Knowledge Sharing within IT Projects

Even though today’s corporations recognize that they need to understand modern project management techniques (Schwalbe, 2002, p2), many researchers continue to provide evidence of poor IT project success. With Kotnour, (2000) finding that project performance is positively associated with project knowledge, a better understanding of how to effectively manage knowledge in IT projects should have considerable practical significance for increasing the chances of project success. Using a combined qualitative/quantitative method of data collection in multiple case studies spanning four continents, and comprising a variety of organizational types, the focus of this current research centered on the question of why individuals working within IT project teams might be motivated towards, or inhibited from, sharing their knowledge and experience in their activities, procedures, and processes. The research concluded with the development of a new theoretical model of knowledge sharing behavior, ‘The Alignment Model of Motivational Focus’. This model suggests that an individual’s propensity to share knowledge and experience is a function of perceived personal benefits and costs associated with the activity, balanced against the individual’s alignment to a group of ‘institutional’ factors. These factors are identified as alignments to the project team, to the organization, and dependent on the circumstances, to either the professional discipline or community of practice, to which the individual belongs.

Practice briefing : Is BOT the best financing model to procure infrastructure projects? A case study of the Hong Kong-Shuhai-Macau Bridge

Abstract: Purpose – Several major infrastructure projects in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) have been delivered by the build-operate-transfer (BOT) model since the 1960s. Although the benefits of using BOT have been reported abundantly in the contemporary literature, some BOT projects were less successful than the others. This paper aims to find out why this is so and to explore whether BOT is the best financing model to procure major infrastructure projects. Design/methodology/approach – The benefits of BOT will first be reviewed. Some completed BOT projects in Hong Kong will be examined to ascertain how far the perceived benefits of BOT have been materialized in these projects. A highly profiled project, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, which has long been promoted by the governments of the People's Republic of China, Macau Special Administrative Region and the HKSAR that BOT is the preferred financing model, but suddenly reverted back to the traditional financing model to be funded primarily by the three governments with public money instead, will be studied to explore the true value of the BOT financial model. Findings – Six main reasons for this radical change are derived from the analysis: shorter take-off time for the project; difference in legal systems causing difficulties in drafting BOT agreements; more government control on tolls; private sector uninterested due to unattractive economic package; avoid allegation of collusion between business and the governments; and a comfortable financial reserve possessed by the host governments. Originality/value – The findings from this paper are believed to provide a better understanding to the real benefits of BOT and the governments' main decision criteria in delivering major infrastructure projects.

Framework and processes for enhancing sustainability deliverables in Australian road infrastructure projects

Road and highway infrastructure provides the backbone for a nation’s economic growth. The versatile dispersion of population in Australia and its resource boom, coupled with improved living standards and growing societal expectations, calls for continuing development and improvement of road infrastructure under the current local, state and federal governments’ policies and strategic plans. As road infrastructure projects involve huge resources and mechanisms, achieving sustainability not only on economic scales but also through environmental and social responsibility becomes a crucial issue. While sustainability is a logical link to infrastructure development, literature study and consultation with the industry found that there is a lack of common understanding on what constitutes sustainability in the infrastructure context. Its priorities are often interpreted differently among multiple stakeholders. For road infrastructure projects which typically span over long periods of time, achieving tangible sustainability outcomes during the lifecycle of development remains a formidable task. Sustainable development initiatives often remain ideological as in macro-level policies and broad-based concepts. There were little elaboration and exemplar cases on how these policies and concepts can be translated into practical decision-making during project implementation. In contrast, there seemed to be over commitment on research and development of sustainability assessment methods and tools. Between the two positions, there is a perception-reality gap and mismatch, specifically on how to enhance sustainability deliverables during infrastructure project delivery. Review on past research in this industry sector also found that little has been done to promote sustainable road infrastructure development; this has wide and varied potential impacts. This research identified the common perceptions and expectations by different stakeholders towards achieving sustainability in road and highway infrastructure projects. Face to face interviews on selected representatives of these stakeholders were carried out in order to select and categorize, confirm and prioritize a list of sustainability performance targets identified through literature and past research. A Delphi study was conducted with the assistance of a panel of senior industry professionals and academic experts, which further considered the interrelationship and influence of the sustainability indicators, and identified critical sustainability indicators under ten critical sustainability criteria (e.g. Environmental, Health & Safety, Resource Utilization & Management, Social & Cultural, Economic, Public Governance & Community Engagement, Relations Management, Engineering, Institutional and Project Management). This presented critical sustainability issues that needed to be addressed at the project level. Accordingly, exemplar highway development projects were used as case studies to elicit solutions for the critical issues. Through the identification and integration of different perceptions and priority needs of the stakeholders, as well as key sustainability indicators and solutions for critical issues, a set of decision-making guidelines was developed to promote and drive consistent sustainability deliverables in road infrastructure projects.

VIVO as an Institutional Data Registry

The Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane, Australia, is involved in a number of projects funded by the Australian National Data Service (ANDS). Currently, QUT is working on a project (Metadata Stores Project) that uses open source VIVO software to aid in the storage and management of metadata relating to data sets created/managed by the QUT research community. The registry (called QUT Research Data Finder) will support the sharing and reuse of research datasets, within and external to QUT. QUT uses VIVO for both the display and the editing of research metadata.

Research data finder : an institutional metadata repository

QUT’s new metadata repository (data registry), Research Data Finder, has been designed to promote the visibility and discoverability of QUT research datasets. Funded by the Australian National Data Service (ANDS), it will provide a qualitative snapshot of research data outputs created or collected by members of the QUT research community that are available via open or mediated access. As a fully integrated metadata repository Research Data Finder aligns with institutional sources of truth, such as QUT’s research administrative system, ResearchMaster, as well as QUT’s Academic Profiles system to provide high quality data descriptions that increase awareness of, and access to, shareable research data. In addition, the repository and its workflows are designed to foster smoother data management practices, enhance opportunities for collaboration and research, promote cross-disciplinary research and maximize existing research datasets. The metadata schema used in Research Data Finder is the Registry Interchange Format - Collections and Services (RIF-CS), developed by ANDS in 2009. This comprehensive schema is potentially complex for researchers; unlike metadata for publications, which are often made publicly available with the official publication, metadata for datasets are not typically available and need to be created. Research Data Finder uses a hybrid self-deposit and mediated deposit system. In addition to automated ingests from ResearchMaster (research project information) and Academic Profiles system (researcher information), shareable data is identified at a number of key “trigger points” in the research cycle. These include: research grant proposals; ethics applications; Data Management Plans; Liaison Librarian data interviews; and thesis submissions. These ingested records can be supplemented with related metadata including links to related publications, such as those in QUT ePrints. Records deposited in Research Data Finder are harvested by ANDS and made available to a national and international audience via Research Data Australia, ANDS’ discovery service for Australian research data. Researcher and research group metadata records are also harvested by the National Library of Australia (NLA) and these records are then published in Trove (the NLA’s digital information portal). By contributing records to the national infrastructure, QUT data will become more visible. Within Australia and internationally, many funding bodies have already mandated the open access of publications produced from publicly funded research projects, such as those supported by the Australian Research Council (ARC), or the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). QUT will be well placed to respond to the rapidly evolving climate of research data management. This project is supported by the Australian National Data Service (ANDS). ANDS is supported by the Australian Government through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy Program and the Education Investment Fund (EIF) Super Science Initiative.

The challenges of managing complexity in projects : an Australian perspective

Project Management (PM) as an academic field is relatively new in Australian universities. Moreover, the field is distributed across four main areas: business (management), built environment and construction, engineering and more recently ICT (information systems). At an institutional level, with notable exceptions, there is little engagement between researchers working in those individual areas. Consequently, an initiative was launched in 2009 to create a network of PM researchers to build a disciplinary base for PM in Australia. The initiative took the form of a bi-annual forum. The first forum established the constituency and spread of PM research in Australia (Sense et al., 2011). This special issue of IJPM arose out of the second forum, held in 2012, that explored the notion of an Australian perspective on PM. At the forum, researchers were invited to collaborate to explore issues, methodological approaches, and theoretical positions underpinning their research and to answer the question: is there a distinctly Australian research agenda which responds to the current challenges of large and complex projects in our region? From a research point of view, it was abundantly clear at the forum that many of the issues facing Australian researchers are shared around the world. However, what emerged from the forum as the Australian perspective was a set of themes and research issues that dominate the Australia research agenda.

Career implications of multi-layered institutional settings

Project work has grown significantly in volume and recognition in recent decades as projects have ‘become a common form of work organization in all sectors of the economy’ (Lindgren & Packendorff, 2006: 841). This increase in project-based work is just one of the many changes that have been affecting the nature of work, the employment relationship and the associated conceptualization and experience of careers (Baruch, 2004b; Söderlund & Bredin, 2006). A career can be defined as a process of development along a path of work experience and roles in one or more organizations (Baruch & Rosenstein, 1992), and careers involving project-based work take place within multi layered institutional settings. Projects are generally undertaken by small temporary organizations (Ekstedt, Lundin, Söderholm & Wirdenius, 1999; Pettigrew, 2003; Söderlund, 2012) which in turn may form part of larger, permanent entities; involve people drawn from a number of disciplines and organizations; or be formed as partnerships, joint ventures or strategic alliances between two or more organizations (Scott, 2007).

Looking beyond image and tourism : the role of flagship cultural projects in local arts development

State and local governments frequently look to flagship cultural projects to improve the city image and catalyze tourism but, in the process, often overlook their potential to foster local arts development. To better understand this role, the article examines if and how cultural institutions in Los Angeles and San Francisco attract and support arts-related activity. The analysis reveals that cultural flagships have mixed success in generating arts-based development and that their ability may be improved through attention to the local context, facility and institutional characteristics, and the approach of the sponsoring agencies. Such knowledge is useful for planners to enhance their revitalization efforts, particularly as the economic development potential of arts organizations and artists has become more apparent.

Time and cost performance of design–build projects

The design-build (DB) delivery method has been widely used in the United States due to its reputed superior cost and time performance. However, rigorous studies have produced inconclusive support and only in terms of overall results, with few attempts being made to relate project characteristics with performance levels. This paper provides a larger and more finely grained analysis of a set of 418 DB projects from the online project database of the Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA), in terms of the time-overrun rate (TOR), early start rate (ESR), early completion rate (ECR) and cost overrun rate (COR) associated with project type (e.g., commercial/institutional buildings and civil infrastructure projects), owners (e.g., Department of Defense and private corporations), procurement methods (e.g., ‘best value with discussion’ and qualifications-based selection), contract methods (e.g., lump sum and GMP) and LEED levels (e.g., gold and silver). The results show ‘best value with discussion’ to be the dominant procurement method and lump sum the most frequently used contract method. The DB method provides relatively good time performance, with more than 75% of DB projects completed on time or before schedule. However, with more than 50% of DB projects cost overrunning, the DB advantage of cost saving remains uncertain. ANOVA tests indicate that DB projects within different procurement methods have significantly different time performance and that different owner types and contract methods significantly affect cost performance. In addition to contributing to empirical knowledge concerning the cost and time performance of DB projects with new solid evidence from a large sample size, the findings and practical implications of this study are beneficial to owners in understanding the likely schedule and budget implications involved for their particular project characteristics.