Prospect. Vol. 15, No.

2, July-December 2017, 51-59

Assessment of construction project management tools

based on PMI principles and experience

Evaluation of tools for construction projects management based on PMI

fundamentals and experience

Jhosymar Louis Pinzón Rincon1, Aldemar Remolina Millantwo

1 M.Sc. in Civil Engineering, Assistant Professor, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana Seccional Bucaramanga, Research
Group in Project Management and Sustainable Construction Technologies - GPTECs. Bucaramanga-Colombia
twoM.Sc. in Civil Engineering, Professor, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana Seccional
Bucaramanga, Research Group on Project Management and Sustainable Construction Technologies - GPTECs.
Bucaramanga-Colombia.
Email: aldemar.remolina@upb.edu.co

Cite this article as: J. Pinzón, A. Remolina, “Evaluation of tools for construction projects
Received 05/19/2016
management based on PMI fundamentals and experience ”, Prospectiva, Vol 15, N ° 2, 51-59,
Accepted 05/01/2017
2017.

RESUME

This article analyzes the tools proposed in the Project Management Body of Knowledge
- PMBOK, as support for the development of each of the ten management areas that make up the
professional practice of the project manager. The analysis is carried out taking into account criteria such
as practicality and the impact that each of the proposed tools has on the manager's management work.
To carry out the analysis, a matrix was developed that integrates the ten knowledge areas with the five
groups of project processes; The matrix developed allowed the identification of the most recurrent tools
that have the greatest impact on the integral management of the project. The compatibility of a group of
selected tools with the tools used in agile project management and with the declared experience of a
sample of practicing project managers was contrasted; The evaluation of the declared experience was
carried out taking into account the use, practicality and impact of the selected tools. The analysis carried
out allows us to conclude that with nine tools it is possible to carry out an integral managerial
management of the ten areas of knowledge through all the groups of processes.

Keywords: Project management tools; Project knowledge areas; Agile practices; Construction project
management.

ABSTRACT

In this paper are analyzed the tools proposed in the Project Management Body of Knowledge - PMBOK, to
support the development of each of ten knowledge areas that make up the professional practice of project
manager. Analysis was performed taking into account criteria such as practicality and impact that each tool
proposed cause over manager management. For the analysis, a matrix that integrates the ten knowledge
areas with the five groups of project processes was developed; the matrix developed, allowed to identify the
most common tools and that have greater impact on the overall project management. the compatibility of a
group of selected tools were contrasted with the tools used in the management of agile projects with the
stated experience of a sample of project managers practitioners; This assessment was made taking into
account usage, practicality and impact of the selected tools. The analysis allows concluding that nine tools can
carry out a comprehensive management practice of the ten areas of knowledge during all phases of the
project

Key words: Project Management Tools; Project knowledge Areas; Agile Practices; Construction Projects
Management.

Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15665/rp.v15i2.746

51
Assessment of construction project management tools based on PMI principles and experience
1. INTRODUCTION
One of the great difficulties that construction project
managers have to face is the lack of integration between
the management methodologies, philosophies, tools and
instruments that have been developed throughout history.
Although few companies in the industry implement
different management methodologies at the same time,
such as the proposal in the PMI guide for project
management and the postulates of Lean Construction
(construction without losses), Sánchez [1] has identified
aspects of compatibility between the tools of these two
methodologies and proposes a method that allows the
implementation of these.
On the other hand, the existence of a large number
of management tools developed both by industry
and by academia and communities of experts, each
one with an approach that is very specific to its
theoretical or practical nature, generates a basic
barrier. This is difficult to overcome since, according
to the survey carried out, it was possible to identify
that one of the barriers in the implementation of
management methods is that managers do not have
sufficient criteria to identify, select and implement
the most appropriate group of tools to carry out the
management required by the magnitude of the
project; Crawford and Pollack [2] showed that
managers working on construction projects have
less use of managerial tools compared to managers
of other types of projects.
Figure 1. Process groups.
Figure 1. Process groups.
52
To address the problem of low implementation of
management tools and methods by practicing
managers in construction projects, it is essential to
review the concepts of project management, its
associated tools and agile practices.
1.1 Project management-knowledge area and
process groups
In the study of project management, it is common to
approach the analysis from two points of view, the
first one takes into account the life cycle of the
project, which is normally organized in chronological
stages of development, such as the pre-investment
stage. sion, investment, operation and ex post
evaluation [3], the second point of view is that
adopted by the quality management systems and
the PMI, where the project is organized by groups of
processes, which involve a series of inputs, sub-
processes or tools and products [4]. Of these two
approaches, the second points more to the way
projects are developed than to the final result
thereof, which facilitates the organization of the
project, the assignment of responsibilities,
In the particular case of PMI, the following 5 groups of
processes are defined (see figure 1).

In a transversal way to the processes, it is necessary
to analyze the knowledge areas that include all the
management aspects of a project, from the
integration management that involves aspects such
as the direction and coordination of the work team
and the interest groups , up to aspects related to
Figure 2. Process groups and knowledge areas.
Figure 2. Process groups and knowledge areas.
1.2 Project management tools
Management tools facilitate data analysis and / or
decision-making and / or the transport of
information between processes, through tangible or
intangible instruments used by management and its
team.
A series of tools are derived from each of the areas
of expertise proposed by the PMI that are adaptable,
easy to implement, do not require specialized
software and allow a project to be successfully
completed, the basis of each of these. tools is that a
professional with basic experience should be able to
use them even if they do not have theoretical
knowledge.
In studies carried out by Blomquist [5], on the impact
generated by the tools proposed in a theoretical way
on the results of the project, the research focus has
been changed, giving greater importance to the
practitioners and the use they make of them. They
give the tools and the theoretical investigation of
them takes a backseat.
53
Prospect. Vol. 15, No. 2, July-December 2017, 51-59
the management of acquisitions that cover all that
corresponds to contractual matters.
As shown in figure 2, the way in which the different
areas of knowledge proposed by the PMI interact
and complement each other can be seen:
Besner and Hobbs [6] analyzed the results of a
survey applied to 756 managers of which a high
percentage were PMPs (Professional Project
Management), obtaining as a result that most of the
tools used have an impact on the planning stage.
and development. In addition to this, the tools with
the most extensive use are not cataloged among the
PMBOK tools [4] and are for generic use. This study
allowed us to identify that the four with the highest
intrinsic value declared by managers are:
• Software for scheduling tasks
• Scope statement
• Requirements analysis
• Lessons learned / post-mortem
On the other hand, it can be assured based on
research such as that of Zhyzhneuski [7] that during
the last decade the use of project management
software has gained prominence as a management
tool in many of the project management processes.
Projects.
Assessment of construction project management tools based on PMI principles and experience
In later studies by Besner and Hobbs
[8] the importance given by PMI to a group of tools is
reconsidered that, according to what was declared
by the managers, has a very low level of use and as
such were classified as tools with very limited use,
even in very mature companies where Managers
were expected to make more use of specialized tools.
In the studies carried out by Broquetas [9] on the use
of the BIM (Building information modeling) system
as a tool that allows integrating designs with the
management of cost, time and quality of the project,
the multiple benefits that it provide have been
evidenced. lead to more efficient management of the
project manager; This contrasts with the little
relevance given by PMI to the use of tools that allow
the modeling of products prior to their execution.
1.3 Agile practices
Agile practices allow efficient management of the
changes typical of non-industrialized projects that
bring great uncertainty; These facilitate the delivery
of information, rely less on specialized tools and
make the customer part of the product development
[10] to guarantee the fulfillment of their expectations.
At present, construction projects must be developed
in a shorter time, involving more resources, which
increases their complexity and makes it necessary to
have professionals from different specialties who
analyze and manage information in an agile way
[11], in Consequently, a diverse number of tools have
been developed that respond to these needs,
facilitating information management. In this regard,
organizations such as PMI have taken the initiative to
compile these types of agile project management
tools and make them available to project managers
as an efficient management alternative;
2. METHODOLOGYÍTO
To carry out the evaluation of the tools, a matrix-type
instrument was developed based on a spreadsheet that
involves the groups of processes with the areas of
knowledge, in this all the tools indicated in the PMBOK
were included in a summarized way, indicating the
group of processes and the management areas in
which it can be used, with this information the tools
were qualified taking into account how many stages
and areas they impact to obtain a new
54
Mere average, based on this qualification, the tools
were organized within the matrix in descending
order and the five tools were identified that, when
used individually, generate a greater impact on the
integral management of the project; Subsequently, a
new matrix was made taking into account only these
tools in order to verify the percentage of the areas
and stages of a project that could be managed if only
these five were available. Table 1 shows the
assignment of a numerical code to each tool with
which it is going to be identified.
Table 1. Selected tools.
Table 1. Selected tools.
Qualification
Numeration Tool
average
1 Expert judgment 13.67
two Meetings 10.33
3 Analytical techniques 6.33
4 Reserve analysis 3.33
5 Audits 3.33
6 Inspection 2.67
Management software
7 2.33
project
Techniques
8 2.33
negotiation
Methods of
9 2.33
communication
With the matrix (table 2) formed, the percentage of
the knowledge areas and the groups of processes
that can be managed with each of the first five tools
and with the combination of these five were
identified, this allowed to visualize which of the Areas
and groups did not have tools for their management
after having included the five tools with the greatest
impact and it was examined within the remaining
tools in the order of impact in order to determine the
minimum amount of tools to be used. required to fill
the gaps left by the first five tools. At the time of
adding each of the tools to the refined matrix and
verifying how many areas of knowledge and groups
of processes could be managed, it was evidenced
that from the fifth tool,
 Prospect. Vol. 15, No. 2, July-December 2017, 51-59

without tools, the execution of human resources, given by the initial matrix in tool number five and
communication and stakeholders, and the monitoring continue adding tools based on the areas of the
and control of scope, time and quality, for this reason it processes that did not count
was decided to stop selecting tools in the organization. with tools.

Table 2. Impact of tools.

Table 2. Impact of tolos.

TOOL SCOPE SUMMARY TABLE

AREAS / STAGES Tool 1 Tool 2 Tool 3 Tool 4 Tool 5 First 5
Start 100% fifty% 0% 0% 0% 100%
Planning 80% 90% twenty% twenty% 0% 100%
Execution 33% 0o% 0% 0% 17% fifty%

Monitoring and control 33% 44% eleven% 22% 22% 67%

Closing fifty% fifty% fifty% 0% fifty% 100%
Integration 100% 60% 40% 0% 0% 100%
Scope fifty% fifty% 0% 0% 0% fifty%

Weather fifty% fifty% fifty% fifty% 0% fifty%

cost fifty% fifty% fifty% 100% 0% 100%

Quality 0% 33% 0% 0% 33% 67%
Human resources fifty% fifty% 0% 0% 0% fifty%

Communications 33% 67% 0% 0% 0% 67%

Risks fifty% 100% 0% fifty% fifty% 100%
Acquisitions fifty% 25% 0% 0% fifty% 100%
Interested 75% 75% 0% 0% 0% 75%

Knowing that this matrix had shortcomings in some
of the areas and stages, we proceeded to include
within the tools found the concept of agile project
tools, classifying the two tools that, according to
experience and the initial matrix, can complement
and enhance the impact of traditional tools on the
same model in which the PMBOK tools were
developed.
the 23 tools with the greatest impact extracted from
the initial matrix by selecting the 5 tools without
which a project could not be managed, and finally, a
set of questions focused on evaluating in a particular
way the practicality, impact and barriers to the
implementation of the 5 main tools according to the
initial matrix, the survey was applied electronically
using the Google Drive forms tool.

The validation of all the tools was carried out based

on the experience statement presented by a group
of managers; To this end, a survey was designed and
applied to a representative sample of 116
professionals specializing in project management
from the city of Bucaramanga, of which 82 responses
were obtained. The survey participants were
postgraduate students from the specialization
program. in Management and Supervision of civil
works from the Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana de
Bucaramanga, which come from different public and
private companies and work on building
construction projects. The survey was designed in
three sections, the first aimed at determining the
manager's profile with questions about the number
of works directed at a single moment,
These data were refined taking into account the
management profile and experience, finally
analyzing 28 surveys that had been answered by
professionals who handled at least two works, which
reported a size greater than 5000 mtwo and more than
15 people in charge, according to the sample size
obtained from professionals with the desired profile,
a data reliability level of 95% and an error rate of 5%
were achieved [13].
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
From the debugging of the tool matrix, taking into
account the minimum amount necessary to manage
all the management areas and process groups, nine
tools were found that fulfill this function and are
distributed in the 11 areas and the 5 stages, the
which can be seen organized in the following table.

55
Assessment of construction project management tools based on PMI principles and experience

Table 3. Impact matrix of selected tools.

Table 3. Impact matrix for selected tools.

First 9 tools
Monitoring and
AREAS Start Planning Execution Closing
control
Integration 1 1 1, 2 1,2,3
Scope 1, 2 6
Weather 1,2,3,4 7
cost 1,2,3,4 4
Quality two 5 6
Human Resources 1.2 8
Communication two 9 1.2
Risks 1.2 2,4,5
Acquisitions 1.2 1 5
Interested 1.2 1.2 9 1.2

With the complete matrix, it can be seen that most of
the tools focus on planning time, costs and
monitoring and control of integration and risks,
finding that there is a lack of tools that allow
planning activities at the time of execution. release
planning (a planning method that sees a horizon of
months and as they are released, new activities
appear), iterative planning ( short-term planning
method that sees a horizon to days and is
iterative and repetitive in time) and the daily standing
meeting (daily meeting to check requirements does not last
more than 10 minutes).
With this initial information, it was possible to design
and apply the survey to the group of project
managers in the city. From the responses obtained in
the second section of the survey on the
indispensable tools to develop project management,
the following was obtained percentage distribution
of tool use (see figure 3).

Figure 3. Essential tools for managers.

Figure 3. Indispensable tool for managers.

Less than 5% Expert judgment

twenty%
14%

Management software
draft
Management systems
12%
information
5%

Group Techniques
decision making
5% Skills
interpersonal
Negotiation techniques 12%
5%

Seven tools
basic quality
6% Inspection
Performance reports eleven%

10%

56
 Prospect. Vol. 15, No. 2, July-December 2017, 51-59

In these data it was found that according to the 28
managers who took part in the census, three of the four
tools most selected as indispensable by the population
that took part in the census coincide with the first seven
tools selected in the initial matrix, which are, Judgment
of experts, Project management software and
Inspection, having a high degree of coincidence
between the decision of the tools
It is intended to be used by managers who are not necessarily
familiar with the PMBOK with the approaches in this guide.
The data resulting from the survey were analyzed
tool by tool, by age ranges, by number of works
managed simultaneously and by ranges according to
years of experience to obtain more specific results,
summarized in the following table:

Table 4. Tool survey result.

Table 4. Result of poll about tools.

Understanding
Methodology at Help in taking Understanding
Knowledge Use by the group of
Tool usor decisions by superiors
job
Yes Not Yes Not Yes Not If not Yes Not If not
Judgment of
69% 31% 69% 31% 55% Four. Five% 91% 9% 44% 56% 90% 10%
experts
Meetings 41% 59% 56% 44% Four. Five% 55% 86% 14% 86% 14% 100% 0%
Techniques
12% 88% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% fifty% fifty% 50% 50%
analytics
Analysis of
18% 82% 100% 0% 67% 33% 100% 0% 33% 67% 67% 33%
Bookings

Audits 29% 71% 100% 0% 56% 44% 78% 22% 43% 57% 86% 14%

From these data it can be summarized that In figure 4 it can be seen that according to the 28
according to the 28 managers who took part in the managers who took part in the census, the judgment of
census, the most specialized tools such as reserve experts and meetings are the most practical tools, and the
analysis, analytical techniques and audits are used by judgment of experts the most impressive followed by
the population analyzed in a more methodological meetings, analytical techniques and analysis of reserves.
way and have more impact than traditional tools
such as meetings or expert judgments, but they are To organize the tools by impact, it is possible to think
less well known and are less understood by the work about carrying out a qualitative evaluation of them in
group and superiors (bosses). order to verify their usefulness in the process, but if
we talk about impact, the most important thing is to
Within the third section of questions, it was requested determine how a single tool is capable of impact on
to rate from 1 to 5 the practicality and impact that various stages and areas of a project, which in turn
project managers perceived from the census regarding describes its adaptability, that is why only a
the use of the tools considered to be the most quantitative classification was carried out,
important, obtaining the following results. considering as having the greatest impact the tools
that cover more areas of knowledge and project
Figure 4. Impact practicality evaluation. process groups.
Figure 4. Practicality and impact assessment.
In addition to the aforementioned, each of the tools
5 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.0 4.0 4.0 that you want to use in a project requires input
4 3.7 elements, analysis processes and generates output
4 3.0 elements on which decision-making should be
3
based, for which reason The use of multiple
3
two
specialized tools to manage a single process requires
two
the use of up to 27 tools, therefore, in the selection
1
of matrices and in the survey, priority is given to the
1 use of tools that are flexible between areas of
0 knowledge and process groups.
Judgment of Meetings Techniques Audit Analysis
Experts analytics Bookings
When starting to fill out the matrix, classifying each of
Practicality Impact the tools by their process, it was possible to identify

57
Assessment of construction project management tools based on PMI principles and experience
tify that there are some areas and stages with the
highest concentration of tools, so it could be believed
that these are the ones that have the greatest
complexity or uncertainty at the time of management
and therefore require the most attention, but when
completing the process it is understood that processes
such as cost and time planning require greater
interaction with the other areas and stages.
It is likely that tools such as audits, which did not
have a good evaluation in terms of practicality or
impact by the census, will be discarded as control
tools that do not contribute to specific projects, but
by disaggregating the surveys and tabulating only
the Answered by managers who are in charge of
more than two projects, this does generate a
fundamental role in achieving the homogenization of
the processes and controls carried out on the
different projects.
4. CONCLUSIONS
In the PMBOK a total of 113 tools can be identified to
manage the different stages and areas of a project,
knowing all these tools would require a very high
dedication of a manager's time and to perform the
data analysis a high volume of work by support
personnel is required, which implies that, without
adequate debugging of the tools proposed in the
guide, their application becomes very difficult.
For the census studied, the more specialized tools
such as trend analysis and reserve analysis, do not
have as much impact if they are observed
throughout the total life cycle of the project, this
means that when managing a project Construction in
a medium-sized city with this type of tools requires
the use of at least twenty-seven specialized tools,
which in practice is inconvenient due to what was
expressed in the previous conclusion.
With a minimum of nine traditional tools and three
agile tools, all stages and areas of a project can be
managed, since these contribute to the management
of all areas of knowledge, during the five groups of
processes, in the case in which the same importance
is given to all processes and a management tool is
considered sufficient for each one of them.
36% of the managers of construction projects in an
intermediate city such as Bucaramanga use generic
management tools, although they do not do so
methodologically. However, they declare that they
use more specific tools in a methodological way.
58
specialized techniques such as analytical techniques and
reserve analysis.
Tools such as expert judgment, project management
software and inspection were classified by the
census managers as high impact tools and are also
among the four most selected as indispensable tools
by the managers surveyed. .
Tools such as audits obtained a low rating in impact
and practicality by those construction managers part
of the census that handle a single work (rating of 2
and 3 out of 5 respectively); which suggests that their
work is not very oriented towards monitoring and
process integration. On the other hand, 100% of the
managers who declared that they manage more
than one project simultaneously, have used the
results of the audits to make decisions, since they
generate information on the status of each project
with very concise indicators.
In the census, 57% of young practitioners and 63% of
more experienced practitioners declared the use of
project management software tools such as OPUS,
Primavera Project Planner and MS Pro as important
and high impact. - ject; which corroborates the
statements made by Zhyzhneuski in previous studies
and is further evidenced as having a high impact in
the matrix resulting from the classification of the 113
tools.
Traditional tools such as meetings and expert
judgments show a high rating in practicality (4.2 and
4.1 out of 5 respectively) by the managers part of the
census, although their use is carried out in a less
methodological way (45% and 55 %) as evidenced in
table 4.
Specialized tools such as reserve analysis and
analytical techniques were 100% selected as being of
great help in decision-making (table 4), although
according to the managers who took part in the
census, their result has a low impact on the global
project (3.6 and 4.0 out of 5 respectively) as shown in
figure 4.
The expert judgment tool theoretically contributes to
the management of 55% of all project management
processes, however, it loses usefulness to the extent
that a construction project manager of an
intermediate city is in charge more than three
projects simultaneously. This is because its
development requires a complex coordination of the
time of experts, site personnel and personnel
dedicated to management.

REFERENCES
[1] J. Sanchez, "Project management models:
compatible project management", Dyna, 87, 214-221,
2012.
[2] L. Crawford, J. Pollack, “How generic are project
management Knowledge and practice?”, Project
Management Journal, 38 (1), 37-48, 2007.
[3] JJM, Miranda, Project management: identification,
formulation, financial-economic-social-environmental
evaluation, MMEditores, 2005, pp. 3-27.
[4] PMI, Guide to the fundamentals of project
management, Fifth Edition, Pennsylvania: Project
Management Institute, 2013, pp. 29-319.
[5] T. Blomquist, M. Hällgren, A. Nilsson, A. Söderholm,
“Project-as-Practice: In Search of Project Management
Research That Matters”, Project Management Journal,
41 (1), 5-16, 2010.
[6] C. Besner, B. Hobbs, “The perceived value and
potential contribution of project management practices
to project success”, Project Management Journal, 37 (3),
37-48, 2006.
[7] A. Zhyzhneuski, Effective Time Management and
Its Importance for Construction Projects [Internet],
59
Prospect. Vol. 15, No. 2, July-December 2017, 51-59
Academy. Available from: <http: //www.acade-
mia.edu/2053443/Effective_Time_Management_
and_its_importance_for_construction_projects._
Time_Management_techniques_and_tools>
[Accessed March 27, 2016], 2007.
[8] C. Besner, B. Hobbs, "Project Management Practice,
Generic or Contextual: AReality Check", Project
Management Journal, 39 (1), 16-33, 2008.
[9] M. Broquetas. Using BIM as a Project Management
Tool. Master's Thesis, University of Applied Sciences
Stuttgart, 2010.
[10] JH, Canós, P., Letelier, MC Penadés, Agile
methodologies in software development. Valencia:
Polytechnic University of Valencia, 2003, pp. 4-5.
[11] PMI, Construction extension to a Guide to the Project
Management Body of Knowledge. Pennsylvania: Project
Management Institute, 2003, pp. 10-17.
[12] PMI, Agile Certified Practitioner (PMI_ACP)
Handbook, Pennsylvania: Project Management
Institute, 2015, pp. 33-35.
[13] M. Suarez, Interlearning of probabilities and
inferential statistics with excel, winstats and graph,
First edition, Ecuador: Ecuadorian Institute of
Intellectual Property, 2013, pp. 139-141.