Archive for September 23rd, 2008

Foundations of program management: A bibliometric view (Artto et al., in press)

Dienstag, September 23rd, 2008

Foundations of program management: A bibliometric view (Artto et al., in press)Artto, Karlos; Martinsuo, Miia; Gemünden, Hans Georg; Murtoaro, Jarkko: Foundations of program management – A bibliometric view; in: International Journal of Project Management, Article in Press, Corrected Proofhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.10.007Update: The article has been published in International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 27 (2009), No. 1, pp. 1–18. Artto et al. investigate the big question if programme management is much more than project management on a large scale. The authors review 517 programme management articles, 1164 project management articles from 21 years. They look into the various foundations of programme management research such as the level of analysis (organisation and its major parts), object of analysis (change of permanent organisation), outcomes of programmes (ambiguity & long-term impacts). Artto et al. also conclude that programmes might be similar to projects, that both management practices share common concepts, but that programmes should not be treated as scaled-up projects.Some more detail is provided regarding the themes, theories, and system thinking behind programme management. The themes, which the authors identified in the literature, are the origins of programme management. They find that programme management has its roots in manufacturing, quality, work and organisational change, and product development. Moreover they do assess the change of focus in these themes – whereas the organisational change is dominant for programmes and new product development is the dominant theme for project management.What is the specific systems thinking regarding programmes? Programmes are usually conceptualised as open systems. [An approach more and more followed in project management research as well.] Furthermore innovation is a major concern of programmes. As such open systems are typically used to innovate processes, organisations, and infrastructure. In contrast innovation using closed systems is more dominant in product development, which subsequently employs more projects than programmes to innovate.Moreover the authors explore the theoretical basis of programme management. They found this research deeply rooted in organisational and strategy theories. Additional theories used to explore this concepts are product development, organisational change, manufacturing, quality, economic, industrial, and institutional theories.Lastly, Artto et al. identify shortcomings of existing research on programme management, which are

  • Ignorance of original theoretical roots of program and project management
  • Neglect of inter-project coordination
  • Neglect of inter-organizational issues and theories
  • Limited contingency view
  • Lack of industry-specific views
  • Neglect of the interplay between the permanent and the temporary organization

Enterprise information system project selection with regard to BOCR (Liang & Li, in press)

Dienstag, September 23rd, 2008

 Enterprise information system project selection with regard to BOCR (Liang & Li, in press)

Liang, Chao; Li, Qing: Enterprise information system project selection with regard to BOCR; in: International Journal of Project Management, Article in Press, Corrected Proof
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.11.001

Lots of consultants earn their money with selecting the right IT system. I have seen the most bizarre total-cost-of-ownership (TOC) calculations to get to it and witnessed the political madness which comes with buying-center decisions in never ending rounds of assessment workshops.

Liang & Li claim that „a comprehensive and systematic assessment is necessary for executives to select the most suitable project from many alternatives.“ Furthermore they claim that „This paper first proposes a decision method for project selection.“ However, the authors apply a analytical hierarchy/network process (AHP/ANP) to this decision-making predicament. They suggest breaking down the decision unsing their mulit-criteria BOCR framework, with the dimensions of benefits (B), opportunities (O), costs (C), and risks (R).

In the case of an manufacturing system, described in that article, the benefits consist of time gained, costs saved, service improvements, capacity increase, and quality improvements. The opportunities are an increased market share, fast ROI and payback period, and the ability for agile manufacturing. The risks associated with this MES are budget overruns, time delays, and several technological risks, e.g., reliability, flexibility, ease of use. Lastly Liang & Li break down the costs into software, implementation, taining, maintenance, upgrade, and costs for existing systems.

Understanding time delay disputes in construction contracts (Iyer et al. 2008) & Delays in construction projects (Sweis et al., 2008)

Dienstag, September 23rd, 2008

Sources and categories of delay in construction

Iyer, K.C.; Chaphalkar, N.B.; Joshi, G.A.: Understanding time delay disputes in construction contracts; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26 (2008), No. 2, pp. 174-184.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.05.002

Sweis, G.; Sweis, R.; Hammad, A. Abu; Shboul, A.: Delays in construction projects – The case of Jordan; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26 (2008), No. 6, pp. 665-674.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.09.009

In my recent obsession with delays [it’s quite sarcastic, I know], I read through these two articles on delays in the construction industry.
Sweis et al. analyse sources of delays on construction projects. The authors identify three main categories contributing to delays –  internal environment, exogenous factors, and input factors.
Internal environmental factors are financial difficulties, poor planning & scheduling, and too many change orders. Exogenous factors found are severe weather and changes in government or regulation laws. The input factor causing delay was a shortage of manpower.

In the second article Iyer et al. look into the contractual strings attached to delays. Therefore they categorise delays in excusable vs. non-excusable. Excusable delays are

  • Labour disputes
  • Force majeure
  • Unusual delay in deliveries
  • Unavoidable delay
  • Unforseen delay in transportation
  • Other unforseeable causes

Non-excusable delays and therefore punishable by fines are

  • Ordinary weather
  • Subcontractor delay
  • Contractor’s failure to coordinate the project site
  • Contractor financing problems
  • Contractor failure to ramp-up
  • Delay in obtaining materials
  • Poor workmanship

[On how many IT projects have I seen non-excusable delays which were excused.]
Lastely, Iyer et al. identify the origins of disputed delays, they were due to

  • Handover on site
  • Release mobilisation advance
  • Late receipt/checking of drawings
  • Accidents
  • Temporary stoppage
  • Re-work
  • Extra work