analysis of project management process groups in urban ... · analysis of project management...

� Henry Stewart Publications 1752-9646 (2015) Vol. 8, 4, 401–412 Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal 401

Analysis of Project ManagementProcess Groups in urban renewalin the city of São PauloReceived (in revised form): 10th March, 2015

Mariana Matayoshi Marchesinis a Master student at the Real Estate Centre of Civil Engineering at the Polytechnic School of the University of SãoPaulo-EPUSP, and works directly with Real Estate Project Management being responsible for coordinating the department in thecompany at which she currently works.

Elaine Monettiis a Professor at the Polytechnic School of the University of São Paulo, a researcher at the Centre for Real Estate andcoordinator in Real Estate MBA Course: Sector Economy and Markets, a publication of the Centre for Real Estate of thePolytechnic School of USP.

João da Rocha Lima Júnioris head Professor (2005) of Real Estate at the Polytechnic School of the University of São Paulo-EPUSP and coordinates theReal Estate Centre of the EPUSP, teaching a unit in undergraduate, postgraduate and MBA, and consulting services for thecommunity. She is also technical coordinator of the magazine Real Estate: Economy and Markets.

Abstract Urban Renewal Projects (URPs) are concerned with degraded areas or areasthat have some historical relevance where projects have been put in place to improve thesocial environment, the economy, infrastructure recovery and expansion of public areas,public transport and social housing. In urban development, public companies are createdto manage these highly complex projects, supported by specific legal instruments.Currently, the average life cycle of these URPs is between 15 and 30 years, fromconception to a project’s completion. This long term process has consequences, such asobsolescence of projects, loss of objectivity, loss of control and loss of the historical valueof the project. This paper studies the public company responsible for managing the URPsin São Paulo, analysing the management processes, organising them into groups ofproject management processes recommended in ‘A guide to the project managementbody of knowledge’, 5th edn, and identifying existing weaknesses in the processes, withthe aim of developing an improved model for URP management. This study revealed thefollowing: the lack of a responsible person or department to manage the projectthroughout its life cycle; a need for greater autonomy for SP Urbanismo (São Paulo’spublic company), which is São Paulo’s public company; and a lack of efficiency in thecontrolling processes of the projects developed by this company. This paper is part ofbroader and more detailed research constituting an ongoing master’s degree dissertationin the Post-graduate Civil Engineering programme at the Polytechnic School of theUniversity of São Paulo-EPUSP.

Keywords: urban plan, project management, urban renewal

Mariana [email protected]

Elaine [email protected]

João de Rocha LimaJú[email protected]

BACKGROUND

Urban Renewal Projects (URPs) are areas,chosen by the Municipality, that requirespecial attention because they are in a stateof degradation or have historicalrelevance. To implement their renewal, thegovernment develops specific urbanprojects through public companies createdto manage them, and they also developspecific laws as instruments for each URP.

The present research focuses on SãoPaulo city, the most important financialand commercial centre in Brazil, with apopulation of 11 million inhabitants. SãoPaulo has the largest number of URPs upand running, and also the greatestexperience in URPs in the country.

The city of São Paulo for a long timewas confined to the centre, built duringthe coffee expansion, and only at thebeginning of 1940, driven byindustrialisation, the city began informalperipheral growth, starting the history of acity without urban planning, as describedby Santos:

‘The architectural–urban consequence ofthis form of urbanisation is a huge waste ofspace, making São Paulo one extremelychaotic patchwork rug, which is lost inincreasingly distant outlying towns. Besides,transportantion costs become moreexpensive as well as installation of urbaninfrastructure.’1

The lack of a financial system capable ofenabling the acquisition of homes or landby the working class and migrants, addedto political neglect, has encouraged slumsand tenements, always pushed to theoutskirts of the urban area of the city.From 1960, the old centre built in theBrazilian Imperial era began to lose theinterest of São Paulo’s elite, owing to theadvent of cars and the emergence of newcommercial centres such as AvenidaPaulista and Faria Lima. As described byLuís Otávio Silva:

‘The years 1960 and 1970 mark a new erain the life of the centre and its relationshipwith the rest of the city. The consolidationof the automobile and the nationalautomotive industry enabled the creation ofnew centres while the process of turningSão Paulo into a metropolis.’2

Thus, the current centre, although stillhaving a commercial movement, isunderused, with many empty buildingsand others invaded by squatters, and itpresents a high level of criminality. Whilethe city continues to grow peripherally,and as the market’s interest extends to theperiphery, URPs are being planned toimprove these areas that had growninformally.

The URPs planned in the city of SãoPaulo are separated into differentprogrammes, which are ‘a group ofprojects, sub-programmes and relatedprogramme activities managed in acoordinated manner in order to obtainbenefits which would not be availablefrom managing them individually’, asdescribed in the PMBOK Guide.3 Thiswork aims to analyse Urban Operationsand the Urban Operations Consortium.These are pre-determined by a StrategicMaster Plan, with a specific law thatdefines the use and occupation of land ina manner unlike that of the other cityregions.

The funds are derived from financialcompensation negotiated with investors inthe real estate market to obtain moreconstructed floor area than is permitted bythe standard zoning law established forthat region. This financial contributionmay be made through Certificates ofAdditional Construction Potential(CEPACs), which are securities issued bythe Municipality of São Paulo, by SPUrbanismo, used as a payment counterpartto the granting of Urban Law AdditionalRight within the perimeter of an UrbanOperation. Each CEPAC equals a given

Matayoshi Marchesin, Monetti and da Rocha Lima Júnior

402 Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal Vol. 8, 4, 401–412 � Henry Stewart Publications 1752-9646 (2015)

value of square metres for use as anadditional area for construction, purchasedthrough auctions conducted by theSecurity and Exchange Commission ofBrazil (CVM), or by cash exchange,buying an onerous grant, which entitlesthe same increase in additional area.

Despite URPs’ possessing the toolsprovided by law, the format of all theprocesses to manage these projects iscomplex. In addition, public companiescurrently seek greater alignment ofinterests with stakeholders, greaterintegration into the globalised context, anincrease in the speed of information, andbetter integration of the renewal areaswith the city and its surroundings. Thus,the Brazilian Government is currentlydeveloping a Model of Excellence inPublic Administration4 through conceptualrevisions on what are the needs of today’scivil society, improvement plan services,public decentralisation, seekingpartnerships with private companies, andeffective participation of civil society indecision making.

The public company responsible formanaging the URPs in São Paulo was,until 2009, EMURB (MunicipalCompany of Urbanism). This was dividedinto two other companies: SP Obras,responsible for procurement of contractsand the implementation and managementof public works; and SP Urbanismo,responsible for urban projects, plans andtheir management.

With the restructuring of SPUrbanismo, the internal team lost theclarity of the internal organisationalstructure of individual goals as well asthose of the department and the company.Moreover, coupled with the lack ofknowledge on the subject of projectmanagement, the company is currentlyweak in organisation, and the employeesare working in isolation.5

Thus, it is important to move the SPUrbanismo organisation structure into

Management Process Groups in order toidentify the weaknesses in organisationalflow and thereby to enable the companyto achieve better efficiency in themanagement of URPs.

PROJECT MANAGEMENTProject Management is described by thePMBOK Guide as being the ‘applicationof knowledge, skills, tools, and techniquesto project activities to meet projectrequirements’.3

In addition, a project is defined byLewis as being the ‘implementation ofmulti-tasks, cost, time and scoperequirements, and which are performedonly once’.6

It is interpreted and described by thePMBOK Guide as ‘a temporaryendeavour undertaken to create a uniqueproduct or service’.3 And it was translatedand adapted by ABNT by ISO21500, as:

‘application of methods, tools, techniquesand skills for a project. [...] is done byprocesses. It is recommended that theprocesses selected to develop a project arealigned with a systemic view. It isrecommended that each phase of the lifecycle of the project has specific deliverables.It is appropriate that these deliveries areregularly and critically examinedthroughout the project to achieve therequirements of the sponsor, customer andother stakeholders.’7

ISO21500 was based on the PMBOKGuide (3rd edn, Chapter 3). Therefore, toalign with ABNT, the PMBOK Guide(5th edn) was incorporated as AppendixISO21500, increasing one area ofknowledge. The PMBOK Guide describes‘Area of Knowledge’ as ‘a complete set ofconcepts, terms and activities that make upa professional field of project managementfield, or a specialization’ (Ref. 3, p. 391).

Urban Renewal Projects are uniqueresults emerging from temporary


Urban renewal in the city of São Paulo

endeavours and, as they are large-scale andcomplex projects, should be planned usingwell-structured project managementmethods, studied and adapted to theirneeds. Thus, the present study uses thePMBOK Guide3 as a didactic method.

For a project to be performed, it mustinvolve multiple processes. These processesare described in the PMBOK Guide as ‘aset of interrelated actions and activitiesthat are performed to create a product,service or a pre-specified result’.3

The integration and interaction of theseprocesses can be organised into five groupsof one or more processes according to thePMBOK Guide:

1. Initiating Processes: authorising theproject or phase

2. Planning Processes: defining and refiningobjectives and selecting the best of thealternative courses of action to attainthe objectives that the project wasundertaken to address

3. Executing Processes: coordinating peopleand other resources to carry out theplan

4. Monitoring and controlling Processes:ensuring that project objectives are metby monitoring and measuring progressregularly to identify variances from theplan so that corrective action can betaken when necessary

5. Closing Processes: formalising acceptanceof the project or phase and bringing itto an orderly end.

Figures 1 and 2 show the integration ofthe five process groups, and how themonitoring and controlling process ispresent in all of them, ensuring theirinteraction. It is worth pointing out thatthese process groups are not considered asphases of projects in the PMBOK Guide:they may be repeated at each stage of thisproject, categorising the same route as thestart and end of a project phase. For thepresent work, however, it will be used

with a holistic view of the SP Urbanismoenterprise, and therefore these projectgroups will be the macro structure of thecompany in relation to urban renewalprojects known by the company as UrbanOperations (UO) and Urban OperationsConsortium (UOC).

PROCESS GROUPS IN URP PROJECTMANAGEMENT

Initiating Process GroupAccording to the PMBOK Guide,3 theInitiating Process Group defines a newproject or phase, where both the initialscope and financial resources arecommitted, the internal and externalstakeholders are identified, and a ProjectCharter is compiled, which in turn shouldbe evaluated, approved and funded in theexternal environment of the project.

The Municipality, through theMunicipal Strategic Master Plan,7 pointsout which areas should be subject toURPs and, through guidelines providedby Municipal Urban Development(MUD), performs a general feasibilitystudy within the SP Urbanismo publiccompany for each URP, through: market



ClosingProcesses

Figure 1: Process Group

Source: PMBOK Guide.3 Adapted by the authors

studies; support capacity; environmentalviability through the EIA-RIMA(environmental impact assessment andenvironmental impact report); andeconomic studies. These are undertaken byeither internal staff in SP Urbanismo8 orby specialised private companiescontracted through auctions conducted bySP Obras.

From the Economic and Market Study,the preliminary budget is raised, the valueof CEPACs is set, and a prospectus isprepared to be issued to the Security andExchange Commission of Brazil (CVM),which, after approving the prospectus,organises the auction sales of thecertificates, thus raising the funds for the

development of URPs and theirimplementation (see Figure 3).

Upon review and approval of theviability of a URP by SP Urbanismo, aLaw Project is developed, which shoulddetermine all the proceedings of thatURP through the management of thispublic company. This Law Project goesbefore the Municipality and, if approved, itis published as a specific Urban OperationLaw. If this particular law has beendeemed insufficient, or needs somemodification, this should becomplemented by a Regulator Decree.

The time that the Municipality spendsfrom the concept design of URPs to theSpecific Regulator Act or Decree depends



Organisationalprocess assetsEnterpriseenvironmentalfactors

Make-or-buydecisionsSourceselectioncriteria

Quality ControlMeasurements

Selected sellers

Enterprise/Organisation

Figure 2: Project Management Process interactions

Source: PMBOK Guide.3 Adapted by the authors

on each project. In the case of ABUO(Água Branca Urban Operation), the firststudies date back to 1988, and the specificLaw was published in 1995, and thenrevised from 1999 to 2013, with a totaltime of seven years for the development ofthe first version of the law; and after fouryears, it took 14 years for its review. InAEUO’s case (Água Espraiada UrbanOperation), the first studies date back to1989, the Specific Law in 2001, and theRegulator Decree in 2004, taking a totalof 15 years. In OUCFL’s case (Faria LimaUrban Operation) early studies weredeveloped around 1995, the Specific Lawpublished in 2004, and the RegulamentorDecree in 2005 and then revised in 2012.It took ten years for the first Decree, andafter six years between the Law and theRegulator Decree, one more year.

Once the Specific Laws were published,and with the approval of the Municipality

and the general guidelines of MUD, SPUrbanismo initiated the formation of theManagement Group (see Figure 4), whichis the gathering of a group composed ofrepresentatives of several public companiesand civil society representatives. They havea responsibility to set a Priority Plan forthe URP’s implementation by SPUrbanismo, and track the progress of theseprojects. The formation of this group iscarried out by sending in the names ofrepresentatives of all public companies aswell as civil society, and after approval bythe mayor, through the publication of anordinance, these representatives aresummoned to a meeting, which definesthe internal rules and the agreements ofthat group: the process of work; scheduleof meetings; and ways of makingdecisions.

In a URP, therefore, the Input of theProcess Initiation has a long way to go



Auction

Figure 3: Development URP Process in SP

Source: Organisational chart provided by the internal team of SP Urbanismo, not based on a formal document.Chart developed by the authors

until the specific law is defined andpublished, and until the release of the saleof CEPACs starting the development ofURPs through this Management Groupand legal preliminary assumptions.

Analysis of weaknesses and barriers ofInitiating Process GroupThe time taken for preparation andapproval of the specific laws that constitutethe preliminary assumptions was found tobe an average of ten years — time fornatural development of the city itself, andfor society to supply many of thedeficiencies in the premises that have beenidentified, making the objectives of thePlan Priorities obsolete. Moreover, theURP’s scale of projects is too large tomaintain a specific law and a PriorityPlan. Lessons should be learned fromprevious experience at the time thatURPs are developed, implemented inaccordance with the conditions and natureof a public company, and used to set goalsfor smaller projects in two-year cycles,thereby achieving more control of thecompany and the needs of the area.

The major weaknesses are:

1. Length of time for publication of theSpecific Law.

2. The collection of financial resources isnot tied to the completion of theproject, so the government does nothave the same urgency as a publiccompany has when it comes to a realestate project; this could generatenumerous requests for changes in theinterests of each current administration.

3. Direct dependence of the interest of thereal estate market in the collection ofmoney compromises the execution ofthe project, and whether the choice ofareas is influenced by the governmentin the interest of investors and the realestate companies, reversing the initialconcept of choosing degraded areasrequiring revitalisation;

4. Dependence of the collection of fundsthrough CEPACs or onerous grantsmakes the timing of the projectdependent on the real estate market. Ifthere is a crisis in the market, there willbe no investment and, therefore, manyprojects will have a longer life cyclethan estimated.

5. The hire of the team designers as wellas the project management to theconstruction design phase areundertaken by SP Obras, so that, afterthe schematic design phase, SPUrbanismo no longer has control of theURP, causing a break in continuity andthe lack of a process controlling theURP throughout its life cycle.

Planning Process GroupAccording to the PMBOK Guide,3 thePlanning Process Group establishes thescope, defines and refines the project goalsand, as long as more information orcharacteristics are collected, understoodand changes are requested, the processesare fed back, and additional schedules areneeded (see Figure 5). This progressivebreakdown is called ‘rolling waveplanning’. The main benefit of this group



• Specific Law• CEPAC’s Sales • Managing Group

• Formatting INITIATING

Figure 4: Initiating Process

Source: Information provided by the internal team of SP Urbanismo, not based on a formal document. Chartdeveloped by the authors

is to outline the strategy and tactics, andthe course of action or path forcompletion of the project or projectphase.

The Management Group has theresponsibility of developing plan priorities,which becomes the basis for targetingapplications of funds raised through salesof CEPACs. Thus, after obtaining financialcompensation, the Management Groupmeets to approve the projects that will bedeveloped later to be referred to theDepartment of Projects within SPUrbanismo, where these projects aredeveloped at the level of Concept DesignPhase. It is then forwarded to other publiccompanies to be approved and thendeveloped as the Schematic Design Phase,these companies are: CET (TrafficEngineering Company subject to theMunicipal Transportation Bureau in SãoPaulo), SEHAB (Municipal HousingSecretariat) and Metrô (MetropolitanoCompany of São Paulo).

The Management of Urban Operations,which is a department within SPUrbanismo, is responsible for coordinatingthe meetings of the Management Groupand the development of reports: theprogress of projects; the inventory ofavailable CEPACs; and financial resourcescollected through the sale of certificates.These reports are forwarded to the FederalEconomic Bank (CEF) for control and to

ensure that these resources are beingreverted to the URPs.

Throughout the planning process, somechanges are requested by the City Counciland MUD for inclusion of premises in theConcept Design Phase or even in thePriority Plan, causing the need to updateplanning, and thus affecting the time andcost originally outlined.

Analysis of weaknesses and barriers ofPlanning Process GroupManaging the UO and UOCS is in thescope of work of the Management ofUrban Operations within SP Urbanismo.In practice, however, this is onlycontrolling the management of theprogress of the project and financialresources, leaving to another departmentwithin SP Urbanismo (the ProjectDepartment) the management of quality,time and human resources of the ConceptDesign Phase of these projects, and toanother department (Management ofEconomic Studies) the cost management.Moreover, another company (SP Obras)manages the URPs from the SchematicDesign Phase to the Construction DesignPhase and the management of hiringexternal staff. There is, therefore, a misuseof this scope of management, and themanagement structure is closer to afunctional structure, where eachdepartment has a specific function.



��

��

��

��

��

��

��•��

� ��!��

•��" ��•��

•� ��#�� $•��%��

•��" &��•��'(

•��)��

��

•��%��*��

� ��

•�*��

��

��

�%

Figure 5: Planning Process Group (MUD: municipal urban development; CEPAC: certificates of additionalconstruction potential)


The weaknesses found in this groupprocess are:

1. Submitting SP Urbanismo to City Halland MUD takes away the company’sauthority to deny or control requestsfor changes arising from them, causinginstability in control of the processesand increasing the life cycle of theproject.

2. The Priorities Plan is developed onlyonce, allowing space for requests forchanges outside SP Urbanismo, asabove. This should be reviewed at eachminor cycle of projects by thecompany, with the Management Group,and subsequently approved by theCity/MUD.

3. The Project Department besidesmanaging the projects also draws thedesigns. Therefore, there is an overlap offunctions affecting the quality andtiming of the projects.

4. The Project Department that developsthe Concept Designs is not within theUrban Operations ManagementDepartment, and is not exclusive tothese projects, as it takes care of otherurban projects. So if another project hasa higher priority, this department maydevelop URPs more slowly.

5. The organisational structure isorganised more by circumstances thanby design: the company is required tohave management communication andproperly prepared information, whichdoes not occur in practice.

6. The scope of deviation of theManagement of Urban OperationsDepartment brings disorganisation,uncertainty and lack of clarity forinternal staff, compromising the finalresult of projects.

7. After the closing process of theConcept Design Phase, they developthe Plan Priorities. It is recommended,however, that at this stage a survey ofintermediate budget would be helpful

to verify whether the funds raised aresufficient to continue the project, orwhether it should undergo a designreview in order to reduce costs to suitthe available resources. This guaranteesthat the project is economically viableand ensures that the project is matureenough before its completedevelopment.

Executing Process GroupAccording to PMBOK Guide,3 theExecuting Process Group consists incompleting the planned work incompliance with the design specifications(see Figure 6). This group should alsocoordinate people and resources andmanage stakeholder expectations. Duringthis phase of the project, the results mayrequire upgrades in planning, increasingthe extension of the life cycle and the costof the project.

Based on the Concept Designs initiatedby SP Urbanismo, bids for hiringoutsourced designers under theresponsibility of SP Obras are carried out,and from the closing of the ConceptDesign Phase, this company startsmanaging the project through to itsConstruction Design Phase. The UrbanOperations Management Departmentcontinues to perform the controllingprocesses, issuing reports to CEF, andupdating the Management Group on theprogress of the development of the URP.

Requests for changes from theMunicipality and MUD continue at thisstage, but have greater consequences forcost and time, because the hiredprofessional team is much larger andcomposed mainly of private companies.

Analysis of weaknesses and barriers ofExecuting Process GroupThe development of most of the projectunder the responsibility of the samecompany that runs its implementation



may compromise the quality of the URPif the project managers and constructioncompany have different points of view. Aconstruction company prioritisesfunctionality and ease of implementation,and has little sensibility to the concept ofthe project or its aesthetic characteristics,always looking to reduce costs, oftencausing a distortion of the initial aims ofSP Urbanismo.


1. Hiring of designers and engineers teamis by the company responsible for theimplementation of the projects.

2. URP management is by the companyresponsible for the implementation ofthe projects.

Closing Process GroupAccording to the PMBOK Guide,3 theClosing Process Group consists of endingall activities of all groups of processes,aiming to close the project or contractualobligations formally. In this project phase,documentations of Lessons Learned, teamevaluation, process improvementrecommendations and other surveyinformation can contribute to the nextsimilar project (see Figure 7).

After the development of theConstruction Design, a final budget maybe raised, this may also result in requestsfor changes, revocation or postponementof the implementation of the URP.Nowadays, as the management of URPsends under the responsibility of SP Obras,which in turn is responsible for the



•�� •��

��

•�� •��

��

��

•�� !��"!�#��

•��!�� •��$��

%&%'%�'%&

��&&%&

•��!(��!��!��•�� )��!�*•�)��"��!��$

� "

+ ��'%&

+ ��'%&

•�'�# !��,�-��!#��.

•��!��!��•��!/� !��0�� !#��•��$��•�1��#��•��#� ��!��#��

•�� •� ��

��*��!�$��!��!�

Figure 6: Executing Process Group (MUD: municipal urban development; CEPAC: certificates of additionalconstruction potential; CEF: Federal Economic Bank)


implementation of the projects, there is noformal closing process.

Analysis of weaknesses and barriers ofClosing Process GroupThe lack of formal closure of projectsmakes it difficult to control the exacttiming of the life cycle of each project.And, added to this, the failure to collectLessons Learned or formally to recordinformation as the development of aHistory Report causes dependence on theteam that was involved with the project,and therefore risks being a subjective viewor having gaps in information.


1. No closing process formalisation,undermining the control of the URPdata

2. No products developed with pastexperience such as History and LessonsLearned documents.

CONCLUSIONThis study aimed to investigate theprocesses of URPs known as UrbanOperations and Urban OperationsConsortium, in the City of São Paulo,through the SP Urbanismo publiccompany. It analysed the managementprocesses used by the company, organisingthem according to the groups of processes



•�� •��

•�� •��

•�� !

�"��#�$%��

�"�� #�$%��

�"�� #�$%��

•��&��#��•�� '��(•�'��)��#��%��#��*

+,+�+��+,-

��,,+,-

. ��+,-

. ��+,-

� )

•�� •� ��

•�� •��*�� "��

•�� -��%��)��

•��%��•��/� ��%0�� •��"�*%��•�1%��•��%�� #��%��

�2�+,-•�� &��

•��/��

•�� 0��

+��

/��

,��

�

��

��(�"��*��#��

Figure 7: Closing Process Group


in the PMBOK Guide,3 and analysingthem in order to point out the fragilitiesfound in the Project Management.

The main weaknesses found were:

1. A long time to develop SpecificLegislation

2. Dependence on the real estate market3. Disorganisation in the organisational

framework of SP Urbanismo4. Project Management and hiring by SP

Obras5. Lack of autonomy for the SP

Urbanismo public company6. Absence of communication and

information management7. Absence of Closing Process Groups.

By addressing the weaknesses reported, itis possible to develop a Model of ProjectManagement of Urban Renewal in orderto reduce or eliminate them, creating amore efficient process and team.

This paper is part of broader and moredetailed research constituting an ongoingmaster’s degree dissertation in thePost-graduate Civil Engineeringprogramme at the Polytechnic School ofthe University of São Paulo-EPUSP.

References1. Santos, M. L. (1992), ‘Expansão Urbana da Cidade

de São Paulo e a Segregação Sócio-Espacialdurante o período de 1850 a 1992’, available athttp:\\www.cefetsp/edu/eso/saopaulo.html, last accessed on 26thSeptember, 2014.

2. Silva, L. O. (2005), ‘A reabilitação do centro de SãoPaulo’, paper presented at the XI EncontroNacional de Pós Graduação e pesquisa emPlanejamento Urbano e Regional-ANPUR, p. 3.

3. Project Management Institute (2013), ‘A guide tothe Project Management Body of Knowledge(PMBOK Guide)’ — Edition 5’, ProjectManagement Institute, Newtown Square, PA.

4. Ferreira, A. R. (2009), ‘Modelo de excelência emgestão pública no governo brasileiro’, paperpresented at the XIV International CongressCLAD, Salvador.

5. Silva, S. A. and Matayoshi, M. M. (2014),‘Reconhecimento dos Principais Desvios deEscopo e dos Maiores Entraves no Gerenciamentode Projetos de Revitalização Urbana’, paperpresented at the 14ª Conferência InternacionaldaLares.

6. Lewis, J. P. (2001), ‘Fundamentals of projectmanagement’, Amacom Books, New York, NY.

7. ABNT —Associação Brasileira de NormasTécnicas (2012), ‘Guidance on projectmanagement’, available at http:\\www.abntcatalogo.com.br/norma.aspx?ID=9233, lastaccessed on 26th September, 2014.

8. São Paulo Urbanismo, available athttp://www.prefeitura.sp.gov.br/cidade/secretarias/desenvolvimento_urbano/sp_urbanismo/empresa/index.php?p=19443, last accessed on 19thJanuary, 2014.



analysis of project management process groups in urban ... · analysis of project management...

Documents