Construction Project Complexity: Characteristic that Project Managers Must Manage to Deliver Successful Projects - Coursework Example

Construction project complexity: critical project characteristic that project managers must manage to deliver successful projects" Matriculation Number Programme/School Engineering and Construction email@addressofauthor Abstract The complexity and challenges of contemporary construction industry demand from contractors and engineers such in-depth knowledge and skills on combined engineering, budget and finance, anthropology, sociology, political science, sociology, safety or health, and innovative information technology (Macheridis & Nilsson, 2004.) Engineering and architecture, as sciences on construction, need not only be focused on mathematical equations and formula to arrive at accurate estimates but must also exercise expediency in performance management, adopt transformational leadership, practice accountability and expertise on human resource administration (Miller & Lessard, 2007). While difficulties are inherent in every large scale construction project, this conference paper inspires construction professionals to master the articulation of strategic operational management and appraisal, with conviction to achieve goals successfully. Keywords: project complexity, performance management, construction, construction industry, complexity. 1. Introduction Construction and architectural modernity brings along with it levels of complexity which challenge construction industry about how to improve workers and management’s performance to meet desired completion based on targeted period and ascertain sustainable building construction (Miller et.al.,2007). This entails that systematic and competitive administration of projects be engendered objectively to ascertain that workers are able to get on the job inspired by standard project management (David,1996). This paper will attempt to inspire and empower construction engineers to deal with systematic reform within the construction industry by explicating project complexity, the challenges which hinder the industry to effectively and efficiently its role for developments; and to raise professional recommendations to avoid pitfalls (Macheridis, et.al., 2004.) It will also simplify the complexity associated with interconnection of management, expertise selection, and actions to be undertaken to deal with it. This will further illustrate the correlation and significance of performance management in the management of complexity within the construction industry (Macheridis, et.al., 2004.) 2. Discussion of Project Characteristics 2. a. Project Complexity Baccarini (1996) opined that construction’s complexity has inherent dynamic nature which determines plan, coordination, collaborative undertakings, performance, and control requirements. It is inclusive of interrelated parts which can be operationalized based on (a) differentiation, e.g. nature of tasks along with needed specialists, and (b) interdependence of elements, work plans, and workers who are expected to systematically contribute to the success of project implementation (Baccarini,1996). Experts contend that project complexity is further characterized with diverse factors which include project critical nature; project visibility and accountability; and, clarity of scopes or definitions (Baccarini,1996). Baccarini (1996) pointed project complexity is an interrelated system which has significant impact in organizational decision-making. It also includes company’s technological capacities for project development. The characters of project complexity can be summarized as follows (Baccarini, 1996). Project complexity determines plan, level of coordination and control; It can hinder goals and objectives of major projects; The level of complexity defines the selection of project inputs; the level of expertise and experiences required in managing personnel; the criterion for procurement system; and the manner on how it affects the objectives, times, cost and quality of services provided (Baccarini, 1996). Figure 1. Sample themes of project complexity (Wood & Ashton, 2010) Moreover, construction project should exercise goal-oriented plans with forecasted key result areas, defined operational systems, administrative leadership, open communication and technological capacity (Marr, 2011; Marshall, 2011; Transdev, 2009). It’s in this context that construction projects correlate to performance management (Marr, 2011; Marshall, 2011; Transdev, 2009). Figure 2.. Strategic Performance Management (Marr, 2011). 2.b. Performance Management Contemporary construction’s complexity correlates with performance management because the nature of the project needs visioning, planning, making of estimates, identification of construction tools, budgeting, sourcing of finance, forecasting detriments, hiring of expert workforces, monitoring, performance appraisal, and other related functions (Macheridis, et.al. 2004). As technology has also advanced, construction companies should also use standard and upgraded technologies apparatus which could aid for executive’s quality decision-makings (Macheridis, et.al. 2004). The company must likewise use standard performance evaluation to measure human resources’ contributions as well as craft internal policies relating to salary scheme that can motivate workers (Dewettinck & Van Dijk, 2009). .As part of performance standard, company must adopt business analytical intelligence for transparent reporting of documentations and finances, forecasting for key results, determination of risks and warehouse management, knowledge optimization, and that dashboard of performance indicators or metrics (Marr, 2011; Baccarini, 1996; Bertelsen, 2003; Gidado, 1996; Miles & Huberman; 1994) . All these are integrated as comprehensive enablers and to maintain Construction Company’s corporate integrity. To cite some models, economists have standard models of evaluation like Corporate Performance Management (CPM), Business Performance Management (BPM), Enterprise Performance Management (EPM) or Strategic Performance Management (SPM) (Marr, 2011; (Baccarini, 1996; Bertelsen, 2003; Gidado, 1996; Miles & Huberman; 1994). All of these have similar endpoint: to gather lessons for empowerment; to produce evidences as basis for better-decision making; and to improve or reengineer organizational performance (Marr, 2011) as depicted in figure below. Figure 3. Strategic Performance Management Appraisal (Marr, 2011) Strategic construction project management has some fundamental steps to undertake, to wit: Strategic Planning – refer to a blueprint or work plan with maps and details on what-to-do based on goals, models, organizational vision and mission (Baccarini, 1996; Bertelsen, 2003; Gidado, 1996; Miles & Huberman; 1994; Marr, 2011) Performance Measurement and Monitoring –this refer to evaluative measure as standard key performance indicators (KPIs) to monitor and evaluate if projects are undertaken in accordance to desired objectives, plans and targets. Results will serve as empirical bases for recommendations and for future actions (Shehu, Z. and Akintoye; 2008; Project Management Institute, 2004; Sommerville & Campbell, 2000; Sommerville, & Campbell; 2001; Marr, 2011); Business Analytic Intelligence– refers to research, knowledge management and database optimization for competitive leveraging I business operations. Construction project complexity should be managed with excellent proficiency to generate better construction outcome (Shehu, Z. and Akintoye; 2008; Project Management Institute, 2004; Sommerville & Campbell, 2000; Sommerville, & Campbell; 2001); Transparent Reporting and Financial Accounting – An integrated performance management must extol accountability on documentation and reporting for operational intelligibility. (Shehu, Z. and Akintoye; 2008; Project Management Institute, 2004; Sommerville & Campbell, 2000; Sommerville, & Campbell; 2001); Performance consistency –means that all human capital must be motivated to work in accordance to what is strategically needed and to attune these to organizational goals. Workers should therefore be significantly salaried with benefits commensurate to invested knowledge, skills and success contributions. (Shehu, Z. and Akintoye; 2008; Project Management Institute, 2004; Sommerville & Campbell, 2000; Sommerville, & Campbell; 2001); Risk Management – All projects must be sensitive to potential risks that may influence the success and accomplishment of projects. Risks include fluctuations of prices affecting finances; disaster cases; human resource drivers; or decline of leadership and management; poor facilities and technology (Mills, 2001; Mulholland & Christian, 1999; Smith, 1999; Marr, 2011). Performance Reporting – Transparency of performance is relevant to a reputable company. This is an indicator that a company has delivered desired levels of performance based on rules and regulations. Information is also useful for company’s internal control and external reporting. Experts are of the perception that database are necessary for informed decision-making, critical analysis, improved client relations, budget and finance prediction, risk management, and procedural re-strategizing when necessary (Strauss & Corbin, 1998; Project Management Institute, 2004; Marr, 2011) Use of technology—refers not only about tools and instruments necessary for innovative knowledge management but also to applications used for performance management to produce desired output and outcome. Nowadays, there are already available software that are helpful for integrated analytics to unify all information that made up empirical corporate management. Ludovic-Alexandre, Marle, Bocquet (2010) moreover, presents measuring complexity in computational manner. Ludovic-Alexandre et.al (2010) said that there are 42 measures identified by professionals but they opted for three measures. These are Coefficient of Network Complexity (CNC) applied to PERT and precedence network (Ludovic-Alexandre et.al. 2010, p. 719). This is illustrated with CNC= quotient of activities squared divided by events. (p. 719). The second is the cyclomatic number presented in an equation: S is the cyclomatic number, A is the number of arcs, and N is the number of nodes. S= A-N +1 Another measure purports that CNC complexity measure is imperfect because it include redundant arcs as part of the account, thus, meant that this is more complex than expected (p. 719). This is illustrated with an equation (p. 719): Cn = 100 × (Log(a / (n−1)) / [Log(n²−1)/ 4(n−1)])% % if n is odd Cn = 100 × (Log(a / (n−1)) / [Log [n²−1/ 4(n−1)])% % if n is even The third group is perceived to have an integrated measure. This is dubbed as systems thinking oriented measures, otherwise dubbed as information measures (p 719). This is illustrated with the following instance: Traditional static entropic measure of complexity advocated by Shannon information, illustrated with the following formula (Ludovic-Alexandre et.al. 2010, p. 719); Sha = −Σlog2 (p ( ni ) ) Experts however posited that these complexity measures can also be explicated through a thinking system approach by identifying factors and aspects of complexity. These factors can be performance cost, composition of workers, political sensitivity and understanding about the many stakeholders in project development (Ludovic-Alexandre et.al. 2010, p. 719). However, others argued that these computational measures have also there inherent limitations, such as matters relating to its reliability and its intuitive nature since these only model of project system ( p. 719). III. Evaluation of the Project Characteristics that Require Greatest Project Management Effort Contemporary problems in managing construction projects are generally confronted with problems, such as, (a) absence or breakdown of equipment needed for completion; (b) lack of expertise and difficulties to perform roles; (c) unclear procedures and poor social acceptance; (d) climatic conditions; (e) tools mechanical breakdown; (f) environmental influences and unpredictability of worker’s health status; (g) engineering problems; and (h) possible inherent weaknesses associated with leadership and management. (Bubshait & Selen, 1993; Gidado, 1993; Melles, Robers, & Wamelink, 1990; Morris, 1972; Wozniak, 1993; C IOB, 19991; Bennett & Fine; 1980; Rowlinson, 1988; Klir, 1985; Sidwell, 1982; Miller, 1973; Mintzberg, 1991; & Hall, 1979). Other hindrances to project’s completion are (a) politically motivated if officials stop the allocation of budget; (b) managerial reorganization; (c) contractual and legal disputes; (d) funding crisis and human resource management; (e) changes of workplan; (f) indecision of contractors or authorities handling the project (Wright, 2010; Marshall, 2011; Transdev, 2009; Henderson, 2010; Edinburgh Evening , 2009). As such, managers handling construction projects should also be imbued with knowledge on investment and property management; market analysis and property appraisals; laws and urban development sustainability; business analysis; information technology and innovation; human and resource management; legal and traditional dispute resolution and in professionalizing services (RICS COBRA & Dauphine University, 2010). However, most of the problems can be dealt relationally. The other relevant problems have impacts to the operational nature of construction, require the need to upgrade of technological facilities for innovative business analysis so that construction company can protect its interest (Bubshait & Selen, 1993; Gidado, 1993; Melles, Robers, & Wamelink, 1990). The same necessitate maximization of savvy expert on information technology who can use e-software for estimates, architecture, designs, knowledge optimization, information and education for those who’d be affected in the development of specific project. The use of advance construction technologies would hasten the process of planning, organizing, staffing, executing, and monitoring which is depicted in a sample table below on interrelations functions (Bubshait & Selen, 1993; Gidado, 1993; Melles, Robers, & Wamelink, 1990; Morris, 1972; Wozniak, 1993; C IOB, 19991; Bennett & Fine; 1980; Rowlinson, 1988; Klir, 1985; Sidwell, 1982; Miller, 1973; Mintzberg, 1991; Hall, 1979). Figure 4. Table of the interrelation managing project complexity (RICS COBRA et.al. 2010) The use of information technology and e-software are applicable for all kinds of construction projects, e.g. building, trams, highways, resorts and the like. It can hasten monitoring, reporting, communications, database banking, budgeting, promotion, recording or documenting and knowledge management. With database intact, construction company can immediately respond to those who doubted the project out of political vested interest; present accurate reports and estimated using 3D models; calculate the prospective budget; read weather forecast online; record electronically the progress the project; and can use the platform for web-based information, education, and campaign of the project for better social acceptability. IT is also an innovative way to promote the company’s goals or achievements to nurture corporate integrity which is also necessary to deflect political and social pressures, especially if project is contracted by the government or its agency. Conclusion Modernization inspires more development infrastructures that are inherently complex in character which require such expertise in managing the web of intricacies inherent in construction developments. Such indeed necessitate strategic performance management as foundational guidance for construction managers, stakeholders of the project, and of employers. The challenges can be addressed by managers who are able to openly communicate the strategic goals, objectives, methods, critical-success-factors and processes to be diligently undertaken by its workers (Locke & Latham, 1990; Locke, Shaw, Saari, & Latham, 1981; Lopes, 1976; & Mento, Cartledge, & Locke, 1980). But performance could be more enhanced if company adopts the information technology as integrated mechanism to systemize the operation and to optimize the services. Regular meetings, appraisal and updating of performances will also keep the work at the proper tract (Tubbs, & Dahl, 1991; Vroom, 1964; Walker; 1994). Research and documentation of these all will be help for evaluation to keep company’s integrity, albeit the difficulties (Stocks & Male; 1984; Morris & Hough, 1987; Hill, 1987). Indeed, complex construction and engineering projects has inherent high-stakes exemplified by considerable unalterable commitments, reward mechanism when successful, and lofty possibilities of failure and disappointments. But workers dynamics can change and improve over time when positively motivated. These are crucial to inspire managers and workers to be more project characterization, concept selection, and planning. This study further affirms that coordination of workers and managers within the necessary period of time has corresponding impact on outcomes and provides more direction to collaborative essential actions in this phase. The systemic coordination of performance standard also depends on the capacity of the company to exhibit business analytical intelligence, transparent reporting of documentations and finances, prediction of key results, fortitude of risks and storehouse supervision, knowledge optimization, and monitoring or evaluation of performance of human resources in accordance to standard indicators or metrics (Marr, 2011; Baccarini, 1996; Bertelsen, 2003; Gidado, 1996; Miles & Huberman; 1994). Moreover, managers and workers should realize that contractors knew that there are variation of actual conditions from expectations, hence, as part of the managing performance, the company must assume and adapt risk management in the implementation of project. Companies should therefore consider all contractual risks affecting the success of project implementation to cope with hazards, instability and of the success of the project (Dewettinck et.al., 2009). Moreover, experts recommend that its significant for project managers to be eloquent and knowledgeable governmental system, structures, and to nurture expertise of its political dynamics (Dewettinck et.al. 2009). Many of the projects are sourced from contractors that are government-based. Being sensitive to the political nature of the government help hasten relation with local executives and those agencies tasked for projects’ regulations (Dewettinck et.al., 2009). Internally, the company must likewise assess whether the complex project is befitting to the capacity and expertise of the company. A company who knows its limitations can strategize how to proceed on the project with option to partner with other companies who can provide direction and in the process of implementation toward success (Dewettinck et.al., 2009). Other than that, it can also encourage determination of needed risk-response drivers ranging from project-related issues to broader governance. Success or failures of projects, no matter how complex, are determined by right decisions, choices, and commitments ((Dewettinck et.al., 2009). References Bacarrini, David (1996). The Concept of Project Complexity- A review. International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier Science Ltd. Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 201-204. Baccarini, D. (1996) The concept of project complexity - a review. International Journal of Construction Management. 14, 201-204. Bertelsen, S. (2003) Complexity - construction in a new perspective. 11th Annual conference in the international group for lean construction. Blacksburg, VA. Bennett, J and Fine, B (1980). Measurement o f Complexity in Construction Projects. Final Report of SERC Project GR/A/1342.4. Department of Construction Management, University of Reading. Bennett, J (1991) International Construction Project Management: General Theory and Practice Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford (1991 ) Bubshait, K A and Selen, W J (1993). Project characteristics that influence the implementation of project management techniques: a survey Project Management Journal XXIII (2) 43-46 Chartered Institute of Building, (1991) Procurement and Project Performance. Occasional Paper No. 45. CIOB, Ascot, England. Edinburgh Evening News (2009) "Citys first tram stop unveiled.. in Croydon". Edinburgh Evening News. 8 September 2009. Accessed: 14 October 2011. Gidado, K. (1996) Project complexity: The focal point of construction production planning. Construction Management and Economics. 14, 213-225. Gidado, K (1993). Numerical Index o f Complexity in Building Construction with Particular Consideration to its Effect on Production Time. University of Brighton. Hall, R H .(1979) Organizations: Structures, Processes and Outcomes. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey Hill, T (1983). Production/Operations Management, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey. Henderson, Damien (2010). "Council loses crucial trams dispute". The Herald. Accessed: 14 October 2011. Klir, G J (1985) Complexity: some general observations Systems Research (2) (1985) 131-140 Locke, E.A. & Henne, D. (1986) Work motivation theories. In: C. Cooper & I. Robertson (eds), ‘International Review of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, pp. 1–35. New York, NY: Wiley. Locke, E.A. & Latham, G.P. (1990) A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Locke, E.A., Shaw, K.N., Saari, L.M. & Latham, G.P.(1981) Goal setting and task performance. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125–152. Lopes, L.L. (1976) Individual strategies in goal setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 15, 268–277. Marr, Bernard, (2011). Performance Management. Advanced Performance Institute. Bluecube House, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom Marshall, Chris (2011). "Times up: Todays the day the first tram should have been running in Edinburgh". Edinburgh Evening News. Accessed: 14 October 2011. Miles, M B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications. London. Mills, A. (2001) A systematic approach to risk management for construction. Structural survey. 19, 254-252. Miller, E J Technology, territory, and time: the internal differentiation of complex production systems in Organizational Systems (Edited by Baker, F) Irwin, Illinois (1973) Mintzberg, H The Structuring of Organizations Prentice-Hall, New Jersey (1991) Mulholland, B. and Christian, J. (1999) Risk assessment in construction schedules. Journal of Construction Management. Jan- Feb. 99, 8-15. Morris, P W G and Hough, G H (1987). The Anatomy o f Major Projects. Wiley, Chichester. Mento, A.J., Cartledge, N.D. & Locke, E.A. (1980) Maryland vs. Michigan vs. Minnesota: another look at the relationship of expectancy and goal difficulty to task performance. Organisational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 419–440. Mento, A.J., Steel, R.P. & Karren, R.J. (1987) A meta-analytic study of the effects of goal setting on task performance: 1966–1984. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 52–83 Melles, B, Robers, J C B and Wamelink, J W F (1990).A typology for the selection of management techniques in the construction industry. CIB 90 Conference Building Economics and Construction Management. Sydney. Morris, P W G A (1972). Study of Selected Building Projects in the Context of Theories o f Organisation. UMIST , America. Naylor, J., Pritchard, R.D. & Ilgen, D.R. (1980) A Theory of Behavior in Organization. Academic Press, New York, NY. Pinto, J.K. & Slevin, D.P. (1988) Project success: definition and measurement techniques. Project Management Journal, 19(1), 67–75. Project Management Institute, (2004) A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK Guide. Project Management Institute, Pennsylvania. RICS COBRA & Dauphine University (2010). The Construction, Building and Real Estate Research Conference of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. London, United Kingdom. 2-3 September 2010. Rockart, J.F. (1979) Chief executives define their own data needs. Harvard Business Review, 57 March–April, 81–93. Rowlinson, S M (1988). An Analysis of Factors Affecting Project Performance in Industrial Building. Brunei University, Brunei. Smith, N J. (1999) Managing risk in construction projects.Blackwell Science. Oxford, UK. Sidwell, A C (1982). A Critical Study of Project Team Organisational Forms within the Building Process, University of Aston, UK. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications, London. Shehu, Z. and Akintoye, A. (2008), “Construction program management skills and competencies: a deeper insight”, The Built and Human Environment Review, Vol. 1. Sommerville, J. and Campbell, C. (2000), “Project management: the role paradigm shift”, Proceedings of ARCOM 16th Annual Conference, Glasgow Caledonian University, pp. 723-9. Sommerville, J. and Campbell, C. (2001), “Project management: an evaluation of the client and provider attribute paradigms”, Proceedings of ARCOM 17th Annual Conference, University of Salford, America. Steers, R.M. & Porter, L.W. (1991) Motivation and Work Behavior. McGraw Hill, New York, NY. Stocks, R K and Male, SP (1984), An investigation into the clients perceptions of contractual form and procedures: the instigation of good practice. Proceedings, CIB W-65 Organization and Management o f Construction . Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (1984) 291-299 Transdev (2009) Transdev loses Edinburgh tram contract as council seeks to scale down scheme’s costs". Transport Xtra. 21 December 2009. Tubbs, M.E. & Dahl, J.G. (1991) An empirical comparison of self report and discrepancy measures of goal commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 708–716. Vroom, V.H. (1964) Work and Motivation. Robert E. Krieger Publishing Co. London. Walker, A. (1994) Building the Future. In: The Controversial Construction of the Campus of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Longman, Asia. Wilsted, W.D. & Hand, H.H. (1974) Determinants of aspiration levels in a simulated goal setting environment of the firm. Academy of Management Journal, 17, 172–177. Wright, Robert (2010). "Extra cost of Edinburgh tram line fuels dispute". Financial Times. Accessed: 14 October 2011. Wood, H L and Ashton, P (2010). Modeling project complexity. In: Egbu, C. (Ed) Procs 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 1111-1120. Wood, H. and Ashton, P. (2009) Factors of complexity in construction projects. In: Dainty, A. (Ed). Procs 25th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2009, Nottingham, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 857-66 Wozniak, T M (1993) Significance vs Capability: Fit for Use Project Controls American Association of Cost Engineers International (Trans) (Conference Proceedings) Dearborn, Michigan A.2.1-8. Macheridis, Nikos & Nilsson, Carl-Henric, (2004). "Managing Project Complexity - a managerial view," Working Paper Series 2004/7, Lund University, Institute of Economic Research. Miller, Roger & Lessard, Donald, (2007). "Evolving Strategy: Risk Management and the Shaping of Large Engineering Projects," Working papers 37157, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management. Dewettinck, K. & Van Dijk, H., (2009). "Linking employee performance management system characteristics with performance management system effectiveness: exploring the mediating role of fairness," Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Working Paper Series 2009-23, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School. Ludovic-AlexandreVidal, Franck Marle, Jean-Claude Bocquet. 2010. Measuring project complexity using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier and Science Direct. 29 (2011) 718–727 Read More