Badran, S S and Abdallah, A B (2025) Lean vs agile project management in construction: Impacts on project performance outcomes. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(5), pp. 2844-2869. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The present research aims to investigate how lean project management (LPM) and agile project management (APM) affect project performance outcomes in the construction sector in Jordan. This study focuses on six key project performance outcomes, namely cost, time, quality, client satisfaction, innovation and responsiveness. Design/methodology/approach: The present study employed a quantitative approach to achieve the research objectives. Accordingly, a multi-item survey questionnaire was prepared to gather data from 392 project managers from construction companies in Jordan. The study’s model showed acceptable levels regarding reliability, validity, fit indices and discriminant validity. In order to test the hypotheses of this study, path analysis was employed using Amos 24.0 software. Findings: LPM demonstrated a remarkably high positive impact on cost performance. It also positively affected quality performance and client satisfaction. However, LPM insignificantly affected time, innovation and responsiveness performance measures. On the other hand, APM showed a notably high positive impact on innovation and responsiveness. The findings also revealed that APM positively impacted quality performance and client satisfaction. In addition, APM negatively impacted cost performance and insignificantly impacted time performance. Originality/value: This study is one of the first comprehensive studies to empirically examine the impact of both LPM and APM on various project performance outcomes in the construction industry in the context of a developing country. It reveals some similarities and differences between LPM and APM with regard to their impacts on project management outcomes. The findings are expected to guide managers in selecting the appropriate project management approach based on the desired performance outcomes. Accordingly, it offers important implications for project managers in construction companies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | agile project management; client satisfaction; cost performance; innovation performance; lean project management; project performance; quality performance; responsiveness performance; time performance |
| Index terms: | project management, path analysis, Jordan, construction industry, client satisfaction, project performance, quality performance, validity, innovation performance, performance outcome, project manager, cost performance, construction sector, questionnaire, methodology, time performance, construction company, survey, performance measure, developing country, manager |
| Subjects: | practitioner, evaluation and assessment methods, client relations, organization, Geography, development economics, research methods, project delivery, value management, data collection methods, profession, industry analysis, statistical analysis, project controls, project management theory and practice, performance measurement, economics |
| Topics: | Project Management, Geographical Context, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, International Construction, Time Control |
| 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