{"title":"Identifying success criteria at the post-handover stage for international development projects","authors":"Johan Fahri, Julien Pollack, D. Kolar","doi":"10.5130/ajceb.v20i4.7289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The question of how successful a project is beyond the handover stage is still echoing in the literature on project management and more magnified in international development (ID) projects. In addressing the question, this study aims to demonstrate the importance of time frame in assessing project success, particularly identifying the success criteria at the posthandover stages (outcome and impact stages). This study used a qualitative approach that was rooted in interpretivism, allowing the use of constructivist grounded theory method (CGTM) in an ID project as an example. The study identified eight success criteria: Convenience, Development, Documentation, Maintainability, New Capability, Price of Service or Product, Training, and Usability. The study also found that, first, each participant had different emphases on different success criteria; second, most of the identified success criteria were still under the outcome stage; and lastly, usability received the highest responses from the participants as the most concerned criterion at the post-handover stages. This last finding verified the importance of time frame where the other criteria became less important if the outputs were useful to deliver the institutions’ strategic objectives. Future studies that use more sampled participants and different types of institutions are also encouraged. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. FUNDING This study was funded by Australian Awards Scholarships from Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Government of Australia and the Provincial Government of North Maluku, Indonesia, through Kieraha Scholarship. 103","PeriodicalId":51729,"journal":{"name":"Construction Economics and Building","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Construction Economics and Building","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v20i4.7289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The question of how successful a project is beyond the handover stage is still echoing in the literature on project management and more magnified in international development (ID) projects. In addressing the question, this study aims to demonstrate the importance of time frame in assessing project success, particularly identifying the success criteria at the posthandover stages (outcome and impact stages). This study used a qualitative approach that was rooted in interpretivism, allowing the use of constructivist grounded theory method (CGTM) in an ID project as an example. The study identified eight success criteria: Convenience, Development, Documentation, Maintainability, New Capability, Price of Service or Product, Training, and Usability. The study also found that, first, each participant had different emphases on different success criteria; second, most of the identified success criteria were still under the outcome stage; and lastly, usability received the highest responses from the participants as the most concerned criterion at the post-handover stages. This last finding verified the importance of time frame where the other criteria became less important if the outputs were useful to deliver the institutions’ strategic objectives. Future studies that use more sampled participants and different types of institutions are also encouraged. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. FUNDING This study was funded by Australian Awards Scholarships from Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Government of Australia and the Provincial Government of North Maluku, Indonesia, through Kieraha Scholarship. 103
期刊介绍:
Construction Economics and Building (formerly known as the Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building [AJCEB]) is a peer reviewed, open access publication for original research into all aspects of the economics and management of building and construction, quantity surveying and property management as well as construction and property education. It is free for authors, readers and libraries.