A Comprehensive Literature Review on Stakeholder Engagement Plan

This literature review examines the critical role of Stakeholder Engagement Plans (SEPs) in construction project management. It highlights the complexity of stakeholder involvement due to their diverse backgrounds, cultural beliefs, and priorities. Effective stakeholder engagement is essential for aligning mutual interests, reducing risks, and fostering collaboration. The review covers various perspectives on stakeholder engagement, including strategic management, ethical considerations, and social learning. It emphasizes the importance of understanding stakeholder influences, managing expectations, and adapting engagement strategies to changing project phases. Furthermore, it addresses the challenges in stakeholder engagement, such as conflicting interests and resource constraints, and underscores the need for transparent communication and risk management. The review concludes that a comprehensive SEP is crucial for achieving project success by ensuring stakeholders are informed, involved, and supportive of project goals, and students can find similar solved assignments on Desklib.

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 1
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN (SEP): LITERATURE REVIEW
Name
Course
Professor
University
City/state
Date

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 2
Table of Contents
1. Literature Review..............................................................................................................................3
1.1. Background................................................................................................................................3
1.2. Main Issues to be addressed in the SEP.................................................................................10
1.2.1. Introduction......................................................................................................................10
1.2.2. Overview of stakeholder engagement.............................................................................10
1.2.3. Stakeholder identification and analysis..........................................................................10
1.2.4. Stakeholder engagement strategy...................................................................................12
1.2.5. Grievance management...................................................................................................12
1.2.6. Implementation of the SEP.............................................................................................12
1.2.7. Monitoring, evaluation and reporting of SEP implementation....................................12
References................................................................................................................................................13

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 3
1. Literature Review
1.1. Background
All over the world, the construction industry is known to be complex, challenging, risky
and capital intensive (Tengan & Aigbavboa, 2017). Among other reasons that contribute to the
complexity of construction projects is the number and diversity of stakeholders involved in these
projects. The stakeholders usually come from different backgrounds and professions, and they
have varied cultural beliefs, priorities, ethics and styles of doing things (De Bony, 2010). It
becomes even more complicated if the project involves stakeholders from different countries due
to the challenge of diverse national cultures (Khan, 2014); (Zegarac & Spencer-Oatey, 2013). If
there is no proper stakeholder engagement and management plan, the project can easily fail to
achieve its objectives. Therefore companies responsible for executing construction projects
should develop a SEP to ensure that all stakeholders involved in the project are brought together
and work as a team towards successful completion of the project (Amponsah, 2012). The SEP
helps in aligning the mutual interests of stakeholders thus reducing risks, conflicts,
misunderstanding and disputes that could otherwise derail and disrupt project completion (Li, et
al., 2012).
The success of construction projects depends significantly on the effective interaction,
collaboration, cooperation and consultation of stakeholders (Luckmann & Farber, 2016). But
considering the diversity of stakeholders that are involved in these projects, there should be a
framework to guide how these stakeholders will engage with each other throughout the project
period (Collinge, 2016). This makes it necessary to develop a SEP during planning phase of the
project. One of the important aspects of SEP is for the project manager to build strong
stakeholder relationship and focus more on how to contribute to these relationships instead of

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 4
what they will get from the stakeholders (Bates, 2015). In other words, all stakeholder should be
valued and treated as crucial resources for successful delivery of the project.
According to Mathur, et al. (2008), stakeholder engagement can be viewed from three
main perspectives: strategic management perspective, ethical perspective and social perspective.
From a strategic management perspective, stakeholder engagement aims at acquiring knowledge,
reducing conflicts, increasing project users’ ownership, enhancing extra partnerships and
promoting innovation. From an ethical perspective, stakeholder engagement aims at enhancing
equity, promoting inclusive decision making, building social capital and promoting local
decision making. From a social learning perspective, stakeholder engagement aims at giving
various stakeholders an opportunity or a platform to learn different values, learn how their values
are perceived by others, and create mutual objectives and a common vision. Thus a proper SEP is
the one that puts together all the three perspectives (Mathur, et al., 2008).
In a study conducted by Chinyio & Akintoye (2008), interviews were used to discuss
different approaches of engaging with stakeholders. The study was conducted from the
perspective of a company targeting to interact with as many stakeholders as possible and ensure
optimal satisfaction despite conflicting expectations and influences. Stakeholders should be
engaged using varied combinations of strategies. It is a complex issue considering that
stakeholders’ influences depend on their interest and power, which keeps on changing with time.
As a result, the company should always understand its stakeholders’ outlook during different
phases of the project and give the most appropriate response. The authors suggest that the
company should develop a group of tried and tested practices, such as negotiation,
communication, offering incentives, trade-offs and making concessions (Chinyio & Akintoye,
2008). They also noted that there is no practice that is superior to the other and therefore they

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 5
should be used depending on effectiveness. When the expectations of stakeholders vary, the
approach of engaging them should also be changed so as to address new demands and conditions
(Zuber, 2013).
Many studies have found that stakeholders are one of the major sources of uncertainty in
most construction projects all over the world. This is because construction projects involve a
wide range of stakeholders who come with different interests and preferences. As a result,
identification and management of stakeholders have become a major issue in management of
construction projects. El-Sawalhi & Hammad (2015) conducted a study to evaluate various
factors that affect management of stakeholders particularly for construction projects in Gaza
Strip. The researchers conducted a comprehensive literature review on topics related to
construction project stakeholder management then conducted a questionnaire survey among
relevant participants in the construction industry. From the study, some of the factors that were
identified to affect stakeholder engagement and management include: competency level of the
project manager, effective communication between stakeholders, transparent analysis of
alternative solution, exploring needs and expectations of stakeholders, and setting common
project goals and objectives (El-Sawalhi & Hammad, 2015). This study emphasizes the need to
have a plan on how project stakeholders will be engaged and managed. This plan helps in
identifying stakeholders and understanding their diverse interests, expectations, needs and
capabilities. Once these issues are understood, it becomes easier to manage and engage
stakeholders for successful delivery of the project.
Stakeholders influence the project delivery process differently depending on their
interests, powers, needs, level of commitment, resources available, knowledge and expertise, etc.
To achieve project success, the project manager must understand how each stakeholder

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 6
influences the project. A group of researchers from the University of South Australia conducted
a study to explore various actions that are used by stakeholders to influence construction
projects. In this study, Nguyen et al. (2017) performed a multiple-case study and identified the
following seven strategies as those commonly used by stakeholders to influence success of
construction projects: withholding inputs, compromising inputs, building coalition, direct action,
communication, building credibility, building coalition and escalating conflicts. The researchers
also observed various patterns between the strategies. The conclusion from this study was that
there is need for stakeholders to be engaged fully and honestly so as to prevent the likelihood of
influencing the project adversely (Nguyen, et al., 2017). It is clear from this study that
stakeholders have the capacity to influence the project positively or negatively. How they decide
to influence the project largely depends on how they are engaged and managed. This requires the
project manager to develop a comprehensive plan on how all stakeholders involved in the project
will be engaged so that they can influence the project positively or else the project goals and
objectives may not be achieved as expected.
Stakeholder engagement also plays a major role towards company-public relationships.
Today, online and offline communication platforms can be used to spread information quickly.
This information can impact the project either positively or negatively. The best way to ensure
that the information shared with the public influences the project positively is to engage
stakeholders on all issues related to or affecting the project (Louma-aho & Vos, 2010). For
example, if a project has numerous environmental impacts, it is very important for the company
to engage environmental agencies, environmentalists, environmental lobby groups and the local
community because they are the ones that will be greatly interested in or directly affected by the
project. However, engaging all these stakeholders and influencing them to support the project

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 7
has its own share of challenges. A study conducted by Luoma-aho (2015), showed that
stakeholder engagement is not as easy as it may sound especially due to the fact that the
environment is usually complex and unpredictable. The researcher explored three types of
stakeholders: faith-holders (stakeholders who are positively engaged), hate-holders (stakeholders
who are negatively engaged) and fake-holders (unauthentic stakeholders who are produced by
algorithm and astroturf). He concluded that for a project to be delivered successfully, the project
manager should ensure that the faith-holders are supported adequately, hate-holders are engaged
accordingly, and fake-holders are revealed (Luoma-aho, 2015). Another conclusion from this
study was that any of the three categories of stakeholders can change from one engagement to
another, that is, they may shift from positive engagement to negative engagement or from
negative engagement to positive engagement at any time. This basically means that all
stakeholders should be identified and their intentions, interests and influences known so as to
find out how to use them for successful project delivery.
In a study conducted by Oates & Dodds (2017), the researchers sought to identify an
approach for stakeholder engagement when delivering projects based on ecosystem approach (a
methodology for integrated management of land, living resources and water that supports
preservation and sustainable and equitable use of these resources) . First, they emphasized on the
importance of effective stakeholder engagement when executing projects of different
magnitudes. They then identified a stakeholder engagement approach involving four main steps:
identifying an applicable policy structure, stakeholders’ roles and agree on common project
objectives; creating a neutral, open and cross-sectorial environment and develop an engagement
procedure that provides an inclusive and safe space; clarifying terminology and creating common
principles or a shared vision via an engagement process; and collectively create management

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 8
actions that are necessary for achieving set objectives and facilitate its implementation (Oates &
Dodds, 2017).
When a company focuses on the project goals and objectives without understanding and
engaging stakeholders that are involved in the project, it becomes extremely difficult to achieve
the set goals and objectives. This is simply because stakeholders can decide to influence the
project adversely if the senior management fails to treat them properly or involve them
appropriately. Construction projects are susceptible to numerous risks and failure by the senior
management to communicate with all stakeholders about the likely risks that the project will face
will hamper efforts to mitigate these risks. Van Zyl (2013) conducted a study to explore risks
associated with companies not information stakeholder communities about the risks they are
facing and discuss how a comprehensive stakeholder engagement process can help in
overcoming these risks. The researcher (Van Zyl, 2013). The researcher analyzed three case
studies and found that stakeholders can interpret information differently if they are not engaged
appropriately. Wrong interpretation will led to wrong decisions and ultimately failure to achieve
project goals and objectives. Therefore it is upon project managers to ensure that stakeholders
are given the right information on time, are made aware of risks associated with the project, and
are given a plan on how to deal with these risks. Failure to engage stakeholders the right way
means leaving them to act on their own and they may make adverse decisions that could affect
successful project delivery.
Ochieng & Chileshe (2016) conducted a study to investigate various external stakeholder
engagement strategies and challenges facing adoption of these strategies, particularly in South
Australian construction sector. The researchers used questionnaires and interviews to identify
twenty one stakeholder management strategies and nine challenges. Top three strategies

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 9
identified were identification of stakeholders, a definite communication plan and strategy, and
understanding stakeholder expectations, whereas bottom two strategies included assigning
responsibilities to stakeholders and open information sharing. The top 3 challenges identified
were: conflicting interests, power conflicts and scarce resources, while the bottom three
challenges included subversive stakeholders, low stakeholder turn out during meetings and
passive stakeholder involvement (Ochieng & Chileshe, 2016). From this study, it is evident that
stakeholder engagement is very essential in successful delivery of construction projects. But
despite having a stakeholder engagement plan, project managers should be aware of challenges
that may face implementation of this plan so as to identify strategies of overcoming these
challenges.
It is also worth noting that most organizations do not engage communities and the public
adequately by considering them less relevant in stakeholder engagement. This is usually disaster-
in-waiting because there are many high-profile projects that have encountered public
controversy, media attention and outrage due to inadequate public participation. It is the
responsibility of the company to engage the local community so as to understand how to deal
with them and facilitate social acceptance of the project. Today, communities are more
demanding as they will need effective and transparent processes that allows them to be part of
decision-making team (Morrissey, 2015). These communities expect and demand more public
participation so that they can give their opinions and raise concerns about the project because
they will live with it for many years to come. For instance, they will demand to know the
implications of the project so that they can raise their concerns and be assured that they will be
addressed before the project proceeds.

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 10
1.2. Main Issues to be addressed in the SEP
Construction projects are generally complex and they involved diverse stakeholders with
different interests, influences and powers (Bal, et al., 2013). For this reason, the need for project
managers to develop comprehensive SEP cannot be overemphasized (Saghatforoush, et al.,
2010). There are several issues that will be covered in the SEP in this report. Some of these
include the following:
1.2.1. Introduction
This section discusses briefly about the project (Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport), its
scope and purpose, and objectives of SEP.
1.2.2. Overview of stakeholder engagement
This section discusses the meaning of stakeholder engagement, importance of SEP, key
principles of stakeholder engagement, and some of the factors that should be considered when
preparing for stakeholder engagement.
1.2.3. Stakeholder identification and analysis
1.2.3.1. Stakeholder identification
This is a process of identifying stakeholders that will be involved in or affected by the
project so as to know how to deal with each one of them and manage them as a team. Identifying
stakeholders helps in understanding the powers, interests and influences of each stakeholder. As
a result, it becomes easier to clarify stakeholders and know who among them should be
prioritized. There are two main categories of stakeholders: internal stakeholders and external
stakeholders (Ballejos & Montagna, 2008). Internal stakeholders are those that are directly
involved in the implementation process of the project, including decision making process. They
include owner, contractors, employees, suppliers, customers, etc. On the other hand, external

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 11
stakeholders are those that are affected by the ongoing project activities. They include
government (federal, state and local government), business owners, property owners, local
community, neighbors, special interest groups, media and the general public (Atkin & Skitmore,
2008). Each of these stakeholders influence the project differently and therefore appropriate
techniques should be used to engage them (Aaltonen & Kujala, 2010); (Ackermann & Eden,
2010). For instance, the best engagement approaches for internal stakeholders may be different
from those for external stakeholders (Olander & Landin, 2008). Analyzing and understanding
these stakeholders help in identifying the following: interests of stakeholders, potential risks,
mechanisms of influencing other stakeholders, key stakeholders that should be given first
priority, and negative stakeholders and their potential adverse effects (Prabhu, 2016).
This SEP will provide a list of internal and external stakeholders that will be involved or
affected by the construction of a third runway at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) airport. The main
stakeholder groups that will be discussed in the SEP include the following: project personnel,
government authorities, contractors, subcontractors, conservation organizations, NGOs, impacted
communities, trade unions, suppliers, academic community, interest groups, general public,
financiers and media.
1.2.3.2. Stakeholder Analysis
This section explores the likely relationship between the project and various stakeholders
with an aim of identifying the most suitable consultation approaches and engagement techniques
for the stakeholder groups. The analysis will also be used to map stakeholders based on their
importance, influence and interest.

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 12
1.2.4. Stakeholder engagement strategy
This section discusses various phases of stakeholder engagement in the construction of
third runway at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport. The main issues to be discussed are:
stakeholder engagement stages (baseline engagement stage, disclosure and consultation stage,
and continuous engagement); and post disclosure stage (creating a community association team
and local review forum).
1.2.5. Grievance management
This basically entails developing a mechanism of settling any grievances raised by
stakeholders. A grievances mechanism outlines the procedure that should be followed by
stakeholders to raise and address issues arising between them. Each project is unique and
therefore the grievances mechanism developed will be customized to address concerns that are
likely to arise from the construction of a third runway at Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport. The
mechanism plan will also be updated as the project progresses or as required to make it more
accessible, relevant and effective.
1.2.6. Implementation of the SEP
This outlines the responsibilities (including the management structure), resources,
materials and tools that will be used in implementing the SEP.
1.2.7. Monitoring, evaluation and reporting of SEP implementation
This highlights how implementation of SEP will be monitored, evaluated and reported.
Reporting will involve preparing monthly and annual reports, and also reporting back to relevant
authorities and the affected communities.

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 13
References
Aaltonen ujala A project lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence strategies in global, K. & K , J., 2010.
projects. candinavian ournal of ManagementS J , pp26(4), . 381-397.
Aapaoja A, ., 2014. Enhancing alue Creation of Construction Projects hrough Early ta eholderV T S k
nvolvement and ntegrationI I , ulu inland niversity of inlandO , F : U F .
Achterkamp M Vos nvestigating the use of the stakeholder notion in project management, . & , J., 2008. I
literature a meta analysis, - . nternational ournal of Project ManagementI J , pp26(7), . 749-757.
Ackermann den C Strategic Management of Stake holders heory and ractice, F. & E , ., 2010. - : T P . ongL
ange PlanningR , pp44(3), . 179-196.
Amponsah R, ., 2012. he eal Project ailure actors and the Effect of Culture on Project Management nT R F F
Ghana, Accra C R: I BE- F.
Atkin Skitmore M ditorial Stakeholder Management in Construction, B. & , ., 2008. E : . Construction
Management and Economics, pp26(6), . 549-552.
allejos Montagna Method for Stakeholder dentification in nterorganizational nvironmentsB , L. & , J., 2008. I I E .
e uirements EngineeringR q , Volume pp13, . 281-297.
al M ryde D earon D chieng Stakeholder ngagement Achieving Sustainability inB , ., B , ., F , . & O , E., 2013. E :
the Constructon Sector. ustaina ilityS b , pp6(2), . 695-710.
ates CB , ., 2015. he mportance of ta eholder EngagementT I S k . nline[O ]
Available at: https www entrepreneurmag co za advice business leadership leading the importance:// . . . / / - / / - -
of stakeholder engagement- - /
Accessed August[ 1 2018].
loomberg ewsB N , 2017. Government to uild n estern ydney irportb $5b W S A . nline[O ]
Available at: https www ausbt com au federal government to build bn western sydney airport:// . . . / - - - -5 - - -
Accessed uly[ 31 J 2018].
uertey Amofa D Atsrim Stakeholder Management on Construction rojects A eyB , J., , . & , F., 2016. P : K
ndicator for roject SuccessI P . merican ournal of Civil EngineeringA J , pp4(4), . 117-126.
Caron roject planning and control early engagement of project stakeholders, F., 2014. P : . he ournal ofT J
Modern Project Management, 2(1).
Chinyio Akintoye A ractical approaches for engaging stakeholders fi ndings from the, E. & , ., 2008. P : UK.
Construction Management and Economics, Volume pp26, . 591-599.
Chinyio lomolaiye, E. & O , P., 2010. Construction ta eholder ManagementS k . st ed ondon iley1 . L , UK: W -
lackwellB .
Collinge Stakeholder Management Strategies During Construction roject ork, B., 2016. P W . ournal ofJ
Healthcare Management, 22(8).

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 14
Cuppen osch Rekveldt M ikaar Mehos D Stakeholder engagement in large scale, E., B - , ., P , E. & , ., 2016. -
energy infrastructure projects Revealing perspectives using methodology: Q . nternational ournal ofI J
Project Management, 1(1).
De ony roject Management and ational Culture A Dutch rench Case StudyB , J., 2010. P N : -F . nternationalI
ournal of Project ManagementJ , Volume pp28, . 173-182.
l Sawalhi ammad S actors affecting stakeholder management in construction projects inE - , N. & H , ., 2015. F
the aza StripG . nternational ournal of Construction ManagementI J , pp15(2), . 157-169.
rkul M itmen Celik Stakeholder ngagement in Mega ransport nfrastructureE , ., Y , I. & , T., 2016. E T I
rojectsP . Procedia Engineering, Volume pp161, . 704-710.
han A ff ects of cultural assimilation on the performance of a construction project evidence fromK , ., 2014. E –
AU E. enchmar ing n nternational ournalB k : A I J , pp21(3), . 430-449.
ivits R hree component stakeholder analysisK , ., 2011. T . nternational ournal of Multiple esearchI J R
pproachesA , pp5(3), . 318-333.
i g S Skitmore M Conflict of Consensus An nvestigation of Stakeholder Concerning DuringL , T., N , . & , ., 2012. : I
the articipation rocess of Major nfrastructure and Construction rojects in ong ongP P I P H K . Ha itatb
nternationalI , pp36(2), . 333-342.
ouma aho V Vos M owards a more dynamic stakeholder model acknowledging multipleL - , . & , ., 2010. T :
issue arena. Corporate Communication n nternational ournal: A I J , pp15(3), . 315-331.
uckmann arber he mpact of Cultural Differences on roject Stakeholder ngagementL , P. & F , K., 2016. T I P E :
A Review of Case Study Research in nternational roject ManagementI P . Procedia Computer cienceS ,
Volume pp100, . 85-94.
uoma aho V nderstanding Stakeholder ngagement aith holders ateholdersL - , ., 2015. U E : F - , H &
akeholdersF . esearch ournal of the nstitute for Pu lic elationsR J I b R , pp2(1), . 1-28.
Mathur V rice A Austin S Conceptualizing stakeholder engagement in the conte t of, ., P , . & , ., 2008. x
sustainability and its assessment. Construction Management and Economics, pp26(6), . 601-609.
Morrissey, B., 2015. he importance of sta eholder and community engagement in engineering projectsT k .
nline[O ]
Available at: http www engineersjournal ie importance stakeholder community:// . . /2015/04/21/ - - -
engagement engineering projects- - /
Accessed uly uly[ 31 J J ].
guyen Chileshe Rameezdeen R ternal stakeholder strategic actions in constructionN , T., , N. & , ., 2017. Ex
projects a Vietnamese study: . Construction Management and Economics, pp. 1-10.
ates Dodds An approach for effective stakeholder engagement as an essential component ofO , J. & , L., 2017.
the ecosystem approach. CE ournal of Marine cienceI S J S , pp74(1), . 391-397.
chieng ChilesheO , J. & , N., 2016. Engagement strategies and challenges for adoption of sta eholderk
management approaches M in outh ustralian construction industry Preliminary o servations(S A) S A : b .
Manchester Association of Researchers in Construction Management ARC M, UK, ( O ).

Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 15
ke A Aigbavboa C Construction rojects and Stakeholders nO , . & , ., 2017. P . I : ustaina le alueS b V
Management for Construction Projects. ew ork City Springer ublishing ppN Y : P , . 49-73.
lander S andin A A comparative study of factors af fecting the e ternal stakeholderO , . & L , ., 2008. - x
management process. Construction Management and Economics, Volume pp26, . 553-561.
rabhu Study on the nfluence of Stakeholders in Construction ndustryP , G., 2016. I I . nternational ournal ofI J
Engineering echnology Management and pplied ciencesT , A S , pp4(6), . 31-45.
roject Management nstituteP I , 2013. Guide to the Project Management ody of no ledgeA B K w . th ed5 .
ewtown Square ennsylvania M ublishing DivisionN , P : P I P .
Royal nstitute for Chartered SurveyorsI , 2014. Guidance ote ta eholder EngagementN : S k . st ed ondon1 . L :
R CSI .
Saghatforoush rigunarsyah oo eriva orbati A, E., T , B., T , E. & H -T , ., 2010. Effectiveness of constructa ilityb
concept in the provision of infrastructure assets . risbane ueensland niversity of echnologyB , Q U T .
Sydney Airport n d, ( . .). acts and iguresF F . nline[O ]
Available at: https www sydneyairport com au corporate about reports and publications fact sheets:// . . . / / / - - / -
Accessed August[ 6 2018].
engan C Aigbavboa C evel of Stakeholder ngagement and articipation in Monitoring andT , . & , ., 2017. L E P
valuation of Construction rojects in hanaE P G . Procedia Engineering, Volume pp196, . 630-637.
Van yl A he mportance of Stakeholder ngagement in Managing Corporate ReputationsZ , ., 2013. T I E .
nternational ournal of nnovation and ustaina le evelopmentI J I S b D , pp7(1), . 46-60.
ang et al A ypology of perational Approaches for Stakeholder Analysis and ngagementY , J. ., 2011. T O E .
Construction Management and Economics, pp29(2), . 145-162.
ang R ang in Stakeholders Attributes ehaviors and Decision Making Strategies inY , ., W , Y. & J , X., 2014. ’ B , -
Construction rojects mportance and Correlations in racticeP : I P . Project Management ournalJ , pp45(3), . 74-
90.
egarac V Spencer atey Achieving mutual understanding in intercultural projectZ , . & -O , H., 2013.
partnerships Cooperation self orientation and fragility: , - , . ntercultural PragmaticsI , pp10(3), . 433-458.
uber hat in the world were we thinking Managing stakeholder e pectations andZ , L., 2013. W , x
engagement through transparent and col laborative project estimation- . Project Management orld ournalW J ,
2(10).