Allport, R J (2008) Improving decision-making for major urban rail projects. PhD thesis, Imperial College London, UK.
Abstract
This research concerns the management of dynamic complexity for a particularly demanding form of megaproject - 'metros' that are defined as urban rail systems that carry a mass ridership rapidly. Increasingly large cities that are not poor turn to metros as the centre-piece of their sustainable development policy. Metros are important because of this and because of their opportunity cost. It is evidently necessary that these decisions are soundly based. The author, having spent his career working in this sector became convinced that there was both a major problem - of a lack of success in developing metro projects. The research purpose was to identify what could be done to improve things - not theoretically but practically. The research was based upon a comprehensive review of existing knowledge about decision-making, major project development and experiences of project success, together with nine in-depth case studies of neWlyopen metros in Asia and the UK. Interviews with key stakeholders and accessed documentation established what had happened, why and with what consequences for whom. The research revealed degrees of success - almost complete in two cases, and a better delivery record than previously known, albeit with caveats; but a common failure to deliver the operational benefits used to justify their costs. An understanding was developed that appeared to explain how projects happened, and issues were identified at the heart of the subject. These concerned sponsor characteristics and strategies, central government's role in creating an enabling environment, how strategic misrepresentation could be reduced and optimism bias countered, a potential role for the private sector, and changes in the management of metro projects, and in particular planning. Practical approaches were developed and a change agenda formulated that could improve success. This agenda appears to provide a resource for effecting improvements that is richer and more comprehensive than previous approaches.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; documentation; government; improvement; megaproject; policy; private sector; project success; sustainable development; stakeholders; failure; optimism bias; case studies; interview; UK |
| Index terms: | major project, private sector, case study, project success, heart, optimism bias, documentation, sustainable development, strategy, interview, complexity, railway construction, megaproject, decision-making, Asia, career |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, regions and continents, strategic project management, civil engineering, management, medical science and clinical practice, project management theory and practice, professional development, health safety and environment, decision analysis, cognitive psychology, systems engineering, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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