Agree or disagree? Level of alignment between project manager and stakeholders on performance indicators

Studies indicate project success should be viewed from the different perspectives of the individual stakeholders. Project managers are owner’s agents. In order to allow early corrective actions to take place in case a project is diverted from plan, to accurately report perceived success of the stakeholders by project managers is essential, though there has been little systematic research in this area. The aim of this paper is to report the findings of an empirical study that compares the level of alignment between project managers and key stakeholders on a list of project performance indicators. A telephone survey involving 18 complex project managers and various key project stakeholder groups was conducted in this study. Krippendorff’s Kappa alpha reliability test was used to assess the alignment levels between project managers and stakeholders. Despite the overall agreement level between project manager and stakeholders is only medium; results have also identified 12 performance indicators that have significant level of agreement between project managers and stakeholders

945-65 Effect of Left Anterior Hemiblock on the Sensitivity of Exercise Stress Tests

We had observed a relatively high frequency of false negative stress electrocardiograms compared with SPECT thallium scintigraphy in patients with LAHB.PurposeTo assess the effect of LAHB on the sensitivity of exercise induced ST depressions for ischemia compared with SPECT thallium scintigraphyMethodsA 5–year retrospective analysis of all treadmill thallium stress tests performed in our exercise laboratory was performed. Patients with LBBB, RBBB, IVCD, LVH or <85% of maximal HR were excluded.Study groupn=25 (16 M, 9 F, ages 35–87)Matched controlsn=18.Results(1) The sensitivity of ST depressions for ischemia in the study group was 30% compared with 71%in the control group, the specificities were 90% and 75% respectively.(2) There was no significant association between presence of ischemia on ECG and on SPECT thallium scans in the study group, while an association was found in the control group (p<0.01).ConclusionsThe sensitivity of exercise stress tests for ischemia is low in the presence left anterior hemiblock

Variation in carbon and nitrogen concentrations among peatland categories at the global scale

Publisher Copyright: © 2022 This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.Peatlands account for 15 to 30% of the world's soil carbon (C) stock and are important controls over global nitrogen (N) cycles. However, C and N concentrations are known to vary among peatlands contributing to the uncertainty of global C inventories, but there are few global studies that relate peatland classification to peat chemistry. We analyzed 436 peat cores sampled in 24 countries across six continents and measured C, N, and organic matter (OM) content at three depths down to 70 cm. Sites were distinguished between northern (387) and tropical (49) peatlands and assigned to one of six distinct broadly recognized peatland categories that vary primarily along a pH gradient. Peat C and N concentrations, OM content, and C:N ratios differed significantly among peatland categories, but few differences in chemistry with depth were found within each category. Across all peatlands C and N concentrations in the 10-20 cm layer, were 440 ± 85.1 g kg-1 and 13.9 ± 7.4 g kg-1, with an average C:N ratio of 30.1 ± 20.8. Among peatland categories, median C concentrations were highest in bogs, poor fens and tropical swamps (446-532 g kg-1) and lowest in intermediate and extremely rich fens (375-414 g kg-1). The C:OM ratio in peat was similar across most peatland categories, except in deeper samples from ombrotrophic tropical peat swamps that were higher than other peatlands categories. Peat N concentrations and C:N ratios varied approximately two-fold among peatland categories and N concentrations tended to be higher (and C:N lower) in intermediate fens compared with other peatland types. This study reports on a unique data set and demonstrates that differences in peat C and OM concentrations among broadly classified peatland categories are predictable, which can aid future studies that use land cover assessments to refine global peatland C and N stocks.Peer reviewe

A Model of project complexity: distinguishing dimensions of complexity from severity

There is increasing agreement that understanding complexity is important for project management because of difficulties associated with decision-making and goal attainment which appear to stem from complexity. However the current operational definitions of complex projects, based upon size and budget, have been challenged and questions have been raised about how complexity can be measured in a robust manner that takes account of structural, dynamic and interaction elements. Thematic analysis of data from 25 in-depth interviews of project managers involved with complex projects, together with an exploration of the literature reveals a wide range of factors that may contribute to project complexity. We argue that these factors contributing to project complexity may define in terms of dimensions, or source characteristics, which are in turn subject to a range of severity factors. In addition to investigating definitions and models of complexity from the literature and in the field, this study also explores the problematic issues of ‘measuring’ or assessing complexity. A research agenda is proposed to further the investigation of phenomena reported in this initial study

Monitoring the performance of complex projects from multiple perspectives over multiple time frames

When complex projects go wrong they can go horribly wrong with severe financial consequences. We are undertaking research to develop leading performance indicators for complex projects, metrics to provide early warning of potential difficulties. The assessment of success of complex projects can be made by a range of stakeholders over different time scales, against different levels of project results: the project’s outputs at the end of the project; the project’s outcomes in the months following project completion; and the project’s impact in the years following completion. We aim to identify leading performance indicators, which may include both success criteria and success factors, and which can be measured by the project team during project delivery to forecast success as assessed by key stakeholders in the days, months and years following the project. The hope is the leading performance indicators will act as alarm bells to show if a project is diverting from plan so early corrective action can be taken. It may be that different combinations of the leading performance indicators will be appropriate depending on the nature of project complexity. In this paper we develop a new model of project success, whereby success is assessed by different stakeholders over different time frames against different levels of project results. We then relate this to measurements that can be taken during project delivery. A methodology is described to evaluate the early parts of this model. Its implications and limitations are described. This paper describes work in progress

Forecasting success on large projects: developing reliable scales to predict multiple perspectives by multiple stakeholders over multiple time frames

Our aim is to develop a set of leading performance indicators to enable managers of large projects to forecast during project execution how various stakeholders will perceive success months or even years into the operation of the output. Large projects have many stakeholders who have different objectives for the project, its output, and the business objectives they will deliver. The output of a large project may have a lifetime that lasts for years, or even decades, and ultimate impacts that go beyond its immediate operation. How different stakeholders perceive success can change with time, and so the project manager needs leading performance indicators that go beyond the traditional triple constraint to forecast how key stakeholders will perceive success months or even years later. In this article, we develop a model for project success that identifies how project stakeholders might perceive success in the months and years following a project. We identify success or failure factors that will facilitate or mitigate against achievement of those success criteria, and a set of potential leading performance indicators that forecast how stakeholders will perceive success during the life of the project's output. We conducted a scale development study with 152 managers of large projects and identified two project success factor scales and seven stakeholder satisfaction scales that can be used by project managers to predict stakeholder satisfaction on projects and so may be used by the managers of large projects for the basis of project control.\u

Project managers's understanding of stakeholders's satisfaction

Studies indicate project success should be viewed from the different perspectives of the individual stakeholders. Project managers are owner’s agents. In order to allow early corrective actions to take place in case a project is diverted from plan, to accurately report perceived success of the stakeholders by project managers is essential, though there has been little systematic research in this area. The aim of this paper is to report the fi ndings of an empirical study that compares the level of agreement between project managers and key stakeholders on a list of project performance indicators. A telephone survey involving 18 complex project managers and various key project stakeholder groups was conducted in this study. Krippendorff’s Kappa alpha reliability test was used to assess the agreement level between project managers and stakeholders. While the overall agreement level between project manager and stakeholders is medium, results have also identified 12 performance indicators that have significant level of agreement between project managers and stakeholders

Project managers’ understanding of stakeholders’ satisfaction

Studies indicate project success should be viewed from the different perspectives of the individual stakeholders. Project managers are owner’s agents. In order to allow early corrective actions to take place in case a project is diverted from plan, to accurately report perceived success of the stakeholders by project managers is essential, though there has been little systematic research in this area. The aim of this paper is to report the fi ndings of an empirical study that compares the level of agreement between project managers and key stakeholders on a list of project performance indicators. \ud \ud A telephone survey involving 18 complex project managers and various key project stakeholder groups was conducted in this study. Krippendorff’s Kappa alpha reliability test was used to assess the agreement level between project managers and stakeholders. While the overall agreement level between project manager and stakeholders is medium, results have also identified 12 performance indicators that have significant level of agreement between project managers and stakeholders

Agree or disagree? Level of alignment between project manager and stakeholders on performance indicators

Studies indicate project success should be viewed from the different perspectives of the individual stakeholders. Project managers are owner’s agents. In order to allow early corrective actions to take place in case a project is diverted from plan, to accurately report perceived success of the stakeholders by project managers is essential, though there has been little systematic research in this area. The aim of this paper is to report the findings of an empirical study that compares the level of alignment between project managers and key stakeholders on a list of project performance indicators. A telephone survey involving 18 complex project managers and various key project stakeholder groups was conducted in this study. Krippendorff’s Kappa alpha reliability test was used to assess the alignment levels between project managers and stakeholders. Despite the overall agreement level between project manager and stakeholders is only medium; results have also identified 12 performance indicators that have significant level of agreement between project managers and stakeholders