Ginevan, S R (2022) The difference of how gender perceives project complexity: A cross sectional study. PhD thesis, Capella University, USA.
Abstract
Success in project management continues to be elusive. The advancement of technology and continually larger projects add to project complexity. This increase in project complexity only furthers the challenge of obtaining project success. Some research has indicated that communication can increase the likelihood of project success. This study aims to understand how different genders perceive project complexity. The research question asks, do male and female project personnel perceive project complexity differently? This study is a quantitative, nonexperimental, cross sectional study. In the study, project personnel in the construction industry, in North America were surveyed. The Project Complexity and Uncertainty Scale was used to collect data for this study. An independent samples t-test was used to analyze the data collected. The null hypothesis states that there is no difference in how male project personnel perceives project complexity. The null hypothesis failed to be rejected as an analysis of the data shows that there was not a statistically significant difference between how males and females perceive project complexity on construction projects in North America.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Ross, S |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; personnel; uncertainty; communication; project success; gender; construction project |
| Index terms: | personnel, construction project, project complexity, complexity, project success, construction industry, project management |
| Subjects: | organizational theory, production management, systems engineering, industry analysis, project management theory and practice, management |
| Topics: | Project Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Human Resources |
| 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