Critical variables and constructs in the context of project management: importance-performance analysis

Abstract

PurposeRelying on the importance-performance theory first established by Martilla and James (1977), this research paper utilizes a unique statistical analysis instrument embedded into the SmartPLS software. It explores the importance and performance of key project management constructs and indicators with a purpose to make practical and actionable recommendations for project managers to identify and improve project management practices.Design/methodology/approachThe data used were derived from 3,130 system delivery projects in the facilities management industry. The data was analyzed with Partial Least Squares Modelling (PLS) software SmartPLS, using its embedded importance-performance functionality.FindingsThe findings indicate the importance and performance of the project management constructs and their respective indicator variables in an importance-performance (IPMA) map. All three project management phases (constructs); proposal, installation and commissioning, were significantly related to satisfaction. The installation phase (construct) showed the highest potential for performance improvement in project management. With regard to the specific indicator variables, the variable “Coordinating their work with other contractors (or the owner's staff)” received a strong “Do better” recommendation.Originality/valueThe approach and results provide an easy to use and visual tool for project managers to assess the importance and performance of the various elements of project management. The instrument provides a project management direction for the identification of strategic enhancement areas as it is essential to recognize what facets of project management contribute most to the improvement of project management performance over a longer period of time (Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Palmer, 1998).

The quality of big data marketing analytics (BDMA), user satisfaction, value for money and reinvestment intentions of marketing professionals

“…The relationship between perceived value for money and satisfaction is well-established in previous research (Kristensen and Eskildsen, 2010) in different contexts, including retail (Slack et al, 2020), tourism (Williams and Soutar, 2009) and services (Kusumawardani and Aruan, 2019), among others. Perceived value for money provides long-term business benefits, thus creating long-term satisfaction (Akter, 2017;Haverila et al, 2020;Haverila et al, 2021). Thus, the following hypotheses are set:…”

“…Satisfaction plays a vital role in marketing, as it enables value creation, which is an important goal for a company to attain profitability and higher stock returns (Armstrong et al , 2017; Parker and Mathews, 2001). Satisfaction is one of the constructs in many research projects focusing on customer-centric constructs (Haverila et al , 2020; Haverila et al , 2020). The current research focuses on user satisfaction (instead of customer satisfaction) for marketing personnel using BDMA, which is one of the key constructs for BDMA applications (Akter et al , 2017).…”

Segmenting the customers of system delivery projects based on data heterogeneity

“…Several researchers have used customer behaviour or motivations to understand better various industries, including food (Honkanen and Frewer, 2009), tourism (Bieger and Laesser, 2002; Boksberger and Laesser, 2009; Bruwer et al , 2018), sports (Hungenberg, 2015) and brand community members (Haverila et al , 2020; Malinen, 2015).…”

A Review on Key Performance Indicators for Measuring Real Estate Project Success

“…The factors that make up the success criteria are usually referred to as key performance indicators [31,35,49]. Time, cost, and quality are three main factors for the success of every project [31,35,[50][51][52][53]. The majority of the studies in consideration to measuring performance areas were based on time, cost, and quality [11,31,[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62].…”