The purpose of this study was to examine the successes and challenges in implementing community art programs for youth in low-income communities. The National Arts and Youth Demonstration Project (NAYDP) was initiated in September 2001 in five program sites across Canada. This article reports on the qualitative findings of NAYDP staff implementation journals that were utilized in the first term of the project. Findings suggest that community partnerships in program recruitment, youth management and engagement and survey administration were all key aspects in the ability of staff to deliver the program. Positive Youth Development (PYD) provides a guiding framework and implications for social work practice, education and future research are explored.

It is agreed upon by many researchers that, although risk management (RM) is accepted as one of the critical success factors for construction projects, project participants generally do not have sufficient knowledge pertinent to risk management concept and the number of risk management support tools which facilitate the process is rather low. In order to facilitate risk management activities, decision support tools that will enable risk identification, analysis and response strategy formulation should be developed. Decision support tools are necessary for systematic identification of risks, scenario generation, proactive management of risk and integration of risk management activities with other project management functions such as planning, cost estimating and monitoring project success. The aim of this study is to introduce a conceptual risk management model and a prototype risk management decision support system (DSS) which is applicable to construction projects. The proposed decision support system, namely Integrated Risk Management System (IRMS), is designed to support the user at all phases of the risk management process and to integrate risk management activities with other project management functions in the bid preparation stage of international construction projects. A risk management process model has been developed as well as a risk information model so that IRMS can be used for systematic management of risk by all parties involved in a construction project. Major functions of IRMS include, risk identification by using a built-in Hierarchical Risk Breakdown Structure (HRBS), risk analysis by Monte Carlo (MC) simulation, risk assessment by risk rating, risk re-assessment, response generation, risk monitoring and corporate memory. The applicability of the system has been tested by a real case study and its functionality has been demonstrated using the data associated with the case study.

Delay is one of the most common problems in the steel construction industry. At the time of bidding steel contractors plan tasks and assign resources according to the site visits, the information given in the contract and specifications related with the project. However, as the project progresses some conditions of the work may change. These changes may affect originally planned means and methods. Finally, the affected activities cause the project total cost and duration to increase. In steel construction projects, if not managed properly in accordance with the contract, changes are likely to result in claims between the project participants. In this study, a delay analysis methodology which is based on time impact analysis is proposed. The aim of this methodology is to quantify impacts of work changes on the schedule and cost of steel construction projects and identify the responsible parties for these changes. A risk breakdown structure is presented to help decision-makers to identify probable sources of risk factors that usually result in time and cost overruns. The potential sources of change are categorized into 3 groups: contractor-related, owner-related and external factors. By using this structure, contractors may classify changes and assign the impacts of changes to the appropriate parties. The proposed methodology comprises of 3 steps: identification and quantification of delays, allocation of these delays to responsible parties and using TIA to calculate overall impact of changes on time and cost. The major benefits of this methodology are / a) its ability to handle and quantify changes in a step by step procedure, b) it provides a graphical representation of actual progress, and c) it helps decision-makers to give reliable decisions by monitoring the impact of changes during the project&amp / #8217 / s life cycle. Construction professionals may use it to apportion impact of changes in a systematic and reliable way. Moreover, reports generated by using this methodology can provide evidence during the claim management process. An application of this methodology on a steel project demonstrates the superiority of the process in explaining the dynamic nature of changes and in apportioning the impacts between different parties in a systematic way.

The major challenges in sustainable implementation are the financial issue and uncertainties. The traditional financial budgeting approach that is commonly used to evaluate sustainable projects normally neglects future decisions that might need to be made over the course of a project. The real options approach has been suggested as a tool for strategic decision making because it can provide flexibility which can increase the project value. Researchers have been trying to identify the potential of the real options approach, and provide the frameworks for a real options evaluation and flexible strategy in sustainability improvement. However, some important variables and financial impacts explanation of real options are missing. Models can be improved to show the variation of possible project values along with its behavior. This work aims to improve the real options model in sustainable projects to provide understanding about the financial impacts of flexible strategy to sustainable improvement projects and to be used as a tool to assist decision making. The results showed that real options can have a positive financial impact to the project. The extension of this model can assist the analysis and development of decision policies.

The potential importance of managing knowledge for competitive advantage has been widely discussed according to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), with the sharing and application of knowledge being widely identified in recent years as key sources of sustained competitive advantage (Hall & Sapsed 2005, p57). While Alavi and Leidner (2001, p216) agree that much theory already exists on knowledge management, they argue that little empirical work has been undertaken and hence there are large gaps in the body of knowledge in this area. Bresnen, Edelman, Newell, Scarbrough, and Swan (2003) further suggest that only recently has attention been specifically directed towards managing knowledge in project environments. Evidence of poor IT project success continues to be provided by many researchers even though today's corporations recognize that to be successful, they need to understand modern project management techniques (Schwalbe 2002, p2). With Kotnour (2000) finding that project performance is positively associated with project knowledge, a better understanding of how to effectively manage knowledge in IT projects should have considerable practical significance for increasing the chances of project success. The focus of this research centres on the question of why individuals working within IT project teams might be motivated towards, or inhibited from, sharing their knowledge and experience in their activities, procedures, and processes. Using a combined qualitative/quantitative method of data collection in multiple case studies spanning four continents, and comprising a variety of organisational types, the research concludes with the development of a new theoretical model of knowledge sharing behaviour, &quotThe Alignment Model of Motivational Focus". This model suggests that an individual's propensity to share knowledge and experience is a function of perceived personal benefits and costs associated with the activity, balanced against the individual's alignment to a group of 'institutional' factors. These factors are identified as alignments to the project team, to the organisation, and dependent on the circumstances, to either the professional discipline or community of practice, to which the individual belongs. The model might be used within knowledge intensive projects, to help identify an individual's latent propensity to share knowledge, and to identify actions that may need to be taken in order to modify knowledge sharing behaviour.

There are many issues involved in implementing Information and Communications Technology (ICT) projects in general, and infrastructure (ICT/I) projects in particular. Failures are still common despite advances in project management tools, and increased ICT sophistication. Executive sponsorship and support is acknowledged to make a difference to the success or failure of these kinds of projects. Little has been written on the views of non-ICT executives about the issues they have with ICT/I projects, which have particular challenges because of their highly technical nature. This research sought to develop a theory not only about what the issues are, from the non-ICT executive perspective, but also how these issues appear in, and may affect the outcomes of, such projects. An interpretive study using single units of analysis within multiple cases, to build an inductively derived theory, was the approach chosen for this research. An adapted grounded theory analysis, following the original Glaser and Strauss (1967) philosophy, was used to analyse data extracted from interviews with fifteen chief executives or equivalents. Three themes arose out of this process: Executive Perceptions of ICT/I; Strategic Alignment of ICT/I projects;ICT/I Project Outcomes The themes had quite strong connections between them. Jargon Barriers between ICT staff and these executives, affected the executives perceptions of ICT/I and were strong contributing factors for a poor strategic alignment between ICT/I projects and business goals. The poor alignment was primarily caused as a result of low levels of executive engagement with these projects, because they couldn’t understand the “techno-speak” of their ICT people. The consequence was consistently low satisfaction with ICT/I project life cycle outcomes. There was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. there was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. The substantive theory developed from this work is that: Jargon barriers created by ICT staff generate poor relationships between ICT staff and their executives, which in turn can cause low levels of executive engagement with their infrastructure projects, and consequently affect executive perceptions about the outcomes of these projects.

There are many issues involved in implementing Information and Communications Technology (ICT) projects in general, and infrastructure (ICT/I) projects in particular. Failures are still common despite advances in project management tools, and increased ICT sophistication. Executive sponsorship and support is acknowledged to make a difference to the success or failure of these kinds of projects. Little has been written on the views of non-ICT executives about the issues they have with ICT/I projects, which have particular challenges because of their highly technical nature. This research sought to develop a theory not only about what the issues are, from the non-ICT executive perspective, but also how these issues appear in, and may affect the outcomes of, such projects. An interpretive study using single units of analysis within multiple cases, to build an inductively derived theory, was the approach chosen for this research. An adapted grounded theory analysis, following the original Glaser and Strauss (1967) philosophy, was used to analyse data extracted from interviews with fifteen chief executives or equivalents. Three themes arose out of this process: Executive Perceptions of ICT/I; Strategic Alignment of ICT/I projects;ICT/I Project Outcomes The themes had quite strong connections between them. Jargon Barriers between ICT staff and these executives, affected the executives perceptions of ICT/I and were strong contributing factors for a poor strategic alignment between ICT/I projects and business goals. The poor alignment was primarily caused as a result of low levels of executive engagement with these projects, because they couldn’t understand the “techno-speak” of their ICT people. The consequence was consistently low satisfaction with ICT/I project life cycle outcomes. There was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. there was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. The substantive theory developed from this work is that: Jargon barriers created by ICT staff generate poor relationships between ICT staff and their executives, which in turn can cause low levels of executive engagement with their infrastructure projects, and consequently affect executive perceptions about the outcomes of these projects.

No description available.

There are many issues involved in implementing Information and Communications Technology (ICT) projects in general, and infrastructure (ICT/I) projects in particular. Failures are still common despite advances in project management tools, and increased ICT sophistication. Executive sponsorship and support is acknowledged to make a difference to the success or failure of these kinds of projects. Little has been written on the views of non-ICT executives about the issues they have with ICT/I projects, which have particular challenges because of their highly technical nature. This research sought to develop a theory not only about what the issues are, from the non-ICT executive perspective, but also how these issues appear in, and may affect the outcomes of, such projects. An interpretive study using single units of analysis within multiple cases, to build an inductively derived theory, was the approach chosen for this research. An adapted grounded theory analysis, following the original Glaser and Strauss (1967) philosophy, was used to analyse data extracted from interviews with fifteen chief executives or equivalents. Three themes arose out of this process: Executive Perceptions of ICT/I; Strategic Alignment of ICT/I projects;ICT/I Project Outcomes The themes had quite strong connections between them. Jargon Barriers between ICT staff and these executives, affected the executives perceptions of ICT/I and were strong contributing factors for a poor strategic alignment between ICT/I projects and business goals. The poor alignment was primarily caused as a result of low levels of executive engagement with these projects, because they couldn’t understand the “techno-speak” of their ICT people. The consequence was consistently low satisfaction with ICT/I project life cycle outcomes. There was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. there was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. The substantive theory developed from this work is that: Jargon barriers created by ICT staff generate poor relationships between ICT staff and their executives, which in turn can cause low levels of executive engagement with their infrastructure projects, and consequently affect executive perceptions about the outcomes of these projects.

There are many issues involved in implementing Information and Communications Technology (ICT) projects in general, and infrastructure (ICT/I) projects in particular. Failures are still common despite advances in project management tools, and increased ICT sophistication. Executive sponsorship and support is acknowledged to make a difference to the success or failure of these kinds of projects. Little has been written on the views of non-ICT executives about the issues they have with ICT/I projects, which have particular challenges because of their highly technical nature. This research sought to develop a theory not only about what the issues are, from the non-ICT executive perspective, but also how these issues appear in, and may affect the outcomes of, such projects. An interpretive study using single units of analysis within multiple cases, to build an inductively derived theory, was the approach chosen for this research. An adapted grounded theory analysis, following the original Glaser and Strauss (1967) philosophy, was used to analyse data extracted from interviews with fifteen chief executives or equivalents. Three themes arose out of this process: Executive Perceptions of ICT/I; Strategic Alignment of ICT/I projects;ICT/I Project Outcomes The themes had quite strong connections between them. Jargon Barriers between ICT staff and these executives, affected the executives perceptions of ICT/I and were strong contributing factors for a poor strategic alignment between ICT/I projects and business goals. The poor alignment was primarily caused as a result of low levels of executive engagement with these projects, because they couldn’t understand the “techno-speak” of their ICT people. The consequence was consistently low satisfaction with ICT/I project life cycle outcomes. There was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. there was a very real difference between the satisfaction levels of executives who had made definite efforts to overcome, or deal with, the ICT/I jargon barriers, and those who hadn’t. The substantive theory developed from this work is that: Jargon barriers created by ICT staff generate poor relationships between ICT staff and their executives, which in turn can cause low levels of executive engagement with their infrastructure projects, and consequently affect executive perceptions about the outcomes of these projects.