Post at least ONE of your secondary responses to other students$iscussions

 Please provide your feedback on their topics by asking questions and

criticizing the investigation

Peeràpost:

Hello Everyone,

For this discussion board I am talking about "Avoiding or disregarding: Exploring the

relationship between scope creep, project complexity" by Ahmed, R., & Jawad, M. (2022).

where the study's hypothesis were evaluated using regression and process methods. The results

showed that elements (i.e., technological, organizational, and human) that contribute to scope

creep have a negative impact on the accomplishment of construction projects, suggesting that

more scope creep has a lower likelihood of project accomplishment. Furthermore, the link

between scope creep and success is dramatically altered by project complexity, and more

complicated initiatives have lower success rates. According to the findings, organizational

factors, which must be taken into consideration during the project's planning and initial stages,

have the biggest influence on its success, followed by technical and human scope creep

difficulties. A survey approach is used to gather data from those involved in the building industry

in Pakistan.

A Population and sample size (positivism) methodology was used in this investigation. In this

methodology in order to investigate the effects of scope creep on project success, data from

construction projects in Pakistan were gathered using a survey approach. The subjects of this

study were construction projects, such as homes, businesses with high-rises, apartments with

high-rise homes, housing cooperatives, and office buildings. I personally feels that the methods

used by the author adequately proves the author's thesis and there is enough evidence to prove it

as well. 

Pros of the positivism methodology is emphasis on empirical evidence, which can lead to more

reliable and accurate knowledge and quantifiable data can be easily replicated and tested. Cons

of the methodology are positivism can be too narrow in its focus on quantifiable data, ignoring

other forms of knowledge such as personal experiences or subjective perspectives and limited

generalizability of the findings.