Walker, A and Hughes, W P (1986) A conventionally-managed project: A systems- based case study. Construction Management and Economics, 4(1), pp. 57-74. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The technique of linear responsibility analysis is used for a retrospective case study of a private development consisting of an extension to an existing building to provide a wholesale butchery facility. The project used a conventionally-organized management process. The organization structure adopted on the project is analysed using concepts from systems theory which are included in Walker's theoretical model of the structure of building project organizations (Walker, 1981). This model proposes that the process of building provision can be viewed as systems and sub-systems which are differentiated from each other at decision points. Further to this, the sub-systems can be viewed as the interaction of managing system and operating system. Using Walker's model, a systematic analysis of the relationships between the contributors gives a quantitative assessment of the efficacy of the organizational structure used. The project’s organization structure diverged from the model’s propositions resulting in delay to the project's completion and cost overrun but the client was satisfied with the project functionally.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building; case study; conventionally-managed project; linear responsibility analysis; private industry; project management; systems theory |
| Index terms: | project management, interaction, cost overrun, case study, systems theory, project organization, organizational structure, linear responsibility analysis |
| Subjects: | organizational theory, project management theory and practice, theoretical framing, behavioral psychology, sociology, data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, financial and cost management |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 CTEA |
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