4.5 Article

Future criteria for success of building projects in Malaysia

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 337-348

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.03.003

Keywords

Success criteria; Project success; Factor analysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several success criteria (SC) and categorization models have been introduced and studied in the previous decades to address the issue of project success. However, most of these models have failed to align success criteria with company's success in the long-term. This paper aims at proposing a framework to categorize project success for building projects in Malaysia from the contractors' perspective. The proposed framework incorporates criteria that align the project efforts with both short and long-term goals of the companies; moreover provide an appropriate judgment of success at all stages of the project. If construction managers can judge the probability of success, they would be able to evaluate the overall relative strength of each project, and identify problems on current projects to direct them toward success. Based on the available literature, thirteen success criteria were found to be significantly and substantially related to building projects success. To develop the SC categorization framework, 151 participants, who are involved in building construction, were invited through a postal and e-mails survey to generate priorities of these criteria. The results of this study indicated that a categorization scheme for success criteria for building projects should include the categories of project management success, product success, along with market success. The findings of this study can further help future researchers seeking solutions in the challenges relating to improvement of building projects implementation and enhancement of project success. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. and IPMA. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available