Lean vs agile project management in construction: impacts on project performance outcomes

Abstract

Purpose The present research aims to investigate how lean project management (LPM) and agile project management (APM) affect project performance outcomes in the construction sector in Jordan. This study focuses on six key project performance outcomes, namely cost, time, quality, client satisfaction, innovation and responsiveness. Design/methodology/approach The present study employed a quantitative approach to achieve the research objectives. Accordingly, a multi-item survey questionnaire was prepared to gather data from 392 project managers from construction companies in Jordan. The study’s model showed acceptable levels regarding reliability, validity, fit indices and discriminant validity. In order to test the hypotheses of this study, path analysis was employed using Amos 24.0 software. Findings LPM demonstrated a remarkably high positive impact on cost performance. It also positively affected quality performance and client satisfaction. However, LPM insignificantly affected time, innovation and responsiveness performance measures. On the other hand, APM showed a notably high positive impact on innovation and responsiveness. The findings also revealed that APM positively impacted quality performance and client satisfaction. In addition, APM negatively impacted cost performance and insignificantly impacted time performance. Originality/value This study is one of the first comprehensive studies to empirically examine the impact of both LPM and APM on various project performance outcomes in the construction industry in the context of a developing country. It reveals some similarities and differences between LPM and APM with regard to their impacts on project management outcomes. The findings are expected to guide managers in selecting the appropriate project management approach based on the desired performance outcomes. Accordingly, it offers important implications for project managers in construction companies.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 27 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.