<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>02714ntm a2200265 a 4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">vtls000083198</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">KUKTEM</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20251117113247.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">141110t2013    my da  f m    000 0 eng d</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">THE0001535(Local)</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="039" ind1=" " ind2="9">
    <subfield code="a">201905271051</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">asmadi</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">201712041154</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">huda</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">201502021022</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">fawwaz</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">201411131526</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">training2</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">201411101112</subfield>
    <subfield code="z">training2</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">UMP</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="090" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">HD61 .M84 2013 r Bc.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Muhammad Mohd Yusof</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
    <subfield code="a">Risk management index /</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">Muhammad Mohd Yusof</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Kuantan, Pahang :</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">UMP,</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">2013</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">xii, 69 p.  :</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">ill. (some col.) ;</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">30 cm. +</subfield>
    <subfield code="e">1 CD-ROM</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Faculty of Engineering Technology</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="502" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Project Paper (Bachelor of Project Management with Honors) -- Universiti Malaysia Pahang &#x2013; 2013</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="504" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Bibliography : p. 70-75</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Because of the complex nature, risk and uncertainty are more widespread in construction industry than many other industries. The risk management is an indispensable discipline for any organisation to achieve its objectives. Aiming to ensure that all project objectives are met, risk management is considered as a critical success factor for construction projects. The core components of risk management are now known and utilised by many organizations. Meanwhile, as declared by Project  Management Institute (PMI), the ability to measure the effectiveness in managing risk is one of the most vital areas that risk management needs to be developed in. Created to evaluate the capability of a project or an organization in a particular area, a maturity model aids in determining strengths and weaknesses, and to target advance strategies accordingly. Several maturity models have been developed for the area of risk management and furthermore, an attempt to adapt a generic risk management maturity model to the construction industry was specified from the literature.  Outstanding risk management maturity models were investigated, six of them were identified as being competent and further examined in terms of their usability and effectiveness. Based on   the coparisons and evaluation made among the models, several advantageous and disadvantageous points were inferred. All in all, when examined, it was seen that most of these models outline the topics to be observed in a maturity assessment and provide guidance in terms of content. It was believed that a practical approach was needed and the diagnostic characteristics of these models should be improved.   </subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="0">
    <subfield code="a">Risk management</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
    <subfield code="a">http://ecollib.ump.edu.my/18272/</subfield>
    <subfield code="z">Access in library only</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">1</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">10000</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">10000</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2019-09-04</subfield>
    <subfield code="l">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="o">HD61 .M84 2013 r Bc.</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">0000090204</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2019-09-04 00:00:00</subfield>
    <subfield code="t">1</subfield>
    <subfield code="w">2019-09-04</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">PSM</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">1</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">10000</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">10000</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2019-09-04</subfield>
    <subfield code="l">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="o">CD 8467 | HD61 .M84 2013 r Bc.</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">0000090205</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2019-09-04 00:00:00</subfield>
    <subfield code="t">1</subfield>
    <subfield code="w">2019-09-04</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">PSM</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">VIRTUA40</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">5652</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">5658</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">VTLSSORT0080*0200*0400*0900*1000*2450*2600*3000*5000*5020*5040*5200*6500*8560*9992</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
