Project-Specific Web Sites: Friend or Foe?
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 127, Issue 5
Abstract
Recent research has shown that one of the keys to project success is effective communication. Today, project communication is becoming increasingly complex, and the rapid transmission of project information is vital to project performance. Unfortunately, our current information network is based on project “push”—where information is moved sequentially to and from each member of the project team. The alternative to push communication is “pull” communication, where individuals access project information from a single central source. Project-specific Web sites (PSWSs) give construction personnel new ways of pulling the information needed to design and build today's complex projects. This paper will describe information push and pull, and discuss its applications in project-specific Web sites. Additionally, the paper will outline a case study approach that uses a social network analysis to study push/pull on three major construction projects. The research found that PSWSs can speed information flows on construction projects, but can also generate information “overload” that limits its effectiveness. More important, the study found that the success of new Internet-based technologies depends on the participation of key members of the project team. When one of these key players refuses to participate, then Internet-based project management systems quickly lose their effectiveness.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Baldwin, A. N., Thorpe, A., and Carter, C. ( 1996). “The construction alliance and electronic information exchange: A symbiotic relationship.” CIB-65, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, U.K.
2.
Bell, L. C., and Back, E. W. ( 1994). “Road kill on the information highway.” Rep. Prepared for Constr. Industry Action Group, Construction Industry Institute Press, Austin, Tex.
3.
Construction Industry Institute (CII). ( 1997). “An assessment tool for improving project team communications.” Res. Rep. 105-11, University of Texas, Austin.
4.
Farace, R. V., and Mabee, T. ( 1980). “Communication network analysis and methods.” Multivariate techniques in human communication research, P. R. Monge and J. N. Cappella, eds., Academic, New York, 365–391.
5.
Garton, L., Haythornthwaite, C., and Wellman, B. ( 1997). “Studying online social networks.” J. Comp. Mediated Communication, 3(1) 〈http: //www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue1/〉.
6.
Guevara, J. M., and Boyer, L. T. (1981). “Communication problems within construction.”J. Constr. Div., ASCE, 107(4), 551–557.
7.
Krackhardt, D., Blythe, J., and McGrath, C. ( 1994). “KrackPlot 3.0: An improved network drawing program.” Connections, 17(2), 53–55.
8.
Kubal, M. T. ( 1995). “Upside-down contracting.” Constr. Business Rev., (January/February), 50–53.
9.
Mead, S. P. ( 1997). “Project specific intranets for construction project teams.” Proj. Mgmt. J., 28(3).
10.
Rwelamila, P. D. (1994). “Group dynamics and construction project manager.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 120(1), 3–10.
11.
Thorpe, A., and Murray, J. ( 1996). “COMPOSITE: Site communications survey.” Final Rep. Prepared for DETR, Loughborough University, U.K.
12.
Tucker, M. L., and Westerman, J. W. ( 1996). “Organizational communication: Development of internal stategic competitive advantage.” J. Business Communication, 33(1), 51–69.
13.
Wasserman, S., and Faust, K. ( 1994). Social network analysis, Cambridge University Press, London.
14.
Yin, R. K. ( 1989). Case study research: Design and methods, Newbury Park, Calif.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Received: May 22, 2000
Published online: Oct 1, 2001
Published in print: Oct 2001
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.