MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596618730

Using facilitative skills in project management

2013· article· en· W2596618730 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference Management Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCompetency Development and Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess managementPsychologyBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Project management can be seen as a profession, discipline and conceptual framework. It has been developed from different fields, including military engineering, mechanical engineering, social sciences and construction. During recent decades, there has been a number of challenges as to its efficacy, for example disappointing project performance and lack of an appropriate project cooperation method due to new forms of cooperation possibilities. More and more organizations are engaged in contractual joint ventures, alliances and other forms of inter-organizational relationships. In addition, virtual cooperation, mediated by interconnected and diversified systems, is becoming more and more common. These relatively new forms of interaction imply new demands on skills and methods facilitating project cooperation within and among various organizations. Given the pervasiveness of these demands, project managers are frequently finding themselves in situations where using facilitating skills is not an option, but a requirement. Facilitation is to be viewed as a process of ‘obstetric’ aid to meet the challenges of coping with the changing conditions for project management described briefly above. The outcome of facilitation depends on at least four interrelated sets of conditions: a) The available time and resources in comparison to the complexity of the aim(s), b) the composition of the participants, c) the skills of the facilitator and d) the methods available to the facilitator. In this paper facilitating skills are identified and discussed in relation to the changing circumstances for project management. The approach used to achieve this paper’s objective includes a literature review, model building and reflection on facilitation skills based on the author’s experiences from facilitating workshops for company managers, public administrators, NGO’s and university professors / students around the world. In addition, this paper is based on the author’s many years of experience in supervising engineering students from for instance China, South Korea, Canada, US, Ghana and various European countries who have come to learn and practise facilitating skills as international students at Technical University of Denmark. The paper identifies facilitation skills at three different levels: the intellectual, emotional and synergistic level. An analysis is conducted based on a practical example of how engineering students are able to learn facilitative skills. The contributions of this paper to the field are an extension and a deepening of existing knowledge of facilitation skills at different levels. In addition, the paper includes a model regarding effective ways of combining various ways of knowing in a facilitation course for university students and future project managers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.310 · 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