A bibliometric-qualitative study about the use of System Dynamics in the areas of Project and Program Management

Luciano da Silva Bastos Sales; Sanderson Barbalho; Rodrigo Augusto

doi:10.1590/1806-9649-2021v28e5770

Artigo Original

A bibliometric-qualitative study about the use of System Dynamics in the areas of Project and Program Management

Luciano da Silva Bastos Sales; Sanderson Barbalho; Rodrigo Augusto

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1806-9649-2021v28e5770 Gest. Prod., vol.28, n4, e5770, 2021

PDF

SciELO

Downloads: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Despite the proliferation as well as great advances in the development of dynamic models applied to project management, research that applies system dynamics principles to program management does not seem to be as fertile. The objective of this paper is to obtain a more accurate vision of how the system dynamics theory is being used in the development of the program management field. The bibliometric-qualitative study confirms there is a robust use of system dynamics tools in the project management area, with a wide range of applications as well as solid results. The study, however, also shows that for programs, despite a noticeable increase regarding the interest in program management by organizations, clearly there is much less research uniting program management and system dynamics. More importantly, some dynamic models are being used to improve the performance of programs, however, few studies take into consideration the specific variables from program management. Thus, we conclude that current research on these two topics can only be viewed as fragmented and in its early stages, offering ample room for improvement.

Keywords

System dynamics, Project management, Program management, Programme management

Referências

Artto, K., Martinsuo, M., Gemünden, H. G., & Murtoaro, J. (2009). Foundations of program management: a bibliometric view. International Journal of Project Management, 27(1), 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.10.007.

Barbalho, S. C. M., Carvalho, M. M., Tataves, P. M., Quintero, C. H. L., & Leite, G. A. (2019a). Exploring the relation among product complexity, team seniority, and project performance as a path for planning new product development projects: a predictive model applying the system dynamics theory. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 66, 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2936502.

Barbalho, S. C. M., Leite, G. A., & Carvalho, M. M. (2019b). Using System Dynamics for Simulating Mechatronic New Product Development. In: J. Reis, S. Pinelas, & N. Melão (Eds.), Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics (pp. 195-206). Cham: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14969-7_17.

Becerril, L., Rebentisch, E., Chucholowski, N., & Conforto, E. (2016). A simulation-based analysis on the integration of program management and systems engineering. In: International Design Conference, (pp. 1835-1844). Dubrovnik: IDCA.

Booth, A., Papaioannou, D., & Sutton, A. (2013). Systematic approaches to a successful literature review. London: England: Sage Publications Ltd.

Conforto, E., Rossi, M., Rebentisch, E., Oehmen, J., & Pacenza, M. (2013). Survey report: Improving integration of program management and systems engineering. In: 23rd INCOSE Annual International Symposium. Philadelphia: INCOSE.

Cosenz, F. (2017). Supporting start-up business model design through system dynamics modelling. Management Decision, 55(1), 57-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-06-2016-0395.

Danwitz, S. (2017). Managing inter-firm projects: a systematic review and directions for future research. International Journal of Project Management, 36(3), 525-541.

Els, S. A., Reichelt, K. S., & Cooper, K. G. (2006). Quantifying the impact of multiple risks on software-intensive programs. the journal of defense modeling and simulation: applications, methodology. Technology, 3(4), 207-216.

Ford, D., & Sterman, J. (2003). Overcoming the 90% syndrome: iteration Management in concurrent development projects. Concurrent Engineering, Research and Applications, 11(3), 177-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106329303038031.

Luna-Reyes, L., & Andersen, D. (2003). Collecting and analyzing qualitative data for system dynamics: methods and models. System Dynamics Review, 19(4), 271-296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sdr.280.

Lyneis, J. M., & Ford, D. N. (2007). System dynamics applied to Project Management: a survey, assessment, and directions for future research. System Dynamics Review, 23(2-3), 157-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sdr.377.

Martinsuo, M., & Hoverfält, P. (2018). Change program management: toward a capability for managing value-oriented, integrated multi-project change in its context. International Journal of Project Management, 36(1), 134-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.04.018.

Martinsuo, M., & Lehtonen, P. (2007). Program and its initiation in pratice: development program initiation in a public consortium. International Journal of Project Management, 25(4), 337-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.01.011.

Ngai, T., & Fenner, R. A. (2016). Designig programme implementation strategies to increase the adoption and use of biosand water filters in rural India. Water Alternatives, 7(2), 320-341.

Oraee, M., Hosseini, R., Papadonikolaki, E., Palliyaguru, R., & Arashpour, M. (2017). Collaboration in BIM-based construction networks: a bibliometric-qualitative literature review. International Journal of Project Management, 35(7), 1288-1301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.07.001.

Randers, J. (2019). The great challenge for system dynamics on the path forward: implementation and real impact. System Dynamics Review, 35(1), 19-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sdr.1623.

Rebentisch, E. (2017). Integrating Program Management and System Engineering. New Jersey: Jonh Wiley & Sons.

Reis, A., Barbalho, S., & Zanette, A. (2017). A bibliometric and classification study of Project-based Learning in Engineering Education. Production, 27(spe), 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.225816.

Rezende, L. B., Blackwell, P., & Gonçalvez, M. D. (2018). Researches focuses, trends, and major findings on project complexity: a bibliometric network analysis of 50 years of project complexity research. Project Management Journal, 49(1), 42-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/875697281804900104.

Ruzzo, A. (2015). DoD predictive program management. In: Proceedings of the 17th International DSM Conference Fort Worth (pp. 97-107). Texas: Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH and Co. KG.

Sales, L., & Barbalho, S. (2018). Indentifying system archetyes in order to comprehend and improve the Program Managemet practices in organizations. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(1), 1-11.

Sales, L., Augusto, R., & Barbalho, S. (2017). Improper Program Management induced System Archetypes. Procedia Computer Science, 114, 73-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.09.012.

Samrah, R., Shaalan, K., & Ali, A. (2017). System dynamics modeling for the complexity of knowledge creation within adaptive large programs management. Recent Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 569, 3-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56535-4_1.

Shao, J., & Muller, R. (2011). The development of constructs of program context and program success: a qualitative study. International Journal of Project Management, 29(8), 947-959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.02.003.

Shehu, Z., & Akintoye, A. (2010). Major challenges to the successful implementation and practice of programme management in the construction environment: a critical analysis. International Journal of Project Management, 28(1), 26-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.02.004.

Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamic: system thinking and modeling a complex world. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Trammell, T., Moulton, A., & Madnick, S. (2016). Effects of funding fluctuations on software development: a system dynamics analysis. Engineering Management Journal, 28(2), 71-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2016.1155390.

Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3. PMid:20585380.

Walenta, T. (2016). Projects and programs are two different animals, don’t underestimate the gap. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 226, 365-371. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.06.200.

Williams, T. (2005). Assessing and moving on from the dominant project management discourse in the light of project overruns. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(4), 497-508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2005.856572.

Yuan, H., Chini, A., Lu, Y., and Shen, L. (2012). A dynamic model for assessing the effects of management strategies on the reduction of construction and demolition waste. Waste Management, 32(3), 521-531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.11.006.

Zhang, X., Yuzhe, W., Liyin, S., & Martin, S. (2014). A prototype system dynamic model for assessing the sustainability of construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 66-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.01.009.

A bibliometric-qualitative study about the use of System Dynamics in the areas of Project and Program Management

Luciano da Silva Bastos Sales; Sanderson Barbalho; Rodrigo Augusto

Abstract

Keywords

Referências

Links

Compartilhar

Gest. Prod.