Critical Success Factors for Construction Projects

Sanvido, Victor E.; Grobler, François; Parfitt, Kevin M.; Guvenis, Moris; Coyle, Michael

doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(1992)118:1(94)

Cited by 380 publications

(228 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

214

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These include, but are not limited to, schedule performance, budget performance, quality performance, functionality, marketability, constructability, aesthetics, and safety [Sanvido et al 1992].…”

Section: Researchers' Perception Of Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Absence of any legal claims on a project (and also client satisfaction) is another common desirable outcome recognized by all the three stakeholders. This means that absence of legal claims serves a major criteria for defining and hence determining project success from the viewpoint of the stakeholders considered by Sanvido et al (1992).…”

Section: Tuman's Success Perception: Stakeholders and Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The objective of constructability is common for the designer and contractor as both aspire minimal or no surprises during the project implementation [Sanvido et al 1992]. and therefore they represent those managerial or enterprise areas that must be given special and continual attention to bring about high performance [Sanvido et al 1992].…”

Section: Tuman's Success Perception: Stakeholders and Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CSF studies highlights the need for a well-defined control and information system, tailor-stitched to the needs of the project and its manager. CSF researchers iterate that without such a control and information system in place, achieving success on large projects would be no more than wishful thinking [PMH 1983, Sanvido et al 1992]. …”

Section: Significance Of Project Csfsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…owner) may be seen as a failure by the end user and vice versa; a project perceived as successful by the developer and consultant may not produce benefits as were initially expected by its constructor. All participants, besides having common stakes, have their own unique sets of stakes involved in a construction project [Sanvido et al 1992]. …”

Section: Chapter 1 -Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Critical Success Factors for Different Organizations in Construction Projects

Inayat¹

2012

Icsdec 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers have been compiling lists of key factors the presence or absence of which have determined the success or failure of projects. Early researches of critical success factors were largely theory based; subsequent researches employed the use of statistics and continuously refined methods like neural network and the analytical hierarchy process. Over the passage of time, the focus has narrowed down from broad generalization of 'projects' to 'project classes'.The thesis can be broadly divided into three components. First Component:The first component (Chapter 1, 2, and 3) leads an insight into the basic concept of success factor studies, and the empirical frameworks adopted for identification of critical success factors. The second and the third component, comprises literature review and original research, respectively. These components pertain to success factor studies of construction projects, and are introduced as below. Second Component:The second component (Chapter 4: Review Component) sets out to choose from among a treasure of resources on construction projects, three such state of the art works that can best explain the progress in search of success factors over a period of the foregoing 25 years. After discussing each work in detail, the reader's attention is drawn to a collective discussion, and summary towards the end of the Review Component. The review includes the following works:(1) Pinto and Covin, 1989, (2) Ashley et al., 1987, and (3) Loh, 2011. Pinto andCovin (1989) endeavored to set aside the convenient research trend of treating all project types (Manufacturing, R&D, Construction etc.) as similar. It was felt that management practitioners considered the generalized project management prescriptions offered by researchers as mostly inapplicable to the unique situations posed by their respective classes of projects.Stepwise regression analysis was employed to seek separate sets of CSFs for construction and R&D projects. The choice of these two project types was made as they apparently lied on opposite ends of the spectrum of characteristics. The phases of project lifecycle considered for determining CSFs were conceptualization, planning, execution, and termination. It was concluded that though identification of a set of general critical success factors has some benefits for both academics and practitioners, strict adherence to them would not necessarily ensure project success. It was proved that every project type offers its own set of problems, and that these vary over a project's lifecycle.The review briefly touches upon the work of Ashley et al. (1987) so as to lead an insight into yet another methodology adopted by CSF researchers. This study views project success from the project managers' perspective for the owner and contractor organizations they works for, and does not take into consideration the view point of other professionals working for owner, contractor and consultant organizations. Hypothesis testing was employed to find those factors that exhibited strong stat...

show abstract

Section: Researchers' Perception Of Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tuman's Success Perception: Stakeholders and Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%