MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000555927 · doi:10.1108/02756660410558942

Project management: key tool for implementing strategy

2004· article· en· W2000555927 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Longman, James L. Mullins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Strategy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Technology Governance and Strategy
Canadian institutionsKimberly-Clark (Canada)Lockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess managementProject management triangleProject managementProject charterWork (physics)Project planningProcess (computing)BusinessKey (lock)Project stakeholderStrategic managementStrategic planningKnowledge managementComputer scienceEngineering managementEngineeringMarketingSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are several conditions essential for project success that apply to all projects, whether related to top‐level strategic business issues or operational ones: executives must make a compelling business case for project management; make it practical, relevant, and beneficial from day one; make systems and procedures project management‐friendly; make project management a win for team members and managers; make project management an ongoing learning experience, and; make success public. Project management requires deliberate planning and action to create the conditions for success and put in place the strategy, leadership, goals, process, skills, systems, issue resolution, and structure to direct and exploit the dynamic nature of project work. If work today is done through projects, as is surely the case, then working smarter on projects will enable an organization to meet, head‐on, whatever strategic and operational challenges may come its way.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0170.014
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.019

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations105
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business StrategySame topicInformation Technology Governance and StrategyFrench-language works237,207