|
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management |
| By: | Nguyen, Phong Thanh; Phu Nguyen, Cuong |
| Abstract: | The constant demand for construction in developing countries like Vietnam causes more and more challenges and difficulties to Project Management Units (PMUs) in carrying projects to completion on schedule, with quality assurance and fewer costs. In order to do this, PMUs need to have better and tighter management tools and forms. However, in order to minimize risks during project implementation, the binding terms in contracts are also becoming stricter with more and more new forms of contracts. One of them is the design-build (DB) contract form. This paper presents the critical risk factors for designbuild projects in the construction industry. Good identification and management of these risk factors will help projects succeed and will increase the confidence of owners and contractors who seek to use the design-build form. |
| Keywords: | design-build (DB); risk management; project manager; construction management; Vietnam |
| JEL: | D81 G32 L33 R42 |
| Date: | 2019–02–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:103509&r=all |
| By: | Jérôme Creel (Observatoire français des conjonctures économiques); Mario Holzner; Francesco Saraceno (Observatoire français des conjonctures économiques); Andrew Watt (Macroeconomic Policy Institute (IMK)); Jérôme Wittwer (Bordeaux population health (BPH)) |
| Abstract: | ■The Recovery Fund recently proposed by the EU Commission marks a sea-change in European integration. Yet it will not be enough to meet the challenges Europe faces. There has been much public debate about financing, but little about the sort of concrete projects that the EU should be putting public money into.■Here we propose a 10-year, €2tn investment programme focusing on public health, transport infrastructure and energy/decarbonisation. ■It consists of two pillars. In a national pillar Member States — broadly as in theCommission proposal — would be allocated €500bn. Resources should be focused on the hardest-hit countries and front-loaded: we suggest over a three-year horizon.■The bulk of the money —€1.5tn — would be devoted to finance genuinely European projects, where there is an EU value added. We describe a series of flagship initiatives that the EU could launch in the fields of public health, transport infrastructure and energy/decarbonisation. ■We call for a strengthened EU public health agency that invests in health-staff skillsand then facilitates their flexible deployment in emergencies, and is tasked withensuring supplies of vital medicines (Health4EU). ■We present costed proposals for two ambitious transport initiatives: a dedicated European high-speed rail network, the Ultra-Rapid-Train, with four-routes cuttingtravel times between EU capitals and regions, and, alternatively, an integrated European Silk Road initiative that combines transport modes on the Chinese model. ■In the area of energy/decarbonisation we seek to “electrify” the Green Deal. We call for funding to accelerate the realisation of a smart and integrated electricity gridfor 100%-renewable energy transmission (e-highway), support for complementary battery and green-hydrogen projects, and a programme, modelled on the SURE initiative, to co-finance member-state decarbonisation and Just Transition policies.■The crisis induced by the pandemic, coming as it does on top of the financial and euro crises, poses a huge challenge. The response needs to take account of the longer-run structural challenges, and above all that of climate change. The European Union should rise to these challenges in the reform of an ambitious medium-runrecovery programme, appropriately financed. An outline of such a programme isset out here by way of illustration, but many permutations and options are available to policymakers. |
| Keywords: | European recovery programme; Covid-19 |
| Date: | 2020–06–18 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/2gtm5um5lm9vvo08gf2gn4a066&r=all |
| By: | Quang Tran, Phu; Thi Quynh Tran, Nhu; Nguyen, Phong Thanh |
| Abstract: | The development of the construction industry is considered to be a significant factor contributing to the economic growth of states and countries. However, many studies have shown that the quality of time and schedule management on civil and construction projects has generally been poor. Thus, it is essential to investigate factors that significantly affect the project schedule. This research aims to examine the practice of time management on a particular construction transport project in a developing country, the urban railway project in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, with its six main lines. The implementation of this project began in 2010, but so far, only two lines have been constructed. The implementation process has been struck by many difficulties leading to the slow implementation of the entire urban railway system. To investigate the main causes leading to project delays, a research survey was carried out in three main stages: (1) a questionnaire was designed (2) data was collected with the participation of experts, and (3) an analysis of the data verification of the research model. Then, the analytical hierarchy process approach was applied to assess the priority level of the proposed solutions to ensure the effectiveness of the schedule of the entire urban railway project. |
| Keywords: | Analytic Hierarchy Process, Construction Management, Urban Railway, Schedule Management, Project Delay |
| JEL: | H43 O18 O2 R42 |
| Date: | 2020–05–28 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:103532&r=all |
| By: | Avdonina Natalia (RANEPA); Avxentyev Nikolay (RANEPA); Grishina Elena (RANEPA); Idrisov Georgy (Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy); Kaukin Andrey (Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy); Klyachko Tatiana (RANEPA); Knobel Alexander (Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy); Kurakova N. (RANEPA); Pleskachev Yuri (RANEPA); Ponomarev Yuri (Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy); Ponomareva Ekaterina (Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy); Khasanova Ramilya (RANEPA) |
| Abstract: | From the day of issuing of Executive Order No.204 of May 7, 2018 of the President of the Russian Federation “On National Goals and Strategic Objectives of the Development of the Russian Federation in the Period till 2024†(hereinafter, the Executive Order No.204) and till the end of 2018, the main efforts in implementation thereof were aimed at developing national projects (NP) and establishing the project management system and the initial organizational base. It can be stated that the main portion of work on implementation of national projects started from the beginning of 2019. Within the framework of the initial period of 2019, efforts were made to clear some issues and liquidate the information asymmetry in implementing national projects at various organizational levels. Within the framework of the “National Projects – “Implementation†Stage†Forum, which was held on April 4-6, 2019 in the Moscow Region and attended not only by representatives of the government and federal agencies, but also numerous representatives from regions, such an attempt was made. Based on the results of the Forum, the Prime Minister signed a number of instructions[1] aimed at resolving some problems – identified during the work of the Forum – related to the start of implementation of national projects. |
| Keywords: | Russian economy, national projects |
| JEL: | P16 P26 P48 |
| Date: | 2020 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gai:ppaper:ppaper-2020-1057&r=all |
| By: | Dezhina Irina (Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy) |
| Abstract: | The main topic related to science in the previous year was the National Project (NP) “Science†and federal projects implemented under its framework.Considering the speed of budget funds allocation, NP “Science†was one of the most dynamic one among projects of similar status. The National Project “Digital Economy†was on the other side of the spectrum, for which allocation of funds to performers has just started. An interlinking via identical monitoring indicators of NP “Science†and the Strategy for Scientific and Technological Development of the Russian Federation (SSTD) took place making the latter a “living†document.At yearend, a more clear distribution of topics/issues that the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS) and the Ministry of Science and Higher Education are focused on, was put in place. The main thing for RAS was the organization of their own activities, that is, clarification of competences, procedure for election of new academy members,organization of expertise of state assignments for all recipient scientific and educational institutions. In addition, RAS was developing a program dedicated to basic scientific research. The Ministry, in turn, was focused on the implementation of federal projects in the pattern of NP "Science", where the major topic could be the establishment of the Research and Educational Centers (hereinafter - REC).Such a focusing is associated with the complexity of the initiative, the need to combine scientific and technological policies of the federal and regional scales. No “breakthroughs†took place in the field of innovation technologies as evidenced by the dynamics of the Russia’s position in various rankings, results of the companies’ survey as well as indicators of the high–tech companies outflow from the country. At the same time, the Government introduced more measures striving to improve the situation, having initiated new target (development of artificial intelligence) and infrastructural projects (technological valleys) |
| Keywords: | Russian economy, R&D, science, technology |
| JEL: | O31 O32 O3 I28 I2 |
| Date: | 2020 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gai:ppaper:ppaper-2020-1061&r=all |
| By: | Nosratabadi, Saeed; Mosavi, Amir; Shamshirband, Shahaboddin (University of Malaya); Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras; Rakotonirainy, Andry; Chau, Kwok Wing |
| Abstract: | During the past two decades of e-commerce growth, the concept of a business model has become increasingly popular. More recently, the research on this realm has grown rapidly, with diverse research activity covering a wide range of application areas. Considering the sustainable development goals, the innovative business models have brought a competitive advantage to improve the sustainability performance of organizations. The concept of the sustainable business model describes the rationale of how an organization creates, delivers, and captures value, in economic, social, cultural, or other contexts, in a sustainable way. The process of sustainable business model construction forms an innovative part of a business strategy. Different industries and businesses have utilized sustainable business models’ concept to satisfy their economic, environmental, and social goals simultaneously. However, the success, popularity, and progress of sustainable business models in different application domains are not clear. To explore this issue, this research provides a comprehensive review of sustainable business models literature in various application areas. Notable sustainable business models are identified and further classified in fourteen unique categories, and in every category, the progress -either failure or success- has been reviewed, and the research gaps are discussed. Taxonomy of the applications includes innovation, management and marketing, entrepreneurship, energy, fashion, healthcare, agri-food, supply chain management, circular economy, developing countries, engineering, construction and real estate, mobility and transportation, and hospitality. The key contribution of this study is that it provides an insight into the state of the art of sustainable business models in various application areas and future research directions. This paper concludes that popularity and the success rate of sustainable business models in all application domains have been increased along with the increasing use of advanced technologies. |
| Date: | 2020–10–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:u4xw3&r=all |
| By: | Elert, Niklas (Research Institute of Industrial Economics (IFN)); Stenkula, Mikael (Research Institute of Industrial Economics (IFN)) |
| Abstract: | Researchers increasingly recognize that entrepreneurial employees, intrapreneurs, play a critical role in innovation. As with regular entrepreneurship, however, the value of intrapreneurial activity depends on the firm-specific and societal reward structures that intrapreneurs face. Ideally, these rules of the game are such that they reward intrapreneurship that is beneficial for the firm and the economy. When this is not the case, intrapreneurship can be beneficial for the firm but not for society, damaging for the firm yet beneficial for society, or downright destructive. We offer a taxonomy describing how society’s rules and firm rules interact to produce different intrapreneurial outcomes. |
| Keywords: | Intrapreneurship; Entrepreneurship; Entrepreneurial behavior |
| JEL: | D02 J24 L26 M14 O17 O31 |
| Date: | 2020–10–26 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:iuiwop:1367&r=all |