Improving HEI Productivity and Performance through Project Management Implications from a Benchmarking Case Study

被引:8
作者
Bryde, David [1 ]
Leighton, Diana [2 ]
机构
[1] Liverpool John Moores Univ, Liverpool Business Sch, Fac Business & Law, Liverpool L3 5UZ, Merseyside, England
[2] Liverpool John Moores Univ, Fac Hlth & Appl Social Sci, Liverpool L3 5UZ, Merseyside, England
关键词
benchmarking; capability; maturity; project management;
D O I
10.1177/1741143209339649
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
As higher education institutions (HEIs) look to be more commercial in their outlook they are likely to become more dependent on the successful implementation of projects. This article reports a benchmarking survey of PM maturity in a HEI, with the purpose of assessing its capability to implement projects. Data were collected via questionnaires from 110 employees involved in projects. The key results indicate the university to be low in overall PM maturity, particularly in the areas of leader ship and project support structures and to have a maturity profile similar to business sectors that are late adopters of PM. These findings suggest the HEI, and probably others in the sector, may have difficulty in sustaining activity in which PM maturity is a pre-requisite. Their capability to implement new teaching methods through project-related change management is potentially impaired by a lack of PM maturity, as is their ability to adapt to the increased project focus in non-teaching areas of activity, such as research and enterprise. To this end, defining a systematic process for increasing PM maturity that aligns corporate practices in a manner that is appropriate to the ethos and culture of HEIs is clearly a priority for attention.
引用
收藏
页码:705 / 721
页数:17
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [1] Business process reengineering: critical success factors in higher education
    Ahmad, Hartini
    Francis, Arthur
    Zairi, Mohamed
    [J]. BUSINESS PROCESS MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2007, 13 (03) : 451 - 469
  • [2] Alsene E., 1999, International Journal of Project Management, V17, P367
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2003, BENCHMARKING ANDMETR, P1
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2004, GUID PROJ MAN BOD KN
  • [5] [Anonymous], J HIGHER ED POLICY M
  • [6] Barber R. B., 2005, International Journal of Project Management, V23, P584, DOI 10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.05.006
  • [7] Bryde D. J., 2003, International Journal of Quality Reliability Management, V20, P229, DOI 10.1108/02656710310456635
  • [8] *CAB OFF, 2003, IMPR PROGR PROJ DEL
  • [9] CARPENTIER V, 2006, HIGHER ED MANAGEMENT, V18, P9
  • [10] Cleland D.I., 1995, INT J PROJ MANAG, V13, P83, DOI DOI 10.1016/0263-7863(94)00018-8