Seeking optimum project duration extensions

Journal of the Operational Research Society

Volumn 50, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 460-467

  Williams, T M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Project management; System dynamics

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CRITICAL PATH ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; OPTIMIZATION; PERT; RESOURCE ALLOCATION;

SYSTEM DYNAMICS METHOD;

PROJECT MANAGEMENT;

EID: 0032666314     PISSN: 01605682     EISSN: 14769360     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600717     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Turner JR and Cochrane RA (1993). Goals-and-methods matrix: coping with projects with ill defined goals and/or methods of achieving them. Int J Proj Mgmt 11: 93-102.
2. Brooks FP (1975). The Mythical Man-Month. Addison-Wesley Publishing: Reading, Mass, USA.
3. Morris PWG and Hough GH (1986). Preconditions of success and failure in major projects. Templeton College MRP 86/3. Templeton College, Oxford, UK.
4. Rodrigues A and Williams TM (1997). Systems dynamics in project management: assessing the impacts of client behaviour in project performance. J Opl Res Soc 49: 2-15.
5. Williams TM, Eden CL, Ackermann FR and Tait A (1995). The effects of design changes and delays on project costs. J Opl Res Soc 46: 809-818.
6. Williams TM (1997). The risk of safety regulation changes in transport development projects. In: Kahkonen K and Artto KA (eds). Managing Risks in Projects. E& FN Spon: London. pp. 284-293.
7. Payne S (1994). Tightening the grip on passenger ship safety— the evolution of SOLAS. Naval Arch p E482.
8. Naval Architect (1996). 1995 SOLAS conference amendments. Naval Arch p 19.
9. Cooper KG (1980). Naval ship production: a claim settled and a framework built. Interfaces 10: 20-36.
10. Cooper KG (1994). The $2,000 hour: how managers influence project performance through the rework cycle. Proj Mgmt J 25(1): 11-24.
11. Eden C, Williams TM and Ackermann F (1998). Dismantling the learning curve: the role of learning in understanding disruption. Int J Proj Mgmt. 16: 131-138.
12. Syan CS and Menon U (eds). (1994). Concurrent Engineering: Concepts, Implementation and Practice. Chapman and Hall: London.
13. Williams TM (1995). Holistic methods in project management. In: Sovnet (ed) Proc INTERNET Symposium, (St. Petersburg, Russia, September) Alans: Moscow, pp 332-336.
14. Richardson GP and Pugh AL (1981). Introduction to System Dynamics Modelling with DYNAMO. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.
15. Weil HB and Etherton RL (1990). System dynamics in dispute resolution. Proc. 1990 International Systems Dynamics Conference, pp 1311-1324.
16. Cooper KG (1997). System dynamics methods in complex project management. In: Williams TM (ed). Managing and Modelling Complex Projects. NATO ASI Series: Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, Netherlands.
17. Abdel-Hamid T and Madnick SE (1991). Software project dynamics: an integrated approach. Prentice-Hall, NJ, USA.
18. Williams TM, Eden CL, Ackermann FR and Tait A (1995). Vicious circles of parallelism. Int J Proj Mgmt 13: 151-155.
19. Senge PM (1990). The fifth Discipline: The Art and Practise of the Learning Organization. Doubleday Currency: New York.
20. Ackermann F, Eden C and Williams T (1997). A persuasive approach to delay and disruption—using “mixed methods. Interfaces 27: 48-65.
21. Rodrigues A and Bowers J (1996). The role of system dynamics in project management. Int J Proj Mgmt 14: 213-220.
22. Rodrigues A and Williams TM (1997). Systems dynamics in software project management: towards the development of a formal integrated framework. Eur J Inf Sys 6: 51-66.
23. Forrester J and Senge P (1980). Tests for building confidence in system dynamics models. TIMS Studies in the Mgmt Sci 14: 209-228.
24. Barlas Y (1996). Formal aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics. Sys Dynam Rev 12: 183-210.
25. Ford D and Sterman J (1998). Modeling dynamic development processes. Sys Dynam Rev 14: 31-68.