MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404436159 · doi:10.1002/cjas.1772

Project management challenges in client‐consultant decision‐making: A case for the Ghanaian mining construction industry

2024· article· en· W4404436159 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
A. Akofa Amegboleza, Amevi Acakpovi, M. Ali Ülkü

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsBusinessConstruction industryMining industryProcess managementEngineering managementKnowledge managementOperations managementEngineeringConstruction engineeringComputer scienceMining engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study explores the complex decision‐making (DM) dynamics between clients and consultants, a crucial area often neglected in existing research. Utilizing a Multi‐Perspective Approach combined with Multi‐Criteria Decision Analysis, we examine DM challenges such as cost overruns, project delays, and compromised work quality stemming from ineffective DM practices. Key findings highlight the pervasive fear of financial repercussions from poor decisions, which impedes decisive and transparent DM. We offer practical recommendations for managers, propose strategies to strengthen DM processes, enhance project execution frameworks and insights to improve operational efficiency and competitive advantages for Ghanaian mining construction sector stakeholders. This study significantly contributes to the literature on project management by offering targeted solutions and advancing knowledge on DM practices.

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.332
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.102 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l AdministrationSame topicConstruction Project Management and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207