Liu, A M M (1999) A research model of project complexity and goal commitment effects on project outcome. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 6(2), pp. 105-111. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Essentially, performance evaluation is a human behavioural phenomenon involving a cognitive perceptual process. Project performance has two attributes, at least: (1) the individual's expected performance (manifested as assigned goals); and (2) the individual's perceived actual performance. Evaluation comprises the comparison of these two attributes. The present paper develops a research model for project outcome evaluation designed to examine the effects of the two moderators, goal commitment and project complexity, on the perceived project performance of project participants. It is postulated that: (1) there is a positive monotonic relationship between goal difficulty and performance, but that this is moderated by project complexity; (2) difficult goals lead to higher performance, but that this will happen only when the project participant is committed to the goal; and (3) the transferability of critical success factors to enhance/improve the performance of subsequent projects has to be examined and applied in the light of the effects of these two moderators on project performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | goal commitment; project complexity; outcome |
| Index terms: | performance evaluation, project outcome, project complexity, project performance, critical success factor, commitment |
| Subjects: | control systems, organizational theory, project management theory and practice, psychology, project completion, performance measurement |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Project Management, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 1 C |
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