Applicability-Compatibility Analysis of PMBOK Seventh Edition from the Perspective of the Construction Industry Distinctive Peculiarities
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. PMBOK and Mainstream of Standardization in Project Management
- Sequence of inserting main sections of “standard” and “body of knowledge” has been reversed.
- Five typical process groups of “planning”, “execution”, “monitoring”, “control”, and “closing” have been converted into ten “Project Management Principles”.
- Ten “knowledge areas” of project management turned into eight main “project performance domains”.
- Introduction of interactive online platform of PMIstandards+™.
- Presents two sections on “Tailoring” and “Models, Methods, and Artifacts”.
3. Research Methodology
4. Content Analysis of Performance Domains
5. Results: Value Creation of PMBOK 7 in the Construction Industry
5.1. Typology of Construction Projects
- Housing construction. Designing and building residential buildings was recognized as the first, and probably the greatest, section in the construction industry. Those projects that are defined as developing any habitat or accommodation for the dwelling of people are placed in this category. Obviously, the housing projects produce architectural spaces and their landscape, are identified as low-cost, low-time and low-risk efforts, which can be set off in both public and private sectors. The contractors, consultants and material supplier companies engaged in these projects generally are small-sized companies. Two main categories of housing projects are:
- 1.1.
- Mass housing
- 1.2.
- Private/single housing
- Building construction. The second major category of construction projects has been identified in this study as the conventional buildings in a civil space except the housing ones. Therefore, all other buildings and construction projects in the urban areas fall into this building category. The building projects also produce architectural spaces, require medium to high costs/time and are relatively low risk in planning and can be considered in both public and private sectors. The building projects in the urban regions commonly are designed and implemented by small- to medium-sized companies. These projects include the following subsections:
- 2.1.
- Commercial buildings
- 2.2.
- Educational buildings (university/schools)
- 2.3.
- Healthcare buildings
- 2.4.
- Public spaces
- Engineering construction. The third main category of construction projects is known in the current study as the non-conventional civil structures and/or constructions. These projects may be implemented in urban or suburban areas or in the sites out of the city boundary. The engineering constructions do not produce almost any architectural spaces and instead it depends more on the engineering aspects, are categorized as medium- to high-cost/time projects with medium risks. Almost all of these projects are defined by the governmental agencies or the public sector and are implemented by the medium- to large-sized companies. The engineering projects can be distinguished into the following:
- 3.1.
- Traffic/transportation (roads, bridges and harbors)
- 3.2.
- Energy/water infrastructures
- 3.3.
- Dam
- 3.4.
- Power networks/pipelines/telecommunications facilities
- Industrial construction. The fourth and final section of the construction industry has been recognized as industrial construction, which is generally located in the non-residential regions. These projects produce limited architectural spaces; they are highly dependent on the industrial processes and require different expertise. The industrial constructions are the most expensive and long-lasting projects in the construction industry and face high levels of risks and various uncertainties of the market. These projects are normally defined with the support of governmental sector or financial entities and are mostly designed and executed by large-sized companies and deep-pocket firms. Two main types of industrial construction are:
- 4.1.
- Factories/chemical plants
- 4.2.
- Petroleum refineries/gas processing:
5.2. Applicability Analysis of Performance Domains in Regards to Construction Projects
5.3. Compatibility Analysis of Management Principles in Regards to Construction Projects
6. Discussion
6.1. Interpretation of Eight Performance Domains in Relation Tog Construction Projects
- Stakeholders. Construction projects in comparison to projects of other industries have vaster stakeholders, especially in the external section. Although other parties may stand as key stakeholders of projects, such as financer or insurance company, internal stakeholders in construction projects often include the traditional triangle of client, consultant/architect and contractor/constructor. External stakeholders of a construction project can be defined in some surrounding tiers from local people, governmental agencies, regulatory, various NGOs, environment activists and many other organizations and authorities. These stakeholders can have direct or indirect, positive or negative impacts on the project and their roles must be taken into account in any project planning.
- Team. The nature of a construction project that leads to physical buildings and constructions through fulfillment of studies in diverse areas of expertise, make team working completely distinct from other projects, such as information and communications technology (ICT), development of industrial products or research works. Indeed, in a construction project, several teams may build up and dissolve throughout the project life cycle; also, it is not unusual to form several distinctive teams at the same time, such that each of them has their own project manager in the organization. The issue stemming from this fact is that each party engaged in a construction project in itself is usually a subsection of a large entity with complicated bureaucracy. Therefore, the creation of an interconnected team in construction projects creates many obstacles and complexities, which usually is addressed through contract legal tools and techniques. Consequently, the team formation in a construction project utterly depends on the type of project delivery system, including conventional method, design-build, engineering-procurement-construction (EPC), finance-based methods (e.g., build-operate-transfer (BOT)) or other practicable contractual methods. It is worth mentioning that the highest level of team working in a concentrated manner and form in construction projects can be found in an integrated project delivery (IPD) method, which is empowered by utilizing building information modeling (BIM) technology (Figure 15).
- Life cycle. Construction projects generally obey a standard sequence of phases, from primary studies and designs to construction and operation, although there are slight differences between diverse project types in this regard (Figure 16). Like the project team, design and formation of the life cycle and phases in a construction project is profoundly hinged upon the project delivery system. The exaggerated conditions can be found in the finance-based methods, like BOT contracts, where the operation phase, a stage which traditionally was supposed out of the project boundary, completely falls into the project scope and the contracted activities. The value creation outlook through project management in the 2021 version of PMBOK is extremely effective for construction projects because it promotes the role of the operation phase as the final ring in the added value chain of the project and will provide more support for the fast tracking of phases to achieve the customer’s intended value. This worthwhile point of view is one way of bringing more agile concepts into construction industry, tailored to this industry.
- Planning. Early exact drafting of the gap-bridging scheme between the current condition (as is) and the desirable situation (to be) is vital for a construction project. There are many consumable and inconsumable resources in a construction project, including human resources, machinery, material and equipment, land and, of course, time and money. To use and to apply these costly resources in an effective and productive manner, it is essential to take considerable time for project planning. On the other hand, critical issues such as risks, quality and project control must be embedded in the project planning considerations. Regarding global warming and climate change, it is essential to include environmental issues as a substantial part of the feasibility study in the pre-project phase, especially in engineering projects, like dams, and industrial projects, like oil productions, which potentially can have considerable effects on the surrounding environment and nature. The significance of the planning phase in construction projects makes it necessary to fulfill the basic planning by mostly utilizing the services of the consulting third party, in both public and private sectors.
- Project Work. The construction phase of the project accounts for the largest part of the project’s budget and time, and so can be deemed as the most crucial step in the construction industry. Implementation of almost all construction projects combines classic consecutive phases, which are organized based on the plans—design of facilities and preparation of drawings, procurement of resources and goods and services, site preparation and erection of building by adding material. It is worth mentioning that recent technological developments, such as prefabrication, robotics, augmented reality, drones, internet of things (IOT), wearable protective equipment, remote site control, etc., have profoundly impacted the construction methods and techniques. Project contract management, quality control, administration of various working groups in the form of subcontractors or in-house teams, health, safety, environment (HSE) and knowledge management are the other major considerations in the construction phase.
- Delivery. The phase of handing over the product to the customer in a construction project can potentially turn into a project itself! It is notable to mention that construction projects mostly face a hierarchy of objectives. For instance, take an oil refinery contract between a governmental entity and a contractor, in this project, the contractor is responsible not only for handover of the erected facilities to the client in the mutually agreed time, cost and scope (as the first tier objective), but they must also deliver the final product (gas or fuel) in the desired amount and requested quality (as the second tier objective). All the while, the contractor will still be responsible for the performance of facilities and the quality of the final product for a predefined period of time inserted into the contract. That is why, in the handover phase of industrial projects to the owner, many processes and tests, including pre-commissioning/cold tests, commissioning/hot tests, start-up of the constructed facilities, etc., should be passed to ensure the final acceptance. If the client is engaged in multi-contracts with different contractors, the other problem that should be handled is removing interface issues and solving battery limit constraints.
- Measurement. Control activities, such as schedule and budget monitoring, in construction projects and daily supervisions of the work to ensure compliance with rules and regulations is an indivisible part of the daily tasks. Nevertheless, assessment of the completed work is not a complicated task in construction and tests to check the acceptance indices can be easily performed, but in regards to those parts of the work that will be covered, if there will be no access to them in future, the control is vital. It is worth mentioning that to be in control of the performance of the work continuously, modern technologies, like drones, sensors, camera, image processing, etc., are employed in construction sites. In addition, reporting the project progress to key stakeholders using various tools, such as online applications, is common nowadays.
- Uncertainty. Uncertainties can have profound negative impacts on the objectives of construction projects and so administration of them can be considered as one of the main axial activities in the construction industry. Risks in the construction industry can be evaluated from different points of view, including those of the government, client and contractor; at various levels of the organization, including owners, senior managers and site works; and in several areas, including economic, political, social and technical, all with both international and national outlooks. The importance of risk management is doubled in the case of projects where the inherent nature of the work itself is a basis for uncertainty, like drilling, digging and excavation, because achievement of the project goals is highly vague and unknown obstacles may have been concealed underground.
6.2. Configuration of Performance Domains in the Construction Industry
- Although team building can be analyzed under the project human resource management section separately due to its significance and exceptional role in the project’s success, obviously administration of the team is a subset of the stakeholder mother set. Why does this interpretation matter? Having holistic view regarding stakeholder management and, subsequently, team administration will lead to various aspects of team development in compliance with the results of other in-house and external stakeholders. This means that all team building activities, such as strategy development, alignment with goals, defining members’ roles and interface management of sections, should be supported and leveled by the outputs of the analysis of stakeholders in a construction project. Regardless of the construction industry considerations, it is worth mentioning that in almost the entire text of PMBOK 7, two concepts of stakeholder and team have been applied simultaneously using the conjunction “And”.
- Determination of project phases, milestones, deliverables of each phase and the fast-tracking possibility of them, etc., is considered under the schedule section of planning. Therefore, development of the project life cycle conceptually falls under the planning umbrella term for all initial efforts. However, it is noteworthy that it is possible that some stages of the project life cycle may fall outside the conceptual scope of project planning. For instance, in the construction industry, it is not uncommon for a consultant engineer or architect to compose the basic reports of the feasibility study even before project definition, or an operation phase after commissioning of the project is always considered out of the project planning scope, at least in conventional construction contracts. Why does this interpretation matter? In a construction project, all vital features, like time and cost estimations and risk analysis, contract type, procurement method, partial delivery of project outputs, etc., strongly depend on the project life cycle framework, which should be determined in the planning phase, named pre-project attempts.
- Project supervision is one of the core activities in the construction industry, in comparison to the other industries, like information and communications technology (ICT), or maybe healthcare and defense. The main reason for this issue is the need to comply with laws and regulations governed with various watchdog entities in different levels and various distinguished expertise and also requirements to meet the problems that arise from diffused and scattered sites. Therefore, Measurement activities definitely fall into the Project Work section. Why does this interpretation matter? The implementation phase in a construction project, including dismantling existing buildings, excavation, erection of structure, finishing works, etc., all require strict data gathering, work monitoring and control of activities to ensure the plan is met. Therefore, diverse elements of a project control system must be designed in regards to project execution conditions and requirements.
7. Conclusions
“With project management evolving more rapidly than ever before, the process-based orientation of past editions cannot be maintained in a manner conducive to reflecting the full value delivery landscape.”
- The four main sectors and 12 subsections of projects in the construction industry are defined as follows:
- 1.1.
- Housing construction (mass housing and private/single housing).
- 1.2.
- Building construction (commercial buildings, educational buildings, healthcare buildings and public spaces).
- 1.3.
- Engineering construction (traffic/transportation, energy/water infrastructures, dams, power networks/pipelines/telecommunications facilities).
- 1.4.
- Industrial construction. (factories/chemical plants and petroleum refineries/gas processing).
- Measurement of the importance of each performance domain in the PMBOK 7 in regards to the context of the construction industry. In total, Delivery, Project Work and Stakeholders are the main three performance domains, which should be thought out as the pivotal points in the construction industry.
- Comparison of the significance of management principles of the PMBOK 7. Overall, the Team, Complexity and Value principles are recognized as the most three effective principles on project performance in the construction industry.
- The eight novel introduced performance domains do not have equivalent roles of effectiveness in the construction industry and can be graded as four major and four subsidiary domains.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Schrapers, M. Applying Standards, Guidelines and Methods in Construction Project Management. Ph.D. Thesis, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK, 5 June 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Garcia, S. How standards enable adoption of project management practice. IEEE Softw. 2005, 22, 22–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hübner, F.; Volk, R.; Schultmann, F. Project management standards: Strategic success factor for projects. Int. J. Manag. Pract. 2018, 11, 372–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grau, N. Standards and excellence in project management—In who do we trust? Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 74, 10–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Faraji, A.; Rashidi, M.; Perera, S. Text Mining Risk Assessment—Based Model to Conduct Uncertainty Analysis of the General Conditions of Contract in Housing Construction Projects: Case Study of the NSW GC21. J. Archit. Eng. 2021, 27, 4021025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahlemann, F.; Teuteberg, F.; Vogelsang, K. Project management standards—Diffusion and application in Germany and Switzerland. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2009, 27, 292–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faraji, A.; Rashidi, M.; Khadir, P.; Perera, S. A Risk Analysis-Best Worst Method Based Model for Selection of the Most Appropriate Contract Strategy for Onshore Drilling Projects in the Iranian Petroleum Industry. Buildings 2021, 11, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larson, E.W.; Gray, C.F.; Desai, G.V. Project Management: The Managerial Process; McGraw-Hill Education: New York City, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Flyvbjerg, B.; Holm, M.S.; Buhl, S. Underestimating costs in public works projects: Error or lie? J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2002, 68, 279–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Faraji, A.; Rashidi, M.; Sorooshnia, E. An Integrated Organizational System for Project Source Selection in the Major Iranian Construction Companies. Buildings 2020, 10, 251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bredillet, C.N. Genesis and role of standards: Theoretical foundations and socio-economical model for the construction and use of standards. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2003, 21, 463–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- ISO. ISO Standards Are Internationally Agreed by Experts. 2021. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standards.html. (accessed on 11 January 2022).
- E.C. for Standardization. What is a Standard? 2021. Available online: https://www.cen.eu/work/endev/whatisen/pages/default.aspx. (accessed on 11 January 2022).
- Faraji, A. Neuro-fuzzy system based model for prediction of project performance in downstream sector of petroleum industry in Iran. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2021, 19, 1268–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faraji, A. Smart Contract Based Conceptual Model for Optimizing Risk Distribution in Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Applied Researches in Structual Engineering and Construction Management, Chicago, IL, USA, 26–27 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Minoli, D. Enterprise Architecture A to Z: Frameworks, Business Process Modeling, SOA, and Infrastructure Technology; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Project Management Institute. The Standard for Portfolio Management, 4th ed.; Project Management Institute: Newton Square PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Stellingwerf, R.; Zandhuis, A. ISO 21500 Guidance on Project Management–A Pocket Guide; Van Haren: Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Golabchi, M.; Faraji, A. Pre-Project Neuro-Fuzzy Decision Support Model for Oil Industry Projects. Ind. Manag. J. 2015, 7, 837–860. [Google Scholar]
- Golabchi, M.; Faraji, A. Project Strategic Management; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Strucker, T. Application of Project Management Standards in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Master’s Thesis, Kauno Technologijos Universitetas, Kaunas, Lithuania, 14 May 2018. [Google Scholar]
- von Wangenheim, C.G.; da Silva, D.A.; Buglione, L.; Scheidt, R.; Prikladnicki, R. Best practice fusion of CMMI-DEV v1. 2 (PP, PMC, SAM) and PMBOK 2008. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2010, 52, 749–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lalmi, A.; Fernandes, G.; Souad, S.B. A conceptual hybrid project management model for construction projects. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2021, 181, 921–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Project Management Institute. Practice Standard For Project Estimating, 2nd ed.; Project Management Institute: Newton Square PA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Skogmar, K. PRINCE2, the PMBOK Guide and ISO 21500: 2012; Axelos: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Matos, S.; Lopes, E. Prince2 or PMBOK—A question of choice. Procedia Technol. 2013, 9, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Faraji, A.; Rashidi, M.; Tezangi, M.R.; Perera, S. Multihybrid Dispute Resolution Framework for Projects of Downstream Sector of Petroleum Industry. J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2021, 13, 4521026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soltaninejad, M.; Faraji, A.; Noorzai, E. Recognizing the effective factors in managing fire incidents to reduce the collateral damages and casualties. Facilities 2021, 39, 805–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faraji, A.; Rashidi, M.; Eftekhari, N.A.; Perera, S.; Mani, S. A Bid/Mark-Up Decision Support Model in Contractor’s Tender Strategy Development Phase Based on Project Complexity Measurement in the Downstream Sector of Petroleum Industry. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Project Management Institute. Project Management Body of Knowledge, 7th ed.; Project Management Institute (PMI): Newton Square PA, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Project Management Institute. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK Guide; Project Management Institute: Newton Square PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Project Management Institute. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), 6th ed.; Project Management Institute: Newton Square PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Project Management Institute. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK Guide; Project Management Institute: Newton Square PA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
Version | Year of Publication | Number of Knowledge Areas/Pages | Number of Process Groups/ITTOs * | Number of Processes (+Added-Subtracted) | Description of Some Major Changes | Methodology |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PMBOK 1st Edition | 1996 | 9/176 | 5/358 | 37 | - | Hierarchical functional decomposition of project management knowledge |
PMBOK 2nd Edition | 2000 | 9/211 | 5/434 | 39 (+2) |
| |
PMBOK 3rd Edition | 2004 | 9/390 | 5/592 | 44 (+7-2) |
| |
PMBOK 4th Edition | 2009 | 9/467 | 5/517 | 42 (+3-1) |
| |
PMBOK 5th Edition | 2013 | 10/589 | 5/619 | 47 (+5) |
| |
PMBOK 6th Edition | 2017 | 10/976 | 5/667 | 49 (+3-1) |
| |
PMBOK 7th Edition | 2021 | 8 Performance domains | - | - |
| Comprehensive principles-based approach |
Demographics | N | Percentage | |
---|---|---|---|
Age | 35–45 | 5 | 35.7 |
45–55 | 8 | 57.1 | |
>55 | 1 | 07.1 | |
Educational level | Bachelor | 3 | 21.4 |
Master | 4 | 28.5 | |
Ph.D. | 7 | 50.0 | |
Years of experience | 0–8 | 3 | 21.4 |
8–20 | 6 | 42.8 | |
>20 | 5 | 35.7 | |
Field of experience | Academic | 8 | 57.1 |
Professional | 6 | 42.8 | |
Sector type | Public | 9 | 64.2 |
Private | 5 | 35.7 |
Knowledge Areas of PMBOK 6 | Performance Domains of PMBOK 7 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Stakeholders | Team | Life Cycle | Planning | Project Work | Delivery | Measurement | Uncertainty | |
Integration | 0% | 22% | 28% | 41% | 9% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Scope | 0% | 0% | 0% | 52% | 0% | 48% | 0% | 0% |
Schedule | 0% | 0% | 0% | 29% | 33% | 21% | 17% | 0% |
Cost | 0% | 0% | 0% | 28% | 32% | 21% | 19% | 0% |
Quality | 0% | 0% | 0% | 28% | 32% | 22% | 18% | 0% |
Resource | 0% | 0% | 0% | 28% | 28% | 26% | 18% | 0% |
Communications | 28% | 31% | 0% | 29% | 12% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Risk | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 100% |
Procurement | 0% | 0% | 23% | 0% | 55% | 22% | 0% | 0% |
Stakeholder | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Performance Domains | Performance Domains | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Stakeholders | Team | Life Cycle | Planning | Project Work | Delivery | Measurement | Uncertainty | |
Stakeholders | - | Defining and prioritizing the requirements and scope for the project team | Determines the way deliverables should be handed over (partially or completely) | Shapes the planning | Engaging and communicating with stakeholders | Determines acceptance and quality criteria for the project deliverables | Focuses on measures of performance | Assists in lowering the amount of uncertainty |
Team | Demonstrates leadership qualities and communication skills throughout the project | - | Communicating the project vision and benefits to stakeholders while planning and throughout the life cycle is one example | Influences plans for working effectively | Employing critical thinking, problem solving and decision making while engaging in project work | Deliverables are the results of team working | Accountability of team for outcomes is demonstrated throughout the Planning and Measurement performance domains | Planning and administration of risks |
Life Cycle | Way and cadence of working and delivering | Comes to project team capabilities and project team leadership skills and project manager’s style | - | Impacts the way in which planning is undertaken and plan may be adjusted to reflect the actual environment | Determines different phases and methods of execution | Has significant overlap with the Delivery performance domain | Define the deliverables of each phase and the measurement indices | Can reduce uncertainty on projects |
Planning | Establishes objectives and measures of progress and success | Shapes the team formation and expertise structure | Determines the main phases and whole life cycle | - | Guides the project work | Guides the delivery of outcomes | Guides the business value performance compared to plans | Uncertainty and Planning interact to address risks |
Project Work | Provides stakeholder engagement to be effective; affects the quality | Provides the environment for project team and impacts its formation | Balances their impacts with the project constraints | Supports efficient and effective planning | - | Defines and results in the deliverable | Determines the indices for measurement | Supports navigating uncertainty, ambiguity and complexity |
Delivery | Influences the realization of project outcomes | Determines the team requirements | The way work is structured | How the work should be done and how the deliverables should be handed over | Enables the deliveries by establishing processes | - | The control methods should support Delivery | Navigates uncertainty |
Measurement | Controls the predefined quantity and quality | Interacts as project team members develop the plans and create the deliverables | Approves or disapproves project phases | The basis for comparing the deliverables to the plan | Presenting up-to-date information | Measures of performance | - | Assess the impacts of risks on outputs |
Uncertainty | Supports the stakeholders’ objectives | Changes project team structure | Impacts on phases and their cadence | Determines the plan and provisional plans | Determines the way work will be carried out | Determines the way outputs will be delivered | Indicates controls to check the risks regularly | - |
Housing Projects | Stakeholders | Team | Life Cycle | Planning | Project Work | Delivery | Measurement | Uncertainty |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Stakeholders | 1 | 0.85 | 0.23 | 0.25 | 0.32 | 0.92 | 0.63 | 0.52 |
Team | - | 1 | 0.45 | 0.75 | 0.92 | 0.87 | 0.58 | 0.46 |
Life Cycle | - | - | 1 | 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.85 | 0.63 | 0.58 |
Planning | - | - | - | 1 | 0.89 | 0.75 | 0.72 | 0.95 |
Project Work | - | - | - | - | 1 | 0.89 | 0.91 | 0.89 |
Delivery | - | - | - | - | - | 1 | 0.89 | 0.92 |
Measurement | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1 | 0.56 |
Uncertainty | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1 |
Type of Construction Project | Importance Index of Performance Domains | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Stakeholders | Team | Life Cycle | Planning | Project Work | Delivery | Measurement | Uncertainty | |
Housing | 4.83 | 3.92 | 3.75 | 4.17 | 4.67 | 4.83 | 3.50 | 3.67 |
Building | 4.25 | 3.92 | 3.67 | 3.92 | 4.75 | 4.92 | 3.83 | 3.67 |
Engineering | 4.33 | 4.08 | 3.58 | 4.25 | 4.67 | 4.92 | 3.92 | 4.00 |
Industrial | 4.67 | 4.17 | 3.33 | 4.33 | 4.75 | 4.92 | 3.92 | 4.67 |
Performance Domains | Construction Industry | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Housing | Building | Engineering | Industrial | |
Top 5 recognized key Stakeholders | 1. Client/ Land owner 2. Final user 3. Architect 4. Contractor 5. Codes regulator body | 1. Owner 2. Final users 3. Customers 4. Neighbors 5. Architect | 1. Governmental agencies 2. Local people 3. Client 4. Consultant engineer 5. Contractor | 1. Owner 2. Environmental agencies 3. Financer 4. Insurance body 5. Final user |
Considerations for Team building | 1. Building Information Modeling (BIM) 2. Architecture as a pivot point | 1. Building Information Modeling (BIM) 2. Architecture as a pivot point | 1. Building Information Modeling (BIM) 2. Engineering as a pivot point 3. Needs more integration between design team and implementation team | 1. Building Information Modeling (BIM) 2. Engineering as a pivot point 3. Many disciplines engaged 4. Strong communication system 5. Needs more integration between design team and implementation team |
Major phases of project Life Cycle (For details, look at Figure 17) | 1. Design 2. Build Or 1. Design-Build | 1. Feasibility study 2. Design-Build | 1. Conceptual Design 2. Feasibility study 3. Design-Build | 1. Conceptual Design 2. Feasibility study 3. Design-Build 4. Operation |
Main axes of project Planning | 1. Client’s design approval 2. Client’s approval on material 3. Client’s approval on quality of implemented work | 1. Construction in urban area 2. Recognition and meet real clients’ needs 3. Design and architecture considerations | 1. Engineering design 2. Possession method the permanent and temporal land 3. Construction phase considerations 4. Environmental concerns | 1. Engineering design 2. Possession method the permanent and temporal land 3. Construction phase considerations 4. Environmental concerns 5. Selling methods of final product |
Main aspects of Project Work | 1. Project quality accordance to client’s needs 2. Project cost and time | 1. Project cost and time 2. Project quality accordance to client’s needs 3. Safety concerns | 1. Project quality accordance to client’s needs 2. Project cost and time 3. Safety concerns 4. Engineering specific considerations 5. Procurement management | 1. Project quality accordance to client’s needs 2. Project cost and time 3. Safety concerns 4. Engineering specific considerations 5. Procurement management 6. Long Lead Items (LLI) advanced orders 7. Project hand over to Operation |
Final Delivery(ies) of project | 1. Main facility(ies) 2. Landscape | 1. Main building 2. Landscape 3. Supportive buildings | 1. Main facility(ies) 2. Infrastructures 3. Supportive buildings 4. Access roads | 1. Main facility(ies) 2. Infrastructures 3. Supportive buildings 4. Access roads 5. Final product |
Major needed Measurements for project control | 1. Client’s satisfaction 2. Budget 3. Schedule | 1. Client’s satisfaction 2. Budget 3. Schedule 4. Safety | 1. Client’s satisfaction 2. Budget 3. Schedule 4. Health, Safety, Environment (HSE) 5. Situation of buying items | 1. Client’s satisfaction 2. Budget 3. Schedule 4. Health, Safety, Environment (HSE) 5. Situation of buying items and LLIs |
Uncertainty | Very low; Mainly about quality, cost and time | Low; Mainly about quality, cost and time + Market situation | High; Mainly about quality, cost and time, Market situation + Health, Safety, Environment (HSE) | Very high; Mainly about quality, cost and time, Health, Safety, Environment (HSE), Market situation + Supply and demand of product |
Principles | Performance Domains | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Stakeholders | Team | Life Cycle | Planning | Project Work | Delivery | Measurement | Uncertainty | Average | |
Be a Diligent, Respectful, and Caring Steward | 4.88 | 4.97 | 1.86 | 3.46 | 4.12 | 4.44 | 3.75 | 2.54 | 3.75 |
Create a Collaborative Project Team Environment | 1.96 | 4.95 | 3.93 | 4.41 | 4.88 | 4.92 | 3.51 | 3.77 | 4.04 |
Effectively Engage with Stakeholders | 4.90 | 2.98 | 2.62 | 4.89 | 3.09 | 3.98 | 2.15 | 2.52 | 3.39 |
Focus on Value | 4.98 | 2.08 | 2.57 | 4.85 | 4.84 | 4.83 | 4.85 | 3.20 | 4.02 |
Recognize, Evaluate, and Respond to System Interactions | 1.06 | 1.75 | 4.85 | 4.90 | 4.92 | 3.78 | 2.14 | 1.65 | 3.13 |
Demonstrate Leadership Behaviors | 4.82 | 4.82 | 1.88 | 2.79 | 3.54 | 3.64 | 2.87 | 2.71 | 3.38 |
Tailor Based on Context | 4.00 | 2.76 | 3.25 | 4.77 | 4.80 | 3.87 | 3.33 | 4.89 | 3.96 |
Build Quality into Processes and Deliverables | 4.82 | 2.61 | 3.44 | 4.23 | 4.62 | 4.86 | 4.79 | 2.72 | 4.01 |
Navigate Complexity | 2.13 | 2.47 | 4.86 | 4.73 | 4.88 | 4.96 | 3.36 | 4.84 | 4.03 |
Optimize Risk Responses | 3.05 | 1.26 | 1.67 | 4.87 | 3.24 | 3.94 | 3.28 | 4.79 | 3.26 |
Embrace Adaptability and Resiliency | 4.84 | 4.13 | 3.02 | 4.89 | 3.84 | 3.05 | 1.57 | 4.13 | 3.68 |
Enable Change to Achieve the Envisioned Future State | 2.97 | 3.30 | 3.24 | 3.96 | 3.08 | 4.79 | 3.19 | 4.87 | 3.67 |
Average | 3.70 | 3.17 | 3.18 | 4.40 | 4.16 | 4.26 | 3.23 | 3.55 | - |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Faraji, A.; Rashidi, M.; Perera, S.; Samali, B. Applicability-Compatibility Analysis of PMBOK Seventh Edition from the Perspective of the Construction Industry Distinctive Peculiarities. Buildings 2022, 12, 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020210
Faraji A, Rashidi M, Perera S, Samali B. Applicability-Compatibility Analysis of PMBOK Seventh Edition from the Perspective of the Construction Industry Distinctive Peculiarities. Buildings. 2022; 12(2):210. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020210
Chicago/Turabian StyleFaraji, Amir, Maria Rashidi, Srinath Perera, and Bijan Samali. 2022. "Applicability-Compatibility Analysis of PMBOK Seventh Edition from the Perspective of the Construction Industry Distinctive Peculiarities" Buildings 12, no. 2: 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020210
APA StyleFaraji, A., Rashidi, M., Perera, S., & Samali, B. (2022). Applicability-Compatibility Analysis of PMBOK Seventh Edition from the Perspective of the Construction Industry Distinctive Peculiarities. Buildings, 12(2), 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020210