A Framework of Issues in Large Process Modelling Projects

As process management projects have increased in size due to globalised and company-wide initiatives, a corresponding growth in the size of process modeling projects can be observed. Despite advances in languages, tools and methodologies, several aspects of these projects have been largely ignored by the academic community. This paper makes a first contribution to a potential research agenda in this field by defining the characteristics of large-scale process modeling projects and proposing a framework of related issues. These issues are derived from a semi -structured interview and six focus groups conducted in Australia, Germany and the USA with enterprise and modeling software vendors and customers. The focus groups confirm the existence of unresolved problems in business process modeling projects. The outcomes provide a research agenda which directs researchers into further studies in global process management, process model decomposition and the overall governance of process modeling projects. It is expected that this research agenda will provide guidance to researchers and practitioners by focusing on areas of high theoretical and practical relevance.

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition in development projects

New product development projects are experiencing increasing internal and external project complexity. Complexity leadership theory proposes that external complexity requires adaptive and enabling leadership, which facilitates opportunity recognition (OR). We ask whether internal complexity also requires OR for increased adaptability. We extend a model of EO and OR to conclude that internal complexity may require more careful OR. This means that leaders of technically or structurally complex projects need to evaluate opportunities more carefully than those in projects with external or technological complexity.

Systematising knowledge management in projects

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a practicable systems-based approach to knowledge management (KM) in a project environment, to encourage organisations to unlock the value in their review processes. It relies on knowledge capture and storage at decision review points, to enrich individual, team and organisational learning during the project life cycle. The project's phases are typically represented horizontally with deliverables (objectives) or project "promises" as the desirable outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to give expression through introducing a vertical dimension to facilitate the KM process. A model is proposed that conceptualises project-specific knowledge drawing on and feeding into the organisation's knowledge management system (KMS) at tactical and strategic levels. Design/methodology/approach – This conceptual paper links concepts from systems theory with KM, to produce a model to identify, collate, and optimise project-based knowledge and integrate it into the management process. Findings – The application of the system theory approach enriches the knowledge generated by a project, and feeds it into the next phase of that project. At the same time, it contributes to the individual's and project team's KM, specifies possible courses of action, together with risks, costs and benefits and thus it expands the organisation's higher level KMS. Research limitations/implications – The concept suggests that the knowledge capture, storage and sharing process may best be undertaken holistically, in view of the systems relationships between the tasks. Systems theory structures this process. Research opportunities include studying the interfaces between levels of KM, in relation to the project's progress. Practical implications – Reconceptualisation of the project as a knowledge creation process may improve the project's progress as well as add to the individual's, project team's, and wider organisation's knowledge base. An example is given. Originality/value – This paper illuminates the broader potential of under-utilised opportunities in well-known management approaches to add dimension to the business project, of knowledge creation, storage and sharing.

The journey to delivered value in Australian procurement

In line with developments overseas Australian clients are turning to considerations of value in project procurement. Until the 1980s the industry operated in a largely traditional manner however the extremely adversarial behaviour exhibited during towards the end of the decade led to a number of significant events and initiatives including the publication of “No Dispute”, the Gyles Royal Commission into the Building Industry, the Construction Industry Development Agency (CIDA) and the work of the Australian Procurement and Construction Council (APCC). A number of research projects in progress in the CRC for Construction Innovation (CRC CI) are focussing on the assessment of value and methodologies to support the delivery of value in the procurement and management of engineering and construction projects. This paper charts the emergence of several key drivers in the process and illustrates how they can be integrated into a comprehensive Decision Support System that balances value to stakeholders with project imperatives and incorporates a lessons learned data base which enriches the decision making process to optimise delivery method design and selection.

Waste minimisation in office refurbishment projects : an Australian perspective

The refurbishment of commercial buildings is growing as a percentage of overall construction activity in Australia and this trend is likely to continue. Refurbishment generates a significant waste stream much of which is potentially reusable or recyclable. Despite this potential, several factors are known to unnecessarily inhibit the amount of recycling that actually occurs on renovation projects. In order to identify the reasons causing this reluctance, a process of project monitoring and expert consultation was carried out. Twenty three experts experienced in commercial refurbishment projects and three waste contractors with specific knowledge of construction waste were interviewed. Records of receipts for waste from a case study project reveal three principal factors inhibiting recycling rates: the presence of asbestos in the building; the continued occupation of the building during construction; and the breaking up of a large project into small separate contracts thereby reducing economies of scale. To ascertain the potential for improvement, current rates for reuse and recycling of materials were collected from the experts. The results revealed a considerable variation in practice between companies and indicated key areas which should be targeted to improve performance.

Extending life-cycle costing (LCC) analysis for sustainability considerations in road infrastructure projects

Sustainable development is about making societal investments. These investments should be in synchronization with the natural environment, trends of social development, as well as organisational and local economies over a long time span. Traditionally in the eyes of clients, project development will need to produce the required profit margins, with some degrees of consideration for other impacts. This is being changed as all citizens of our society are becoming more aware of concepts and challenges such as the climate change, greenhouse footprints, and social dimensions of sustainability, and will in turn demand answers to these issues in built facilities. A large number of R&D projects have focused on the technical advancement and environmental assessment of products and built facilities. It is equally important address the cost/benefit issue, as developers in the world would not want to loose money by investing in built assets. For infrastructure projects, due to its significant cost of development and lengthy delivery time, presenting the full money story of going green is of vital importance. Traditional views of life-cycle costing tend to focus on the pure economics of a construction project. Sustainability concepts are not broadly integrated with the current LCCA in the construction sector. To rectify this problem, this paper reports on the progress to date of developing and extending contemporary LCCA models in the evaluation of road infrastructure sustainability. The suggested new model development is based on sustainability indicators identified through previous research, and incorporating industry verified cost elements of sustainability measures. The on-going project aims to design and a working model for sustainability life-cycle costing analysis for this type of infrastructure projects.

How environmental and organizational complexity affects opportunity recognition and exploitation in development projects

Principal Topic: Project structures are often created by entrepreneurs and large corporate organizations to develop new products. Since new product development projects (NPDP) are more often situated within a larger organization, intrapreneurship or corporate entrepreneurship plays an important role in bringing these projects to fruition. Since NPDP often involves the development of a new product using immature technology, we describe development of an immature technology. The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 aircraft is being developed by the U.S. Department of Defense and eight allied nations. In 2001 Lockheed Martin won a $19 billion contract to develop an affordable, stealthy and supersonic all-weather strike fighter designed to replace a wide range of aging fighter aircraft. In this research we define a complex project as one that demonstrates a number of sources of uncertainty to a degree, or level of severity, that makes it extremely difficult to predict project outcomes, to control or manage project (Remington & Zolin, Forthcoming). Project complexity has been conceptualized by Remington and Pollock (2007) in terms of four major sources of complexity; temporal, directional, structural and technological complexity (See Figure 1). Temporal complexity exists when projects experience significant environmental change outside the direct influence or control of the project. The Global Economic Crisis of 2008 - 2009 is a good example of the type of environmental change that can make a project complex as, for example in the JSF project, where project managers attempt to respond to changes in interest rates, international currency exchange rates and commodity prices etc. Directional complexity exists in a project where stakeholders' goals are unclear or undefined, where progress is hindered by unknown political agendas, or where stakeholders disagree or misunderstand project goals. In the JSF project all the services and all non countries have to agree to the specifications of the three variants of the aircraft; Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL), Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) and the Carrier Variant (CV). Because the Navy requires a plane that can take off and land on an aircraft carrier, that required a special variant of the aircraft design, adding complexity to the project. Technical complexity occurs in a project using technology that is immature or where design characteristics are unknown or untried. Developing a plane that can take off on a very short runway and land vertically created may highly interdependent technological challenges to correctly locate, direct and balance the lift fans, modulate the airflow and provide equivalent amount of thrust from the downward vectored rear exhaust to lift the aircraft and at the same time control engine temperatures. These technological challenges make costing and scheduling equally challenging. Structural complexity in a project comes from the sheer numbers of elements such as the number of people, teams or organizations involved, ambiguity regarding the elements, and the massive degree of interconnectedness between them. While Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor, they are assisted in major aspects of the JSF development by Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, Pratt & Whitney and GE/Rolls-Royce Fighter Engineer Team and innumerable subcontractors. In addition to identifying opportunities to achieve project goals, complex projects also need to identify and exploit opportunities to increase agility in response to changing stakeholder demands or to reduce project risks. Complexity Leadership Theory contends that in complex environments adaptive and enabling leadership are needed (Uhl-Bien, Marion and McKelvey, 2007). Adaptive leadership facilitates creativity, learning and adaptability, while enabling leadership handles the conflicts that inevitably arise between adaptive leadership and traditional administrative leadership (Uhl-Bien and Marion, 2007). Hence, adaptive leadership involves the recognition and opportunities to adapt, while and enabling leadership involves the exploitation of these opportunities. Our research questions revolve around the type or source of complexity and its relationship to opportunity recognition and exploitation. For example, is it only external environmental complexity that creates the need for the entrepreneurial behaviours, such as opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? Do the internal dimensions of project complexity, such as technological and structural complexity, also create the need for opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation? The Kropp, Zolin and Lindsay model (2009) describes a relationship between entrepreneurial orientation (EO), opportunity recognition (OR), and opportunity exploitation (OX) in complex projects, with environmental and organizational contextual variables as moderators. We extend their model by defining the affects of external complexity and internal complexity on OR and OX. ---------- Methodology/Key Propositions: When the environment complex EO is more likely to result in OR because project members will be actively looking for solutions to problems created by environmental change. But in projects that are technologically or structurally complex project leaders and members may try to make the minimum changes possible to reduce the risk of creating new problems due to delays or schedule changes. In projects with environmental or technological complexity project leaders who encourage the innovativeness dimension of EO will increase OR in complex projects. But projects with technical or structural complexity innovativeness will not necessarily result in the recognition and exploitation of opportunities due to the over-riding importance of maintaining stability in the highly intricate and interconnected project structure. We propose that in projects with environmental complexity creating the need for change and innovation project leaders, who are willing to accept and manage risk, are more likely to identify opportunities to increase project effectiveness and efficiency. In contrast in projects with internal complexity a much higher willingness to accept risk will be necessary to trigger opportunity recognition. In structurally complex projects we predict it will be less likely to find a relationship between risk taking and OP. When the environment is complex, and a project has autonomy, they will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. When a project experiences high competitive aggressiveness and their environment is complex, project leaders will be motivated to execute opportunities to improve the project's performance. In contrast, when the project has high internal complexity, they will be more cautious in execution. This paper reports the first stage of a three year study into the behaviours of managers, leaders and team members of complex projects. We conduct a qualitative study involving a Group Discussion with experienced project leaders. The objective is to determine how leaders of large and potentially complex projects perceive that external and internal complexity will influence the affects of EO on OR. ---------- Results and Implications: These results will help identify and distinguish the impact of external and internal complexity on entrepreneurial behaviours in NPDP. Project managers will be better able to quickly decide how and when to respond to changes in the environment and internal project events.

Responding to sustainability challenge and cost implications in highway construction projects

Highway construction often requires a significant capital input; therefore it often causes serious financial implications for developers, owners and operators. The recent industry-wide focus on sustainability has added a new dimension to the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the economical scale of ‘going green’. Comprehensive analysis of the whole-of-life highway development that responds to sustainability challenges is one of the primary concerns for stakeholders. Principles of engineering economics and life cycle costing have been used to determine the incremental capacity investments for highway projects. However, the consideration of costs and issues associated with sustainability is still very limited in current studies on highway projects. Previous studies have identified that highway project investments are primarily concerned with direct market costs that can be quantified through life cycle costing analysis (LCCA). But they tend to ignore costs that are difficult to calculate, as those related to environmental and social elements. On a more positive note, these studies proved that the inclusion of such costs is an essential part of the overall development investment and a primary concern for decision making by the stakeholders. This paper discusses a research attempt to identify and categorise sustainability cost elements for highway projects. Through questionnaire survey, a set of sustainability cost elements on highway projects has been proposed. These cost elements are incorporated into the extension of some of the existing Life Cycle Costing Analysis (LCCA) models in order to produce a holistic financial picture of the highway project. It is expected that a new LCCA model will be established to serve as a suitable tool for decision making for highway project stakeholders.

The management of transport construction projects : a survey of public sector organisations in Queensland Australia

Construction procurement organisations in the Australian framework provide broad guidelines on project management in setting benchmark performance measurements and processes for evaluating their projects. Despite this, little has been known in the project management practise in transport construction projects in Australia, in particular Queensland. Questionnaire data from 53 project management practitioners employed in State and City public sector organisations in Queensland,suggested that many practitioners in the public sector have little or a lack of understanding of government regulatory policies, which are used as economic evaluation tools for project options. Public sector project managers perceive socio-economic evaluation tools as inappropriate for public sector projects. The survey results also found conducting risk management analysis, developing a risk register and mitigation of risks were most effective way of managing risk. This study provides an opportunity for the public sector to review and provide training on project management practices and government regulatory policies governing public projects. This will improve project management practitioners’ understanding and interpretation of government regulatory policies.

Implementing value management as a decision-making tool in the design stages of design and build construction projects : a methodology for improved cost optimization

Value Management (VM) has been proven to provide a structured framework, together with other supporting tools and techniques, that facilitate effective decision-making in many types of projects, thus achieving ‘best value’ for clients. One of the major success factors of VM in achieving better project objectives for clients is through the provision of beneficial input by multi-disciplinary team members being involved in critical decision-making discussions during the early stage of construction projects. This paper describes a doctoral research proposal based on the application of VM in design and build construction projects, especially focusing on the design stage. The research aims to study the effects of implementing VM in design and build construction projects, in particular how well the methodology addresses issues related to cost overruns resulting from poor coordination and overlooking of critical constructability issues amongst team members in construction projects in Malaysia. It is proposed that through contractors’ early involvement during the design stage, combined with the use of the VM methodology, particularly as a decision-making tool, better optimization of construction cost can be achieved, thus promoting more efficient and effective constructability. The main methods used in this research involve a thorough literature study, semi-structured interviews, and a survey of major stakeholders, a detailed case study and a VM workshop and focus group discussions involving construction professionals in order to explore and possibly develop a framework and a specific methodology for the facilitating successful application of VM within design and build construction projects.