Identifying the key process factors affecting project performance

Lindhard, S and Larsen, J K (2016) Identifying the key process factors affecting project performance. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 23(5), pp. 657-673. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose A construction project traditionally involves a variety of participants. Owners, consultants, and contractors all have diverse opinions and interests, but they all seek to ensure project success. Success is habitually measured as performance output regarding cost, time, and quality. Despite previous research mapping the success and failure factors, construction managers seem to have difficulty in attaining success. To provide clearer guidance on how to fulfill success criteria, the purpose of this paper is to identify the underlying factors that affect performance and thus project success in construction processes. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire survey based on a literature review provided 25 key process factors divided into five key categories. Based on the responses from commonly involved construction parties, the factors were ranked and tested for significant differences between the parties. Findings The top five most important process factors were found to relate to the sharing of knowledge and communication. Moreover, testing the ranking for significant differences between owners, consultants, and contractors revealed five differences. The differences related to the interpretation and importance of trust, shared objectives, project coordination, and alternative forms of coordination. Originality/value All respondents identify improved knowledge sharing and communication as the key to improved cost, time, and quality performance and are therefore the areas where construction managers need to focus their resources. Thus, improved experience sharing and communication will increase the likelihood of project success, through improving competences, commitment, and coordination.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: performance; knowledge management; communication; success factors; failure factors
Index terms: owner, project success, coordination, testing, project performance, quality performance, knowledge sharing, success factor, survey, literature review, commitment, failure factor, success criteria, knowledge management, questionnaire, construction manager, competence, construction project, methodology, mapping, construction process
Subjects: sociology, building construction, assessment methods, production management, personnel development, project management theory and practice, professional development, management, research methods, spatial and geospatial analysis, data analysis and analytics, knowledge management, professional practice, health monitoring assessment and metrics, project delivery, psychology, profession, risk assessment, data collection methods
Topics: Organizational Design, Site Management, Quality Management, Human Resources, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Information Management
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

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