Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Tillmann, Patricia; Tzortzopoulos, Patricia; Sapountzis, Stelios; Formoso, Carlos; Kagioglou, Mike
Languages: English
Types: Unknown
Subjects: NA
Value generation has been an increasing concern in the project management literature.\ud It has been argued that the main challenge for generating value is no longer the design\ud of a physical facility or asset, but the capability of understanding the project\ud holistically and going beyond the physical facility to generate benefits that are aligned\ud with strategic intent. Thus it has been suggested that projects should be understood as\ud means of achieving agreed goals rather the simply delivery of outputs. Thus, this\ud paper presents a case study that was carried out to analyse the contributions of the\ud BeReal model on achieving agreed outcomes and goals. The BeReal model was\ud developed by the University of Salford and was being implemented in a healthcare\ud redevelopment programme in the UK. It was observed that the BeReal model was\ud beneficial for the case study project in many ways: enabling a holistic understanding\ud of value, enabling a dialogue about stakeholders’ expected outcomes; and providing\ud means for accountability. Expected contributions of the model were not observed in\ud its full extent. Two main reasons were identified, the adoption on a later stage of\ud development and the team’s focus on complying with OGC procedures. While\ud adopting the model from the earlier stages might be beneficial, the rigid structures\ud commonly imposed to governmental projects might be a hinder to learning and\ud continuous improvement.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Ballard, G. (2008). “The Lean Project Delivery System: An Update.” Lean Construction Journal, pp. 1-19. Retrieved from: www.leanconstructionjournal.org in May/26/2012.
    • BeReal (2010) BeReal Model. Retrieved from: http://www.bereal.salford.ac.uk/N/model.htm in 03/04/2012.
    • Bradley, G. (2006). “Benefit Realisation Management - A Practical guide to achieving benefits through change,” Hampshire, UK, Gower.
    • Christoffersen A. K. and Emmit, S. (2009). “A Value-based Approach to Design Management.” in Emmit, S.; Prins, M and Otter, A. Architectural Management: international research and practice. Wiley-blackwell 2009.
    • Farbey, B., Land, F. & Targett, D. (1999). “The moving staircase - problems of appraisal and evaluation in a turbulent environment.” Information Technology and People Journal, 12, 238-252.
    • Howell, G.; Laufer, A. and Ballard, G. (1993). “Uncertainty and Project Objectives in Project Appraisal.” 8, pp. 37-43. Guildford, England: march, 1993.
    • Koskela L. and Kagioglou M. (2007). The Proto-theory of Design: the method of analysis of the ancient geometers. Strojarstvo 49 (1) 45-52.
    • Reiss, G., et al. (2006). Gower Handbook of programme management, Gower Publishing: Hampshire, UK, 712p.
    • Remenyi, D.; Sherwood-Smith, M. (1998). “Business benefits from information systems through an active benefits realisation programme.” International Journal of Project Management, v.16, pp. 81-98.
    • Rooke J. A.; Sapountzis, S.; Koskela, L. J.; Codinhoto, R.; Kagioglou, M. “Lean Project Management and the Problem of Value.” Proceedings of the 18th International Group for Lean Construction Conference. Haifa, Israel, 14 - 16 July 2010. Walsh, K.; Alves, T. (Eds.). Technion Israel Institute of Technology, pp. 581-590 2010.
    • Thorp, J. (1998). The Information Paradox: realising the business benefits of information technology, Toronto, Canada, McGraw-Hill.
    • Tillmann P.; Tzortzopoulos, P. and Formoso, C. (2010). “Analysing benefits realisation from a theoretical perspective and its contribution to value generation.” 18th Annual Conference, International Group for Lean Construction, Haifa, Israel, July14-16 2010
    • Winter M.; Szczepanek,T. (2008). “Projects and programmes as value creation processes: a new perspective and some practical implications.” International Journal of Project Management, 26, pp. 95-103.
    • Zwikael, O. and Smyrk J. R. (2009). “Towards an Outcome Based Project Management. Theory.” Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE IEEM, 633-637.
    • Zwikael, O., Smyrk, J. R. (2011). Project management for the creation of organisational value. London: Springer.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article