4.3.3 Sustainable Project Management The footprint of the world's economic activity exceeded the earth’s biocapacity by 50% in 2007 (WWF 2010). In the U.K., for example, the main source of pollution is construction and demolition of buildings (Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution 2007); these activities are almost always organized as projects. An interesting research question is how a regulator can incentivize multiple projects to pollute less without unnecessarily increasing their costs. This problem has been studied under voluntary standards, especially the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program (Corbett & Muthulingam 2007). However, it has apparently not been studied under explicit environmental regulatory constraints. A typical regulatory constraint model involves two levels. At the higher level is a regulator who acts as the decision leader. The regulator sets limits on pollution of different types. The regulator optimizes a social welfare function that may include project costs, environmental benefits, and some investment in green technology. At the lower level are multiple project managers, who optimize their project costs, given the limits set by the regulator. Since the project managers act independently, the regulator may need to provide a subsidy to ensure optimization of its social welfare function. Among the issues to be overcome is the design of incentives for truth telling. For example, the project managers may exaggerate some of their costs, in order to receive less strict regulation. Ultimately, the most successful design of the system will (a) encourage truthful reporting, and (b) coordinate the decisions of the regulator and the project managers.  Because of both the growing problem of industrial pollution, and the increasing use of project management in a wide variety of business applications, the development of an effective environmental regulation system for projects is an important issue. 5. Conclusions Several conclusions can be drawn from this work.
  1.  We identify the following trends making project management harder: increased competition, shorter  product and service life cycles, tighter budgets, unfamiliar and more complex applications, globally distributed and multicultural project teams.
  2.  In contrast, several trends are making project management easier: better project management training, publication of best practices information, and better software support. The relative impact of these two effects varies from application to application.  3.  Underestimation of the value of project management as a planning methodology over the last 20 years has led research to fall behind recent business innovation and the growing range of applications.  4.  Important recent developments on the business innovation side of project management are not yet well supported by research.  5.  Leading journals in operations research and operations management have published few articles on project management in the last 10 years, compared to many other topics of comparable practical importance.  6.  Practice and research have perged, and few new researchers have entered the project management field. Our overall conclusion is that a confluence of these factors has resulted in numerous interesting research opportunities in project management for at least the next 10 years. Acknowledgments This research is supported in part by the Summer Fellowship Program of the Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University. Preliminary versions of this paper were presented as plenary addresses to ICSSSM'2011, Tianjin, China (June 2011) and to Taishan Academic Forum, Rizhao, China (July 2011). References [1] agilemanifesto.org. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Available via DIALOG. http://agilemanifesto.org/  源Z自-优尔+文/论^文]网[www.youerw.com
[2] Amram, M. & Kulatilaka, N. (1999). Real Options: Managing Strategic Investment in an Uncertain World. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA  [3] Aumann, R. & Serrano, R. (2008). An economic index of riskiness. Journal of Political Economy, 116: 810-836   [4] Bertsimas, D. & Sim, M. (2004). The price of robustness. Operations Research, 52: 35-53  [5] Brânzei, R., Ferrari, G., Fragnelli, V. & Tijs, S. (2002). Two approaches to the problem of sharing delay costs in  joint projects. Annals of Operations Research, 109: 359-374 [6] Brown, D.B. & Sim, M. (2009). Satisficing measures for analysis of risky positions. Management Science, 55: 71-84  [7] Cai, X., Hall, N.G. & Zhang, F. (2012). Cooperation and contract design in project management. Working paper, Department of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management, Chinese University of Hong Kong  项目管理最近发展和研究机会英文文献和中文翻译(2):http://www.youerw.com/yanjiu/lunwen_53373.html