A model for assessing and correcting construction project health

Abstract Maintaining the health of a construction project can help to achieve the desired outcomes of the project. An analogy is drawn to the medical process of a human health check where it is possible to broadly diagnose health in terms of a number of key areas such as blood pressure or cholesterol level. Similarly it appears possible to diagnose the current health of a construction project in terms of a number of Critical Success Factors (CSFs) and key performance indicators (KPIs). The medical analogy continues into the detailed investigation phase where a number of contributing factors are evaluated to identify possible causes of ill health and through the identification of potential remedies to return the project to the desired level of health. This paper presents the development of a model that diagnoses the immediate health of a construction project, investigates the factors which appear to be causing the ill health and proposes a remedy to return the project to good health. The proposed model uses the well-established continuous improvement management model (Deming, 1986) to adapt the process of human physical health checking to construction project health.

The impact of unique characteristics of projects and project-based organisations on knowledge transfer

Knowledge has been recognised as an important organisational asset that increases in value when shared; the opposite to other organisational assets which decrease in value during their exploitation. Effective knowledge transfer in organisations helps to achieve and maintain competitive advantage and ultimately organisational success. So far, the research on knowledge transfer has focused on traditional (functional) organisations. Only recently has attention been directed towards knowledge transfer in projects. Existing research on project learning has recognised the need for knowledge transfer within and across projects in project-based organisations (PBOs). Most projects can provide valuable new knowledge from unexpected actions, approaches or problems experienced during the project phases. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the impact of unique projects characteristics on knowledge transfer in PBO. This is accomplished through review of the literature and a series of interviews with senior project practitioners. The interviews complement the findings from the literature. Knowledge transfer in projects occurs by social communication and transfer of lessons learned where project management offices (PMOs) and project managers play significant roles in enhancing knowledge transfer and communication within the PBO and across projects. They act as connectors between projects and the PBO ‘hub’. Moreover, some project management processes naturally facilitate knowledge transfer across projects. On the other hand, PBOs face communication challenges due to unique and temporary characteristics of projects. The distance between projects and the lack or weakness of formal links across projects, create communication problems that impede knowledge transfer across projects. The main contribution of this paper is to demonstrate that both social communication and explicit informational channels play important role in inter-project knowledge transfer. Interviews also revealed the important role organisational culture play in knowledge transfer in PBOs.

The guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK Guide) : applicability and contribution to project success in Australia

The PMBOK Guide is one of the most influential publications concerning the knowledge of the project manangement. Moreover, the pervasion of this guide seems to be set to increase as the basis of accreditation - in conjunction with the increasing global trend toward obtaining project management professional status. However, despite the influence and strengthening profile of this guide, reports continue to be published that detail numerous project failures in a wide range of different industries. The PMBOK Guide comprises mainly declarative (know-what) and procedural (know-how) information. In this sense, the guide is largely normative and provides a very good example of the limitations of this approach as highlighted by proponents of a move to the genuine application of positibe theory in project management.----- The aim of this paper is to determine the applicability of the guide in Australia and to determine the extent to which project success can be attributed to the guide. Project Managers from a variety of organisations were surveyed. This postal survey yielded 48 replies. Descriptive statistics was used to assess the incidence and effectivieness of all the processes in the guide. The results indicate that there were no processes that could be considered as peripheral or as a candidate for elimination from the guide. More specifically, all the processes were identified as either a key routine process or a key selective process and positively related to the level of project success. However, the results also indicated that other major factors pertaining to causal knowledge (know-why) are, at least, equally important determinants of project success. It is concluded that declarative, procedural and causal knowledge are all valuable, and given the preponderance of the first two types of knowledge, there seems to be an urgent need to now ensure an equal quest for causal knowledge. In terms of developing causal knowledge, a good starting point would appear to be both positive theory from production and economics.

Learning, evaluation, action and reflection for new technologies, empowerment and rural sustainability (The LEARNERS project)

-

Developing a participatory impact assessment approach and action research culture within a communication for social change organisation in Nepal

Developing an effective impact evaluation framework, managing and conducting rigorous impact evaluations, and developing a strong research and evaluation culture within development communication organisations presents many challenges. This is especially so when both the community and organisational context is continually changing and the outcomes of programs are complex and difficult to clearly identify.----- This paper presents a case study from a research project being conducted from 2007-2010 that aims to address these challenges and issues, entitled Assessing Communication for Social Change: A New Agenda in Impact Assessment. Building on previous development communication projects which used ethnographic action research, this project is developing, trailing and rigorously evaluating a participatory impact assessment methodology for assessing the social change impacts of community radio programs in Nepal. This project is a collaboration between Equal Access – Nepal (EAN), Equal Access – International, local stakeholders and listeners, a network of trained community researchers, and a research team from two Australian universities. A key element of the project is the establishment of an organisational culture within EAN that values and supports the impact assessment process being developed, which is based on continuous action learning and improvement. The paper describes the situation related to monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and impact assessment before the project began, in which EAN was often reliant on time-bound studies and ‘success stories’ derived from listener letters and feedback. We then outline the various strategies used in an effort to develop stronger and more effective impact assessment and M&E systems, and the gradual changes that have occurred to date. These changes include a greater understanding of the value of adopting a participatory, holistic, evidence-based approach to impact assessment. We also critically review the many challenges experienced in this process, including:----- • Tension between the pressure from donors to ‘prove’ impacts and the adoption of a bottom-up, participatory approach based on ‘improving’ programs in ways that meet community needs and aspirations.----- • Resistance from the content teams to changing their existing M&E practices and to the perceived complexity of the approach.----- • Lack of meaningful connection between the M&E and content teams.----- • Human resource problems and lack of capacity in analysing qualitative data and reporting results.----- • The contextual challenges, including extreme poverty, wide cultural and linguistic diversity, poor transport and communications infrastructure, and political instability.----- • A general lack of acceptance of the importance of evaluation within Nepal due to accepting everything as fate or ‘natural’ rather than requiring investigation into a problem.