Project Management Practices in Mega Projects at Jeddah City Municipality - Dissertation Example

?Section 7: Literature Review The literature review will define the various theories and ideologies that are set with mega projects. This will consist of looking at the defining factors of a mega project and how this affects those involved in the project management to completion of what is needed. This will then look at the aspects of project management and how this either hinders or helps with the successful completion of a larger project. The review will also define the theories related to risks and ways in which these risks form within a project. The examination will be furthered with how the external environment adds into the risks. The review will then determine the various areas which should be considered with project management of mega projects, including project delay and cost risk analysis, as well as how these link to other forms of risk within a project. By examining the various theories and case studies of project management for mega projects, there is the ability to gain a deeper understanding of the main concerns with these projects. The aim of understanding the main risks as well as the ways in which this could have been prevented for the Jeddah City Municipality can then further be analyzed. The concept of mega projects is one which has been defined specifically because scope of the project is larger. This means that the investment needs to follow the completion of specific goals and there are milestones set, usually with smaller projects that add into the mega project (Altshuler, Luberoff, 2003). The main concept is associated with building larger components within cities which can be used for stabilized growth and alterations within society while creating a stronger set of functions in terms of economy, society and the cultural relationships which are created at a given time frame. The main concept of mega projects began in the 1980s, specifically when many in cities began to note that there were infrastructure problems with the larger cities. Areas such as New York, Amsterdam and China began to invest in larger projects that would secure the structure and change the activities within a given region. Urban projects began to increase during this time by 9%, including projects such as a new airport in Denver, Colorado, rail lines in Los Angeles and a Central Artery in Boston (Altshuler, Luberoff, 2003). Waterways, sports facilities and city centers have been several of the other projects that are facilitated in cities, specifically which have been developed with efforts to change the infrastructure and functions within given cities for better social, political and economic responses (Altshuler, Luberoff, 2003). 7.1 Project Management and Mega Projects The project management is one of the defining factors of mega projects. This is defined because the end goals consist of larger expectations as well as smaller projects or milestones which have to be met for completion of the overall project. When beginning a specific project, there is a structure and organizational process which is first defined. This sets the end goals and organizes individuals which are responsible for the completion of the project. Strategic planning and development is used after individuals understand the main goals and purpose of a given project. The defining of a mega project occurs after this stage, specifically when the scope and definition of the project expands to include different attributes (Maylor, 2010). Performance measurement, organizational goals, research and development of the project process all work together to create the scope of the project. After this stage, there is the ability to identify time lines, economy and other estimates dependent on the size and expectations o the project. These initial stages become the most essential components in determining both the management of the project as well as how the end goals of the project should be defined (Maylor, 2010). The concept of project management is one which is essential to the overall process, completion and value which are created with any type of project. For mega projects, these initial stages are essential in developing a sense of value to the overall project while having the capability of bringing the project strategically into completion. Without the correct project management, it is impossible to define the value of a given project and what the initiatives are (Kerzner, 2006). The value is further defined by concepts such as total quality management, information systems, training, human resources and the organizational approach which is required throughout the duration of the project. The concept of project management is defined first to give perspective and value to the overall project. After this phase, there is the ability to create and define the details to value which need to take place throughout the duration of the project as well as how this will continue to create the organizational value within the framework of a given project (Thomas, Mullaly, 2007). The project management which is provided is one which is essential to the overall value as well as the risk which is created within any type of project or mega project. The projects and mega projects which are created are initialized through strategies and development while being divided according to smaller steps and processes which are required for the overall management and completion (Flyvbjerg, Bruzelius, Rothengatter, 2003). For a mega project, this becomes even more valuable, specifically because the risk is higher and the scope of the mega project requires more planning and initiatives for completion. The ability to develop time, manage resources and to create a step – by – step definition of requirements changes the cost, development and end goals that are associated with a mega project. If the strategies and development with the initial management isn’t constructed in a conducive manner, then the risk increases. The risk included with management involves human resources, financial risks, stakeholder support and the organizational management having the capability to meet end goals (Flyvbjerg, Bruzelius, Rothengatter, 2003). 7.2 Risk Identification in Mega Projects The problem which occurs with mega projects is based on the initiatives for prediction which are created through the organizational structure and initial planning which occurs. The risk comes from the only capability of development being based on estimates of finances, human resources and overall development within the project. The failure which occurs is based on the inability to create a deeper understanding of the requirements for completion of a project as well as how individual components may affect the end goals of the entire project (Flyvbjerg, 2006). For instance, if there is a lack of human resources or materials available, then the project will become delayed. The organizational structure then has to invest more finances in the project and the overall initiatives become instable in the completion of the project. At the same time, forecasting and expecting risks is one which is limited and can’t be identified in the initial stages of strategy and planning that is a part of the projects which occur. The concept of estimating what problems may occur with daily initiatives is one that can create the wrong forecasts and the inability to truly predict what the end results of any project are (Flyvbjerg, 2006). The predictions that are associated with mega projects are only one form of risk which is created with the development, strategies and planning which occurs. The second problem which arises with the scope of projects occurs with the inability to plan and develop accountability within each of the projects. If a problem occurs during the initial phases, then it may not be recorded or identified. For larger infrastructures, this creates several problems. The first is with overlooking the project problems in the initial stages and pushing through with the completion of the project so as to avoid financial risks, difficulties with timing and other problems associated with projects (Kerzner, 2009). However, the lack of accountability in the beginning may heighten the risks that accumulate in the end. This type of accountability is only one form which creates more risk for a mega project. The continuation of the project alters with the changes in performance specifications, regulations and involvement of risk capital. When these are not identified correctly, then the risk continues with a lack of accountability toward other phases of the project. Not identifying the details, specifically with mega projects, then becomes one of the most problematic features of those involved with the development phases (Bruzelius, Flyvbjerg, Rothengatter, 2002). Each of the areas of risk which begin to affect those in the process of mega projects are further defined by decision making and details of daily actions which are taken. In the initial stages of mega project development, there is the capability of identifying specific needs according to strategic planning and the implementation of analysis and estimates. However, the risks heighten as projects continue, specifically because the human resources, materials, time lines and other problems may slowly arise with the project (Meredith, 2009). This creates changes with everything from cost analysis to time lines within the project, all which create more characteristics that require change to avoid heightened risks. The management characteristics then become one of the most important reflections of risk and risk management, specifically because the response which occurs through various obstacles also change the end results with the mega project. To lower the risk, innovation and changes in initial planning are required. However, most management capabilities heightens the risk with the inability to change the planning phases and with unexpected changes which can’t be compensated for in the development of the project (Priemus, Flyvbjerg, 2008). 7.3 Theories of Mega Project Risks The development of mega projects and the way in which they alter with risk is one which is not only defined by the identification of several risks. Theories also show that the risks come from various components in the internal and external environment. One is the optimism theory, which also is linked to the idea of project escalation. In this particular theory, there is the belief that a mega project can be done with the right resources and finances within a smaller amount of time. However, this is based on estimates and often does not provide the right alternatives for the completion of the project. In this particular instance, there are problems with estimating the right costs, materials, framework and time line. There is also the inability to look at strategic issues which may arise with the belief that the project will continue to escalate without difficulties (Winch, 2008). For any project, this becomes problematic, specifically because the estimations and planning cannot identify the risks. This is furthered with the inability for the mega projects to respond correctly with how long it will take to fix risks. For the Jeddah Municipality, the optimism of completing the project quickly was a basis of the problem, with the inability to compensate with the right cost or time quality when problems began to arise. The concept of mega projects being able to reach consistent goals is followed by the belief that all projects should have the ideology of project – perfect as a main agenda. In this particular theory, there is the belief that the project should hypothetically work with a specific agenda or mechanics. The ideal is that the collective set of individuals which are working on the project should be able to compensate with resources, finances and monetary needs. The collective that works on this can then meet what is needed, specifically because each individual holds the necessary resources to keep the mega project moving in the right direction, even if problems persist (Smith, 2007). In the instance of the Jeddah Municipality, it can be seen that there was an expectation that resources in terms of financing and schedules would compensate for any difficulties which arose. The project then continued to move forward, despite the lack of resources or capabilities of individuals meeting the needs and of the collective being able to make decisions with the changes in the project. The project – perfect agenda which was followed then shows one of the main downfalls in the overall project. 7.4 Forms of Projects and Risk of Investors While the initiatives of mega projects are focused primarily on urban development for infrastructure, it is also known that there are differences in how the project design is initialized. This foundational form is essential in identifying the risk of a project as well as how the initiatives will continue to develop until successful completion. The forms of projects consist of public or private initiatives, as well as combined efforts which may take place. For mega projects, it is known that public – private combined initiatives are more common, specifically because the goal is based on better infrastructures within a given city as well as creating better scale with public businesses involved in the project (Marrewijk et al, 2008). For the Jeddah Municipality, it is required that both are followed, specifically because of the amount of funding which is needed. This, as a common agenda, becomes a main focus of meeting the needed initiatives. Partnerships that are established are known to change the risk involvement, specifically because of expectations that are a part of both the public and private partnerships. The diversity of initiatives involved, as well as the expectations in goals that come from a variety of perspectives is known to change the overall development and results from those that are involved in the project. While the initial infrastructure of the organizational structure is designed to meet several goals, this also creates complexities in the establishment of the partnerships. Differences in interest, the inability to meet specific goals, failure to meet cost estimations, time schedules and project completion estimations all heighten in risk with the involvement of several partnership individuals. This is specific to the project culture and designs which changes with the development of several committees working with the initial projects (Marrewijk, et al, 2008). The examination with this in the Jeddah Municipality can create a deeper understanding of the gaps which were created during the management time frame and how this affected those involved in the project. 7.5 Risks with Economy and Infrastructure The problem which arises in terms of the foundation continues not only with different visions which are associated with the project. There are also difficulties because of the political agenda which is often associated with the project. Most mega projects which occur are developed because of the ideology of having better economic alternatives, creating a stronger infrastructure or developing a region which ensures the culture and society is able to have specific needs met (Altshuler, Luberoff, 2003). The intention that is created not only involves public and private corporations that have to work together. The foundation is also created with a response to infrastructure investments based on political expectations. Most often, politicians promise specific changes to stimulate the economy or to assist with the social and cultural aspects of a community and city. This initiative is combined with promises which are made public and which creates a specific pressure in initializing and completing the project within a given time frame. The political framework is often followed by the politics of stakeholders that develops, specifically because of investments which are made toward the promises and estimates made by companies. These foundational aspects heighten the risk not only within the internal infrastructure, but also with pressure which is developed from the external environment. The result is intergorvenmental politics which take place in the organizational structure for the mega project as well as within the overall environment with the project (Altshuler, Luberoff, 2003). 7.6 The External Environment and Mega Projects The overall complexity which is initialized through the structure of the organization for mega projects is furthered with how this relates to the external environment. When a mega project begins, it is initialized with the announcement to the community and promises to the public about the overall development of the project. This includes the overall plans, objectives and goals as well as time frames which are created in the completion of the project. These particular announcements create a specific sociology which begins to surround the project and the overall concepts which occur in relation to the promises made. This creates a sense of having a project culture that includes both the internal expectations as well as the external environment (Marrewijk, 2007). The sociology which surrounds mega projects, as well as mega events, is not based on the overall understanding of economic development or reaching public agendas. Instead, the response is based on how the mega project can help with the development, change and initiatives which are taken by each individual as well as how the behaviors may begin to change with the individuals when the project is completed. The sociological analysis which develops in term of large scale development then creates a reaction according to the approval or disapproval of what is occurring, both in the initial development stage and completion of the project. The importance of this is based on the heightening of risk for the initial stages, promises which are made in terms of completion and expectations and pressures which come from the sociological viewpoints in society. If timelines and the scope of the project isn’t developed, then the result is pressures and other components from the external environment, which leads to political, private and public pressures that are within the organizational structure (Horne, Manzenreiter, 2006). There are several examples of the external environment and how this changes the initiatives and heightens the risk of the mega projects which occur. Each of the examples shows how the mega project begins to alter because of the external environment. By understanding this, there is the ability to evaluate different changes which could have occurred with the Jeddah Municipality to decrease risk. An example which heightens this understanding of risk can be evaluated with the mega project of the Thai Water Grid. This project included over four million hectacres of land that was irrigated and designed to create farm land in Thailand. The grid included several smaller water projects as well as larger initiatives which were used to ensure more development and more space for storage within the land (Molle, Floch, 2008). The project was announced in 2003 by the government, specifically with the focus of maintaining and developing the water in the region while ensuring that more space could be used for farming. The response by those in Thailand was based on support, specifically because of the known need which was developed through the difficulties within the environment. During the project, there were several debates, both through politicians and within society. The change which occurred because of this was inclusive of altering the project, showing how the project could work for bettering the land and trying to find ways to stop the behaviors, reactions and attitudes from society. However, it was noted that when the mega project reached completion, there were several social and environmental changes, specifically with lifestyle alterations, expectations in the agricultural economy and an impact that was developed because of the change in the amount of land which was created. This example shows how the external environment influenced the development of the project and also changed the social and environmental structure after the water grid was completed (Molle, Floch, 2008). Another impact which is created through the external environment is based on the expectations from society not only in terms of infrastructure but also how the development can change the various aspects of the community. A main reason for the components is to create a difference in the power structure of the area, specifically with the cities recognized as a main area for growth and development. As a mega project is able to create a specific change within the environment, are also pressures which begin to develop socially and in terms of politics (Morgan, Marsden, Murdoch, 2006). This heightens the risk of a project, specifically because the expectations of pushing deadlines, meeting the needs of cost investments and creating a specific amount of response in terms of progression become the main focus. The problem with the pressures from the external environment is based on many in the organization which will change the strategies to improve on the pressures. This not only increases the initial risk with the project, but also creates complexities in problems which may arise and that are often looked over, specifically because of the pressure required to complete the project by stakeholders, politicians and other individuals within society (Morgan, Marsden, Murdoch, 2006). As these factors are considered with the Jeddah Municipality, there is the ability to understand and define potential changes which should be made. 7.7 Developments and Progress in Mega Projects The pressures of the external environment, organizational structure and the strategic planning and development that is associated with project management creates more risk with the development and progress which occurs with mega projects. At this stage, are several micro level changes which begin to occur, all which specifically alter according to the initiatives and development taken within the organizational structure. The level of development which occurs at this phase is one which is initialized by the planning and strategy being met (Walkup, 2006). Milestones are created specifically with time, investment and the use of resources as the main objective. This is followed by expectations that occur during the process, initialized with the amount of accountability and the actions which take place. The project management which occurs at this stage is one which is based on two initiatives. The first is staying with the strategy and planning phase to reach goals. The second is based on having flexibility for risk and problems which may occur with the mega project that is occurring (Walkup, 2006). The concept which is approached with the development and progress is defined by the shaping of the project and the actions which are taken. The main source of risk which occurs is when the planning and strategies, as well as estimates, become a physical reality. The planning becomes one based on micro projects, initiatives and episodes which occur at each stage. If this is not met realistically or in response to risks and problems which arise, then difficulties may continue to be experienced with the mega project. The risk isn’t only based on the development and the cost analysis which may begin to change. The final development and the ability to meet goals may be compromised by either ignoring the problems which arise or by abandoning the initial project initiatives (Priemus, Flyvbjerg, 2008). With pushing forward of timelines, problems with construction, resources and the final project may occur. With the strategy and estimates being abandoned are difficulties with may arise in terms of new cost estimates, delays in timing and other management problems which may arise in the future. The difficulty not only impacts the organizational structure for the project but also creates changes with the external environment and responses to the project. The increase in uncertainty which may occur then results in higher amounts of risk that can occur after the project is initialized and moves forward (Priemus, Flyvbjerg, 2008). 7.8 Project Delay The initiatives taken with mega projects are defined not only by the uncertainty which can accumulate toward deeper problems. Each of the micro-steps which are taken in a project can create an effect which causes other areas to be affected. One is project delay which is based on a project not meeting the initial plans and milestones set through the strategic planning. When a project begins, the public is notified about the initial components and planning of the project as well as what the end goals is and when these will be met. The projects are followed by milestones that are set to ensure that smaller goals are met with the structure which takes place (Cicimil, Williams, Thomas, 2006). If the project execution doesn’t meet correctly, then stakeholders are expected to continue investing, the public has to continue to wait for completion of the project and materials and resources can no longer be used effectively. More important, the delay can attribute to other complexities with the project, such as a lack of resources, problems with the initial designs and overlooked concepts which manifest during the construction of a project (Palmer, Mukherjee, 2006). The several complexities with the project delay is one which is further defined by other problems which begin to arise when the milestones and events aren’t met. An example of this is shown with the 2004 project of the Korean Train Express (KTX). The managing and scheduling was one that was known to have a high amount of risk, specifically because it linked directly to the infrastructure of the city needing to change, as well as the inability to estimate the costs and timing accurately when building the express. The result was schedule delays, specifically because planning at each stage had to occur and changed the overall milestones which were supposed to be met. The problem instigated problems with cost effectiveness, specifically with the project moving toward larger and unexpected investments. It was known that the project delays were based on the infrastructure of the organization not creating the right strategies, changes and conflicts from the external environment in terms of routes, resistance because of environmental concerns, lack of proper scheduling for materials and changes in structures and tunnels that were not expected and which were instigated despite the structure of the city. It can be seen that the project delay was the basic result of several problems which began from the initial planning stages and which incorporated resistance and problems with both the infrastructure of the project and the external environment (Han et al, 2009). 7.9 Cost Risk Analysis Another weakness which occurs with mega projects is based on the cost – analysis and the way in which this changes the outcome of the project. The initial estimates are based on research and investigation of human resources, materials and other applications which are needed for the construction of the project. However, there are factors which change the amount of cost which is required. Most mega – projects span through a time frame of five to ten years, meaning that economic fluctuations will instigate alterations with the cost (Priemus, Flyvbjerg, 2003). More important, the project may require more materials and human resources, specifically if the planning doesn’t look at the risk in the actions taken as well as complexities which may occur with the building of the project. For instance, if the cost – analysis doesn’t predict difficulties in building a specific part of a building, then there aren’t added finances into the project. However, once this occurs, the project is not able to move forward until the structure is fixed. This leads to more costs than expected and also causes the projects to require more funding than expected. For both stakeholders and others who approve the project are difficulties in both maintaining and controlling finances as well as continuing to approve what is needed for the successful completion of the project (Priemus, Flyvbjerg, 2003). The concept of cost – analysis is one which not only causes problems because of the inability to estimate the overall costs. There are also difficulties because the higher costs which may accrue eventually lead back to delays that occur within a project. If there isn’t the ability to meet the finances through stakeholders or supporters, than the project will stop until further financing can be met. An example of this occurring is with the Gaza Strip in Israel. The project consisted of a development of buildings, all which were to be developed by a variety of contractors and consultants. In the beginning, an overrun of the project occurred, specifically because the materials and contract work wasn’t made available (Enshassi, Kumaraswamy, 2009). The problem was continued with strikes, border closures and the inability to offer contractors specific time frames to complete the project. This caused delays in the construction of the Gaza Strip which were at first taken casually. However, it was noted that the delays caused the cost to continue to increase, specifically because the contractors had to move into more materials and human resources, which caused the project to be overrun. The delays eventually moved into a larger portion of finances being used and led to difficulties with the overall development in this particular region (Enshassi, Kumaraswamy, 2009). 7.10 Summary The problems which are associated with mega projects are consistent with strategies and planning, organizational development, influences with the external environment and results which occur during the various stages of the mega project. The result which occurs with problems from the initial planning are based on risk factors which occur during the active building and construction of the project. The risk factors include delays from structural problems, lack of materials and resources, difficulties with planning and strategy and other unknown factors which may occur from the external environment. These are reflected with the problems which arise during the project, specifically which is seen in the results of cost – analysis and project delays that occur. The ability to identify the problems and the understanding of why and how mega projects alter then creates a deeper initiation toward analyzing the effectiveness and foundational problems which occur in the mega projects now developed. Each of the concepts which are noted for risk as well as the outcomes can be applied to the Juddah Municipality, specifically because of the problems and issues which have been created with this specific mega project. The result which is seen can be analyzed through the project delays which have occurred over time. However, the project delays can further be identified through planning, strategies, cost – analysis, materials and resources and responses from the external environment. Applying these various levels of understanding to the Juddah Municipality then creates a holistic understanding of why there were project delays and different forms of cost that affected the overall initiatives with the mega project, as well as the final developments and goals having the capability of being met with a sense of success. Section 11: References Adams ,G and Schvaneveldt, J (1991) Understanding research methods (2nd edn.), Longman, New York Adcroft, A and Willis, R (2008) A snapshot of strategy research 2002-2006, Journal of Management History, 14 (4), 313-333 Altshuler, Alan, David Luberoff. (2003). Mega Projects: The Changing Politics of Urban Investment. New York: Brookings Institution Press. Assaf, S. and Hejji, S. (2005) Causes of delay in large construction projects, International Journal of Project Management, 24, 349–357 Assaf, S.A., Al-Khalil, M. and Al-Hazmi, M. (1995) Causes of delay in large building construction projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 11(2), 45–50. Bruzelius, Nils, Bent Flyvbjerg, Werner Rothengatter. (2002). “Big Decisions, Big Risks. Improving Accountability in Mega Projects.” Transport Policy 9 (2). Cicmil, S, T Williams, J Thomas. (2006). “Rethinking Project Management: Researching the Actuality of Projects.” Journal of Project Management 17 (1). Creswell, J (2003) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches, (2nd edn), annotated, SAGE Easter, M et al. (2002) Management research: An Introduction (2nd edn.), Sage, London Enshassi, Adnan, Mohan Kumaraswamy. (2009). “Delays and Cost Overruns in the Construction Projects in the Gaza Strip.” Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction 14 (2). Faridi, A. and El-Sayegh, S (2006) Significant factors causing delay in the UAE construction industry, Construction Management and Economics, 24, 1167–1176 Flyvbjerg, Bent. (2006). “From Nobel Prize to Project Management: Getting Risks Right.” Project Management Journal 37 (3). Flyvbjerg, Bent, Nils Bruzelius, Werner Rothengatter. (2003). Megaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition. UK: Cambridge University Press. Frimpong, Y. and Oluwoye, J. (2003) Significant factors causing delay and cost overruns in construction of ground- water projects in Ghana, Journal of Construction Research, 4(2), 175–87. Glazier, J and Powell, R (1992) Qualitative research in information management, Libraries unlimited Han, S, S Yun, H Kim, Y Kwak, H Park, S Lee. (2009). “Analyzing Schedule Delay of Mega Project: Lessons Learned from Korea Train Express.” Engineering Management 56 (2). Horne, John, Wolfram Manzenreiter. (2006). ‘An Introduction to the Sociology of Sports Mega – Events.” The Sociological Review 54 (s2). Howick, S, C Eden. (2001). “The Impact of Disruption and Delay when Compressing Large Projects: Going for Incentives?” Journal of the Operational Research Society(52). Jeddah Municipality. (2011). ‘Mega Projects of Jeddah City.” [online]. Available from: http://www.jeddah.gov.sa/english/MPPUD/SpecialDesigns.php. Jeddah Municipality (2011) Mega Projects [online] Available from < http://www.jeddah.gov.sa/English/MPPUD/index.php> [accessed April 21, 2011] Kerzner, H. (2009). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. Routledge: New York. Kottegoda, N.T. and Rosso, R. (1997) Statistics, Probability, and Reliability for Civil and Environmental Engineers. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, New York. Marrewijk, Alfons. (2007). “Managing Project Culture: The Case of Environ Megaproject.” International Journal of Project Management 51 (2). Marrewijk, Alfons, Stewart Clegg, Tyrone Pitsis, Marcel Veenswijk. (2008). “Managing Public – Private Megaprojects: Paradoxes, Complexity, and Project Design.” International Journal of Project Management 26 (6). Maylor, Harvey. (2010). Project Management 3rd ed. New York: Pearson Education Limited. Meredith, J. (2009). Project Management: A Managerial Approach. New York: Pearson Education. Molle, Francois, Philippe Floch. (2008). “Megaprojects and Social and Environmental Changes: The Case of the Thai ‘Water Grid.” AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 37 (3). Morgan, Kevin, Terry Marsden, Jonathan Murdoch. (2006). Worlds of Food: Place, Power, and Provenance in the Food Chain. New York: Oxford University Press. Ng, S.T., Skitmore, M., Deng, M.Z.M. and Nadeem, A. (2004) Improving existing delay analysis techniques for the establishment of delay liabilities. Construction Innovation, 4, 3–17. Ogunlana, S.O., Promkuntong, K. and Vithool, J. (1996) Construction delays in a fast-growing economy: comparing Thailand with other economies. International Journal of Project Management, 14(1), 37–45. Palmer, J, T Mukherjee. (2006). “Megaproject Execution.” Society of Petroleum Engineers (24). Priemus, Hugo, Bent Flyvbjerg. (2008). Decision Making on Mega Projects: Cost Benefit Analysis, Planning and Innovation. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Saunders, M et al. (2000) Research methods for business students, (2nd edn.), Financial Times / Prentice Hall Smith, Charles. (2007). Making Sense of Project Realities: Theory, Practice and the Pursuit of Performance. England: Gower Publishing Limited. Thomas, Janice, Mark Mullaly. (2007). “Understanding the Value of Project Management: First Steps of an International Investigation in Search of Value.” Project Management Journal 38 (3). Walkup, GW. (2006). “The Good, Bad, and Ugly of Stage – Gate Project Management Process as Applied in the Oil and Gas Industry.” Society of Petroleum Engineers. Winch, Graham. (2008). “Towards a Theory of Escalation in Major Project Organizing.” The University of Manchester 7 (1). William, P. and Ferrell, O. (2003) Marketing: concepts and strategies, Houghton Miffin Co. Zhai, Li, Yanfei Xin, Chaosheng, Cheng. (2009). “Understanding the Value of Project Management from a Stakeholder’s Perspective: Case Study of Mega Project Management.” Project Management Journal 40 (1). Read More