Comparative Study of University Courses on Critical-Path Method Scheduling
This article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYPublication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 132, Issue 7
Abstract
There is a growing need for project controls on today’s construction projects. Delivering a project on time does not mean just signing a contract and hoping that the required contract completion date will be met. More often than not, the majority of today’s constructed projects encounter events and/or changes that affect the original plan of executing a project. A key to monitoring a project’s progress is a critical-path method (CPM) schedule. However, the methods and techniques of CPM scheduling vary widely on any construction site. In light of this difference, a growing need has emerged for standards for CPM scheduling, a common foundation from which terms, definitions, and applications can be universally understood. In determining what recommendations might be reasonable in establishing scheduling standards, one area to be examined is how CPM scheduling is being taught in the universities. In this examination, the writer conducted a survey of university CPM curriculums in the United States, Europe, and Asia. This paper reflects the findings of this survey focusing on the base guideline of time management as presented by the Project Management Institute’s Project management book of knowledge (PMBOK) as compared to how the concepts in the PMBOK are taught in university courses in CPM scheduling in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Data obtained from the study will then provide a basis for recommendations to both industry and academia relative to potential changes which would bring the world closer together in commonality in the area of CPM scheduling.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writer would like to thank all the institutions that participated in this study and the information that they provided. While the writer obtained the actual curriculum and syllabus, these have not been included in Appendix I at the request of the multiple professors who have requested that the information remain confidential. Rights were obtained to use the information for purposes of this research paper in preparation of the writer’s Ph.D. studies in this subject. The writer also wishes to thank Brooke Maples for her assistance in designing the database and to Brooke Maples and Karie O’Donnell Jones for assisting in gathering the information for the survey.
References
Galloway, P. D. (2003). “CPM scheduling—Its importance in monitoring and demonstrating construction progress.” Project Management Conf. Proc., Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Tokyo.
Hinze, W. J. (1998). “Construction planning and scheduling.” Special edition using Microsoft Project, Prentice–Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shater, S. M., and Sutton, M. M. (2001). Project management in practice, Wiley, New York.
Project Management Institute (PMI). (2000). Project management book of knowledge, Project Management Institute, Drexel, Pa.
Project Management Institute (PMI). (2005). “Monthly Newsletter.” Project Management Institute, Drexel, Pa.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2006 ASCE.
History
Received: Mar 16, 2005
Accepted: Dec 8, 2005
Published online: Jul 1, 2006
Published in print: Jul 2006
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.