The development, validation and use of an interprofessional project management questionnaire in engineering education

Figures & data

Table 1. The Interprofessional Project Management Questionnaire Items.

Imagine you are working on a project which is complex and requires inputs from a number of different professions (for example, people with legal training, engineers, social scientists, designers, etc.). Please indicate how much you agree with each of the following statements.

Q1 I am good at making a clear problem statement to clarify the goals when I start working on a project.

Q2 I am good at defining a clear work plan early in a project.

Q3 I am good at breaking a large project into a number of smaller work packages

Q4 I am good at analysing a project work plan to identify the order, priority and importance of work tasks.

Q5 I am good at identifying how to keep track of which tasks have been completed and how a project is progressing.

Q6 I am good at clarifying how likely it is that something will go wrong with a project.

Q7 I am good at identifying how much damage or trouble may be caused by something going wrong with a project.

Q8 When working on a project, I am good at estimating the likelihood and potential impact of something going wrong.

Q9 I am good at identifying what actions should be taken to minimise or alleviate something going wrong with a project.

Q10 I am good at recognising that other team members’ definition of what it means for something to ‘go wrong’ may be different from my own.

Q11 When working on a project, I am good at asking myself if a project like this could have a positive impact on someone else’s life.

Q12 When working on a project, I am good at asking myself if a project like this could have a negative impact on someone else’s life.

Q13 I am good at putting myself in the shoes of someone whose life could be affected by a project’s results.

Q14 I am good at identifying all the people who could be impacted by a project, no matter how directly or indirectly.

Q15 I am good at trying to understand the perspective of other team members.

Q16 I am good at making sure that all the necessary information is shared with other team members.

Q17 I am good at explaining my ideas in ways that other people can understand.

Q18 When someone disagrees with me, I am good at paying close attention to see if I can learn something from their alternative perspective.

Q19 I can normally work productively with another team member even if I am angry or frustrated with them.

Q20 I am good at recognising the knowledge and skills of different professions involved in a project team.

Q21 I am good at being sensitive to the way in which different professions may use the same word.

Q22 I am good at clarifying with people from other professions how their knowledge and skills contribute to each stage of a project.

Q23 I am good at identifying the skills or knowledge that other professions in the team have, which I should try to develop.

Q24 I am good at sharing responsibility with the other professions in the team for the overall success of a project.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics for the IPMQ items.

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Min	Max
Q1	3.87	0.78	1	5
Q2	3.70	0.89	1	5
Q3	3.89	0.86	2	5
Q4	3.84	0.83	2	5
Q5	3.78	0.85	1	5
Q6	3.58	0.88	1	5
Q7	3.54	0.90	2	5
Q8	3.59	0.85	2	5
Q9	3.73	0.72	2	5
Q10	3.84	0.90	1	5
Q11	4.04	0.85	1	5
Q12	3.88	0.90	1	5
Q13	3.90	0.89	1	5
Q14	3.56	0.84	2	5
Q15	4.01	0.81	2	5
Q16	4.01	0.77	2	5
Q17	3.81	0.95	1	5
Q18	4.20	0.79	1	5
Q19	3.69	1.03	1	5
Q20	4.18	0.69	2	5
Q21	3.68	0.88	1	5
Q22	3.86	0.77	1	5
Q23	3.97	0.76	2	5
Q24	4.00	0.73	2	5

Note: Each item is scored on a Likert scale ranging from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). Full text of each item is in Table 1.

Table 3. Factor loadings for IPMQ items and Factor standardised Cronbach α scores.

Q	Factor 1 α = .71	Factor 2 α = .80	Factor 3 α = .76	Factor 4 α = .73
Q3	.567
Q2	.558
Q4	.534
Q24	.487
Q5	.382
Q9	.340
Q8		.759
Q7		.743
Q6		.727
Q12			.766
Q13			.704
Q11			.692
Q14			.414
Q16				.655
Q18				.565
Q15				.546
Q10				.507
Q23				.375
Q19				.360
Q17				.332

Note: factor loadings lower than .3 are not presented to aid readability, Q1, Q20, Q21 and Q22 did not load adequately on any factor in this model. Full text of each item is in Table 1.

Table 4. Correlation matrix between extracted factors.

	Project planning	Risk assessment	Ethical sensitivity	Interprofessional communication
Project planning	1.0
Risk assessment	.30	1.0
Ethical sensitivity	.32	.20	1.0
Interprofessional communication	.43	.23	.44	1.0

Table 5. Descriptive statistics for the French-language IPMQ items.

	Mean	Standard Deviation	Min	Max
Q1	3.82	0.80	1	5
Q2	3.56	0.93	1	5
Q3	3.80	0.82	1	5
Q4	3.69	0.79	1	5
Q5	3.64	0.77	1	5
Q6	2.97	0.99	1	5
Q7	3.26	0.91	1	5
Q8	3.26	0.83	1	5
Q9	3.41	0.84	1	5
Q10	3.79	0.87	1	5
Q11	3.79	0.89	1	5
Q12	3.71	0.88	1	5
Q13	3.66	0.95	1	5
Q14	3.32	0.86	1	5
Q15	3.91	0.88	1	5
Q16	3.84	0.91	1	5
Q17	3.68	0.95	1	5
Q18	3.92	0.82	2	5
Q19	3.14	1.05	1	5
Q20	3.77	0.77	1	5
Q21	3.33	0.88	1	5
Q22	3.69	0.82	1	5
Q23	3.69	0.83	1	5
Q24	3.90	0.90	1	5

Note: Each item is scored on a Likert scale ranging from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). Full text of each item is in Table 1.

Table

Project Planning

Q2 I am good at defining a clear work plan early in a project.

Q3 I am good at breaking a large project into a number of smaller work packages

Q4 I am good at analysing a project work plan to identify the order, priority and importance of work tasks.

Q5 I am good at identifying how to keep track of which tasks have been completed and how a project is progressing.

Q9 I am good at identifying what actions should be taken to minimise or alleviate something going wrong with a project.

Q24 I am good at sharing responsibility with the other professions in the team for the overall success of a project.

Risk assessment

Q6 I am good at clarifying how likely it is that something will go wrong with a project.

Q7 I am good at identifying how much damage or trouble may be caused by something going wrong with a project.

Q8 When working on a project, I am good at estimating the likelihood and potential impact of something going wrong.

Ethical Sensitivity

Q11 When working on a project, I am good at asking myself if a project like this could have a positive impact on someone else’s life.

Q12 When working on a project, I am good at asking myself if a project like this could have a negative impact on someone else’s life.

Q13 I am good at putting myself in the shoes of someone whose life could be affected by a project’s results.

Q14 I am good at identifying all the people who could be impacted by a project, no matter how directly or indirectly.

Interprofessional Communication

Q10 I am good at recognising that other team members’ definition of what it means for something to ‘go wrong’ may be different from my own.

Q15 I am good at trying to understand the perspective of other team members.

Q16 I am good at making sure that all the necessary information is shared with other team members.

Q17 I am good at explaining my ideas in ways that other people can understand.

Q18 When someone disagrees with me, I am good at paying close attention to see if I can learn something from their alternative perspective.

Q19 I can normally work productively with another team member even if I am angry or frustrated with them.

Q23 I am good at identifying the skills or knowledge that other professions in the team have, which I should try to develop.

Note: the original question numbering has been retained to aid the reader in connecting this table to tables 1, 2, 3 and 5. Others using the questionnaire are, of course, free to use their own numbering format.