Madter, N; Brookes, N J; Bower, D A and Hagan, G (2012) Exploring project management continuing professional development in engineering construction. Construction Management and Economics, 30(8), pp. 639-651. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Project management is a critical organizational capability in the engineering construction sector: the development of that capability through continuing professional development (CPD) is, therefore, of substantive interest to practitioners and researchers alike. The aim of this investigation was to explore current practice in CPD in engineering construction. This was achieved by undertaking a cross-case analysis of the experiences of project management CPD in 17 organizations. The analysis revealed a highly unsystematic approach to CPD and a very limited adaptation of CPD to the engineering construction context. The impact of introducing more structured and contextualized approaches to CPD on the effectiveness of project managers needs to be investigated further.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | continuing professional development; engineering construction; project management |
| Index terms: | adaptation, project manager, project management, effectiveness, construction project management, investigation, continuing professional development, construction sector, organizational capability, practitioner, cross-case analysis |
| Subjects: | professional development, project management theory and practice, performance management, industry analysis, sociology, practitioner, user focus, data collection methods, profession, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Project Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Education, Design Practice, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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