摘要：This research presents a model for project performance review. The objective of the research, which was development of the model, originated in response to demand from Owners and Practitioners; it fills an extant gap in both research and practice. While performance audits and metrics have been conducted in government for decades, the application to projects is fairly new.The research evolved from a doctoral study of 700 construction projects. The doctoral study extracted factor data from audit reports, and objectively and empirically compared the effects of different factors on audit results. Subsequent published analyses reviewed the scope of the project audits, evaluated existing project assessment methods to identify essential elements for project review, and studied stakeholder interviews to extract their primary concerns and definitions of success.The model is the result of two decades of project management & controls expertise, extensive literature review, research, and leading practices gathered from around the globe on project performance assessment and audit. Although the case studies and interviews were from construction projects in the United States, the tools may be applied to projects in any industry, worldwide.Even though audit is a common mechanism for both external and internal project oversight, existing performance audit standards and guidance are not just insufficient but nearly non-existent. Published literature, research, professional associations, and oversight bodies exist in the evaluation and financial audit fields, but not in the domain of performance audit. As such, practitioner approaches to scope and methodology are highly variable. This variability, which includes issues of audit sampling and review rigor, team composition, industry knowledge, audit scope, quality and availability of data, and other factors, has been proven to impact audit results. Economy, efficiency, effectiveness, and risk - concepts integral to the very definition performance audit - are rarely assessed in practice, a gap which could be considered by stakeholders to be a deficiency in the audit process, essentially a failure to deliver the depth and breadth of review promised or implied. Further, while traditional audit methods of testing procedural compliance can be effective in organizations where activities are repetitive and predictable, many projects are considerably more complicated, the project organization is temporary, and processes continuously evolve in response to changing circumstances and risk. Standard audit techniques applied in such situations are ineffective.This model focuses on giving stakeholders confidence in project delivery. It enables qualitative and quantitative findings, is flexible and modular, and can be applied in any industry, sector, and country, while satisfying regulatory requirements.
