Project Execution - Science topic

Affirmative

To be clear before to start tike few minutes to see the positive theory of plannings such

‘delimmas in general theory of planning‘ @ Horst and others this is important to look out the boxes

Both, it is science and art, sure of that.

Best,

Litart

You could also look at http://www.leanconstruction.org/

The Lean Construction Institute has some principles that help improve predictability.

Personally, I think "Fast Tracking" is a fantasy. The biggest problems are

1. On site safety. Lost time from accidents is the most costly error. In product development projects the most costly error is deferring quality checks until testing and approval.

2. Failure to consider potential risks and planning assumptions. If one considers planning assumptions as the major source of risk then some mitigation is possible. Dozens of projects are delayed because of erroneous assumptions about suppliers, soil checks, capability and capacity of subs and even obvious things like strength of new materials.

Invariably, fast tracking makes more assumptions than usual and hence encounters even more problems than usual.

In my personal view, the value of very high predictability far outweighs the value of faster completion because the inherent risk grows so much.

Dear Andrei

I would recommend having a look at the web site of Charities Evaluation Services, a UK organisation which offers many free tools and resources for evaluation research with social projects: http://www.ces-vol.org.uk/tools-and-resources  For academic references, download my publication 'Putting evaluations to use' and follow the references from the bibliography that seem relevant for you. The journal 'Evaluation' may be helpful if you can access it.

Helen

Hi

Please see these links:

Morgenstern deems the various risks could be classified as human uncertainty, model uncertainty and parameter uncertainty, these may be suitable for complex construction projects.

Hi,

Raul Tormos just defended a PhD with some wonderful applictations of cohort studies. The problem is that, to my best knowledge, there is no APC approach used or even tested for cross-cultural studies. There is Yang and Land's Cross-Classified Multilevel Model, which could be specified with an additional level for culture. They have recently released a book http://lib.freescienceengineering.org/view.php?id=1018978 but there are critical papers on their approach forthcoming. We are currently applying it to Schwartz values. There is also a model of Malcom Fairbrother using time variant contextual covariates (we will use it for moral attitudes).

To my best knowledge there are any internationally valid/comparable classifications for cohorts. And even if, their defining element and reactions to period effects are most likely to differ (see Realo & Dobewall, 2011 on life satisfaction). van Herk and Poortinga (2012) proposed five historical cohorts for Europe which work well for graphical analyses.

But I would love to learn that there is cross-cultural research separating age, period and cohort effects in cross-cultural research:-)

Selected references:

Alleman G.B. (2002). Agile Project Management Methods for IT Projects. Greenwood Press/Quorum Books, Colorado (USA)

Hass, B.K. (2007). The Blending of Traditional and Agile Project Management". PM World today, PMI, May 2007.