Adams, J D and Brown, A W (2002) Project management in public sector construction projects: Assessing value for money. Journal of Construction Procurement, 8(2), pp. 84-100. ISSN 1358-9180
Abstract
Clients in the UK frequently appoint consultant project managers to control new building procurement. This has been the case despite varying perceptions relating to the value added to a project by such consultants. Indeed, a number of clients indicate scepticism in connection with the use of external consultant project managers and some are convinced that little benefit is secured in relation to the professional fees, which are incurred. Given that the use of project management continues to grow it is considered of importance that precise influence that the consultant project manager has upon the performance variables, time, cost and quality, be objectively quantified. This paper presents a casual path model developed in order to achieve such a quantification and presents the results obtained by analysis of a provisional data set. The results are analysed and the implications for the project management discipline are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | client requirements, path analysis, project management, value |
| Index terms: | building procurement, value-for-money, construction project, public sector, quantification, project manager, project management, path analysis, client requirements |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, professional development, statistical analysis, administrative law, measurement and scaling, profession, evaluation, production management, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Project Management, Procurement, Legal Issues, Value Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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