CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
‘Efficiency appears a somewhat elusive, omnipresent concept, which is not explicitly talked about, but is often implicitly alluded to. How can organisations become more efficient if they do not know what this means?’
The study aims to develop a model to help AQOs understand the requirements for output efficiency. Kling (2006) showed that an understanding of the factors that contribute to output efficiency actually improves the efficiency of the organisation; hence, it is important to identify and quantify the factors that contribute to the output efficiency of the AQOs.
In this chapter, the studies published by researchers on CM, KM and PM are reviewed to identify the previous activities that were monitored as variables (discussed in Section 1.4.1) that contribute to output efficiency. These variables are subsequently used to inform the selection of the input variables for this study as well as the grouping of the variables into categories relating to CM, KM, PM Routine, and Other activities.
The literature review focuses on the areas that added value to the model developed in this study, viz. the specific CM, KM and PM activities required for output efficient. In addition, the available models applicable to the study are discussed.
Moorcroft (2006) described PM as a related set of disciplines that together enabled managers to accomplish their role successfully. The variables of man-hours, cost, quality and peoples’ behaviour are examined in addition to the requirements for project success or failure.
Organisations that use PM focus on developing interdisciplinary project teams and open communication (Moorcroft, 2006).
KM refers to information after it has been examined and compared to other information or data, and that is then applied to describe, predict or adapt to a situation (Durant-Law, 2008). A ‘know how and why’ enrichment occurs with the addition of further context, experience and understanding, to result in an understanding of principles (Durant-Law, 2008). Bridgman and Davis (2004) reported that KM was required for efficient policy development and implementation. The Bridgman and Davis (2004) study focused on allocating resources to knowledge transferred within government and prioritising and addressing system failures.
Brown and Eisenhardt (1998) stated that change was the striking feature of contemporary business and that the key strategic challenge was managing that change. Most successful organisations are those that are able to adjust themselves to new conditions quickly. Leaders must allocate resources and address problems that may arise from change (Meredith & Mantell, 2003). Efficient organisations monitor the resources allocated to planned learning processes (Recklies, 2004). Organisations also need to document the learnings (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Longman and Mullins (2004) recommended that for an organisation to manage change, it must capture the learnings in a projects lessons learned event and report.
Further details on PM, KM and CM, which provide insights into the selection of the variables used for data collection on the input activities, follow.
The PM profession has grown in size and complexity largely because organisations understand that PM, particularly the management of portfolio of projects, is essential for an organisation to be efficient (Clark, 2004). PM first came to popular attention in the management literature in the late 1960s and early 1970s, although it has its origins in a number of distinct fields. PM is defined by the Project Management Institute’s (2000 Edition) Project Management Body of Knowledge as the application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to project activities to meet stakeholders’ needs and expectation from a project.
PM is defined as a unique effort, with a defined beginning, a defined end, a specific deliverable and assigned resources. Other definitions refer to planning, controlling, organising and tackling activities (Struckenbruck, 1981; Chapman, 2007). The PM process requires five different managerial activities (Project Management Institute, 2000):
- define the project vision, goals and objectives;
- plan the performance specification, time schedule, budget, mix of people and physical resources to be used;
- lead by providing managerial guidance;
- monitor by measuring actual against planned activities and initiating corrective changes; and
- complete and wrap up the required documentation.
Westland (2006) described the PM process in four phases using the Method123 Project Management Methodology, as shown in Figure 2.1. The four phases were as follows:
- Phase 1: Initiation involves starting up the project, by documenting a business case, the feasibility study, terms of reference, appointing the team and setting up a Project Office.
- Phase 2: Planning involves setting out the roadmap for the project by creating the following plans: project plan, resource plan, financial plan, quality plan, acceptance plan and communications plan.
- Phase 3: Execution involves building the deliverables and controlling the project delivery, scope, costs, quality, risks and issues.
- Phase 4: Closure involves winding down the project by releasing staff, handing over deliverables to the customer and completing a post-implementation review.
The critical success factors to improve output efficiency highlighted by Westland (2006) included the following:
- efficient planning, which requires an understanding of the system requirements; top management support and documented work processes and schedules.
- communication with all internal and external stakeholders, where stakeholders refer to any person or group who has a vested interest in the success of the project, e. either provides services to the project, or receives services from the project. A further recommendation was a communication plan that detailed the frequency and method of communication.
- training and development of people: Westland (2006) showed that when there were gaps in the skilled workforce – gaps caused by lack of training – then work became inefficient and money and time were lost. Westland (2006) recommended that for projects to be successful, an agreed schedule of training and development plans is required.
Westland (2006) believed that identify the level of project success. projects to enable efficient CM.
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction and Context
1.2 Scope of the Study
1.3 Historical Development and Current State of Play
1.4 Input Activities and Output Efficiency of AQOs.
1.5 Research Aim and Objectives
1.6 Research Approach and Methodology
1.7 High Level Findings and Recommendations
1.8 Significant Original Contribution and Reasons for Significance
1.9 Limitations of the Research
1.10 Layout of Thesis
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.2 Project Management
2.5 Summary of the Variables for Measuring Public Sector Efficiency
2.6 Models as Management Tools
2.7 Management Models in the Public Sector and Academia
2.8 Management Models in Air Quality Management
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
3.1 Study Aim and Objectives
3.2 Research Methodology
3.3.1 Selecting the Output Variables (Dependent Variables)
3.4 Data Collection
3.5 Research Participants
3.6 Data Analysis.
CHAPTER 4: MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND RESULTS.
4.1 Response Rate for the Study.
4.2 Descriptive Statistics
4.3 Data Preparation: Clustering of Data into Categories.
4.4 Model Development and Interpretation
4.5 Developing the logistic regression model
4.6 Information from the Logistic Curve
4.7 Summary ..
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.2 Gaps Identified in the Literature Review
5.3 Evaluation of the Methodology Selected
5.4 Evaluation of the Research Results
5.5 Implications of the Findings
5.6 Contribution of the Study to Leadership
5.7 Application of the Model
5.9 Suggestions for Future Areas of Research
LIST OF REFERENCES
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT