A decision support system for sustainable urban development : the integrated land use and transportation indexing model

Broad, early definitions of sustainable development have caused confusion and hesitation among local authorities and planning professionals. This confusion has arisen because loosely defined principles of sustainable development have been employed when setting policies and planning projects, and when gauging the efficiencies of these policies in the light of designated sustainability goals. The question of how this theory-rhetoric-practice gap can be filled is the main focus of this chapter. It examines the triple bottom line approach–one of the sustainability accounting approaches widely employed by governmental organisations–and the applicability of this approach to sustainable urban development. The chapter introduces the ‘Integrated Land Use and Transportation Indexing Model’ that incorporates triple bottom line considerations with environmental impact assessment techniques via a geographic, information systemsbased decision support system. This model helps decision-makers in selecting policy options according to their economic, environmental and social impacts. Its main purpose is to provide valuable knowledge about the spatial dimensions of sustainable development, and to provide fine detail outputs on the possible impacts of urban development proposals on sustainability levels. In order to embrace sustainable urban development policy considerations, the model is sensitive to the relationship between urban form, travel patterns and socio-economic attributes. Finally, the model is useful in picturing the holistic state of urban settings in terms of their sustainability levels, and in assessing the degree of compatibility of selected scenarios with the desired sustainable urban future.

From the editor

In this issue of the Journal, the articles presented to the readers cover the breadth and depth of project management research and practice by addressing the relationship between project strategy and managing projects (Patanakul and Shenhar, “What Project Strategy Really Is: The Fundamental Building Block in Strategic Project Management”), on the need to align corporate strategy with program management (Ritson, Johansen, and Osborne, “Successful Programs Wanted: Exploring the Impact of Alignment”), identifying metrics to measure program success across project contexts (Shao, Müller, and Turner, “Measuring Program Success”), managing individual projects by identifying major risks in customer relationship management (CRM) implementation projects (Papadopoulos, Ojiako, Chipulu, and Lee, “The Criticality of Risk Factors in Customer Relationship Management Projects”), application of earned value management (EVM) to aerospace projects (Kwak and Anbari, “History, Practices, and Future of Earned Value Management in Government: Perspectives From NASA”), and capturing tacit knowledge of construction project professionals to determine the optimal construction site layout (Abdul-Rahman, Wang, and Siong, “Knowledge Acquisition Using Psychotherapy Technique for Critical Factors Influencing Construction Project Layout Planning”)...

From the Editor

In this issue of the Journal, the articles considered reflect the depth of research and practice that is unique to project management discipline. The range of topics addressed includes managing project contracts (Chan et al., “A Comparative Study of the Benefits of Applying Target Cost Contracts Between South Australia and Hong Kong”), managing project complexity (Chronéer and Bergquist, “Managerial Complexity in Process Industrial R&D Projects: A Swedish Study”), identifying early warning signs in complex projects (Williams et al., “Identifying and Acting on Early Warning Signs in Complex Projects”), project risk management (Krane, Olsson, and Rolstadås, “How Project Manager–Project Owner Interaction Can Work Within and Influence Project Risk Management”), exploring decisions regarding outsourcing and alignment of the project management office (Martins and Martins, “Outsourcing Operations in Project Management Offices: The Reality of Brazilian Companies”), and project management practices at strategic and tactical levels of the organization leading to sustainable development (Herazo, Lizarralde, and Paquin, “Sustainable Development in the Building Sector: A Canadian Case Study on the Alignment of Strategic and Tactical Management”).

From the Editor

The five articles appearing in this issue of the journal reflect the breadth of project management research and the cross-fertilization of ideas from other management disciplines with project management. These articles focus on the evolution of project management theory (“A Bibliometric View on the Use of Contingency Theory in Project Management Research” by Hanisch and Wald), interfirm knowledge management and learning in project networks (“Exploring Negotiation Through Boundary Objects in Global Design Project Networks” by Di Marco, Alin, and Taylor), learning within one project organization (“Organizational Learning in Project-Based Companies: A Process Thinking Approach” by Koskinen), identifying the factors affecting project performance (“Factors Causing Design Schedule Delays in Turnkey Projects in Taiwan: An Empirical Study of Power Distribution Substation Projects” by Yau and Yang), and considering the antecedents of negative employee behavior and its consequences for project team performance (“Counteracting Free-Riding With Team Morale—An Experimental Study” by He).

From the editor

This special issue of Project Management Journal presents a collection of six of the best papers presented at the International Research Network on Organizing by Projects (IRNOP) Conference hosted by the University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM) in June 2011 in Montréal, Canada. In this editorial, Professor Brian Hobbs, organizer of the IRNOP 2011 Conference and Project Management Chair at UQAM, shares his observations about the current state of project research and identifies trends...

From the editor

In this issue of the Journal, articles presented to the readers cover project management practices throughout history (“Frontinus—A Project Manager From the Roman Empire Era,” Walker and Dart), project success and failure revisited through integrated theoretical lens on the one hand (“Translation and Convergence in Projects: An Organizational Perspective on Project Success,” Alderman and Ivory) and, on the other hand, with a focus on systems engineers' capacity for engineering systems thinking (“The Relationship Among Systems Engineers' Capacity for Engineering Systems Thinking, Project Types, and Project Success,” Frank, Sadeh, and Ashkenasi), project management offices (PMOs) investigated through community of practice theory (“Exploring PMOs Through Community of Practice Theory,” Aubry, Müller, and Glückler), influence of cultural patterns on project team behavior (“Cultural Patterns Influencing Project Team Behavior in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Case Study in Ethiopia,” Jetu, Riedl, and Roithmayr), and human factors and differences of perception and their impact on risk management (“Exploring Risk Dimensions in the Indian Software Industry,” Sharma, Sengupta, and Gupta)...

From the editor

Intelligence and context, knowledge, competence, and performance and results summarize the content of the papers presented to readers in this issue of the Journal. This is a very relevant series of papers as, for the past 50 years, project management has become a well-accepted way to manage organizations. The field of project management has evolved from operational research techniques and tools to a discipline of management encompassing various schools of thought (Söderlund, 2002; Turner, Huemann, Anbari, & Bredillet, 2010)...

From the editor

In order to read this Project Management Journal issue, I suggest embracing a modeling perspective. Talking about modeling should lead me to define what is meant by “model” and to develop some kind of categorization, classification, or taxonomy of models. One can consider basic categories like quantitative vs. qualitative, explanatory vs. predictive, stochastic, nonstochastic mathematical, or qualitative models, linear vs. nonlinear and their underlying assumptions, degree of simplification, systemic effects integration, and so on...

From the editor

In this Project Management Journal issue, the reader will “travel” from human capital to portfolio selection through knowledge development and maturity, systems thinking and problem (dis)solving, and development of combinative capabilities...

From the editor

In this issue of the Project Management Journal, the reader will explore understanding better the contribution of project management to organizational performance, discovering the necessity to move beyond the old reigning paradigm of single-loop project control, raising the question whether PMP® certification leads to better performance, learning how to develop project management competence through a course based on service learning and an experiential learning approach, supporting new product development with the use of “dormant knowledge,” and increasing performance of virtual new product development projects...

From the editor

In this issue of Project Management Journal, the reader will explore different perspectives, exemplifying the dynamic and creativity at stake within the project, program, and portfolio management field. These papers provide good illustrations of the various schools of project management research I introduced in the From the Editor letters between June 2007 and September 2008...

PMI Research and Education Conference 2010

The PMI Research and Education Conference 2010 ended one week ago at the time of this writing. Aside from 3 enlightening keynote speeches, 78 proffered papers were presented. On the basis of the reviewers' assessments, the 10 best papers have been selected to form this special issue...

Mapping the dynamics of the project management field : project management in action (part 6)

This is the sixth part of a Letter from the Editor series where the results are presented of an ongoing research undertaken in order to investigate the dynamic of the evolution of the field of project management and the key trends. Dynamics of networks is a key feature in strategic diagrams analysis. The radical change in the configuration of a network between two periods, or the change at subnetwork level reflects the dynamic of science. I present here an example of subnetwork comparison over the four periods of time considered in this study. I will develop and discuss an example of subnetwork transformation in future Letter from the Editor article..

Mapping the dynamics of the project management field : project management in action (part 5)

This is the fifth part of a Letter From the Editor series where the results are presented of an ongoing research undertaken in order to investigate the dynamic of the evolution of the field of project management and the key trends. I present some general findings and the strategic diagrams generated for each of the time periods introduced herein and discuss what we can learn from them on a general standpoint. I will develop and discuss some detailed findings in future Letter From the Editor articles...