IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v37y1991i8p990-1001.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Parkinson's Law and Its Implications for Project Management

Author

Listed:
  • Genaro J. Gutierrez

    (Graduate School of Business, Management Department, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712)

  • Panagiotis Kouvelis

    (Graduate School of Business, Management Department, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712)

Abstract

Critical path models concerning project management (i.e. PERT/CPM) fail to account for work force behavioral effects on the expected project completion time. In this paper, we provide a modelling framework for project management activities, that ultimately accounts for expected worker behavior under Parkinson's Law. A stochastic activity completion time model is used to formally state Parkinson's Law. The developed model helps to examine the effects of information release policies on subcontractors of project activities, and to develop managerial policies for setting appropriate deadlines for series or parallel project activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Genaro J. Gutierrez & Panagiotis Kouvelis, 1991. "Parkinson's Law and Its Implications for Project Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(8), pages 990-1001, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:37:y:1991:i:8:p:990-1001
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.37.8.990
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.37.8.990
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.37.8.990?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Williams, Terry, 1999. "Towards realism in network simulation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 305-314, June.
    2. Wendi Tian & Erik Demeulemeester, 2014. "Railway scheduling reduces the expected project makespan over roadrunner scheduling in a multi-mode project scheduling environment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 213(1), pages 271-291, February.
    3. Chen, Bo & Hall, Nicholas G., 2021. "Incentive schemes for resolving Parkinson’s Law in project management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 666-681.
    4. Kamburowski, J., 1997. "New validations of PERT times," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 323-328, June.
    5. Michael T. Pich & Christoph H. Loch & Arnoud De Meyer, 2002. "On Uncertainty, Ambiguity, and Complexity in Project Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1008-1023, August.
    6. Dvir, Dov & Lechler, Thomas, 2004. "Plans are nothing, changing plans is everything: the impact of changes on project success," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Raul O. Chao & Stylianos Kavadias & Cheryl Gaimon, 2009. "Revenue Driven Resource Allocation: Funding Authority, Incentives, and New Product Development Portfolio Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(9), pages 1556-1569, September.
    8. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    9. Robert D. Austin, 2001. "The Effects of Time Pressure on Quality in Software Development: An Agency Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 195-207, June.
    10. Jan Bartoska & Tomas Subrt, 2012. "The effect of human agent in project management," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 20(3), pages 369-382, September.
    11. Beate Jochimsen, 2009. "Service Quality in Modern Bureaucracy: Parkinson's Theory at Work," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 44-64, February.
    12. López, Luis & Zúñiga, Roy, 2014. "Dynamics of judicial service supply chains," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(7), pages 1447-1454.
    13. Vanhoucke, Mario, 2010. "Using activity sensitivity and network topology information to monitor project time performance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 359-370, October.
    14. Kazuaki Okubo & Makoto Okumura, 2022. "Understanding Project Performance with Stochastic Interruption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    15. Shi Chen & Hau Lee, 2017. "Incentive Alignment and Coordination of Project Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 1011-1025, April.
    16. Nicholas G. Hall & Zhixin Liu, 2023. "Scheduling with present bias," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1743-1759, June.
    17. Vanhoucke, Mario, 2011. "On the dynamic use of project performance and schedule risk information during projecttracking," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 416-426, August.
    18. Trietsch, Dan & Mazmanyan, Lilit & Gevorgyan, Lilit & Baker, Kenneth R., 2012. "Modeling activity times by the Parkinson distribution with a lognormal core: Theory and validation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 386-396.
    19. Mandyam M. Srinivasan & William D. Best & Sridhar Chandrasekaran, 2007. "Warner Robins Air Logistics Center Streamlines Aircraft Repair and Overhaul," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 37(1), pages 7-21, February.
    20. Jochimsen, Beate, 2007. "Determinants of service quality in bureaucracy: Parkinson's theory at work," Discussion Papers 2007/11, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:37:y:1991:i:8:p:990-1001. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.