Dao, B; Kermanshachi, S; Shane, J; Anderson, S and Damnjanovic, I (2022) Developing a logistic regression model to measure project complexity. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 18(3), pp. 226-240. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
The study develops a binary logistic regression model to assess and measure complexity levels of a project. The complexity measures were statistically verified to create a basis for the model. The variable reduction process called Principle Component Analysis was used to combine the significant complexity indicators into component variables. The study enriches the complexity theoretical basis in the field of project management by providing an innovative approach that aids scholars and practitioners in assessing complexity levels based on the applicability of identified complexity measures. The research results also help facilitate the management process and formulate an appropriate complexity management plan.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity attribute; complexity indicator; logistic regression model; project complexity |
| Index terms: | logistic regression, project complexity, project management, complexity, component analysis, practitioner |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, systems engineering, organizational theory, project management theory and practice, data analysis and analytics, practitioner |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| 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