This directly contribute to goals (Cooke-Davies, 2002; Fortune and

 

This section, a brief literature review is described to give a support of key concepts used for the dissertation. It starts with a concept regarding impact of PRINCE 2 methodology on construction project success, followed by draw ups a crucial link to sustainable development of the UK construction works. The describe literature reviews are to provide that how effectives the project methodology and its selection into construction works to achieve their needs and goals. Summary of the reviews cite that it is possible to sustainable development in the UK if project pay more attention on using dynamic PRINCE 2 for delivering successful projects.

 

2.1  Project Management Methodology is important to project Success?

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

From the last 40 years, an important attention of the project manager and researchers have shifted from individual tools and methods to methodologies (Lehtonen and Martinsuo, 2005).  What is more, Merriam-Webster (2013) states a method as “a systematic procedure, technique, or mode of inquiry employed by or proper to a particular discipline.” And a methodology contains many methods where one method is used in a certain situation. For instance, PRINCE 2 is a process-oriented project methodology, is also use as “a method that supports some aspects of project management” (TSO, 2009).

Some researchers show that project methodologies directly contribute to goals (Cooke-Davies, 2002; Fortune and White, 2006; White and Fortune, 2002) or to the perceived appropriateness of project management (Lehtonen and Martinsuo, 2006, Joslin and Muller, 2015). However, many more research and project managers trying to find a positive result into methodology and project success, but the literature on project methodologies is divided (Joslin and Muller, 2015). A positive attitude toward project methodologies with sometimes unrealistic expectations are directed toward them at a time (Lehtonen and Martinsuo, 2005). If these methodologies do not give back the expected results, it is replaced by other methodologies and often with those methodologies have some other limitations (White and Fortune, 2002).

Sometimes, methodologies do not fit to a project, as like complex project environments; that’s time, methodologies are customized, ultimate result it become too complex to be maintained, and the organization may switch from an overly formal, rigid control to chaotic freedom (Lehtonen and Martinsuo, 2005). The author Thomas and Mullaly (2007) describe this dilemma that limitation of project management methodology with its elements are the deeper knowledge and experiences of the users.

Busby and Hughes (2004) express an interesting notion that irrespective of configuration of the tools and systems used in a methodology are the infected with pathogens, that the methodology never achieves its intended purpose of supporting project success. Therefore, the Standish Group, 2010 states that methodologies are either referenced in the literature as a whole or by one or more aspects of project management practices methodology element(s) investigating the impact of these practices on project success (Cooke-Davies and Arzymanow, 2003; Milosevic and Patanakul, 2005).

To understand the importance of the project management methodology and project success relationship, the “methodology elements” need to be understood and it include processes, tools, techniques, methods, capability profiles, and knowledge areas (Joslin and Muller, 2015). The author moreover stated that these methodology elements can then be applied to a project, as needed, throughout the project life cycle. Methodologies and their elements collectively support achieving project success, viewing methodologies are at too high a level or on a singular element basis may not be sufficient. The Author also mention that guidance could come from looking at project success factors that are described at the level of the methodology elements.

Joslin and Muller (2015) show on the research paper that the difference between a project methodology element and a project success factor as in the description. Where, to describe its syntactic role for qualifying the underlying methodology element, a project success factor contains an adjective used. Project scheduling is a methodology element example, whereas well-organized project scheduling is also a success factor. Selecting one methodology element and the same time determining its impact on project success do not give a holistic picture regarding how the methodology elements impact on the characteristics of the project success. Whereas some methodology elements could have a greater joint impact on project success characteristics than others (Joslin and Muller (2015).

Lehtonen and Martinsuo (2006) review the dilemma on project methodologies by stating “The confusion in research results is reflected also in companies’ swing between standardized and customized systems, and between formal and chaotic methodologies.” Joslin and Muller (2015) analysis the above statement with a conclusion that the effective use of a methodology is depending upon the project environment. As well as, every project environment has its own unique factors that influences the project and uses resources throughout the project life cycle (Crawford et al., 2008).

However, conducted research and literatures have shown that projects where methodologies are used provide more expectable and higher success rates, still there are lot of failure report (Wells, 2012). This circumstance investigated by, Yazici, (2009); Carvalho, Patah and Bido (2015), Joslin and Muller (2015) and so on and highlight the evidence is limited and inconclusive. These gap about understanding the relationship between project management methodology and project success with its elements collectively impact required further study (Aubry and Hobbs, 2010; Carvalho, Patah and Bido, 2015; Joslin and Muller, 2015).

 

2.2  How effectives the methodology-PRINCE 2 on construction industry success?

As of the Of?ce of Government Commerce (OCG), UK, 2009, PRINCE 2 (Projects IN a Controlled Environments) is a structured project management approach that can manage projects effectively. Thousands of projects and project sponsors, project managers, project teams, academics, trainers experience are the base of the method. It contains all the basic concepts and processes of project management, planning, delegating, monitoring and control of all aspects of the project life cycles to achieve the project objectives within the expected performance targets for time, cost, quality, scope, benefits and risks (OGC, 2009).

For instance, a new house is completed by creating drawings-designs, basements, floors, walls, windows, a roof, plumbing, electric wiring and linked services. PRINCE 2 method is to keep control over the specialist work required to create the project’s products or, to continue with the house analogy, to make sure the roofing contractor doesn’t arrive before the basements are built. Additionally, easy-clipped and flexible management framework for different kinds of projects (Lianying, Jing and Xinxing, 2012) given business change by implementing a secure, consistent, well-proven approach to project management is a valuable business investment (OGC, 2009). In addition, every methodology offers to be the answer to overcoming problems faced by projects and their commonly occurring problems come in particular contexts (PRINCE2; OGC, 2009).

PRINCE 2-project management methodology constitutes as “a system of practices, techniques, and procedures, and rules” (Project Management Institute, 2013), enhance project effectiveness and increase chances of success (Vaskimo, 2011). Therefore, PMM elements as processes, tools, techniques, knowledge areas, and comprehensive capability profiles were developed to assist the managers in achieving more success rate. So far, still project is back to their success goals (Wells, 2013) and a significant progress is missing at the same time (Joslin and Muller, 2015).

Throughout the last 40 years, project management attention has shifted on or after individual tools and methods to methodologies that encompass multiple methods and tools (Lehtonen and Martinsuo, 2005). For instance, PRINCE 2 is a process-oriented project methodology is described as “a method that supports some aspects of project management” (TSO, 2009). Joslin and Muller, 2015 defined that this methodology comprises with many methods where one method is applied in a particular situation. Thus, the government organization set up the PMMs to control costs, plans, and quality (Packendorff, 1995), the UK government widely considered as the leading method in every project management (OGC, 2009) also in construction project has complex in nature.

Standardized, customized and the comprehensiveness PMM were the main context lead to a higher chance of project success (Joslin and Muller, 2015). Where project manager often perceives projects to attain corporate goals follow the rules of corporate control and standardization (Packendorff, 1995). On the contrary, Shenhar et al.’s mantra Wysocki (2011) stated that the term “one size fits all” does not suitable in every project management to achieve success. However, Russo, and Stolterman proposed a solution that customized tailor procedures is to the most successful project management methodology (2002).

Aubry et al. (2010) found that Project Management Organization’s experienced is agile related project methodology allow flexibility in the processes and organization. Project management methodology requirements are varied according to their size (Turner et al., 2010). However, the idea of standardizing and/or customizing a methodology is underlying the methodology become comprehensive to manage the project to higher levels of success means project methodology have to supplement for effective use by the project manager (Joslin and Muller 2015).

Besides, while an organization’s project management methodology is incomplete or limited (absent methodology elements), there project efficiency, quality, and ultimately the probability of project success will be impacted (Fortune et al., 2011; Wells, 2012). However, as a dynamic and complex in nature construction industry’ projects generally require a standardizing and/or customizing a methodology, which meets its contexts properly to success (Ribeiro, 2013; Nguyen, 2004). Following these statement, there is a gap in the research literatures regarding whether the PRINCE 2 methodology with its elements collectively influence the characteristics of construction project success factors.

 

2.3. Project success and Sustainable Development in construction industry.

The idea is to look at whether sustainable development (SD) of construction project could be a part of success performance objectives in PRINCE 2 project management. As a consequence of global state-of-the-art project development concept, socially, environmentally and economically consideration (known as Triple-Bottom Line Dilemma-TBL) and maintaining a project is fundamental idea, that is why sustainability is paramount (Martens and Carvalho, 2016; Kaysi, 2013).

2.3.1 An overview of Sustainability in construction project environment:

A lot of international events were developed with several studies have been conducted for clearing the construction project sustainability concept from different perspectives. Hartshorn, et al. (2005) assessed that near about 30-60 distinct definitions with very limited agreement as to its theoretical or practical meaning practices. Among them, ”The future we want” that met the commitment of countries for the sustainable development (Brasil, 2013).

Marcelino-Sadaba, et al., (2015) observed that the environmental aspects of sustainability use as more generally. And others, todays, people start thinking in new concept owing to the increasing interest in Corporate Responsibility (CR) including corporate ?nancial responsibility, corporate environmental responsibility and corporate social responsibility (WBCSD, 2006), it means corporate SD (Baumgartner and Ebner, 2010).

Similarly, when the focus going on project management, there have proposals to find out the relationships between project management and sustainability and most of the research studies trying to identify a process or sustainable project management methodology (Sanchez, 2015). As like, Gareis et al. (2009, 2013) developed a model to explore relationships between sustainable development and project management. Additionally, Zuofa & Ochieng (2016), as well as others (Presley & Meade, 2010; Herazo, et al., 2012; Bal, et al., 2013; Yuan, 2013; Oladinrin & Ho, 2014;) indicate that ‘there is a relatively high level of consciousness and effort toward the pursuit of sustainability in the construction industry’. Some construction scholars are presently engaged in the debate about sustainability incorporate in construction industry is realistic or not and trying to prescribe business strategies and principal to address the increasing demand from governments and the wider public for sustainable construction development (Zhao, et al., 2012; Opoku & Ahmed, 2014; Zuofa & Ochieng, 2016).

2.3.2 Principles of construction project Sustainability:

Shrivastava & Berger, 2010, notes that so far, several principles have been used by various projects, sectors, national, and international bodies toward ensuring sustainability. Miyakate (1996); CIB (1999); Hill & Bowen (1997) and Zuofa & Ochieng (2016)  have identified some principles for sustainable construction development include: 1) minimizing resource consumption, 2) maximizing the resource reuse, 3) use of renewable and recyclable resources, 4) protect the natural environment for future, 5) create the healthier and non-toxic environments, 6) ensure the quality while creating the built environment, and 7) sustainability awareness should provide additional stimulus for stakeholders to make a deliberate efforts to adopt sustainability during project implementation (Brooks & Rich, 2016). One or more choice or use of the principles depend on stockholders’ decision and/or construction industry’ project methodology with their consensus and compromise.

2.3.3 Sustainability and project management methodology relationship:

In place of the project activities, especially construction complex projects demanding the issue of sustainability is urgent (Martens and Carvalho, 2016). By reason of a large complex construction project being environmentally destructive and using vast amounts of natural resources. The use of energy in building’s construction and operational is responsible for nearly 47% of total UK CO2 gas emissions, 80% of which comes from in-use building emissions (HM Government, 2010). As well, this industry can cause a considerable amount of air and water pollution incidents (Brooks and Rich, 2016).

Nonetheless, increasing demand from governments and the wider public needs presented, significant number of reference guides in the project management field, such as the Guide of the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) given by the PMI (2013), contain ten areas of knowledge, so far it is showing no special attention to the area of sustainability (Martens and Carvalho, 2016). Similarly, the International Project Management Association (IPMA, 2013), the Australian Institute of Project Management (AIPM, 2013), the Association for Project Management (APM, 2013), the Projects in Controlled Environments – PRINCE2 (GCO, 2009) and the International Contract for Process Plant Construction (ENAA, 2013), also offer no special attention to the issue of sustainability (Martens and Carvalho, 2016).

Sanchez, 2015, cites that to address sustainable issues into project management methodology, it needs a clear understanding of the details involved of the project and their interactions is required, but then again Sustainability (TBL: economic, environmental and social dilemma) needs to be incorporated into and worked within the project management function. Authors also show that still a big gap is present in the literature and in practice context (Brones et al., 2014; Carvalho and Rabechini, 2015; Marcelino-Sadaba et al., 2015), due to involves the organizational processes and its management level, TBL three dimensions variables. (Singh et al., 2012; Carvalho and Rabechini, 2011; Silvius et al., 2013).

2.3.4 Projects success and sustainability relationship:

Traditionally, the criteria used to evaluate project success include: scope, time and cost (Adnan et al., 2013; Berssaneti and Carvalho, 2015). Shenhar and Dvir (2007), Shenhar (2011) and Shenhar et al. (2001) evaluate the success use the criteria in ?ve dimensions: 1) the ef?ciency in cost, time and scope; 2) the impact on customer consideration and satisfaction with improve the life quality 3) the impact on team (4) the business success analyzing considering the development of the project, increase the sales, revenue and pro?tability as well as return on investment, competitiveness and market performance (Munns and Bjeirmi, 1996); (5) the future analyzing by long-term effects (Bryde, 2003), and, in addition to creating new markets, products and technologies.

And other study suggests that sustainability is a new dimension of success evaluation (Carvalho and Rabechini, 2015) aligned with the TBL. Furthermore, Kaysi, (2013, p.21) define the sustainable development considers with TBL by focus that ”1) inclusive (diverse business owners rather than cartels or monopoles and value human resources: Employees, and Ownership by employees,) 2) financially sound (financial control, cost, and benefit are considered), 3) healthy business (quality on stable output) and care about resources (waste management for example)”.

2.3.5 Key Challenges to Sustainability Development in Construction Industry:

Still, construction industry’ diverse views on what sustainability within the construction industry, when discussing the barriers affecting the incorporation of sustainability into their practices, quite a lot of interesting answers emerged. Most answers focus on the major challenge are related to the lack of sustainability awareness within the industry (Zuofa & Ochieng, 2016). Together with its usefulness can’t be seen and measurement is complex nature supportive to the gap of awareness.

A considerable body of sustainability literatures (Zuofa, et al., 2015; Martens and Carvalho, 2016; Zuofa & Ochieng, 2016) have identified some barriers and challenges to sustainable construction development such as: ”1) Perceived high cost, knowledge and skills of employees, limited management support, 2) Insufficient research and development, limited knowledge transfer, unclear guidance and implementation, 3) Inadequate policies and legislations, client requirements and specifications, resistance to change, 4) Obsolete building and construction codes, lack of public awareness and misconception, limited infrastructure”.

However, the integration of sustainable development issues with project management methodology together with project success is still a lack of literatures (Carvalho and Rabechini, 2011; Silvius et al., 2013; Martens, 2015; Martens and Carvalho, 2016). Besides that, the London Olympic 2012 construction project is controlled under the PRINCE 2 methodology with ensured a set of targets of environmental issues implementation (Dodd and Yu, 2009). Therefore, the success story of sustainable construction work in London Olympic 2012 demands a critical study to future learning legacy.