MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1496330034 · doi:10.1177/875697280403500306

Understanding the Role of “Vision” in Project Success

2004· article· en· W1496330034 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProject Management Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProject managementProject management triangleProject sponsorshipProject stakeholderExtreme project managementProject charterProject managerProject portfolio managementProcess managementProject planningKnowledge managementEngineeringEngineering managementBusinessOPM3Computer scienceSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rigorous applications of project management methodologies are responsible, though only partially, for project success. We argue, however, that a significant driver of project management success is effective and intelligent leadership communicated through an inspiring vision of what the project is meant to achieve and how it can make a significant positive impact. An information technology case study project is presented to illustrate how project vision provided and maintained commitment to a complex project that was judged successful when compared to similar projects despite the difficulties described. This success was substantially attributed to the project leadership group's use of a vision.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it