Dina Koutsikouri, D A A S (2006) Critical success factors for multidisciplinary engineering projects. In: Boyd, D (ed.) Proceedings of 22nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2006, Birmingham, UK.
Abstract
Project success is an attractive idea but what factors lead to success remains an area of conjecture. In the project management literature the success has often been defined in terms of better control of timescales, budgets and resource planning. Yet these are impoverished terms for conceptualising success, which is both multi-dimensional and contextual. The study explores the perceptions of critical success factors (CSFs) in a multi-disciplinary engineering practice. Project success is seen to be related to five dimensions of work: individuals, teams, process, project and product. Understanding these elements and their interdependence may enable managers to identify strengths and weaknesses in current work practices. An important insight is that CSFs is a form of knowing, which needs to be articulated and communicated more effectively within the project community, emphasising the role of social capital and social networks.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | consulting engineering; critical success factors; multidisciplinary projects; organizational behaviour; project success; social capital; success factors |
| Index terms: | social network, success factor, organizational behaviour, social capital, manager, project success, resource planning, critical success factor, dimension, interdependence, project management, work practice |
| Subjects: | business, control systems, practitioner, health monitoring assessment and metrics, resource management, management, project management theory and practice, sociology, organizational analysis |
| Topics: | Site Management, Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Project Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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