Public Perspectives on Project Success – Influenced by National Culture?

AbstractProject success, both the determination and the achievement, is a widely discussed subject. Literature seems to agree on one thing: whether a project is considered a success depends on the perspective taken to judge it. But how the public project manager determines the success of his project is not clearly discussed in literature. In 2013 we conducted a research using Q-methodology to reveal which success criteria are important to Dutch public project managers who are in charge of construction projects. In the follow up research, described in this paper, we will extend the research to several European countries. Within the European Union national governments are the largest initiators and clients of large infrastructure projects, which are put up for tender in an international market. In this international context it is essential for private companies, consultancies or contractors, to better understand their public client, in order to come up with internationally competitive bids, successfully collaborate and complete complex projects. The objective of this follow up research is to expose managerial viewpoints on project success in different European countries. The respondents in the research performed early 2014 are governmental project managers, who are responsible for the execution of an internal assignment and who are the representative of the client to the contractor. The position of the respondents in the government organization is similar to the research already carried out in the Netherlands. Based on the research (Hofstede, 2001) into differences in the national culture of countries variations between these countries can be expected. This paper describes the set-up of the study and hypotheses, based on literature, influences of culture on the perception of project success

Psychological outcomes, knowledge and preferences of pregnant women on first-trimester screening for fetal structural abnormalities:A prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION: The primary aim of this study is to investigate the impact of a 13-week anomaly scan on the experienced levels of maternal anxiety and well-being. Secondly, to explore women's knowledge on the possibilities and limitations of the scan and the preferred timing of screening for structural abnormalities. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective-cohort study conducted between 2013-2015, pregnant women in the North-Netherlands underwent a 13-week anomaly scan. Four online-questionnaires (Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4) were completed before and after the 13- and the 20-week anomaly scans. In total, 1512 women consented to participate in the study and 1118 (74%) completed the questionnaires at Q1, 941 (64%) at Q2, 807 (55%) at Q3 and 535 (37%) at Q4. Psychological outcomes were measured by the state-trait inventory-scale (STAI), the patient's positive-negative affect (PANAS) and ad-hoc designed questionnaires. RESULTS: Nine-nine percent of women wished to be informed as early as possible in pregnancy about the absence/presence of structural abnormalities. In 87% of women levels of knowledge on the goals and limitations of the 13-week anomaly scan were moderate-to-high. In women with a normal 13-week scan result, anxiety levels decreased (P < .001) and well-being increased over time (P < .001). In women with false-positive results (n = 26), anxiety levels initially increased (STAI-Q1: 39.8 vs. STAI-Q2: 48.6, P = 0.025), but later decreased around the 20-week anomaly scan (STAI-Q3: 36.4 vs. STAI-Q4: 34.2, P = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: The 13-week scan did not negatively impact the psychological well-being of pregnant women. The small number of women with screen-positive results temporarily experienced higher anxiety after the scan but, in false-positive cases, anxiety levels normalized again when the abnormality was not confirmed at follow-up scans. Finally, most pregnant women have moderate-to-high levels of knowledge and strongly prefer early screening for fetal structural abnormalities