工程项目管理英语毕业dissertation范文参考-CSFs on risk management

工程项目管理英语毕业dissertation范文参考-CSFs on risk management

 

The CSFs on risk management are identified and examined, the results of which are shown in the below Table 6-8.

 

Table 6-8 : CSFs on risk management

Answer Options Separated Sub-groups Combined Group

Sub-group Rank Mean SD t-test p Rank Mean SD t-test q

A. Regularly conducting change evaluation / risk management meetings PRC 3 3.42 1.12 0.019 2 3.62 0.99 0.084

UK 1 3.82 0.76 0.000

B. Managing risks and changes across the entire project related on time, cost, quality and health and safety PRC 1 3.84 0.84 0.000 1 3.73 0.90 0.296

UK 2 3.62 0.79 0.002#p#分页标题#e#

C. Timely updating and documenting the changes and their impacts PRC 2 3.66 0.77 0.000 3 3.52 1.03 0.262

UK 3 3.38 1.39 0.063

 

Adopting the same method to interpret the questionnaire results according to the p and q values, PRC respondents agreed all the three statements, while UK respondents agreed the first two statements. Although so, their opinions are not significant different suggested by the q values all above 0.05. 

 

CSFs on problem solving / conflict resolution

The CSFs on problem solving / conflict resolution are identified and examined, the results of which are shown in the below Table 6-9.

 

Table 6-9 : CSFs on problem solving / conflict resolution

Answer Options Separated Sub-groups Combined Group

Sub-group Rank Mean SD t-test p Rank Mean SD t-test q

A. Identifying potential conflicts and problems in an early stage PRC 1 3.71 1.62 0.001 1 3.70 1.17 0.903

UK 1 3.68 1.13 0.000

B. Identifying the positions, interests, common grounds and issues between the conflicting parties PRC 2 3.37 1.91 0.109 2 3.40 1.23 0.804

UK 2 3.44 1.10 0.018

C. Acquiring of basic dispute resolution techniques such as negotiation skills and emotional control ability PRC 2 3.37 1.70 0.090 3 3.33 1.28 0.807

UK 3 3.29 1.61 0.178

 

Diverse opinions existed regarding to the identified three items in this category. Both groups considered item A is a CSF of project manager’s leadership. However, both groups don’t agree that item C is a CSF. Regarding item B, the UK group agreed it is a CSF while the PRC group did not agree. Even though, the mean scores in respect of each item is not very different between the two groups, in which all q values are larger than 0.05.

 

CFFS OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER’S LEADERSHIP

In this section, the previously identified CFFs from literature review and interviews were grouped and listed under the following categories: (i) CFFs on project management; (ii) CFFs on relationship management; (iii) CFFs on management skills; (iv) CFFs on risk management; and (v) CFFs on problem solving / conflict resolution, which are tightly related to the above sub-section’s five groups of CSFs. The analysis methods adopted are the same as the above section. 

 

CFFSs on project management

The CFFs on project management are identified and examined, the results of which are shown in the below Table 6-10.

Table 6-10 : CFFSs on project management

 

Answer Options Separated Sub-groups Combined Group

Sub-group Rank Mean SD t-test p Rank Mean SD t-test q

A. Unknowledgeable http://www.ukthesis.org/yylw/ and inexperienced in cost, time and quality management techniques PRC 4 3.50 1.12 0.006 4 3.31 1.16 0.164

UK 4 3.12 1.56 0.581

B. Unknowledgeable and inexperienced in civil / building engineering techniques PRC 5 3.49 1.09 0007 #p#分页标题#e#5 3.28 1.20 0.133

UK 5 3.06 1.75 0.794

C. Not actively engaged in progress control PRC 2 3.84 0.79 0.000 2 3.65 0.99 0.114

UK 2 3.47 1.17 0.014

D. Not actively engaged in managing the cost and budget PRC 1 3.87 0.82 0.000 1 3.70 1.00 0.152

UK 1 3.53 1.17 0.006

E. Not actively engaged in checking and auditing the quality of works PRC 3 3.71 0.91 0.000 3 3.50 #p#分页标题#e#1.02 0.084

UK 3 3.29 1.12 0.109

 

The PRC group considered all items are CFFs of a project manager’s leadership. While the UK group indicated only items C, D and E are agreed as CFFs. Although so, their mean scores are not significantly different suggested by the q values. 

 

CFFs on relationship management

The CFFs on relationship management are identified and examined, the results of which are shown in the below Table 6-11.

Table 6-11 : CFFs on relationship management

Answer Options Separated Sub-groups Combined Group

Sub-group Rank Mean SD t-test p Rank Mean SD t-test q

 

A. Rarely concerning the relationship among team members PRC 4 3.55 1.71 0.013 5 3.43 1.27 0.447

UK 7 3,32 1.45 0.126

B. Little communication with clients and sub-contractors in the strategic planning phase PRC 2 3.79 #p#分页标题#e#0.98 0.000 3 3.69 1.03 0.411

UK 3 3.59 1.16 0.003

C. Little communication with clients and sub-contractors in project management progress PRC 1 3.84 1.00 0.000 1 3.79 1.02 0.661

UK 1 3.74 1.11 0.000

D. No specific team members to communicate with clients and sub-contractors PRC 6 3.42 1.44 0.037 7 3.38 1.16 0.805

UK 5 3.35 1.27 0.071

E. Focusing on short-term relationship with clients and sub-contractors PRC 7 3.39 1.49 #p#分页标题#e#0.054 4 3.49 1.11 0.465

UK 3 3.59 0.98 0.001

F. Rarely sharing project performance with clients and sub-contractors PRC 3 3.71 1.13 0.000 2 3.71 1.03 0.985

UK 2 3.71 1.00 0.000

G. Rarely concerning team members’ personal problems PRC 5 3.47 1.66 0.029 6 3.41 1.30 0.696

UK 6 3.35 1.75 0.123

 

Except for item F, the PRC believed that all other factors may cause project manager’s leadership failure. The UK group seems more positive, that they believed item A, D and G are not CFFs of project manager’s leadership. Generally, there is no significant difference between the two groups of responses indicated by the q values.

 

CFFs on management skills

The CFFs on management skills are identified and examined, the results of which are shown in the below Table 6-12.#p#分页标题#e#

Table 6-12 : CFFs on management skills

Answer Options Separated Sub-groups Combined Group

Sub-group Rank Mean SD t-test p Rank Mean SD t-test q

A. Unclear work break-down and individual responsibilities PRC 2 4.11 1.02 0.000 1 4.07 1.01 0.753

UK 1 4.03 1.06 0.000

B. No systematic team performance assessment PRC 4 3.87 1.04 0.000 3 3.81 1.05 0.679

UK 4 3.76 1.22 0.000

C. Treating team members the same in ignorance of their individual performance PRC 5 #p#分页标题#e#3.79 1.36 0.000 6 3.69 1.26 0.504

UK 6 3.59 1.89 0.016

D. Unclear organization structure and communication route PRC 1 4.16 1.00 0.000 1 4.07 0.99 0.430

UK 2 3.97 0.99 0.000

E. No recognized company culture as long as having the job done PRC 5 3.79 1.25 0.000 4 3.79 1.09 0.986

UK 3 3.79 1.14 0.000

F. No other motivations other than salary and welfare PRC 3 3.92 0.94 #p#分页标题#e#0.000 4 3.79 1.13 0.306

UK 5 3.65 1.63 0.005

 

Same as the previous CSFs evaluation, the management skills category received relatively higher scores than the other categories. All items listed are agreed by both groups as CFFs in project manager’s leadership. And no significant different opinions identified between two groups of respondents according to q values. There are two items been scored over 4, which is very rare high score throughout this questionnaire survey.  

 

CFFs on risk management

The CFFs on risk management are identified and examined, the results of which are shown in the below Table 6-13.

 

Answer Options Separated Sub-groups Combined Group

Sub-group Rank Mean SD t-test p Rank Mean SD t-test q

A. No regular change evaluation / risk management meetings PRC 2 3.58 0.90 0.001 2 3.57 0.96 0.930

UK 2 3.56 0.98 0.002

B. Managing risks and changes in ad hoc manner#p#分页标题#e# PRC 1 3.89 0.80 0.000 1 3.79 0.92 0.317

UK 1 3.68 0.89 0.000

 

As suggested by the above table, all p values are less than 0.05 and both q values are more than 0.05. Therefore, all respondents agreed that risk management aspects are important factors to affect the project manager’s leadership. 

6.4.5 CFFs on problem solving / conflict resolution

The CFFs on problem solving / conflict resolution are identified and examined, the results of which are shown in the below Table 6-14.

Table 6-14 : CFFs on problem solving / conflict resolution

Answer Options Separated Sub-groups Combined Group

Sub-group Rank Mean SD t-test p Rank Mean SD t-test q

A. Dealing with conflicts in ad hoc manner PRC 1 3.55 1.50 0.008 1 3.48 1.23 0.632

UK 13.41 1.59 0.061

B. Dealing with conflicts emotionally and adversarially PRC 2 3.42 1.71 0.055 2 3.32 1.31 0.490

UK 2 3.21 1.74 0.362

 

The PRC respondents believed that dealing with conflicts in ad hoc manner is a failure factor for project manager’s leadership, while the UK group did not think so. Both groups did not consider dealing with conflicts emotionally and adversarially are failure factors. The two groups hold the similar opinions.