the influence of experience and information search
Post on 03-Apr-2018
263 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
1/12
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 54, NO. 2, MAY 2007 315
The Influence of Experience and Information SearchStyles on Project Risk Identification Performance
Eunice Maytorena, Graham M. Winch, Jim Freeman, and Tom Kiely
AbstractThe management of risks in projects is a growingarea of concern. Both the identification and analysis phases of therisk management process are considered the most important, forthey can have a big effect on the precision of the risk assessmentexercise. Currently, it is assumed that project managers relylargely on experience to identify project risks. These decisions,influenced by individual perception and attitudes, are madeprimarily under conditions of uncertainty. Understanding howindividuals respond to uncertain situations, therefore, requires anunderstanding of how individuals intuitively assess the situationthey perceive, before expressing a response. The Project RiskIdentification (Pro-RIde) project interviewed 51 project managersusing active information search (AIS) as a data collection method
and cognitive mapping as a data-capturing tool. Our resultssuggest that the role of experience in the risk identification processis much less significant than it is commonly assumed to be. Bycontrast, information search style, level of education and riskmanagement training do play a significant role in risk identifica-tion performance. These findings suggest the potential for a morethorough approach to risk identification.
Index TermsActive information search, cognitive mapping,project risk identification, project risk management.
I. INTRODUCTION
PROJECT risk management has become an important areaof research in project management over the past decade.
Interest in risk management has increased as the size and com-
plexity of projects have grown and as competition between firms
has intensified. As a result, numerous best practice standards,
guides, and specialist tools and techniques have been developed
focusing on a more effective project risk management process. It
is widely held that both the identification and analysis phases of
the risk management process are the most important ones as they
can have the biggest effect on the precision of the risk assess-
ment exercise [1], [2], [3]. However, the vast bulk of research
Manuscript received June 20, 2005; revised November 1, 2005 and February1, 2006. This work was supported in part by the United Kingdom Engineeringand Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) under Grant N51452/01. Re-view of this manuscript was arranged by Department Editor J. K. Pinto.
E. Maytorena is with the Center for Research in the Management of Projects,Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Booth Street West,Manchester, M15 6PB, U.K. (e-mail: E.maytorena-sanchez@man.ac.uk).
G. M. Winch is with the Center for Research in the Management of Projects,Manchester Business School, Manchester, M15 6PB, U.K. (e-mail: graham.winch@mbs.ac.uk).
J. Freeman is with the Manchester Business School, Manchester, M15 6PB,U.K. (e-mail: jim.freeman@mbs.ac.uk).
T. Kiely was with the Miller Construction, Edinburgh, EH12 9HD, U.K.and the Pro-RIde research project, Centre for Research in the Management ofProjects, Manchester Business School, Manchester, M15 6PB, U.K. (e-mail:T.Kiely@hotmail.com).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TEM.2007.893993
to date has focused on the analysis phase, while the identifica-
tion phase and its techniques have had little rigorous evaluation
[1] and development [4]. Yet we would argue that the analysis
phase is completely dependent upon possible risk events being
accurately identified in the first instance. The consensus on this
phase, we suggest, is that experienced projects managers en-
gage in brainstorming, develop risk registers, conduct risk in-
terviews to identify risks, which can be taken forward for anal-
ysis and subsequent action through the project life cycle. This
leaves open such questions as which strategies are used to gather
information, how much information is required and who is best
placed to carry out identification in order for a judgment to be
made on what is a risk. The aim of this research is to provide
a better understanding of the individual process of risk iden-
tification by focusing on the individual information gathering
process. Thus, this paper focuses on two different but ultimately
connected aspects of the way project managers identify risks.
First, we explore the role of individual project management ex-
perience on risk identification performance (RIP). And second,
we explore the role of information search styles on RIP. We
thereby hope to provide the basis for a more rigorous approach
to the identification phase of project risk management.
II. PROJECT RISK IDENTIFICATION
A. Project Risk Identification in Context
Since the 1980s the development of project risk management
has shifted from progressing the quantitative aspect towards im-
proving the understanding of the risk management process [5].
Greater understanding of this process is important for project
risk management practice, for as Royer suggests unmanaged
or unmitigated risks are one of the primary causes of project
failure [6, p. 6].
Project risk management is a process that aims to system-
atically identify, evaluate and manage project related risks to
improve project performance. The basic idea is to make the ex-
ercise more objective. The general consensus from the variousguides [7][10] and risk management literature [11][15] is that
the risk management process can be synthesized in four basic
sub processes, illustrated in Fig. 1. These are located in the con-
text of the project mission and clearly defined project objectives,
which are looped through the project lifecycle: identify and clas-
sify the risks, analyze the risks, respond to the risks and monitor
the risks.
The identification and analysis subprocesses are considered
the most important [1][3]. However, we argue that analysis is
dependent on risks being accurately identified in the first place.
If risks are not identified they cannot be analyzed and man-
aged. Hence, the risk identification phase, where the questions
0018-9391/$25.00 2007 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
2/12
316 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 54, NO. 2, MAY 2007
Fig. 1. A generic model of the risk management process [16]. Our researchfocuses on the first sub process, the identification and classification of risks.
addressed are what might happen and how, is the focus of this
research.
B. Project Risk Identification: A Literature Review
The risk identification phase has been the subject of relatively
little research. Williams [4] points out that there has been little
structured work on identification. We discuss here some of the
exceptions to this assessment. Noonan and Thamhain [17] pro-
posed a risk factor framework that can aid in the categorization
and analysis of project risks. Ashley and Avots [18] proposed
using influence diagramming as a way of simplifying and struc-
turing the sensitive issues in a project. Charette [19] proposed
a framework for risk categorization based on risk causes and
level of predictability. He identified a two-step risk identifica-
tion process: information gathering and risk categorization. In
order to understand the causes of risks one must gather back-ground information from various sources. The sources of infor-
mation, he notes, may come from traditional knowledge (per-
ceived information generally taken as fact), historical data from
other projects, personal judgment, experiments and tests (sim-
ulations, modeling), and statistical surveys. Charette [19] ar-
gues information based on past history is probably the best
primary source for identifying risks [19, p. 106]. As a second
step, categorization is used to help structure the risks based
on their causes and level of predictability. Carr et al. [20] de-
veloped a taxonomy-based risk identification method for soft-
ware engineering projects. The taxonomy offers a framework
for structuring the issues and the elicitation of risks is carriedout based on a questionnaire. Most recently, Chapman [21] has
looked at the steps a design team undertakes in the risk identi-
fication and assessment stages. The steps identified are: knowl-
edge acquisition, selection of core design team, presentation of
the process, identification, encoding, and verification. The un-
derstanding of the risk identification and assessment stages is
through description of tasks, activities and techniques used by
the design team during each of the steps. For the identification
step, Chapman [21] reviews techniques that can be used, such as
brainstorming, Nominal Group Technique (NGT), Delphi and
historic records. Empirical research on risk management prac-
tice [1], [2], [22][26] indicates that over the past decade: check-
lists, brainstorming, and interview sessions have been the mostcommonly used risk identification tools.
Thus the focus of the related literature is on the tools and tech-
niques used for assisting in risk identification, such as risk reg-
isters, risk breakdown structures (RBS) and brainstorming, but
these are not unproblematic. The widely used risk register is
simply a list of all the risks that have been previously identified;
its development is typically ad-hoc. For this to be of practical
use, the register has to be filtered for a particular project underscrutiny and the results prioritized. However, it is not clear how
this is done, by whom, and how reliable the results are [27].
There appears to be a complete lack of connection with the liter-
ature on knowledge management as a tool for capturing organi-
zational learning from projects [28]. RBSare more sophisticated
risk registers which provide a hierarchical structure of potential
risk sources [29] from which a list of risks can be drawn through
a brainstorming session. The issues related to risk registers and
brainstorming also apply to the RBS technique. Brainstorming
[11] is project specific and requires a group of experienced prac-
titioners to consider creatively possible risk sources. This list is
then more analytically considered and key risks identified. Dif-
ficulties with brainstorming include the selection of the appro-priate experts, the number required, and bringing them together
frequently enough to be of use to a dynamic project lifecycle,
and the avoidance ofgroupthink dynamics.
Chapman [30] and Al-Tabtabai and Diekmann [31] argue that
the identification of risks relies on the individual judgment and
insight of the various actors involved in a project, which is de-
pendent on their knowledge, professional training, role, level
of responsibility and length of exposure to the project sector in
which they are working.
Although this research provides a general understanding of
the risk identification process, it leaves unclear how individual
project managers search and gather information from the men-tioned sources in order to make a judgment on what is a risk,
and how, if in any way, this influences risk identification effec-
tiveness. Crutcher [32] states the importance of obtaining this
type of information in order to identify its role on performance.
In addition, the related literature highlights the importance of
the individuals understanding of the project, its development
process and risk sources as fundamental for the effectiveness of
risk identification. Risk identification relies on individual judg-
ment. The untested premise of both research and practice in
project risk management is that experience is the key to effective
risk identification, and that the deployment of this experience in
the risk identification process is largely unproblematic.
III. HYPOTHESES
From these considerations, we can derive hypotheses for
testing. We have identified the widely accepted, but untested,
assertion in the literature that experience matters in project RIP.
H1: There is no association between a project managers
years of experience and their level of project RIP.
We have also indicated that the information gathering stage as
a first step to risk identification required research attention. We
believe that information search styles, those that project man-agers use to gather information, may play a role on project RIP:
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
3/12
MAYTORENA et al.: INFLUENCE OF EXPERIENCE AND INFORMATION SEARCH STYLES ON PROJECT RIP 317
H2: There is no difference in the styles of information
search used by project managers and their level of RIP.
IV. THE METHOD
A. Theoretical Underpinning
Project risk management is part of the more general problem
of judgment under uncertainty [33]. To address this problem
in a project context, we draw upon a critique of the predom-
inant perspective in this area Expected Utility Theory [34].
Here, the decision-maker rationally evaluates the probabilities
against a final asset position before choosing a course of ac-
tion. However, this theory has been criticized for its assumption
that rationality is possible under such conditions, because evi-
dence has been found that decision-makers use flawed heuris-
tics in decision-making, which are subject to systematic biases
[35], [36]. Within this perspective, Kahneman and Tversky [37]
proposed their prospect theory, in which decision-makers as-
sign values to gains and losses rather than to final assets andto decision weights rather than to probabilities. This produces
the distinctive s-curve value function of the theory. While there
have been important debates within the heuristics and biases lit-
erature [38] this probabilistic approach to decision-making has
been widely accepted. However, the heuristic and biases critique
of expected utility theory has been criticized on methodological
grounds due to the artificial nature of the decision problems re-
searched [39]. Generally in decision-making studies, decision
makers are presented with well-defined problems with all re-
quired probability distributions available. In practice, an active
information search (AIS) is required by decision makers to tease
out the nature of the problem situation and assign the appro-priate decision weights to the data. This naturalistic approach is
much closer to the sort of situation facing project risk decision
makers than those of perfect information envisaged by expected
utility theory and bounded rationality envisioned by prospect
theory. The research methodology used in this research is based
on AIS.
B. AIS and Cognitive Mapping
AIS was developed to study judgment and decision making in
naturalistic tasks. These are ill structured problems in knowl-
edge-rich domains, where causal relations and attributions and
the decision makers control belief are relevant [39, p. 15].At its core AIS is a process tracing technique of information
search and collection, carried out in the context of an interview
where the interviewee is presented with a scenario of a problem.
After the review of the scenario the interviewee asks the facili-
tator questions in order to obtain information. These questions
are recorded and answers are provided in printed form. Huber s
[39] model of how individuals reach a decision in a naturalistic
situation assumes that the decision maker constructs a simple
mental representation of the situation and alternatives, which
can change in the course of the decision process. In this re-
search we utilized this technique with the developments pro-
posed by Ranyard et al. [40], Williamson and Ranyard [41],
and Williamson et al. [42]. The developments consist in pro-viding spoken rather than written answers to questions and by
including think aloud instructions, so that a conversational ap-
proach is adopted. The use of think aloud instructions is useful
for the provision of processing information data, but leaves open
the question of how these processes are to be recorded for sub-
sequent analysis. For this reason, we turned to cognitive map-
ping as a data recording and analysis tool. Cognitive mapping
[43], [44] is an interactive decision support tool used to analyzecomplex or messy processes through which decisions emerge.
A cognitive map is a graphical model which structures the way
an individual makes sense of their experiences. The map is rep-
resented by concepts (distinct phrases) and links between con-
cepts, creating a network, which communicates the nature of a
problem. Although cognitive mapping has been used in the area
of risk management [45][47] and in other fields that involve
risk[44], [48][51] its application to the problem of how project
managers specifically identify risks in projects combined with
an AIS methodology is novel.
C. Participants
We were very keen to work with practicing managers in a do-
main with which they were familiar, as this yields the most ap-
propriate context for research on naturalistic decision-making
[52]. We, therefore, chose to collaborate with a group of four
U.K.-based construction firms from whom we sampled middle
managers. These firms comprised: two large international con-
struction firms, one large U.K. national construction firm, and
one medium-sized London-based construction firm. The selec-
tion criteria were that potential participants had a minimum
of two years experience in a project management position and
could potentially take over a project at short notice. As the in-
terviews progressed, each firm provided our research team with
a list of 1220 potential participants. Our research team used ajudgment sampling [53] based on professional role to select the
interviewees.
We interviewed 51 (4 female, 47 male) practicing construc-
tion project managers. Their ages ranged from 28 to 62 years
( ), with average experience of 17.5
years in a management role, and average experience of
years in current job title. 78% of interviewees
had formal risk management training (22% had no formal risk
management training), and 51% of interviewees had a grad-
uate-level education (49% had a nongraduate level education).
The first four interviews constituted the face validity exercise
and two additional interviews could not be conducted properly
due to time constraints; we have excluded these data from the
analysis. We used for this analysis the data from 45 of our inter-
views. Agresti and Finlay state that a sample size of 25 or 30
is adequate for a good approximation of a normal distribution
[54, p. 104]. Although our sample is not random, we believe that
it is reasonable to suggest that our findings are representative of
middle-level project managers in the U.K.. We have no reason
to believe that the sample is systematically biased in any partic-
ular way. Clearly, however, a larger sample would be required
to draw general conclusions.
D. AIS Procedure
Participants were interviewed individually in their place ofwork. Interruptions and distractions were kept to a minimum.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
4/12
318 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 54, NO. 2, MAY 2007
Fig. 2. Research method process.
The ProRIde AIS interview procedure lasted between one and a
half and two hours and was structured in three stages:
1) introduction and warm-up;2) AIS exercise;
3) summary and questionnaire.
The introduction informed the interviewee of the aim of the
research project, the structure of the interview process and what
was expected of the interviewee. The aim was to clarify the ex-
ercise to the interviewee, but at the same time information was
kept to a minimum so as not to influence the outcome of the AIS
exercise. The warm-up exercise aimed to clarify the dynamics
of the main exercise (AIS), such as thinking aloud and using
questions and answers.
The aim of the AIS exercise was to produce a response from
the practicing managers that would be as real as possible. Thepiloted scenario [55], based on a real construction project,
was developed by the research team in collaboration with the
project manager of the real project. The scenario (included in
Appendix A) described a building project under a design and
build contract that was currently in progress; participants were
given limited information about its location, team, cost, client
and project status with a focus on schedule and budget risks.
The limited information meant that the potential of the scenario
to shape the interviewees responses was kept to a minimum
and would compel the interviewee to request additional infor-
mation from the facilitator. This process needed to occur in
order for the AIS method to work. Each interviewee was asked
to assume that they were part of the project team and that theyhad to take over the project at short notice. Each interviewee
then went through the AIS process described in Section IV-B
with the aim of identifying the risks in the project.
The objective of the summary exercise was to obtain a retro-spective view of how decisions were made. Interviewees were
asked to summarize the risks that they had identified and the
reason why the interviewee considered them risks. In addition,
the facilitator could also ask why certain questions were asked
or not. This type of report was used to review the consistency of
the data elicited [41]. In addition, demographic data were col-
lected through a questionnaire.
V. DATA ANALYSIS
The process of preparing and analyzing the data consisted of
three main stages: data mapping, data coding, and analysis. In
some instances these were carried out simultaneously. Fig. 2illustrates the method from data collection to data output.
A. Data Mapping
Both the scenario and summary stages of the AIS procedure
were tape-recorded and transcripts produced. The verbal reports
(sequential transcripts) contain data in sequence on the lines
of reasoning and type of information searched for and used
during the scenario exercise. Due to the volume of data gathered
(1520 pages per transcript) we recognized that we needed to do
more than analyze the content. Therefore, we used Decision Ex-
plorer (cognitive mapping software) to represent graphically
the AIS data. This type of graphical representation can be con-
sidered a cognitive map because it represents people in relationto their information environment [56, p. 267]. For the purpose
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
5/12
MAYTORENA et al.: INFLUENCE OF EXPERIENCE AND INFORMATION SEARCH STYLES ON PROJECT RIP 319
Fig. 3. Informationsearch cluster styles. (a) Linear cluster style, (b) Feedback cluster style.
of clarity we will refer to these as information search maps (Bin Fig. 2).
We built the information search maps by transcribing the data
directly into Decision Explorer. Starting at the beginning of
the tape, we entered sequentially numbered concepts into De-
cision Explorer and linked these to represent a chronological
relation (conceptsfollowing in time). A conceptcould be a ques-
tion or statement from the interviewee or an answer from the fa-
cilitator. The sequence of concepts and links was broken when
a new question was asked about a new or different topic. The
new concept then marked the start of a new line of inquiry.
B. Data Coding
During the data mapping stage, and in order to analyze the
information search maps, we developed a coding framework for
three distinct variables:
concept variable;
outcome variable;
process variable.
The concept variable, a distinct phrase, coded at concept level
(A in Fig. 2), was coded as answers (facilitators input), ques-
tions, and statements. The coding of concepts was based on
how to code guidelines developed by the coding team.
The outcome variable is the risks identified by the intervie-
wees and this was also coded at concept level (C in Fig. 2). The
risks identified form the base for the development of a RIP mea-sure. This is explained in Section V-D.
Each coded information search map contained between 200and 600 concepts. To help manage the data we used Decision
Explorers cluster analysis option (D in Fig. 2), in which each
information search map was segmented into groups of concepts
called clusters. Clusters were created based on the strength of
linkage between concepts. The process variable, coded at cluster
level (E in Fig. 2), indicates the approach taken by the project
managers to search and collect information; this could be in a
linearor feedbackstyle.
Fig. 3 illustrates these two types of cluster styles. A linear
cluster style was evident when the interviewees asked single
independent questions without follow-up. As can be seen in
Fig. 3(a) two closed questions were asked about risk assess-ments but no additional detail was requested.
A feedback cluster style was evident when the interviewees
asked a series of related questions in an investigative manner.
As can be seen in Fig. 3(b) five questions were asked to obtain
more detail about the cladding packages, and the program and
drawings were reviewed before an assessment was made. Each
cluster, therefore, describes the sequence and style of informa-
tion search an interviewee went through during a particular topic
of the scenario. In this sense, each cluster describes a specific
topic; and each was given a title to capture its contents.
To improve coding reliability, two coders independently ex-
amined the information search maps. The comparison between
coded maps indicated a high percentage of agreementbetween the two coders.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
6/12
320 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 54, NO. 2, MAY 2007
Fig. 4. Summary information search map: Linear style.
C. Summary Information Search Map Analysis
Our data cannot claim to have captured every nuance of the
interviewees thought processes. Nonetheless they do give an in-
sight into what information was sought, in what order, what de-
cisions were based on prior experience, which were based on
information collected during the decision exercise, and what in-
formation search strategies were used.
In order for the information search maps to be compared in
terms of content and structure, it was necessary to summarizethem further at cluster level. Therefore, a summary information
search map (F in Fig. 2) was created for each interviewee using
VISIO (graphics software package).
These summary maps contain data about the information that
was sought, the sequence of the information search, the number
of questions asked per topic, the style of information search
used, which could be in a linear or feedback style, the risks
identified, and feedback loops. By calculating the percentage of
linear and feedback clusters in the summary information search
map we obtain a measure for the process variable. That is, we
have a measure of both linearand feedbackinformation search
styles, which is used in the subsequent analysis. Therefore, we
can also determine the predominant style used. A predominantlylinear style is defined if more that 50% of the clusters were linear
[as shown in Fig. 3(a)]; a predominantly feedback style is de-
fined if more than 50% of clusters were feedback style [as shown
in Fig. 3(b)]. Fig. 4 illustrates a summary information search
map, with a predominantly linear style.
D. Risk Identification Performance (RIP)
The risks identified by the interviewees were of varied scope
and we needed to develop a measure that would capture this
variation. A frequency count of the risks identified on its own
was inappropriate, as this did not take into account the qualityof the risks identified. We initially considered using the concept
of impact and probability to develop a measure. However, due to
the unavoidable use of hindsight knowledge in our assessment
of the risks identified, it was not believed to be appropriate to
allocate a probability of each risk event occurring. On the other
hand, we did believe it to be appropriate to use a measure of
impact (severity) as the basis for developing a RIP measure, as
a measure of individual risk identification effectiveness.
The project manager who managed the real-life construction
project on which the scenario was based is the project manager
of the research team. We were able, therefore, to benefit fromhis
detailed knowledge of the scenarios background to assess the
impact each of the risks identified by the interviewees wouldhave on the scenario project should it have occurred. In other
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
7/12
MAYTORENA et al.: INFLUENCE OF EXPERIENCE AND INFORMATION SEARCH STYLES ON PROJECT RIP 321
TABLE I
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN RIP AND EXPERIENCE
words, we took advantage of this hindsight knowledge to estab-
lish the potential impact of each risk identified by the intervie-
wees. All identified risks were, therefore, entered into a matrix
and rated individually on a 1 (very low) to 5 (very high) impact
scale (G in Fig. 2). Two other members of the research team in-
dependently reviewed the rated matrix for consistency. The total
number of risks identified by each interviewee weighted by their
impact rating and expressed in suitably standardized form [57]
gave us the RIP measure for each interviewee (H in Fig. 2). In
other words, the RIP is constructed from partial averages of
ordinal observations which are assumed to be
independent identically distributed observations with expected
value and variance . Thus
and
If we convert the means to values where
`` '' , then the variance of
becomes whatever the value of k (number of risks). In this
case the RIP measure is actually equivalent to .
Using the law of large numbers and the central limit theoremwe deduce, for sufficiently large , that RIP is approximately
normally distributed with constant varianceas required for the
subsequent multiple regression modeling.
It is important to note that the RIP measure is not an indi-
cation of absolute level of performance, but a relative measure,
constrained by our choice of scenario. The RIP forms our de-
pendent variable in the subsequent quantitative analysis of the
summary information search maps.
VI. QUANTITATIVE RESULTS
The development of an RIP measure and the identification of
two information search styles: linear and feedback, and demo-
graphic data collected allows us to test the specified hypotheses.
A. Testing the Hypotheses
The premise of both research and practice in project risk man-
agement is that experience is the key to effective risk identifica-
tion. Here, we test hypothesis 1. The following analysis takes
the RIP measure as the dependent variable and years in man-
agement role, years in current job title and age (all proxies for
experience) as the independent variables. Table I summarizes
the results. As can be seen we cannot reject the null hypothesis
at the 5% level.
We stated that the way in which project managers search andgather information may play a role in their level of project RIP.
TABLE II
DIFFERENCE IN PREDOMINANT STYLE AND RIP
Here, we test hypothesis 2. Table II summarizes the results. As
can be seen we can reject the null hypothesis at the 5% level.
A descriptive analysis showed that project managers with a pre-
dominant use of feedback style had a higher average RIP score
than those managers who had a predominant linear style.
B. Regression Analysis
Having tested the specified hypotheses we wanted to explore
further other determinants of project managers RIP. Therefore,
multiple regression analysis was used to establish empirically,
the determinants of managers RIP.
In this case the RIP measure we adopted allowed for tra-ditional regression modeling. Before analysis began the stan-
dard validation tests [58] were carried out, these are included
in Appendix B. Only one outlier with a standardized residual
of 2.02 was found for the model (all other standardized resid-
uals were within the to range). See the relevant plots for
the model in Appendix B, which show the normality and ho-
moscedasticity assumptions for the response are upheld.
A standard multiple regression analysis was carried out using
the RIP measure as the dependent variable and, age, linear style,
feedback style, whether or not the interviewee had had formal
risk management training (dummy variable) and whether they
had a graduate or nongraduate degree (dummy variable), as po-tential predictor variables. Previous analysis showed that years
in a management role and years in current job title were not sig-
nificant predictor variables and were not included in this anal-
ysis. Descriptive statistics and correlations between the vari-
ables entered into the model are presented in Table III, and the
results of the regression analysis are shown in Table IV. Table III
shows that the linear and feedback styles of information search
and educational attainment have strong correlations with the
RIP measure, but that the correlation between the RIP measure
and other predicator variables is weak. The results of the mul-
tiple regression analysis (Table IV) show that over a third (36%)
of the variation in the RIP measure can be explained by three
predictorsin order of importance- education attainment, theuse of feedback style followed by risk management training.
C. Orphan Risk Analysis
Some of the risks identified were not linked directly to any
cluster in the summary information search map. This indicates
that the risk was identified without any prior information ac-
quisition or follow-up. We infer from this that previous expe-
rience; training or company procedures were used to identify
these risks. These types of risks we have called orphan risks.
Therefore, the following analysis takes the orphan risks (mea-
sured as percentage of total risks identified) as the dependent
variable and the demographic factors as the independent vari-able with a null hypothesis that there is no association between
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
8/12
322 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 54, NO. 2, MAY 2007
TABLE III
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN RIP AND PREDICTOR VARIABLES
TABLE IV
REGRESSION OF RIP ON PREDICTOR VARIABLES
TABLE VCORRELATION BETWEEN ORPHAN RISKS AND DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES
the two. Table V summarizes the results. As can be seen we
cannot reject the hypothesis at 5% level except for role (com-
mercially or production orientated) with production orientated
managers tending to identify more orphan risks; years in man-agement role (positively associated) and years in job title (posi-
tively associated). It appears that more experienced project man-
agers are less likely to approach the scenario with a questioning
mind, and seem to rely upon procedures and their prior experi-
ence in identifying project risks.
The following analysis takes orphan risks (measured as per-
centage of total risks identified) as the dependent variable and
cluster style ratio (ratio of linear cluster style/feedback cluster
style) as the independent variable with a null hypothesis that
there is no association. Table VI summarizes the results. As can
be seen we can reject the null hypothesis at 1% level. These re-
sults suggest the higher the style ratio, that is, the more linear
cluster style of information search used, the higher the per-centage of orphan risks identifiedin other words those who
TABLE VI
CORRELATION BETWEEN ORPHAN RISKS AND CLUSTER STYLE RATIO
prefer a linear style of information search for identifying project
risks are also more likely to identify orphans risks, that is iden-
tify risks without any prior enquiry.
D. Results Overview
From these data, therefore, we can conclude that there is no
significant association between managers age, years in man-
agement role and years in job title (proxies for experience) and
their RIP measure. Hence, we cannot reject , in other words,
having more years of project management experience does not
lead to a higher RIP measure. There is a significant difference
in the styles of information search used by project managers
and their RIP measure. Hence, cannot be rejected, in other
words, those managers who used a feedback style more fre-
quently had a higher RIP measure and those who used a linear
style more had a lower RIP measure. Further exploration of
the data showed that the linear and feedback styles of informa-
tion search, and educational attainment have a strong correlation
with the RIP measure. And the variation in the RIP measure can
be explained by education attainment, the use of feedback style
and risk management training. In other words the way in which
managers search for information plays a role in their level of
RIP.
The link between style of information search and level of ed-
ucation is difficult to discern with our sample size because it isnot simply a question of graduates using feedback, and nongrad-
uates using linear styles of information search. Graduates tend
to use both styles as appropriate, while the nongraduates are less
likely to use a feedback style. These conclusions are reinforced
by the analysis of orphan risks, defined as those risks identified
without enquiry. While these are a minority of the risks identi-
fied, more experienced project managers (older and with more
years in a management role) and those who preferred a linear
style tended to identify more orphan risks. Exploration of these
risks indicated that they tended to be the lower impact risks, for
example, logistic risks. These we infer might be more readily
identified using prior experience, training or company proce-dures.
These findings are both counter-intuitive and interesting.
They are counter-intuitive, because they suggest that experi-
ence plays no direct role in project RIP. They are interesting
because they suggest that educational attainment and training
can improve project RIPyears of experience is not subject
to managerial intervention to improve performance, but it is
possible to train staff. In addition, we find that the process style
in which information is gathered also contributes to the RIP.
In this case, a feedback style, that is, an iterative, investiga-
tive approach to gathering information contributes to a better
RIP, that is, identification of a greater number of high impact
risks. Again, this suggests the potential for staff training. Wealso suggest that a linear style of enquiry can be considered
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
9/12
MAYTORENA et al.: INFLUENCE OF EXPERIENCE AND INFORMATION SEARCH STYLES ON PROJECT RIP 323
to be a proxy for a checklist mentality. Those educated at
nongraduate level and more senior managers tended to rely on
past experiencewhether codified or not- rather than taking
an open-minded look at potential risks on the project they are
being asked to manage.
VII. CONCLUSION
This paper describes a method for studying how project man-
agers search and gather information in order to make a judg-
ment of what is a risk in a project. The review of the related
literature indicated that the risk identification phase, although
one of the most important has received little research attention,
with the literature focusing on tools and techniques used to aid
this process. Understanding how managers identify risks, that
is, the means by which they use their knowledge, expertise and
information, placed the enquiry in the area of judgment under
uncertainty. The review of the development and critiques of key
decision making theories pointed towards the importance of the
use of AIS for teasing out the nature of a problem situation. As
a result the methodology used to study the first step of risk iden-
tification process information search and gathering is a conver-
sation-based AIS combined with cognitive mapping, which was
used to capture the AIS data for subsequent coding and cluster
analysis. The results show that:
the style of information search plays an important part in
RIP;
there is no significant correlation between the RIP measure
and age, years in management, years in job title, which are
our proxies for project management experience;
risk management training contributes to improving RIP; graduate level of educational attainment seems to con-
tribute to a better RIP;
role, years in management role and years in current job
title are significantly correlated with the identification of
orphan risks and the use of a checklist approach.
Having looked at the data in different ways, feedback style,
risk management training, and educational attainment have been
highlighted as significant. In sum, the results show that intervie-
wees with a high use of feedback style of information search per-
formed better at identifying more high impact risks. The iden-
tification of risks without any information search tends to be a
common strategy used by those with more project managementexperience and with a nongraduate level of education.
This paper has provided some insights and better un-
derstanding into how project managers search and gather
information in order to identify project risks. Therefore, con-
tributing to a body of knowledge which has not been subject
of much structured research. The AIS method has allowed us
to capture the initial thoughts and information search process.
The use of Decision Explorer to capture and analyze this
process at cluster level has been extremely beneficial for the
identification of information search styles, in addition the use
of a graphic software, in this case VISIO, has beneficial for
visualizing the process dynamics.
These results report on the first stage of longer-term researchinto how project managers cope with risk and uncertainty on
their projects. We have demonstrated empirically that the re-
liance on the project management experience alone in the identi-
fication of project risk is inadequate. Indeed, it may be counter-
productive because it seems to encourage a check-list men-
tality. In broad terms, our findings suggest the importance of
what Schn [59] has called reflective practice for the practice
of risk management. Risk registers and brainstorming by expe-rienced people may not be adequate for effective risk identifica-
tion, and this has strong implications for effective risk manage-
ment practice.
The next stages in our research focus on translating our find-
ings into practice by reviewing risk management training pro-
grams of study and developing recommendations for improving
the risk identification phase. In parallel, we are looking at risk
identification at group level focusing on the group dynamic as-
pects. We will be reporting on these in due course.
APPENDIX A
You are a project manager working for a main contracting
organization. The company operates nationally and specializes
in the mid range size of building and civil engineering projects
within the range 520 million. For the purposes of this exer-
cise, assume that this fictitious company operates the same pro-
cedures and corporate policies as the one that currently employs
you.
You have just completed your last project. The project you
will now be involved with represents an important potential
business opportunity for your company, as the client is an im-
portant property developer who is keen to exploit further sites
for development.
As a consequence of the illness of the original project man-ager, you have been asked to take over this project at very short
notice. The sudden departure of the previous project manager
has allowed little time for a formal hand-over. Therefore, you
will have to quickly review the situation finding the necessary
information from the site files and the rest of the project manage-
ment team. The team consists of an assistant project manager,
two section managers, and a graduate engineer.
You will be responsible for all operations particularly, the en-
velope of the building, including the cladding and windows sub-
contract, the brickwork associated to the external finishing and
roofing.
The first brief you receive can be summarized as follows. Theproject involves demolishing an existing building, replacing it
with an 8-storey, high-quality, prestige, office block with retail
on basement, ground and first floors. The total value of the con-
struction contract is about 8m. The site is located in the heart
of Birmingham in a very popular, busy and congested mixed use
area, controlled by a vigilant Local Authority which requires the
site to be operated in accordance with all statutes and local by-
laws.
The contract is a novated design and build. The architect had
been working on the design for some time, taking advice from
at least one trade contractor whom you will be responsible for.
Your company, as main contractor, has responsibility for the
completion of the design through to hand-over. The design teamcomprises consultants who have worked together previously, but
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
10/12
324 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 54, NO. 2, MAY 2007
neither your company nor you personally have worked with any
of them before.
The whole system of cladding and fenestration is the product
of a preliminary design, which the architect carried out during
the early stages, with the help of a specialist company. The prin-
cipal part of the envelope, the fenestration package, is valued at
approximately 1.5 m. Other packages you will be responsible
for are as follows.
Roofing package (valued at about 500 000).
Reconstructed Stone package (valued at about 100 000
supply and fix).
Facing Brickwork package (valued at about 250 000).The current status of the project is as follows.
The demolition works have started.
The design status is:
structural design inc. reinforcement detailing complete;
architectural G.A.s complete;
architectural and specialist detail design at Design Princi-
ples stage.
Some subcontracts have been awarded:
demolition;
groundworks;
R.C. frame.
Others are in negotiation: reconstructed stonework (supply and fix);
facing brickwork;
membrane insulated roof construction;
windows, curtain wall and cladding;
The management team is concerned about some specific as-
pects of the project.
At this stage you need to take control of the project. We would
like you to verbally describe your thoughts and concerns about
it. Thismaybe intheform ofa short listof whatyouthinkarethe
principal risks involved. To do that, feel free to ask any questions
you need to help in your judgments. The facilitator will try to
answer with realistic answers. If he/she is not able to answer
the question you will have to make your own assumptions as towhat possibilities there may be.
APPENDIX B
Obs FEEDB CL RIP Fit SE Fit Residual St Resid.
20 62.0 5.000 9.613 0.842 .
R denotes an observation with a large standardized
residual.
Durbin-Watson statistic .
No evidence of lack of fit .
The latter MINITAB output also shows there are no problems
with first-order serial correlation of errors or model fit.
REFERENCES
[1] R. Chapman, The effectiveness of working group risk identificationand assessment techniques, Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 16, pp.333343, 1998.
[2] D. Bajaj, J. Oluwoye, and D. Lenard, An analysis of contractors ap-proaches to risk identification in New South Wales, Australia, Con-struction Manage, Econ., vol. 15, pp. 363369, 1997.
[3] D. F. Cooper and C. B. Chapman, Risk Analysis for Large Projects:Models, Methods and Cases. New York: Wiley, 1987.
[4] T. Williams, A classified bibliography of recent research relating toproject risk management, Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 85, pp. 1838, 1995.
[5] K. A. Artto, , K. Kahkonen and K. A. Artto, Eds., Fifteen years ofproject risk management applications where are we going?, in Man-
aging Risks in Projects. London: E & FN SPON, 1997, pp. 314.[6] P. S. Royer, Risk management: The undiscovered dimension ofproject management, Project Manage. J., vol. 31, pp. 613, 2000.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
11/12
MAYTORENA et al.: INFLUENCE OF EXPERIENCE AND INFORMATION SEARCH STYLES ON PROJECT RIP 325
[7] Guide to Project Management Book of Knowledge. Newton Square:PMI, 2000.
[8] J. Bartlett, C. Chapman, P. Close, K. Davey, P. Desai, H. Groom, D.Hillson, M. Hopkinson, R. Gerdes, E. Major, K. Newland, S. Simister,M. Greenwood, P. Campbell, and T. Williams, Project Risk Analysisand Management (PRAM) Guide, 2nd ed. Norwich, U.K.: APM,2004.
[9] C. Lewin, RAMP: Risk Analysis and Management for Projects.London, U.K.: Thomas Telford, 2002.
[10] BS 6079-1:2002 Project ManagementGuide to ProjectManagement,, BSI, 2002, U.K.: British Standard Institute.
[11] C. Chapman and S. Ward, Project Risk Management Processes, Tech-niques and Insights, 2nd ed. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2003.
[12] C. Pritchard, Risk Management: Concepts and Guidance, 2nd ed.Arlington, VA: ESI International, 2001.
[13] J. Raftery, Risk Analysis in Project Management. London: E & FNSpon, 1999.
[14] E. M. Hall, Managing Risk: Methods for Software Systems Develop-ment. , USA: Addison-Wesley, 1998.
[15] D. F. Cooper, S. Grey, G. Raymond, and P. Walker, Project Risk Man-agement Guidelines. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2005.
[16] G. M. Winch, Managing Construction Projects: An Information Pro-cessing Approach. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell, 2002.
[17] F. Noonan and H. Thamhain, Identifying and assessing risks forprojects, presented at the Measuring Success, 18th Annu. Sem.
Project Management Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada, 1986.[18] D. B. Ashley and I. Avots, Influence diagramming for analysis ofproject risk, Project Manage. J., vol. 15, pp. 5662, 1984.
[19] R. Charette, Software Engineering Risk Analysis and Management.New York: McGraw-Hill, 1989.
[20] J. M. Carr, S. L. Konda, I. Monarch, F. C. Ulrich, and C. F. Walker,Taxonomy Based Risk Identification 1993, Software Engineer Insti-tute, Carnegie Melon University, Pittsburgh, PA CMU/SE1-93-TR6.
[21] R. Chapman, Thecontrolling influences of effective risk identificationand assessment for construction design management, Int. J. Project
Manage., vol. 19, pp. 147160, 2001.[22] S. Simister, Usage and benefits of project risk analysis and manage-
ment, Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 12, pp. 58, 1994.[23] A. Akintoye and M. MacLeod, Risk analysis and management in con-
struction, Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 15, pp. 3138, 1997.[24] C. Egbu and Z. Serafinska, Attitudes to risk management in diverse
project environments, presented at the COBRA Conf., Greenwich,
U.K., 2000.[25] T. Raz and B. Michael, Use and benefit of tools for project risk man-
agement, Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 19, pp. 917, 2001.[26] T. Lyons and M. Skitmore, Project risk management in the Queens-
land engineering construction industry: a survey, Int. J. ProjectManage., vol. 22, pp. 5161, 2004.
[27] F. D. Patterson and K. Neailey, A risk register database system to aidthe management of project risk, Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 20, pp.365374, 2002.
[28] K. Ayas and N. Zeniuk, Project-based learning: Building communi-ties of reflective practitioners, Manage. Learning, vol. 32, pp. 6176,2001.
[29] D. Hillson, The risk breakdown structure (RBS) as an aid to effectiverisk management, presented at the 5th European Project ManagementConf., Cannes, France, 2002.
[30] C. Chapman, A risk engineering approach to project risk manage-ment, Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 8, pp. 516, 1990.
[31] H. Al-Tabtabai and J. E. Diekmann, Judgemental forecasting in con-struction, Construction Manage, Econ., vol. 10, pp. 1930, 1992.
[32] R. J. Crutcher, Telling what we know: The use of verbal reportmethodologies in psychological research, Psychological Sci., vol. 5,pp. 241244, 1994.
[33] J. Rosenhead and J. Mingers, Rational Analysis for a ProblematicWorld Revisited: Problems Structuring Methods for Complexity,Uncertainty and Conflict, 2nd ed. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2001.
[34] J. Schoemaker, The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, purposes,evidence and limitations, J. Econ. Literature, vol. 20, pp. 529563,1982.
[35] D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, and A. Tversky, Judgement under Uncer-tainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ.Press, 1982.
[36] T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, and D. Kahneman, Heuristics and Biases: ThePsychology of Intuitive Judgement. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge
Univ. Press, 2002.[37] D. Kahneman and A. Tversky, Prospect theory: An analysis of deci-sion under risk, Econometrica, vol. 47, pp. 263291, 1979.
[38] G. Gigerenzer and P. Todd, Eds., Simple Heuristics that Make usSmart. New York: Oxford Univ. Press/ABC Res. Group, 1999.
[39] O. Huber, R. Wider, and O. W. Huber, Active information search andcomplete information presentation in naturalistic decision tasks, ActaPsychologica, vol. 95, pp. 1529, 1997.
[40] R. Ranyard, J. Williamson, L. Cuthbert, and E. Hill, Inconsistentdecisions involving risk and uncertainty: Tracing peoples thoughts,
EPSRC research programme on Risk and Human Behaviour, vol. 5,
pp. 711, 1999.[41] J. Williamson and R. Ranyard, A conversation-based process tracingmethod for use with naturalistic decisions: An evaluation study, Br. J.Psychol., vol. 91, pp. 203221, 2000a.
[42] J. Williamson, R. Ranyard, and L. Cuthbert, Risk management in ev-eryday insurance decisions: Evidence from a process tracing study,
Risk Decision Policy, vol. 5, pp. 1938, 2000b.[43] C. Eden, Cognitive mapping: A review, Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 36,
pp. 113, 1988.[44] C. Eden and F. Ackermann, Making Strategy: The journey of Strategic
Management. London, U.K.: Sage., 1998.[45] C. Eden, T. Williams, F. Ackermann,and S. Howick, The role of feed-
back dynamics in disruption and delay (D&D) in major projects, J.Oper. Res. Soc., vol. 51, pp. 291300, 2000.
[46] T. Williams, C. Eden, F. Ackermann,and A. Tait, Theeffectsof designchanges and delays on project costs, J. Oper. Res. Soc., vol. 46, pp.809818, 1995.
[47] T. M. Williams, F. Ackermann, and C. Eden, , K. Kahkonen and K.A. Artto, Eds., Project risk: Systemicity, cause mapping and scenarioapproach, in Managing Risks in Projects. London, U.K.: E & FNSPON, 1997, pp. 343352.
[48] G. P. Hodgkinson, Images of Competitive Space: A study in Manage-rial and Organizational Strategic Cognition. Basingstoke, U.K.: Pal-grave Macmillan, 2005.
[49] R. Axelrod, Structure of Decisions, the Cognitive Maps of PoliticalElites. Guildford, U.K.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1976.
[50] J. A. Maule, G. P. Hodgkinson, and N. Brown, , D. Hardman andL. Macchi, Eds., Cognitive mapping of causal reasoning in strategicdecision making, in Thinking: Psychological Perspectives on Rea-soning, Judgement and Decision Making. West Sussex, U.K.: Wi-
leyLtd, 2003, pp. 253272.[51] J. Swan, Usingcognitivemapping in management research: Decisions
about technical innovation, Br. J. Manage., vol. 8, pp. 183198, 1997.[52] J.M. Meziasand W. H.Starbuck, Studying the accuracy of managers
perceptions: A research odyssey, Br. J. Manage., vol. 14, pp. 317,2003.
[53] M. Berenson, D. M. Levine, and T. C. Krehbiel, Basic Business Sta-tistics Concepts and Applications, 9th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Education, 2004.
[54] A. Agresti and B. Finlay, Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences,3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1997.
[55] A. Edkins, G. Millan, and E. Maytorena, Construction Risk Identifica-
tion: A Methodological Proposal. London, U.K.: Bartlett School ofGraduate Studies, UCL, No. 17, 2003.
[56] C. M. Fiol and A. S. Huff, Maps for managers: Where are we? wheredo we go from here, J. Manage. Studies, vol. 29, pp. 26785, 1992.
[57] W. Feller, An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications,2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1971, vol. 2.
[58] J. Johston, Econometric Methods, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw Hill,1984.
[59] D. Schon, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professional Think in Ac-tion. New York: Basic Books, 1983.
Eunice Maytorena received the B.A. degree inarchitecture from the Universidad Autonoma de
Baja California, Mexico and the Ph.D. degree fromthe Bartlett School of Graduate Studies, UniversityCollege London, U.K.
Her work experience includes architectural designand consultancy, research in various aspects ofthe built environment and lecturing in project riskmanagement. She has served as a Research Asso-ciate on ProRIde: Project Risk Identification. Atpresent, she is a Research Associate at Manchester
Business School, Manchester, U.K. Her current research interests are project
management, risk management and organizational cognition.Dr. Maytorena is a member of Project Management Institute (PMI) and thePMI Risk Special Interest Group.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA. Downloaded on September 24, 2009 at 20:44 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
-
7/28/2019 The Influence of Experience and Information Search
12/12
326 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 54, NO. 2, MAY 2007
Graham M. Winch is Professor of Project Manage-ment in Manchester Business School, the University
of Manchester, Manchester, U.K., and Director of theCentre for Research in the Management of Projects.A social scientist by training, he has run constructionprojects and researched various aspects of innovationand project management across a wide variety of en-gineering sectors. He is the author ofManaging Pro-
duction : Engineering Change and Stability (OxfordUniversity Press, 1992), a study of the implementa-tion of CAD/CAM Systems, Innovation and Man-
agement Control (Cambridge University Press, 1985), a study of new productdevelopment in the car industry, and most recently, Managing ConstructionProjects, an Information Processing Approach (Blackwell, 2002). These arecomplemented by over 30 refereed journal articles, complemented by numerousbook chapters, conference papers, and research reports. Professor Winch has
held numerousESRC andEPSRCawards, andis currently PrincipalInvestigatoron ProRIde : Project Risk Identification and a co-investigator on RethinkingProject Management : Developing a New Research Agenda.
Jim Freeman was educated at the universities ofWales, Bath, and Salford where he received the
B.Sc.degree in pure mathematics and the M.Sc. andPh.D. degrees in applied statistics, respectively.
His work experience includes programming andstatistical lecturing/consultancy. He is currently Di-rector of MBSs M.Sc. degree program in operationsmanagement. In the past, he has been employed as
a Statistician, a Training Adviser and in 1992 wasappointed Visiting Professor at the University of Al-berta,Edmonton, AB,Canada. At present, he lectures
in statistics at MBS where hisresearch interestsinclude gaming, simulation, andadvanced modeling applications.
Dr. Freeman is a member of the Operational Research Society and a Fellowof the Royal Statistical Society.
Tom Kiely He is a project manager by training with a U.K. Higher NationalDiploma (HND). He has 40 years management experience in the constructionindustry. He was Project Manager for the ProRIde: Project Risk Identificationresearch project.
Mr. Kiely is a member of the Chartered Institute of Building.
top related