【正文】 xplicit representations of the interrelationships that exist between these views. Examples of the additional views include 共 18 頁(yè) 第 7 頁(yè) the following: ? Organization View: An anizational view identifies the project participants。D has not had greater impact. One significant problem seems to be that the resulting technologies and tools do not fit particularly well with current project management practices. More specifically, the new tools assume and require a level of integration and coordination among project participants that is seldom found in practice. Clearly, the technologies require further development towards tools that better suit current practice. Yet it may be useful to also consider current project management practices to see if changes could be introduced that would allow projects to better exploit the advances that have been made in IT. From this initial perspective of IT, we have begun to explore potential weakness and opportunities for improvement in current project management practices. In the process, the perspective has broadened to identify several issues that are not specifically IT related. These are not new concepts, but a collection of several current trends in AEC/FM and relevant ideas from other industries. In this paper, we consider several of these views on weakness in current project management practices and opportunities for improvements. We then synthesize these into a proposed framework for a unified approach to project management in AEC/FM. Perspectives on Weaknesses and Opportunities for Project Management Complexity and Interdependencies in AEC/FM projects. AEC/FM projects are often described as large and increasingly plex. A greater understanding of the nature of this plexity can point to the areas where the need for improved management is greatest. Studies have identified the following characteristics as generally mon to any 共 18 頁(yè) 第 2 頁(yè) type of plex system11: 1. Complex systems are prised of a multiplicity of things。 共 18 頁(yè) 第 1 頁(yè) 英語(yǔ)原文 A Unified Approach to Project Management Thomas Froese* and Sheryl StaubFrench* *Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z4. , Abstract In current project management practice, the overall task of designing, managing, and constructing a building is carried out by anizing the work into many distinct tasks assigned to many different groups. Most project effort is then directed towards carrying out these tasks in the most effective manner possible, while relatively little effort (concentrated within a few critical positions) is focused on managing the interdependencies between tasks and effectively bining these results to yield the overall result. We propose a unified approach to project management that brings an integrative view to the forefront, centered on the notion of defining multiple views of the project and the interrelationships that exist between the views. This integrated representation acts as a model or prototype of the physical facility, allowing more experimentation and optimization and providing a unifying focus for the ongoing work. The representational framework, proposed methodology, and acpanying IT issues for this approach to project management are discussed. Motivation Much of our previous research has been in the area of information technologies (IT) applied to the task of project management (PM) in the field of architecture, engineering, construction, and facilities management (AEC/FM). Within this field of research and development (Ramp。D), a major theme has been the integration of information resources and tools throughout the AEC/FM project lifecycle. Great progress has been made in the concepts, technologies, and tools to support this integration. As of yet, however, the results have had minimal impact on practice in the industry. This situation begs the question of why this active area of Ramp。 they have a large number of entities or parts. Generally, the more parts a system contains, the more plex it is. 2. Complex systems contain a dense web of causal connections among their ponents. The parts affect each other in many ways. 3. Complex systems exhibit interdependence of their ponents. The behavior of parts is dependant upon other parts. If the system is broken apart, the ponents no longer function (like the parts of the human body). 4. Complex systems are open to their outside environments. They are not selfcontained, but are affected by outside events. 5. Complex systems normally show a high degree of synergy among their ponents: the whole is more than the sum of its parts. 6. Complex systems exhibit nonlinear behavior. A change in the system can produce an effect that is not proportional to its size: small changes can produce large effects, and large changes can produce small effects. To some extent, all of these features can be observed in AEC/FM projects. AEC/FM projects are made up of ponents such as the physical elements in a building, thedesign or construction activities, the people and resources utilized, etc. In many cases, the individual ponents are not plex. Yet the number of ponents that make up the project is vast, and the causal connections between these ponents are numerous. For example, a change in the intended use of some space in a building could affect the heating and cooling requirements for that space, which could affect the design of parts of the mechanical system, which could alter the elements of the electrical system, which could change a purchase order for material supplies, which could delay a material delivery, which could influence the construction schedule, which could reduce the productivity of a work crew, which could increase a work package cost, which could affect a subcontractor’s financing, and so on. AEC/FM projec