Pub Date : 2023-03-25DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00108
This paper presents the results from an academic-industry partnership where a team of university researchers and architecture, engineering, and construction industry (AEC) professionals compared a physical mockup to an immersive virtual reality (VR) environment. The goals of this research were to understand how and in what ways VR can replace the use of physical mockups. The study included an experiment where two groups of AEC professionals reviewed a physical mockup and a VR mockup of the same hotel room layout. Group members were asked first to evaluate each mockup from the owner's standpoint as hotel guests and housekeepers, and then suggest design changes based on their professional expertise individually. The groups were then asked to discuss the design together and make a team decision. At the end of the experiment, participants reflected on how the VR mockup did or did not meet their needs in reviewing the room design. The findings from this study show that VR cannot yet fully replace physical mockups due to the user dimension perception, lack of touch sense, unrealistic simulation in VR, and the need for physical samples. However, participants reported VR could be a cost-efficient tool to look at design options and layout in the early design phase and get feedback from the project team and end-users before the construction of the physical mockup to save potential time and money in rework. They also suggested using VR for visualization of the conflicts between different building systems in 3D coordination process.
{"title":"Immersive Virtual Reality Mockup Versus Physical Mockup","authors":"","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00108","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents the results from an academic-industry partnership where a team of university researchers and architecture, engineering, and construction industry (AEC) professionals compared a physical mockup to an immersive virtual reality (VR) environment. The goals of this research were to understand how and in what ways VR can replace the use of physical mockups. The study included an experiment where two groups of AEC professionals reviewed a physical mockup and a VR mockup of the same hotel room layout. Group members were asked first to evaluate each mockup from the owner's standpoint as hotel guests and housekeepers, and then suggest design changes based on their professional expertise individually. The groups were then\u0000asked to discuss the design together and make a team decision. At the end of the experiment, participants reflected on how the VR mockup did or did not meet their needs in reviewing the room design. The findings from this study show that VR cannot yet fully replace physical mockups due to the user dimension perception, lack of touch sense, unrealistic simulation in VR, and the need for physical samples. However, participants reported VR could be a cost-efficient tool to look at design options and layout in the early design phase and get feedback from the project team and\u0000end-users before the construction of the physical mockup to save potential time and money in rework. They also suggested using VR for visualization of the conflicts between different building systems in 3D coordination process.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"339 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88198622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-07DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00107
L. Crawford
This essay reflects on Peter Morris’s concerns about the the way that project management has been articulated through the advocacy of those institutions and associations that were formed to recognise project management as a distinct area of activity. The essay considers how project management has wrestled with the challenge of being recoginised as both a discipline and a profession and how there has been both progress and concern at how our understanding and practice of project management has evolved. The essay concludes with a recognition that the developments in both the understanding of the discipline of project management and the profession of project management have been in directions that Peter Morris was recommending for many years but, as he also made clear, we cannot rest on our laurels as there is still more to be done.
{"title":"Progressing and Discipline and Profession of Projects","authors":"L. Crawford","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00107","url":null,"abstract":"This essay reflects on Peter Morris’s concerns about the the way that project\u0000management has been articulated through the advocacy of those institutions and associations that were formed to recognise project management as a distinct area of activity. The essay considers how project management has wrestled with the challenge of being recoginised as both a discipline and a profession and how there has been both progress and concern at how our understanding and practice of project management has evolved. The essay concludes with a recognition that the developments in both the understanding of the discipline of project management and the profession of project management have been in directions that Peter Morris was recommending for many years but, as he also made clear, we cannot rest on our laurels as there is still more to be done.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73608866","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-16DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00106
A. Davies
This paper suggests that were three main motivations driving Peter Morris to develop the Management of Projects (MoP) as an alternative approach to traditional project management: first, the need to improve the performance and practice of project management; second, the need to understand the history, context and challenges facing society; and third the need to engage with theory and scholarship. The paper draws upon Peter’s three main single or co-authored books which form the corpus of his work on MoP.
{"title":"From Project Management to the ‘Management of Projects’","authors":"A. Davies","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00106","url":null,"abstract":"This paper suggests that were three main motivations driving Peter Morris to develop\u0000the Management of Projects (MoP) as an alternative approach to traditional project\u0000management: first, the need to improve the performance and practice of project management; second, the need to understand the history, context and challenges facing society; and third the need to engage with theory and scholarship. The paper draws upon Peter’s three main single or co-authored books which form the corpus of his work on MoP.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79664140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-20DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00105
Vorgers, de Groot, van Buiten, Volker
In public infrastructure projects, risks can emerge quickly due to its external uncertainties and interdependencies among a large number of stakeholders. Scholars still debate whether the current approach of risk management is dynamic enough to safeguard project objectives in such public environments. Because of little empirical evidence that explains how and why Project Management Teams (PMTs) select a specific risk treatment, we aim to characterize risk treatment selection by PMTs in public infrastructure projects. Based on document reviews and semi-structured interviews with PMT members and their executives of a Dutch project-oriented public infrastructure agency, it was found that the diversity in risk treatment selection is limited and risk treatment in public infrastructure projects focuses on controlling risk predominantly through preventive control measures. Although PMTs also intentionally control risk through preventive measures, the decision to do so is often implicitly taken and constitutes an unwitting routine that PMTs seem to have developed due to a risk-averse organizational culture. We conclude with providing directions to improve risk management practices and enable more diversity in risk treatment selection by PMTs in public infrastructure projects.
{"title":"Limited Diversity in risk treatment selection in public infrastructure projects","authors":"Vorgers, de Groot, van Buiten, Volker","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00105","url":null,"abstract":"In public infrastructure projects, risks can emerge quickly due to its external\u0000uncertainties and interdependencies among a large number of stakeholders. Scholars still debate whether the current approach of risk management is dynamic enough to safeguard project objectives in such public environments. Because of little empirical evidence that explains how and why Project Management Teams (PMTs) select a specific risk treatment, we aim to characterize risk treatment selection by PMTs in public infrastructure projects. Based on document reviews and semi-structured interviews with PMT members and their executives of a Dutch project-oriented public infrastructure agency, it was found that the diversity in risk treatment selection is limited and risk treatment in public infrastructure projects focuses on controlling risk predominantly through preventive control measures. Although PMTs also intentionally control risk through preventive measures, the decision to do so is often implicitly taken and constitutes an unwitting routine that PMTs seem to have developed due to a risk-averse organizational culture. We conclude with providing directions to improve risk management practices and enable more diversity in risk treatment selection by PMTs in public infrastructure projects.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78021349","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-23DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00103
J. Pinto
In his seminal book, The Anatomy of Major Projects (co-authored with George Hough), Peter Morris established himself as one of the early, original theorists in project management scholarship. Not simply a ground-breaking study of major projects at its time, Anatomy has proven to have both a lasting residual impact as well as serving as a wellspring of new ideas and directions for research and theory in the field. This essay, honoring Morris's impact on our scholarly community, focuses on an examination of Anatomy - both on its many contributions, as well as serving as the source for shifting the manner in which a new generation of academics and practitioners understand how projects can best be organized, managed, and understood.
{"title":"A path less-traveled has become the highway: How Peter Morris’s The\u0000Anatomy of Major Projects pointed the way to modern project management\u0000research and practice","authors":"J. Pinto","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00103","url":null,"abstract":"In his seminal book, The Anatomy of Major Projects (co-authored with George Hough),\u0000Peter Morris established himself as one of the early, original theorists in project management scholarship. Not simply a ground-breaking study of major projects at its time, Anatomy has proven to have both a lasting residual impact as well as serving as a wellspring of new ideas and directions for research and theory in the field. This essay, honoring Morris's impact on our scholarly community, focuses on an examination of Anatomy - both on its many contributions, as well as serving as the source for shifting the manner in which a new generation of academics and practitioners understand how projects can best be organized, managed, and understood.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78239353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-23DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00104
Hwangbo Bae, Denise R. Simmons, Cassandra McCall
Turnover rates in construction are high and must be slowed to meet the needs of an expanding and evolving industry. Therefore, it is critical to understand what makes construction professionals continue their employment in a company and persist in the field. This exploratory study examined the work values that influenced construction professionals’ decisions to seek employment at a company (i.e., values influencing recruitment) with the work values they perceived as lacking within the company (i.e., values influencing retention). Qualitative analysis of open-ended survey responses from 314 construction professionals identified three salient work values for improving recruitment: (1) development, (2) autonomy, and (3) belonging; and three values for retention: (4) advancement, (5) inclusivity, and (6) flexibility. Two actions that companies can exercise to support these values were also identified: (1) communicating and demonstrating a commitment to building people as they build work such as promoting modus operandi, trust and practice, and personification, and (2) building an employee-centered structure for communication, empowerment, and acknowledgment that is not stifling to employees. These findings point to a larger implication for construction companies’ recruitment and retention efforts to build employees as active agents in navigating their career paths at a company.
{"title":"Building people as they build work: promoting the recruitment and retention of construction professionals by facilitating agency","authors":"Hwangbo Bae, Denise R. Simmons, Cassandra McCall","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00104","url":null,"abstract":"Turnover rates in construction are high and must be slowed to meet the needs of an expanding and evolving industry. Therefore, it is critical to understand what makes construction professionals continue their employment in a company and persist in the field. This exploratory study examined the work values that influenced construction professionals’ decisions to seek employment at a company (i.e., values influencing recruitment) with the work values they perceived as lacking within the company (i.e., values influencing retention). Qualitative analysis of open-ended survey responses from 314 construction professionals identified three salient work values for improving recruitment: (1) development, (2) autonomy, and (3) belonging; and three values for retention: (4) advancement, (5) inclusivity, and (6) flexibility. Two actions that companies can exercise to support these values were also identified: (1) communicating and demonstrating a commitment to building people as they build work such as promoting modus operandi, trust and practice, and personification, and (2) building an employee-centered structure for communication, empowerment, and acknowledgment that is not stifling to employees. These findings point to a larger implication for construction companies’ recruitment and retention efforts to build employees as active agents in navigating their career paths at a company.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"80 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88163291","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-23DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00102
D. Chiponde, Barry J. Gledson, D. Greenwood
In their 2011 paper titled “Managing the Institutional Context for Projects” Morris and Geraldi raised the importance of the institutional context in the management of projects. Building on that, this study proposes the conceptualisation and understanding of project-related failure and success through an institutional perspective. This is based on an understanding that projects are distinctive, time-constrained, undertakings meant to generate benefits for all associated stakeholders whose perception of failure varies. Yet, little attention has been given to explaining how such perception is influenced by underlying institutional contexts. Therefore, the aim of the study was to examine the knowledge base for contrasting perspectives of project managers and construction managers around project-related failure in light of the institutional perspectives. To do this, a systematic literature review (SLR) approach was adopted. The first finding of note from this SLR is the dominance of interest in and from the UK Construction Industry (UKCI). This may be attributed to the culture and structure of the UKCI driven by the autonomy and authority of organisations such as the National Audit Office (NAO). The findings further reveal that in the general Project Management (PM) literature, considerations of failure are more introspective and discussed more in terms of project outputs with the causes associated with project management limitations. Considering the three levels discussed by Morris and Geraldi (2011) the PM perspective of failure and success can be associated with the technical level of analysis of project outputs. In contrast, the Construction Management (CM) literature focuses predominantly on specific failures, and on external failures. Causes are more attributed to profitability and the wider supply chain and this can be associated with Morris’s strategic level focus on effectiveness and value. The results from this study call for a systemic approach by heeding the call of Prof. Peter Morris to consider the institutional context level in the perception and analysis of failure instead of solely focusing on output or technical level parameters of time cost and quality.
{"title":"Contrasting Perceptions of Construction Managers and Project Managers Around Failure in Light of Morris and Geraldi’s Institutional Context","authors":"D. Chiponde, Barry J. Gledson, D. Greenwood","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00102","url":null,"abstract":"In their 2011 paper titled “Managing the Institutional Context for Projects” Morris and Geraldi raised the importance of the institutional context in the management of projects. Building on that, this study proposes the conceptualisation and understanding of project-related failure and success through an institutional perspective. This is based on an understanding that projects are distinctive, time-constrained, undertakings meant to generate benefits for all associated stakeholders whose perception of failure varies. Yet, little attention has been given to explaining how such perception is influenced by underlying institutional contexts. Therefore, the aim of the study was to examine the knowledge base for contrasting perspectives of project managers and construction managers around project-related failure in light of the institutional perspectives. To do this, a systematic literature review (SLR) approach was adopted. The first finding of note from this SLR is the dominance of interest in and from the UK Construction Industry (UKCI). This may be attributed to the culture and structure of the UKCI driven by the autonomy and authority of organisations such as the National Audit Office (NAO). The findings further reveal that in the general Project Management (PM) literature, considerations of failure are more introspective and discussed more in terms of project outputs with the causes associated with project management limitations. Considering the three levels discussed by Morris and Geraldi (2011) the PM perspective of failure and success can be associated with the technical level of analysis of project outputs. In contrast, the Construction Management (CM) literature focuses predominantly on specific failures, and on external failures. Causes are more attributed to profitability and the wider supply chain and this can be associated with Morris’s strategic level focus on effectiveness and value. The results from this study call for a systemic approach by heeding the call of Prof. Peter Morris to consider the institutional context level in the perception and analysis of failure instead of solely focusing on output or technical level parameters of time cost and quality.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76225812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-23DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2022.00101
G. Winch
Projects are both shaped by processes of socio-economic change and shape those processes of socio-economic change – an insight that guided much in Peter Morris’ career and contribution. In this paper, we address a growing concern of both Peter and the projects research community more generally with the grand challenges we all face, particularly achieving net zero. We therefore place project organizing research in the context of the four industrial revolutions and the Anthropocene over the last 250 years or so. In particular, we focus on the role of projects in sustainability transitions – that is the transition from one sociotechnical regime to another such as from fossil fuels to renewables for electricity generation. On this basis, we suggest that the major projects of the third industrial revolution that Peter so comprehensively analysed may not be the most appropriate models for addressing the challenges of the fourth when projecting for sustainability transitions. We close by suggesting one potential additional approach.
{"title":"Projecting for Sustainability Transitions: Advancing the Contribution of Peter Morris","authors":"G. Winch","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2022.00101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2022.00101","url":null,"abstract":"Projects are both shaped by processes of socio-economic change and shape those\u0000processes of socio-economic change – an insight that guided much in Peter Morris’ career and contribution. In this paper, we address a growing concern of both Peter and the projects research community more generally with the grand challenges we all face, particularly achieving net zero. We therefore place project organizing research in the context of the four industrial revolutions and the Anthropocene over the last 250 years or so. In particular, we focus on the role of projects in sustainability transitions – that is the transition from one sociotechnical regime to another such as from fossil fuels to renewables for electricity generation. On this basis, we suggest that the major projects of the third industrial revolution that Peter so comprehensively analysed may not be the most appropriate models for addressing the challenges of the fourth when projecting for sustainability transitions. We close by suggesting one potential additional approach.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85748700","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-21DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2021.00113
Transport infrastructure projects typically take a number of years to complete and there is a strong case for adjusting ‘nominal costs’ incurred in different years to ‘real costs’ in base year prices by using an inflation index. The literature on the funding and financing of transport infrastructure projects and investment in public works addresses the choice of inflation index as a metaphorical footnote on the treatment of costs incurred in different years. This article gives deeper consideration to this issue and identifies the substantial effect the choice of inflation index has on ex-post cost evaluation. ‘Inflation shopping’ can occur when there are alternative inflation indices to choose between, and where the choice of inflation index has a substantive effect on the outcome of ex-post cost evaluation and the allocation of inflation risk between parties. Data from Crossrail, a large rail scheme in London, is used to illustrate the effect of the choice of alternative inflation indices on ex-post cost evaluation outcomes.
{"title":"How Transport Infrastructure Cost Evaluation Is Affected by choice of inflation index","authors":"","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2021.00113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2021.00113","url":null,"abstract":"Transport infrastructure projects typically take a number of years to complete and there is a strong case for adjusting ‘nominal costs’ incurred in different years to ‘real costs’ in base year prices by using an inflation index. The literature on the funding and financing of transport infrastructure projects and investment in public works addresses the choice of inflation index as a metaphorical footnote on the treatment of costs incurred in different years. This article gives deeper consideration to this issue and identifies the substantial effect the choice of inflation index has on ex-post cost evaluation. ‘Inflation shopping’ can occur when there are alternative inflation indices to choose between, and where the choice of inflation index has a substantive effect on the outcome of ex-post cost evaluation and the allocation of inflation risk between parties. Data from Crossrail, a large rail scheme in London, is used to illustrate the effect of the choice of alternative inflation indices on ex-post cost evaluation outcomes.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90661060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.25219/epoj.2020.00101
C. Paul, Dossick Carrie, H. Miriam, Hartmann Timo, J. Amy, M. Ashwin, Vedran Vedran
Peer review is a cornerstone of high-quality research. While attending PhD programmes, we mostly interact with advisors, however the academic quality of our work is ultimately judged by a broader range of academic peers. For early career researchers, transitioning into independent thought-leaders requires increasing exposure with our community of peers, and inevitably engaging with review practices - both as authors and reviewers. Whilst many PhD programmes around the world offer training on paper and grant reviews, journal paper reviews remain somewhat vague to many researchers at all levels who haven’t had extensive exposure to advisors, editors, and peers who share their understanding of expectations and best practices. This article provides a discussion of the review and revision process for journal articles, including a check-list for each section.
{"title":"Journal Reviews and Revisions: Advice from an Early Career Panel Discussion","authors":"C. Paul, Dossick Carrie, H. Miriam, Hartmann Timo, J. Amy, M. Ashwin, Vedran Vedran","doi":"10.25219/epoj.2020.00101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.25219/epoj.2020.00101","url":null,"abstract":"Peer review is a cornerstone of high-quality research. While attending PhD programmes, we mostly interact with advisors, however the academic quality of our work is ultimately judged by a broader range of academic peers. For early career researchers, transitioning into independent thought-leaders requires increasing exposure with our community of peers, and inevitably engaging with review practices - both as authors and\u0000reviewers. Whilst many PhD programmes around the world offer training on paper and grant reviews, journal paper reviews remain somewhat vague to many researchers at all levels who haven’t had extensive exposure to advisors, editors, and peers who share their understanding of expectations and best practices. This article provides a discussion of the review and revision process for journal articles, including a check-list for each section.","PeriodicalId":36081,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Project Organization Journal","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86716194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：