China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Project Delivery Systems
Published in Abdul Razzak Rumane, Handbook of Construction Management, 2016
A project manager (PM) contract is used by the owner when the owner decides to turn over the entire project management to a professional PM. In the PM type of contract, the PM is owner’s representative, and is directly responsible to the owner. The PM is responsible for planning, monitoring, and managing the project. In its broadest sense, the PM has the responsibility for all phases of the project from inception of the project till the completion and handing over of the project to the owner/end user. The PM is involved in giving advice to the owner and is responsible to appoint design professional(s), consultant, supervision firm, and select the contractor to construct the project. Table 2.5 illustrates the main aspects, advantages, and disadvantages of the PM type of project delivery system, and Figure 2.6 illustrates the contractual relationship.
Project management practice
Published in Riadh Habash, Professional Practice in Engineering and Computing, 2019
The PMI defines PM as “the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to meet project requirements”. PM may also be defined as the discipline of planning, organizing, motivating, and controlling resources to achieve specific goals.
How relational contract theory influence management strategies and project outcomes: a systematic literature review
Published in Construction Management and Economics, 2021
In planning a project, it is crucial to recognise the close relationship between design and construction and the various construction strategies available. The Project Manager (PM) is expected to possess the ability to manage and encourage individuals and teams, while skilfully progressing the project to completion and achieving the project’s goals (Walker and Lloyd-Walker 2015). There is a challenge about how to bridge the gap between the design and construction interface to improve communication and handover between phases (Alarcón and Mardones 1998). A fragmented delivery process results from design and construction teams’: (1) lack of knowledge sharing; (2) missed opportunities for innovation and knowledge development, and; (3) the free-riding problem–“where each stakeholder (designer or builder) takes the easiest path to achieve their individual goals and ends up putting the burden on the other stakeholder” (De la Garza and Pishdad-Bozorgi 2018, p. 4). For practitioners, the success of interorganisational relationships strongly relies on how they (practitioners) collaborate. The choice of strategy affects how interorganisational relationships happen between design and construction. Some research has pointed out that a transactional strategy, governed by the contract, can limit interorganisational collaboration (Cao and Lumineau 2015).
The impact of developmental dyslexia on workplace cognition: evidence from a virtual reality environment
Published in Behaviour & Information Technology, 2023
James H. Smith-Spark, Rebecca Gordon, Ashok S. Jansari
The PM system is responsible for remembering delayed intentions (Winograd 1988). Three types of PM task cue have been identified in the literature (e.g. Brewer et al. 2011), namely event-based, time-based, and action-based (also referred to as activity-based). Of these, event-based and time-based PM are the two most studied. In event-based PM, objects in the individual's surrounding environment act as cues to support PM (e.g. seeing a postbox should remind the individual that there is a letter in his or her bag which needs to be posted). Time-based PM requires an intention to be acted upon at or by a particular timepoint in the future (e.g. paying a bill by the end of the following week). Prospective memory of this kind is self-initiated and relies on internally-generated cues to support remembering, drawing upon executive function (e.g. Martin, Kliegel, and McDaniel 2003; McDaniel and Einstein 2000). Like event-based PM, action-based PM intentions are environmentally cued and require an intention to be carried out after another task has been performed (e.g. Brewer et al. 2011; Kvavilashvili and Ellis 1996). Action-based PM is the least cognitively demanding as the external cues associated with it coincide with the completion of the ongoing activity itself (Shum et al. 2004). Of the three cue types, time-based PM is the most cognitively complex and to draw on executive function to a greater extent than either event- or action-based PM (e.g. Einstein et al. 1995). The uses of PM in the workplace are manifold; for example, in remembering to carry out tasks, attach documents to emails, attend meetings, and pass on messages to colleagues. The real-world challenges of carrying out PM tasks are, for instance, in coping with interruptions, in dealing with busy and demanding situations, and monitoring for rarely occurring events over extended time periods (McDaniel and Einstein 2007). Its importance in safety-critical work settings has been highlighted (e.g. Loft, Dismukes, and Grundgeiger 2021), while PM has also been studied in a work environment through the use of active badges logging participants movements and actions during their work day (Sellen et al. 1997). The role of PM in recovering from interruption of work tasks has also been studied (e.g. Dismukes 2012). In the context of ergonomics, the role of PM has been investigated, for example, in air-traffic control (e.g. Loft 2014), driving behaviour (Sharma, Khan, and Kushvah 2020), intensive care units (Grundgeiger et al. 2013), and, more generally in complex sociotechnical systems (Grundgeiger, Sanderson, and Dismukes 2014). This literature indicates the involvement in, and importance of, PM across a range of employment settings and work tasks.