File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Systematizing construction project evaluations

TitleSystematizing construction project evaluations
Authors
Issue Date1996
PublisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.pubs.asce.org/journals/me.html
Citation
Journal Of Management In Engineering, 1996, v. 12 n. 1, p. 34-39 How to Cite?
AbstractPresent trends toward multiparticipant megaprojects have heightened the need for effective and efficient evaluations by stakeholders, both of themselves and of fellow participants. Feedback from such evaluations helps improve the management of ongoing and oncoming projects. It also assists in a more objective selection of suitable organizational and/or individual participants for future projects, based on their past performance. However, a recent investigation indicated an apparent lack of systematic project evaluations in construction projects in particular. The need was noted to identify comprehensive sets of evaluation criteria, as well as to formulate sets of indicators corresponding to such criteria, by which performance may be evaluated. Data banks of typical values of such indicators in specific types of projects also needed to be developed for benchmarking. Although the development of such a framework may appear to be a formidable task, its feasibility and usefulness were demonstrated in a pilot exercise in Sri Lanka and the UK, as reported in this paper. One of the useful devices developed in this exercise was a "knowledge-based" or "expert system" front-end to select appropriate modules of the proposed evaluation system for a particular evaluation. Expert assessments of typical or average values of relevant indicators were also useful in the absence of adequate information to develop comprehensive data banks in certain project categories. Subjectivity in multicriteria assessments was reduced by pairwise comparisons as incorporated in the system proposed in this paper.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/71423
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.84
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.060
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKumaraswamy, MMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorThorpe, Aen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T06:31:51Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T06:31:51Z-
dc.date.issued1996en_HK
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of Management In Engineering, 1996, v. 12 n. 1, p. 34-39en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0742-597Xen_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/71423-
dc.description.abstractPresent trends toward multiparticipant megaprojects have heightened the need for effective and efficient evaluations by stakeholders, both of themselves and of fellow participants. Feedback from such evaluations helps improve the management of ongoing and oncoming projects. It also assists in a more objective selection of suitable organizational and/or individual participants for future projects, based on their past performance. However, a recent investigation indicated an apparent lack of systematic project evaluations in construction projects in particular. The need was noted to identify comprehensive sets of evaluation criteria, as well as to formulate sets of indicators corresponding to such criteria, by which performance may be evaluated. Data banks of typical values of such indicators in specific types of projects also needed to be developed for benchmarking. Although the development of such a framework may appear to be a formidable task, its feasibility and usefulness were demonstrated in a pilot exercise in Sri Lanka and the UK, as reported in this paper. One of the useful devices developed in this exercise was a "knowledge-based" or "expert system" front-end to select appropriate modules of the proposed evaluation system for a particular evaluation. Expert assessments of typical or average values of relevant indicators were also useful in the absence of adequate information to develop comprehensive data banks in certain project categories. Subjectivity in multicriteria assessments was reduced by pairwise comparisons as incorporated in the system proposed in this paper.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.pubs.asce.org/journals/me.htmlen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Management in Engineeringen_HK
dc.rightsJournal of Management in Engineering. Copyright © American Society of Civil Engineers.en_HK
dc.titleSystematizing construction project evaluationsen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0742-597X&volume= 12&issue=1&spage=34&epage=39&date=1996&atitle=Systematizing+construction+project+evaluationsen_HK
dc.identifier.emailKumaraswamy, MM:mohan@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityKumaraswamy, MM=rp00126en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0029734237en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros14173en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0029734237&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume12en_HK
dc.identifier.issue1en_HK
dc.identifier.spage34en_HK
dc.identifier.epage39en_HK
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKumaraswamy, MM=35566270600en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridThorpe, A=7102836328en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats