Assessing CPM Scheduling Software For The Small to Mid-Size Construction Firm
| dc.contributor.advisor | O'Connell, Kenneth J | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author | Hawkins, Craig Vernon | en_US |
| dc.contributor.department | Civil Engineering | en_US |
| dc.contributor.publisher | Digital Repository at the University of Maryland | en_US |
| dc.contributor.publisher | University of Maryland (College Park, Md.) | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2008-04-22T16:08:11Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2008-04-22T16:08:11Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2007-12-11 | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | An analysis of the results of a regional survey and a comparison of three commonly used programs, SureTrak, Primavera Contractor, and Microsoft (MS) Project, was undertaken. Selected because of their comparable cost structure and their wide acceptance in the industry, these three programs were evaluated on the basis of the features construction managers use to manage their projects. The results indicate that each program had many benefits. However, MS Project and Primavera Contractor both scored better than SureTrak on the overall rating. MS project also scored best in terms of ease of use. It must be noted that this study is based on a comparison of use on relatively small projects (approximately $500,000 in final value and four months duration) and that the results on larger, more complex projects might be different. | en_US |
| dc.format.extent | 201671 bytes | |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1903/7786 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | |
| dc.subject.pqcontrolled | Engineering, Civil | en_US |
| dc.subject.pquncontrolled | Project Management | en_US |
| dc.subject.pquncontrolled | Critical Path Method | en_US |
| dc.subject.pquncontrolled | CPM | en_US |
| dc.subject.pquncontrolled | Scheduling | en_US |
| dc.title | Assessing CPM Scheduling Software For The Small to Mid-Size Construction Firm | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_US |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1