington to investigate the means and methods for overcoming barriers to the implementation of Web-based project management systems (WPMS), and to develop a set of best practices in both the United States and Japanese construction industries. The United States and Japanese economies are high-tech intensive and both cultures have embraced technology. However, a relatively small sector of the construction industry in each country has implemented WPMS. The question posed here is why have these drivers not resulted in the industry's adoption of this new technology, and further, perhaps there are lessons learned from those who have successfully implemented WPMS. This research seeks to broaden our understanding of implementation barriers that are limiting the use of WPMS tools as well as means and methods of overcoming those barriers based on successful implementation in both countries.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | communication; information management; information technology; internet; Japan; project management |
| Index terms: | new technology, project management, internet, implementation, construction industry, best practice, Japan, United States, information technology, lessons learned |
| Subjects: | computing systems, business, contractual arrangements, innovation and technology management, Geography, project management theory and practice, professional development, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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