Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the current construction progress monitoring (CPM) process in relation to the contractual obligations, how project management teams carry out this activity in the field and why teams continue to adopt the current method. The study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current monitoring process and its effectiveness, identify any shortcomings and propose recommendations for improvements that can lead to better project outcomes.

The study conducted semi-structured interviews with 28 construction management practitioners to explore their views on contractual requirements, traditional progress monitoring practices and advanced monitoring methods. Thematic analysis was used to identify existing processes, practices and incentives for advanced monitoring.

Standard construction contracts mandate current progress monitoring practices, which often rely on manual, document-centric and labor-intensive methods, leading to slow and erroneous progress reporting and project delays. Key barriers to adopting advanced tools include rigid contractual clauses, lack of incentives and the absence of reliable automated tools. A holistic automated approach that covers the entire CPM process, from planning to claim management, is needed as a viable alternative to traditional practices.

The study's findings can inform researchers, stakeholders and decision-makers about the existing monitoring practices and contribute to enhancing project management practices.

The study identified contractually mandated progress monitoring processes, traditional methods of collecting, transferring, analyzing and dispensing progress-related information and potential incentives and points of departure towards technologically advanced methods.

This study aims to investigate the accounting role’s deficiencies in managers’ decision-making processes.

The current research applies a critical review method, which along with a deductive approach – based on a library review of existing sources – examines the underlying causes for the deficiencies of accounting role in the decision-making process of managers; moreover, based on the results obtained, the current study proposes a structural model to explain the issue.

The results exhibit the inadequacies of the accounting role in the decision-making process of managers into three sections: “dilution of financial reporting information content,” “malpractice of accounting information providers” and “managers’ unwillingness to use accounting information.”

This research provides a new perspective on critical accounting studies for the accounting profession, policymakers and managers and invites them to examine the roles of accounting information in more depth and breadth.

This article is the first study that critically expounds upon the literature on the deficiencies of accounting role in the decision-making process of managers and presents these deficiencies in the form of a structural model from three different perspectives.