IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v20y2002i6p493-505.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generic and specific IT training: a process protocol model for construction

Author

Listed:
  • J. S. Goulding
  • M. Alshawi

Abstract

This paper considers the generic processes involved in structuring an information technology (IT) training strategy to meet a construction organization's business strategy. It identifies and discusses how generic and specific IT training needs can be affected by the availability and priority of resources, type of organizational infrastructure, degree of management commitment, and prevailing level of culture. It goes on to discuss the principles of the capability maturity model (CMM), developed at Carnegie Mellon University, and the concepts of the process protocol (PP), developed by Salford University. It builds upon these approaches to analyse the key sequential stages and links needed to satisfy (or close) the 'performance gap' between the business strategy and the IT training strategy. An IT training model is presented the remit of which can help managers assess the impact of IT training on their organization's business strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • J. S. Goulding & M. Alshawi, 2002. "Generic and specific IT training: a process protocol model for construction," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 493-505.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:20:y:2002:i:6:p:493-505
    DOI: 10.1080/01446190210151069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01446190210151069
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446190210151069?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michalski, Greg V. & Cousins, J. Bradley, 2000. "Differences in stakeholder perceptions about training evaluation: a concept mapping/pattern matching investigation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 211-230, May.
    2. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    3. Hammer, Michael & Champy, James, 1993. "Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 90-91.
    4. George P. Huber, 1991. "Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 88-115, February.
    5. Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 1911. "The Principles of Scientific Management," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number taylor1911.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Fatima Afzal & Benson Lim, 2022. "Organizational Factors Influencing the Sustainability Performance of Construction Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-17, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Da Mota de Pina E Cunha, A.M., 1998. "Determinants of Product Innovation in Organizations : Practices and Performance in the Portugese Financial Sector," Other publications TiSEM e6e4e56e-b72a-4392-8d79-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Daniel Geiger & Jochen Koch, 2008. "Von der individuellen Routine zur organisationalen Praktik — Ein neues Paradigma für die Organisationsforschung?," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 60(7), pages 693-712, November.
    3. Eric W. Ford & Rebecca Wells & Terrie C. Reeves, 2014. "Strategy and Structure: A Learning Perspective and Analysis," Business and Economic Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, June.
    4. Markus Gmür, 2003. "Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: A methodological evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(1), pages 27-57, January.
    5. Brian T. Pentland, 2003. "Conceptualizing and Measuring Variety in the Execution of Organizational Work Processes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(7), pages 857-870, July.
    6. Steve Ku & Yung‐Ho Suh & Gheorghe Tecuci, 1996. "Building An Intelligent Business Process Reengineering System: A Case‐Based Approach," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(1), pages 25-39, March.
    7. Maria Adenfelt & Katarina Lagerström, 2006. "Organizational rejuvenation for knowledge exploitation: Exploring corporate entrepreneurship in an MNE," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 83-98, September.
    8. Brian T. Pentland, 2003. "Sequential Variety in Work Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(5), pages 528-540, October.
    9. Bernardo Batiz-Lazo & Jorge Gomes & Maria Mendes, 2002. "New Product Development & Management Of Knowledge In Portuguese Higher Education," Industrial Organization 0211019, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. J S Edwards & B Ababneh & M Hall & D Shaw, 2009. "Knowledge management: a review of the field and of OR's contribution," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(1), pages 114-125, May.
    11. Skerlavaj, Miha & Stemberger, Mojca Indihar & Skrinjar, Rok & Dimovski, Vlado, 2007. "Organizational learning culture--the missing link between business process change and organizational performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 346-367, April.
    12. Lindbeck, Assar & Snower, Dennis J, 2000. "Multitask Learning and the Reorganization of Work: From Tayloristic to Holistic Organization," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 353-376, July.
    13. Nicolas Pouzacq & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2022. "L'influence de l'évaluation de politiques publiques sur les apprentissages organisationnels : une étude sur les collectivités françaises," Post-Print hal-03909341, HAL.
    14. Andrea Francesconi & Enrico Guarini, 2017. "Performance-based funding e sistemi di allocazione delle risorse ai dipartimenti: prime evidenze nelle universit? italiane," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(1), pages 113-134.
    15. Pooja Kushwaha & M. K. Rao, 2017. "Integrating the Linkages between Learning Systems and Knowledge Process: An Exploration of Learning Outcomes," Business Perspectives and Research, , vol. 5(1), pages 11-23, January.
    16. Edna Isabel de la Garza Martinez & Zochitl Araiza Garza & Nidia Estela Hernández Castro & Izamar Guadalupe Amador Charles, 2016. "Relationship Between Levels Of Organization Learning,Relacion Entre Los Niveles De Aprendizaje Organizacional," Revista Internacional Administracion & Finanzas, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 9(3), pages 71-82.
    17. Jeremy Atack & Robert A. Margo & Paul Rhode, 2020. "‘Mechanization Takes Command’: Inanimate Power and Labor Productivity in Late Nineteenth Century American Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 27436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Schweizer, Lars & Patzelt, Holger, 2012. "Employee commitment in the post-acquisition integration process: The effect of integration speed and leadership," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 298-310.
    19. Eelke Wiersma, 2007. "Conditions That Shape the Learning Curve: Factors That Increase the Ability and Opportunity to Learn," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(12), pages 1903-1915, December.
    20. Ahammad, Mohammad Faisal & Tarba, Shlomo Yedidia & Liu, Yipeng & Glaister, Keith W., 2016. "Knowledge transfer and cross-border acquisition performance: The impact of cultural distance and employee retention," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 66-75.

    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:taf:conmgt:v:20:y:2002:i:6:p:493-505. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    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.