مشخصات مقاله | |
ترجمه عنوان مقاله | ارزیابی ارزش پروژه های عمومی برای پول: یک مطالعه تجربی از سودمندی تحلیل های هزینه-سود در تصمیم گیری |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله | Assessing public projects’ value for money: An empirical study of the usefulness of cost–benefit analyses in decision-making |
انتشار | مقاله سال 2019 |
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | 16 صفحه |
هزینه | دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد. |
پایگاه داده | نشریه الزویر |
نوع نگارش مقاله |
مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article) |
مقاله بیس | این مقاله بیس میباشد |
نمایه (index) | Scopus – Master Journals List – JCR |
نوع مقاله | ISI |
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی | |
ایمپکت فاکتور(IF) |
5.979 در سال 2018 |
شاخص H_index | 121 در سال 2019 |
شاخص SJR | 2.203 در سال 2018 |
شناسه ISSN | 0263-7863 |
شاخص Quartile (چارک) | Q1 در سال 2018 |
مدل مفهومی | دارد |
پرسشنامه | ندارد |
متغیر | ندارد |
رفرنس | دارد |
رشته های مرتبط | مدیریت |
گرایش های مرتبط | مدیریت پروژه، مدیریت مالی |
نوع ارائه مقاله |
ژورنال |
مجله / کنفرانس | مجله بین المللی مدیریت پروژه-International Journal of Project Management |
دانشگاه | Concept Research Program, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway |
کلمات کلیدی | ارزش پروژه، ارزیابی پروژه، تحلیل های هزینه-سود، مورد تجاری |
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی | Project value; Project appraisal and evaluation; Cost–benefit analysis; Business case |
شناسه دیجیتال – doi |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.02.007 |
کد محصول | E12201 |
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله | ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید. |
دانلود رایگان مقاله | دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله | سفارش ترجمه این مقاله |
فهرست مطالب مقاله: |
Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Literature review 3. Conceptual framework 4. Methodology 5. Presentation and discussion of findings 6. Conclusions 7. Limitations and further work Funding Declaration of interest Acknowledgements References |
بخشی از متن مقاله: |
Abstract
Value for money, as measured by cost–benefit analyses (CBAs), is a crucial part of the business case for major public investment projects. However, the literature points to a range of challenges and weaknesses in CBAs that may cause their degree of usefulness in decision-making to be limited. The paper presents an empirical study of CBA practice in Norway, a country that has made considerable efforts to promote quality and accountability in CBAs of public projects. The research method is qualitative, based on a case study of 58 projects. The results indicate that the studied CBAs are largely of acceptable quality and heeded by decision-makers. Appraisal optimism seems to have been reduced by the introduction of external quality assurance of CBAs. However, there is need for a more consistent assessment of the non-monetized benefits, and distinguishing them from other decision perspectives such as the achievement of political goals. The paper offers a set of practical recommendations to increase CBA usefulness further. Introduction The project management community has increasingly shifted its attention beyond the ‘iron triangle’ of cost, time, and quality, to take a wider, strategic view of projects. Projects are implemented to deliver benefits and create value for users, the parent organization, and/or society at large (Morris, 2013; Samset and Volden, 2012). Accordingly, project governance has become an important issue in project research and practice. It refers to the processes, systems, and regulations that the financing party must have in place to ensure that relevant and viable projects are chosen and delivered efficiently (Müller, 2009; Volden and Samset, 2017b). Williams and Samset (2010) refer to the choice of project concept as the most important decision that project owners make. The choice of concept ought to be approved on the basis of a business case, in which the expected benefits and strategic outcomes are described (Jenner, 2015). The business case provides a rationale for the preferred solution, and is therefore crucial for future benefits and cost management (Musawir et al., 2017; Serra and Kunc, 2015). |