Identifying the key process factors affecting project performance

Abstract

Purpose A construction project traditionally involves a variety of participants. Owners, consultants, and contractors all have diverse opinions and interests, but they all seek to ensure project success. Success is habitually measured as performance output regarding cost, time, and quality. Despite previous research mapping the success and failure factors, construction managers seem to have difficulty in attaining success. To provide clearer guidance on how to fulfill success criteria, the purpose of this paper is to identify the underlying factors that affect performance and thus project success in construction processes. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire survey based on a literature review provided 25 key process factors divided into five key categories. Based on the responses from commonly involved construction parties, the factors were ranked and tested for significant differences between the parties. Findings The top five most important process factors were found to relate to the sharing of knowledge and communication. Moreover, testing the ranking for significant differences between owners, consultants, and contractors revealed five differences. The differences related to the interpretation and importance of trust, shared objectives, project coordination, and alternative forms of coordination. Originality/value All respondents identify improved knowledge sharing and communication as the key to improved cost, time, and quality performance and are therefore the areas where construction managers need to focus their resources. Thus, improved experience sharing and communication will increase the likelihood of project success, through improving competences, commitment, and coordination.

Examining the impact of relationship-related and process-related factors on project success: the paradigm of Stimulus-Organism-Response

“…In addition, coordination is another process-related factor needed to be investigated in this study. Coordination was regarded as one of the critical factors contributing to project success in many previous researches (e.g., Lindhard and Larsen 2016;Yamin and Sim 2016). However, there is a lack of empirical investigation on the relationship between coordination and project success.…”

“…Successful implementation of construction projects demands the thoughts of potential process-related factors which influence project performance (Lindhard and Larsen 2016). As is often pointed out, optimizing in the construction processes can indirectly result in better project performance and eventually promote project success (Kivrak et al 2008;Lindhard and Larsen 2016).…”

Shared Mental Models and Inter-organizational AEC Project Teams

“…Errors in construction and rework are common on construction projects and are known to cause delay and incur extra costs (Assaf and Al-Hejji, 2006). Skills shortage, incompetence, and lack of education regarding the procedural knowledge are key issues impeding performance on construction projects (Chang-Richards et al, 2017;Lindhard and Larsen, 2016;Sawacha et al, 1999). The AEC literature has recommended standardizing the operating procedures in construction for better performance Engineering Project Organization Journal (February 2020) Volume 9…”

Project Portfolio Management and Quality

“…It can be pointed out that there are positive relationships between coordination and control in the project carried out by the project management offices and the quality of project portfolio management (Unger, Gemünden and Aubry, 2012). As a result, the increase in quality of project management has a positive impact on success of the entire portfolio (Jonas, Kock and Gemuenden, 2012), which in this case is usually measured as effectiveness of the project in terms of costs, time and quality (Lindhard and Larsen, 2016). The tools and techniques of quality and operational excellence will play a particularly important role in the case of large infrastructure projects, under which they can ensure sustainable success of the undertaking (Basu, 2017).…”