Nitithamyong, P (2003) Analysis of success and failure factors in application of web-based project management systems in construction. PhD thesis, Purdue University, USA.
Abstract
The use of Web-Based Project Management Systems (WPMSs) is rapidly increasing in the construction industry as it promises to enhance project documentation and control and to revolutionize the way in which a project team conducts businesses. However, the WPMS concept is still relatively new to most construction firms and the usefulness of WPMSs in construction has not yet been proven as promised. Research studies conducted to date usually have aimed to solve existing WPMS implementation problems by introducing new advanced techniques to improve the current systems, but non-technical factors are often considered separately, overlooked, or even ignored completely. It is obvious that a gap exists in our understanding of what factors can influence the success/failure of WPMS implementation. This study developed and tested an analytical model to capture the success/failure factors of WPMS implementation in construction projects, with a focus on systems that can be rented or leased from Application Service Providers (ASPs) and referred to as Project Management Systems-Application Service Providers (PM-ASPs). The model proposed that characteristics of the project, the project team, the service provider, and the system are among the groups of factors affecting the performance of a PM-ASP in a construction project. The factors associated with each group reflect both concerns from the industry practitioners, as well as factors proposed in the literature as important. A Web-based questionnaire was developed and used to collect the data, and a total of 82 completed responses from construction projects that were managed utilizing 14 different PM-ASPS were analyzed. The results showed partial support for the hypothesized relationships in the model, as well as some contra-hypotheses findings. Three project-level case studies were conducted to illustrate the quantitative findings obtained from the survey, and the findings from the case studies and the survey were summarized into a series of recommendations that form the basis for a PM-ASP implementation model. The results of this study could help construction-related organizations that are currently using or planning to implement PM-ASPS gain a better understanding of the important factors that need to be considered to ensure the success of PM-ASP implementation and thereby lead to an improvement of PM-ASP utilization, management, and acceptance in the construction industry.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Skibniewski, M J |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | failure; project team; construction firms; construction project; documentation; case studies |
| Index terms: | case study, project team, project management, construction industry, implementation, failure factor, construction firm, survey, documentation, project documentation, practitioner, questionnaire, construction project, analytical model |
| Subjects: | project delivery, contractual arrangements, project planning, practitioner, organization, risk assessment, data collection methods, industry analysis, project management theory and practice, professional development, production management, theoretical framing |
| Topics: | Procurement, Risk Management, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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