Improving Sustainable Project Success Strategies Focused on Cost and Schedule for Electrical Construction Project Management

Issue

Response/Correction

Field Editor

1. Requires major revision.

The authors would like to first thank the editor for giving us this opportunity to revise and resubmit this paper. We also sincerely appreciate the anonymous reviewers who provided thorough reviews and valuable comments to help us improve the manuscript. Thank you once again.

Reviewer #1              

1. The abstract should mention the research method used. The research findings are also not clearly stated.

The following abstract was revised.

“Electrical contractors encounter problems such as limited construction sites, schedule interference, and inefficient communication with other transactions as they typically subcontract with general contractors. Electrical projects require systematic and effective project management strategies to overcome the problems and achieve the desired goal. In an electrical construction project, indi-vidual tasks are interconnected at different stages, including pre-construction planning (PCP) and project execution (PE). Therefore, analyzing the effect of task strings on the project success in terms of costs and schedule performance is necessary. The main objective of this study is per-forming the static analysis to compare successful and failed projects with a focus on the cost and schedule performances, using the PCP and PE task strings in electrical construction projects. To achieve this, continuous PCP-PE task strings implementation score was calculated for each PE group in terms of cost and schedule, and successful and failed projects on unweighted and weighted values were compare and analyze by performing independent sample t-test. Conse-quently, it was confirmed that the use of most task strings had a positive effect on the cost success at a confidence level of 95%, and that only the subcontractor management group had a positive effect on the schedule success. Hence, it was derived the usage of task strings for these groups is recommended for cost success in electrical construction, and continuous PCP-PE task strings do not have a positive effect on schedule success, so it is recommended to use the PCP-PE task strings only for specific groups for schedule success in electrical construction. Demonstrating the rela-tionship between the PCP and PE tasks, the findings of this study are expected to benefit electrical contractors achieve higher performances using effective project management strategies.”

2. Line 53-55: The argument is not strong enough. There are many studies on project maturity that measure project management performance. Take a look at the paper on project maturity.

The following sentences were added.

“Project management became an issue to be considered at the organizational level [33], and this need led to the concept of organizational project management maturity in the late 1990s [34]. And many project maturity models have been introduced and the related studies have been conducted. Iqbal (2013) provided an overview of the ex-isting project maturity model [35], and Yazici (2009) showed that the contribution of project management maturity to better project performance is largely determined by organizational culture characteristics [36]. In particular, the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business published a special issue in 2014 on the topic of project management maturity. And Pasian (2014) pointed out the decisive role of non-process factors in achieving matured project management for projects that are not precisely defined [37]. In addition, studies on more successful project management have been conducted using the project management maturity model  [38-41]. Therefore, it is necessary to quantify and analyze the degree of management to successfully carry out the project in the field of electrical construction.”

3. Line 70-84: this should be in the method section of the paper.

The method section ‘1.2. Research methodology’ was added.

4. Data collection: why 50 data is enough? the author has to do some reliability/validity test.

The section ‘5. Validation of continuous PCP-PE task strings’ was added.

5. Line 194-200: independent sample t-test does not recognize the dependent and independent variables. Please rewrite this section.

The following sentences were added in Lines 227-229.

“The independent variables are successful and failed projects in terms of the cost and schedule, and the dependent variables are the continuous PCP-PE task string implementation score means.”

6. Line 216: The data must come from two different populations. It is also important to study/hypotheses why they succeeded or failed

The following section  was revised.

“3.1. Data collection

Data of 50 completed projects were collected from 25 electric companies in the United States to perform PCP-PE task string analysis. It was randomly selected from a list of 2,000 electrical members of the National Electrical Contractors Association. Each company provided data on successful and failed projects. The data consisted of information on PCP-PE task execution and project performance, categorized as success or failure in terms of cost and schedule. A project was classified as a successful project if the target cost and schedule were met; otherwise, it was classified as a failed project. In terms of cost, 30 of 50 electricity projects were classified as successful and 20 as failed, whereas 42 and 8 projects were classified as successful and failed, respectively, considering the schedule criterion. That is, in terms of cost and schedule, success and failure were classified according to the degree of achievement, and the degree was in-vestigated through a survey. To quantify the performance of implementing 239 con-tinuous PCP-PE task strings to project success, electrical experts prioritized their im-portance considering the cost and schedule success criteria. The survey was sent via email to 75 electricians, and 29 surveys were collected, yielding a response rate of 38.7%.”

7. The authors used only one statistical tool (independent sample t-test). By looking at the available data, the authors can use ANOVA or even regression to enrich the analysis and identify other findings such as which factors contributed to the success or failure of the project.

If the authors deal with ANOVA or regression, this paper will be too long paper and complicated. And so, the authors dealt only with the independent sample t-test in this paper. The additional statistical tools will be covered in the next paper.

8. This paper also needs to discuss the managerial implications of the findings.

The section ‘6. Discussion’ was added.

“6. Discussion

To quantitatively evaluate the subjective project maturity, this study analyzed wheth-er continuous PCP-PE task strings affect project success in terms of cost and schedule through a survey of electricians. Project maturity refers to an organization's ability to master a project [50]. Companies with high project maturity are considered more likely to succeed than companies with low project maturity. Measuring project maturity can be subjective rather than objective [51]. Some of the most important work on project maturity focuses primarily on the operations performed by organizations and project people [52]. Also, projects they simply fail or succeed. In other words, a project does not fail or succeed on one variable, but is influenced by many other factors.

Mullaly (2014) emphasized the need to consider both organizational and contextual factors, and pointed out the need for a conditional perspective on project maturity as-sessment both in the project process and the context. And it was considered that the situational factor was underestimated because the maturity model has a repeatable process and the process itself is an appropriate tool to improve the project manage-ment maturity. And many studies suggested the need to identify organizational-level determinants to achieve higher levels of maturity [54-58]. clearly stated. And some Studies have emphasized that they do not consider organizational-level determinants and other contextual factors that shape organizational project management maturity [59-60].”

9. Turnitin score is 45% so article needs to be rewritten

Overall, it was revised.

Issue

Response/Correction

Field Editor

1. Requires major revision.

The authors would like to first thank the editor for giving us this opportunity to revise and resubmit this paper. We also sincerely appreciate the anonymous reviewers who provided thorough reviews and valuable comments to help us improve the manuscript. Thank you once again.

Reviewer #2              

1. Invalid definition of project success: Project success is measured only by two variables in this study: meeting cost and schedule. This is far from what the current literature includes. Project success is measured by how much the project respects the triple constraint, satisfies stakeholders, meets the business objectives for which it was launched, produce a product that meets today’s needs, and respect social corporate responsibility. A way to solve this issue is not to relate meeting project cost and schedule to project success but to call them by their name. The authors can add a paragraph to show that meeting project cost and project schedule are factors contributing to project success.

(1) The title was revised as follow.

“Improving Sustainable Project Success Strategies Focused on Cost and Schedule for Electrical Construction Project Management”

(2) The following sentences were added.

“In electrical construction projects, individual tasks of pre-construction planning (PCP) and project execution (PE) are correlated with each other at different stages [16]. Relevant tasks in PCP-PE must be linked and completed consecutively to achieve an efficient PE instead of completing PCP or PE tasks separately. Therefore, a continuous task string model was developed which consists of specific combinations of the PCP and PE tasks [1]. The PCP-PE task string model can be utilized to recognize the task relationship between planning and execution. It can eliminate unnecessary tasks and improve project productivity by efficiently using PCP-PE task strings. However, to verify the effect on PCP-PE task strings, it is necessary to investigate on the project performance. In particular, the effectiveness of continuous task strings on project per-formance must be quantified in terms of the costs and schedule success [33], which are significant in construction projects. The main objective of this study is performing the static analysis to compare successful and failed projects with a focus on the cost and schedule, using task strings of PCP and PE in electrical constructions. Meeting project cost and schedule is an important factor contributing to project success. Therefore, this paper is limited to success in terms of cost and schedule.”

2. Biased definition of project success: A project is either successful or failed. It cannot be considered successful when considering cost and failed when considering schedule. In the same sample, 20 projects were considered a failure when cost is considered while only 8 failed when schedule was considered! Projects do not fail or succeed in one variable with respect to the other; they simply either fail or succeed!

The section ‘6. Discussion’ was added.

“6. Discussion

To quantitatively evaluate the subjective project maturity, this study analyzed wheth-er continuous PCP-PE task strings affect project success in terms of cost and schedule through a survey of electricians. Project maturity refers to an organization's ability to master a project [50]. Companies with high project maturity are considered more likely to succeed than companies with low project maturity. Measuring project maturity can be subjective rather than objective [51]. Some of the most important work on project maturity focuses primarily on the operations performed by organizations and project people [52]. Also, projects they simply fail or succeed. In other words, a project does not fail or succeed on one variable, but is influenced by many other factors.

Mullaly (2014) emphasized the need to consider both organizational and contextual factors, and pointed out the need for a conditional perspective on project maturity as-sessment both in the project process and the context. And it was considered that the situational factor was underestimated because the maturity model has a repeatable process and the process itself is an appropriate tool to improve the project manage-ment maturity. And many studies suggested the need to identify organizational-level determinants to achieve higher levels of maturity [54-58]. clearly stated. And some Studies have emphasized that they do not consider organizational-level determinants and other contextual factors that shape organizational project management maturity [59-60].”

3. Sampling method: The authors did not mention how they identified the organizations, projects, contractors, and subcontractors. What was the sampling method and why was it selected?

The following section  was revised.

“3.1. Data collection

Data of 50 completed projects were collected from 25 electric companies in the United States to perform PCP-PE task string analysis. It was randomly selected from a list of 2,000 electrical members of the National Electrical Contractors Association. Each company provided data on successful and failed projects. The data consisted of information on PCP-PE task execution and project performance, categorized as success or failure in terms of cost and schedule. A project was classified as a successful project if the target cost and schedule were met; otherwise, it was classified as a failed project. In terms of cost, 30 of 50 electricity projects were classified as successful and 20 as failed, whereas 42 and 8 projects were classified as successful and failed, respectively, considering the schedule criterion. That is, in terms of cost and schedule, success and failure were classified according to the degree of achievement, and the degree was in-vestigated through a survey. To quantify the performance of implementing 239 con-tinuous PCP-PE task strings to project success, electrical experts prioritized their im-portance considering the cost and schedule success criteria. The survey was sent via email to 75 electricians, and 29 surveys were collected, yielding a response rate of 38.7%.”

4. Findings do not respect the research design and statistical tests: The results of a correlational study confirm or fail to confirm whether the predictor variables predict the criterion variable. The proposed results suggested a causal relationship which is not supported by an experimental design! To solve this problem, the researchers should change some wording in their finding and use the word “predict” in their evaluations and discussions.

Overall, it was revised.