Dainty, A R J; Cheng, M I and Moore, D R (2003) Redefining performance measures for construction project managers: An empirical evaluation. Construction Management and Economics, 21(2), pp. 209-218. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Traditional success criteria for construction projects centre on the achievement of cost, programme and quality targets. In this paper, it is argued that these simple measures are too crude to be used for gauging managers' performance in the context of today's construction project environment, as many variables outside of the manager's control can impact on outturn performance and the demands on project managers are far broader than in the past. It is argued that the industry needs to define more appropriate performance criteria for measuring project managers' performance and encouraging their professional development. These must redefine traditional success parameters to consider the knowledge, skills and behavioural inputs which contribute to superior performance. These can then be used to engender a more appropriate set of management behaviours that lead to improved project outcomes. This study has developed such a framework by examining the views of members of project teams and other organizational stakeholders through a series of focus groups. Factor analysis was used to refine a range of nine performance criteria against which managers' performance can be evaluated. These have the potential to be used as a basis for developing more appropriate reward management approaches and as a starting point for developing competency-based performance management tools in the future.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | competence analysis; contractor's construction project managers; factor analysis; performance criteria; performance management |
| Index terms: | competence, construction project, manager, success criteria, performance criteria, focus group, performance measure, programme, factor analysis, project team, performance management, professional development, project manager, project outcome |
| Subjects: | practitioner, project completion, data collection methods, profession, project delivery, professional development, personnel development, production management, performance measurement, statistical analysis, assessment methods, project controls |
| Topics: | Information Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Human Resources, Quality Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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