一篇工程管理方面的留學生畢業dissertation范文-SUMMARY

 

In Chapter Two, firstly, the development of leadership theories was examined. Secondly, an investigation to the relationships between leadership and culture is presented, with an introduction to Hofstede’s modal and specific research on Chinese culture and Western culture’s influence on their leadership. Thirdly, the relationships between leadership and diverse contexts / sectors are explored, with a focus on the leadership in the construction industry. In the next chapter, more details and in-depth findings are presented on construction project manager’s leadership, project performance and how the project manager’s leadership affects the project performance.

 

CONNECTING PROJECT MANAGER LEADERSHIP WITH PROJECT PERFORMANCE BY CRTICAL SUCCESS FACTORS AND CRITICAL FAILURE FACTORES

 

INTRODUCTION

This chapter providing the foundation for this research project through obtaining theories from a comprehensive literature review on project performance and project leadership. Meanwhile, it explores the nature of project leadership by reviewing the definitions, types and factors.  Moreover, it explores and analyzes the connection between project performance and project manager leadership and derived a set of CFSs and CFFs.

 

THE NATURE OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE

Importance of measure project performance

Definitions of project performance

The terminology performance can easily cause confusion because there are difference kinds of performance with corresponding scopes. Project performance is difference from project manager performance (Anantatmula, 2010). Cooke-Davies (2002) states that project performance is measured against the overall objectives of a project, such as completion on time, with higher quality and within budget. However project manager performance is measured again the competencies factors such as the ability of creating clarity in communication, defining clarity roles and responsibility and establishing trust etc.

 

Tools used to measure project performance

The process of measuring project performance is project evaluation.  Samset (2003) states that ‘Evaluation can be defined as systematic, analytical studies conducted aperiodically to answer specific management questions about performance.’

Difference kinds of project performance evaluation

Corrie (1991) presents three categories of evaluations which are listed as follows:

 

• Planning and feasibility studies – to determine the most suitable choice which can fulfill the determined  objectives best

• In-project evaluation during implementation – to measure whether or not the project is constructed following the set plan; is achieving performance objectives; and whether is necessary to make any adjustments;

• Project performance reviews – to make an overall measure of project outcomes, and to decide how many deficiencies should be correct.

 

Samset (2010) evaluations can also be divided into three categories as below

• Ex ante evaluations – to support decision for whether or not make investment;

• Interim evaluations – to deal with management aspects and address the problems emerging from stakeholders;

• Ex-post evaluations – to measure whether or not the objectives are achieved

 

the functions of project evaluation

Sang (1995) summarized the functions of project evaluation as follows (Sang, 1995): 

 

• To provide the necessary information, e.g. the technical, economic and financial structure of the project, the project’s plan, and the project’s operational organization after construction finished

• To rate the competing projects

• To assess a project’s financial profitability

• To appropriately allocate the resources among sectors or projects

• To support decision making, such as decision-making on whether to invest or not, selecting design alternatives and allocation of resources.

 

Tools used in project evaluation

According the aforementioned description, there are difference types of evaluation with corresponding purposes and scopes. In order to fulfil those different objectives, there are appropriate tools which can be used in corresponding types of evaluation.  There are two categories for evaluation tools. One is used to determine the objectives such as construction cost estimation (Samset, 2010) and the other one is used to review performance such as Key Performance Indicators (The KPIs working group, 2000).

 

Reviewing problems in project performance evaluation

Review of the evaluation problems

A comprehensive literature review was done to review the publications associated with project performance evaluation from conference proceedings, internet resources, books, professional reports and journals. Based on this review, three significant problems relevant with project performance evaluation identified are summarized in Table 3-1. 

 

There are many research done on evaluation problems, such as Surahyo and EI-Diraby, 2008; Lueng and Edum-Fotwe, 2005; Liu and Walker, 1998. However, it is founded that some of these problems and the corresponding causes are different. The fundamental reasons for those differences are the different location, the study focus and methods used.

 

Table 3-1 : A summary of evaluation problems from literature and interviews

　 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 　

Identified common problems in Project performance evaluation Liu and Walker, 1998 Dainty et al., 2003 Ugwu et al., 2005 Glaser and Tolman, 2008 Surahyo and EI-Diraby, 2008 Park, 2009 Toor and Ogunlana, http://www.400190.com/dissertation_sample2010 Frequence In literature review sample Average weightings in interviews

1. Lack of systematized project performance evaluation methods √ 　 √ 　 √ √ 　 2 4

2. Lack of databases of associated historical data 　 √ 　 　 √ 　 4 3

4. Lack of comprehensive project performance evaluation factors √ √ √ √ √ √ √ 7 2

 

Analysis of the identified project performance evaluation problems

The identified project evaluation performance problems were listed in Table 3-2. It is supposed that the problems are more important which are with higher frequency.

 

Table 3-2 : The ranked project performance evaluation problems

common project performance evaluation problems Rank and Frequency

 

In the literature sample In the interview sample

1. lack of comprehensive project performance evaluation factors 2 (7) 4

2. Lack of systematized approaches in project performance evaluation 4 (4) 3

3. Lack of databases of related historical data 6 (2) 2

 

Although every project is different from each other, there are some common perspectives which can be used to measure the performance. These common perspectives can be measure by a set of comprehensive factors. However, there is a lack of established systematic evaluation factors.

 

Corrie (1991) states that evaluation should be done during the whole life of a project.  Within this context, evaluation should be a systematic, continuous process (Samset, 2010). However, general project evaluation is not comprehensive enough. Some reasons are stated as below.

 

Project evaluation is not established on the organization theory or the industry psychology theory which can assist to get the valuable stakeholder management experience from previous projects (Liu and Walker, 1998). 

 

There is not enough relationship established among the impacts of society and environment, their costs and the estimation methods during the process of evaluation.

 

There is a lack of interoperability among the definitions of social and environmental impacts, their costs and their estimation methods during the process of decision making (Surahyo and EI-Diraby, 2008). 

 

Associated data from previous similar projects can help to establish realistic performance indicators. What more, similar experience can be learnt from previous project so as to perform better in future projects (Stallworthy and Kharbanda, 1985). However, these information are not enough (Park, 2009). The rare relevant information is a barrier for experiences learning as well as hampers to performance measurement (Park, 2009).