The relationship between project management process characteristics and performance outcomes
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to examine the links between project management process characteristics and project-level and firm-level performance outcomes to test the hypotheses that project management assets being valuable, rare, inimitable and having organizational support leads to competitive advantage. Design/methodology/approach – This paper analyzes data from responses to an online survey by 198 North American Project Management Institute® members. Regression analysis is used to examine the relationship between six factors extracted from an exploratory factor analysis that comprise the three project management asset characteristics – valuable, rare and inimitable, three factors that comprise organizational support for the project management process, and two factors that comprise project management performance outcomes – project-level and firm-level performance. Findings – Organizational support for the project management process, specifically project management integration, was found to significantly contribute to both project-level and firm-level performance. Of the asset factors examined, valuable project management knowledge was found to contribute to project-level and firm-level performance, though information technology (IT) tools did not. Inimitable proprietary tangible assets were found to contribute to both project-level and firm-level performance, and inimitable embedded intangible assets were also found to contribute to firm-level performance. Rare knowledge sharing tools and techniques were found to negatively contribute to project-level performance. Research limitations/implications – Limitations of this study include sample size, response rate and self-report bias, calling for a larger sample in ongoing research. Practical implications – This study draws managerial attention to project management assets as sources of competitive advantage, highlighting the need to have organizational support for the project management process through organizational integration, and emphasizing the importance of valuable project management knowledge-based assets and inimitable project management assets that are proprietary and tangible as well as those that are embedded and intangible. Originality/value – Few papers have applied the resource-based view of the firm to examine project management capabilities as a source of competitive advantage. This paper contributes to the literature on the resource-based view of the firm and to an improved understanding of project management as a source of competitive advantage.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,023 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle