MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2183292324 · doi:10.19030/jber.v2i2.2856

The Client-Consulting Relationship: A Case Study Of Critical Success Factors At MQ Telecommuniques

2011· article· en· W2183292324 sur OpenAlexaff
Steven H. Appelbaum, Anthony Steed

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Business & Economics Research (JBER) · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineDecision Sciences
ThématiqueConstruction Project Management and Performance
Établissements canadiensBell (Canada)Concordia University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFontStyle (visual arts)PsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span class="Heading2Char"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; mso-bidi-font-style: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The primary intent of this study then, is to examine recent projects involving external management consultants at MQ TeleCommuniques, from the employees’ point of view, to </span></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">measure the extent to which the aforementioned “critical success factors” were perceived as being evident. A secondary purpose was to examine <span class="Heading2Char"><span style="font-weight: normal; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-style: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-ansi-font-size: 10.0pt;">which, if any, of these factors differ between more or less successful consulting projects with a view to building a model to predict employees’ perceptions of the level of the projects’ success. A third objective was to gather employee opinions on other factors that might contribute to the success of consulting projects. A fourth, and final, objective was to gather general employee opinions on the use of management consultancy at MQ TeleCommuniques. </span></span><span class="Heading2Char"><span style="font-weight: normal; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-style: normal; mso-ansi-font-size: 10.0pt;">A total of 102 employees responded to a questionnaire consisting of 59 questions. </span></span>A model including six independent variables was able to predict overall rating of project success, with an adjusted R<sup>2</sup> =0.68, F=27.81 (p<.0001).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>The significant variables, in order of importance, were:</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"> </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";">                   </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the solution took into account our internal state of readiness;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";">                   </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the project included prototyping new solutions;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";">                   </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the project deliverables were clear;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";">                   </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the consultant partnered with the project team throughout;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">5.<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";">                   </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the consultant was professional; and </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">6.<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";">                   </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the consultant understood our sense of urgency. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"> </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">There were substantial differences seen on most measures between projects judged “successful” and projects judged “not successful”. Nevertheless, it is encouraging that many of the success factors suggested in the literature, and proposed under “an ideal client-consultant engagement”, were judged as present in management consulting projects at MQ TeleCommuniques, to one degree or another. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>General opinions of management consultants were mixed and somewhat negative. Employees at MQ TeleCommuniques certainly do not agree with the traditional benefits of management consultants promoted by the industry.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>Finally, the results of this study certainly support the anecdotal and theoretical models in particular those emphasizing the importance of process issues, the client-consulting relationship and their impact on project outcome.</span></span></p>

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.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,014
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,134
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0140,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,507
Tête enseignante GPT0,490
Écart entre enseignants0,017 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations13
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Business & Economics Research (JBER)Même sujetConstruction Project Management and PerformanceTravaux en français237 207