CRITERIA FOR A GOOD PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Definition of Project Management is the application of expertise , knowledge and skills , both technically with the use of limited resources to achieve the goals set , in order to get the highest performance , time , quality and optimum safety .

In project management , the need for a focused and good management , because a project has limitations that the ultimate goal of the project can be achieved .  that must be managed in a project that is of quality , cost , time , safety and health , environmental , resource , risk and information systems .

There are three major things that are reviewed in this article project management , to create a course of a project , namely :

1 . plan

In order to achieve an objective , the project needs a well-planned design . By providing project goals and objectives while making administration and programs , in order to be applied . With the aim to meet all requirements specified in the time constraints , including cost, quality and safety . Planning a project undertaken by way of conducting feasibility studies , value engineering , planning within the scope of project management ( therein including time , cost , quality , resources , health and safety , environment , information systems and risk ) .

2 . scheduling

Scheduling Project Management is the application of planning by providing knowledge about the plans and progress of the project schedule , and includes all the resources there , including costs , equipment , labor , material and timely in completing the project . Project scheduling is done by observing the development of projects with a variety of problems .Process monitoring and updating always worked to produce the correct scheduling , to be consistent with the project objectives . There are several ways to make project scheduling , ie scheduling Linear ( Vector diagram ) , curve S ( hanumm Curve ) , Network Planning , Time barchart and duration of action . In the event of errors and deviations from the initial plan , the corrective action is taken and the evaluation of the project , in order to keep it running on the right path .

3 . Control and Management Project

The main objective of the project by reducing or eliminating any form of irregularities that might occur during the execution of development projects . The goal of the project is to empower control the entire time , quality , cost and safety projects maintained , as well as having appropriate criteria as a benchmark . All activities undertaken during the control process is inspection , supervision and correction re the project during the implementation process .

Good project management is to manage and organize a variety of assets , human resources , time and quality of work of the project , so the project produces maximum quality within the planned time and give effect to the welfare of employees . Within a project needed a good organization so that each personnel can carry out their job properly fit his tenggung each without pressure from superiors .

The characteristics of a good project management :

a.       Rapid development , good quality and cheap price .

b . Pleasant working atmosphere , compact and a mutual respect among co-workers , superiors , and subordinates by superiors to subordinates .

c . The Manager in project management can act as a leader .

d . Fulfillment of the rights and responsibilities of employees well .

e . and another which if well

A good project management will be able to complete construction of the project in a short time schedule is less than a maximum contract or no experience delays , cost control but it also must be done properly so as to get maximum benefit , plus the good quality of the buildings is also a key project management because it could also be a marketing activity for a so easy to get a building project that is ready to work .

Type A Project Management

Type of project management based on the main activity component and the end result :

1 . Construction projects . For example in the form of buildings , construction of bridges and highways .

2 . Manufacturing Industry Project . Form of project design activities so a result ( product ) .
3 . New Product Development Project . It is a combination of research and development projects with capital intensive projects .

4 . Infrastructure projects . Supplying the needs of the wider community in terms of transport infrastructure , reservoirs , power plants , telecommunication installations and supply of drinking water sources .

5 . Research and Development Project . Can we call a research and development , until the occurrence of an outcome and the goal is to enhance or improve a service , product or particular method .

6 . Project Management Services . Intimately associated with the non-physical facilities or services of the company . For example, the development of enterprise information systems , increase the productivity of employees , including management and the project itself .
7 . Capital intensive projects . Form scale projects with large capital . For example the purchase and procurement of goods , land acquisition and construction of a production facility .

Sumber : http://waterfres.blogspot.com/2013/09/kumpulan-artikel-bahasa-inggris-tentang_15.html

The Big Four Auditors Accountable

BUYING Autonomy, a British software company, once seemed like a good idea to Hewlett-Packard (HP). Western investors were once eager to buy into Chinese companies that had secured listings on American exchanges. Neither idea seems so hot now. Both these changes in sentiment raise awkward questions for the Big Four accounting firms: Deloitte, Ernst & Young, PwC and KPMG.

HP first. The computer giant announced last month that it was writing down the value of Autonomy by $8.8 billion, in part because of “accounting improprieties, misrepresentations and disclosure failures”. (Mike Lynch, Autonomy’s former boss, denies the charges and has set up a website demanding that HP detail its accusations.) With so few global auditors to choose from, a saga like this ends up sucking them all in. Deloitte was Autonomy’s auditor; Ernst & Young is Hewlett-Packard’s. KPMG provided advice on the deal. PwC has been hired by HP to sort through the mess.

If HP’s claims are true, Deloitte, Autonomy’s auditor, will be the one in the cross-hairs. If they are false, Ernst & Young, which will sign off HP’s huge write-down of Autonomy, will have a lot of explaining to do. HP says the third of the Big Four, KPMG, “audited” the deal; KPMG says it provided only a “limited set of non-audit-related services”.

Deloitte has most reason to be nervous. As well as auditing Autonomy, it provided $6.7m in non-audit services over seven years, prompting critics to raise familiar questions about conflicts between accountants’ auditing duties and their consulting work. Deloitte advised Autonomy on executive pay, for example, something that would be forbidden under America’s Sarbanes-Oxley law, but was permitted in Britain. Moreover, Deloitte Luxembourg last year announced a close partnership with Autonomy to roll out a piece of Autonomy software.

The HP-Autonomy saga points to another feature of the Big Four’s business model. The quartet may market themselves as seamless global firms but in fact they are a string of legally independent local partnerships. That is why Britain’s Deloitte LLP can do things that would be forbidden for Deloitte LLP in America, despite their common membership in the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu network.

On December 3rd this network structure came under attack from another quarter. America’s Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) charged the Big Four and BDO (a smaller firm) for refusing to share documents related to audits of troubled Chinese firms listed on American exchanges. Chinese divisions of the Big Four have audited several Chinese firms that listed abroad and then tanked. Prominent among these are Longtop Financial, a technology firm that has since been delisted in America, and Sino Forest, which Canadian authorities are investigating for allegedly faking its own forestry assets.

American regulators, including the SEC and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), have been demanding the work papers for the controversial audits from the Chinese affiliates. That puts the auditors in a bind. American regulators must ensure that the foreign auditors of firms listed in America are doing their job properly. But Chinese laws forbid the sharing of those documents, on the grounds that vaguely defined “state secrets” might surface.

For a while, Sino-American negotiations seemed to be making some progress on a compromise. A few months ago officials from PCAOB were allowed to observe their Chinese counterparts during a “trust-building” exercise. But a meeting between the two sides in November appears to have ended frostily, and the SEC hardened its position this week by declaring that “firms that conduct audits knowing they cannot comply with laws requiring access to these work papers face serious sanctions.” The PCAOB is expected to declare by year’s end that if a foreign auditor has not been inspected properly by American authorities, it will be deregistered.

If such a rule is upheld by courts and confirmed as policy, it would mean the Big Four’s affiliates in China could lose many multinationals as clients, as American laws require firms to use registered auditors. It might also force the exit of scores of Chinese firms listed in America. Perhaps in anticipation, China Development Bank, a state-run institution, has recently set aside more than $1 billion to help smaller firms leave American exchanges.

The Big Four claim that their global scale and multidisciplinary scope are good things. In one sense they are right. Consulting is the fastest-growing of the Big Four’s businesses; Asia, the zippiest of the regions they operate in. But the events of the past few weeks show there are perils, too, in trying to have the best of all worlds.

Sumber : http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21567953-two-controversies-ensnare-big-four-accountable?zid=294&ah=71830d634a0d9558fe97d778d723011d

Akuntansi Sektor Publik

Dari berbagai kupasan seminar dan lokakarya, pemahaman sektor publik sering diartikan sebagai aturan pelengkap pemerintah yang mengakumulasi “utang sektor publik” dan “permintaan pinjaman sektor publik” untuk suatu tahun tertentu. Artikulasi ini dampak dari sudut pandang ekonomi dan politik yang selama ini mendominasi perdebatan sektor publik. Dari sisi kebijakan publik, sektor publik dipahami sebagaituntutan pajak, birokrasi yang berlebihan, pemerintahan yang besar dannasionalisasi versus privatisasi. Terlihat jelas, dalam artian luas, sektor publik disebut bidang yang membicarakan metoda manajemen negara.Sedangkan dalam arti sempit, diartikan sebagai pembahasan pajak dankebijakan perpajakan. Dari berbagai sebutan yang muncul, sektor publikdapat diartikan dari berbagai disiplin ilmu yang umumnya berbeda satu dengan yang lain.

Sejarah Akuntansi Sektor Publik 

Sejarah organisasi sektor publik sebenarnya sudah ada sejak ribuan tahunyang lalu. Dalam bukunya, Vernon Kam (1989) menjelaskan bahwa praktik akuntansi sektor publik sebenarnya telah ada sejak ribuan tahun sebelum masehi. Kemunculannya lebih dipengaruhi pada interaksi yang terjadi padamasyarakat dan kekuatan sosial didalam masyarakat. Kekuatan sosialmasyarakat, yang umumnya berbentuk pemerintahan. Organisasi sektor publik ini, dapat diklasifikasikan dalam: 

1. Semangat kapitalisasi (Capitalistic Spirit). 

2. Peristiwa politik dan ekonomi (Economic and Politic Event). 

3. Inovasi teknologi (Technology Inovation). 

Aspek Filosofi Sektor Publik 

Dari berbagai buku Anglo Amerika, akuntansi sektor publik diartikan sebagai mekanisme akuntansi swasta yang diberlakukandalam praktik-praktik organisasi publik. Dari berbagai buku lamaterbitan Eropa Barat, akuntansi sektor publik disebut akuntansipemerintahan. Dan diberbagai kesempatan disebut juga sebagaiakuntansi keuangan publik. Berbagai perkembangan terakhir,sebagai dampak penerapan daripada accrual base di Selandia Baru,pemahaman ini telah berubah. Akuntansi sektor publik didefinisikansebagai akuntansi dana masyarakat. Akuntansi dana masyarakatdapat diartikan sebagai: “mekanisme teknik dan analisisakuntansi yang diterapkan pada pengelolaan dana masyarakat”. Daridefinisi diatas perlu diartikan dana masyarakat sebagai dana yang dimiliki oleh masyarakat - bukan individual, yang biasanya dikelolaoleh organisasi -organisasi sektor publik, dan juga pada proyek-proyek kerjasama sektor publik dan swasta. Di Indonesia, akuntansisektor publik dapat didefinisikan: “… mekanisme teknik dananalisis akuntansi yang diterapkan pada pengelolaan danamasyarakat di lembaga-lembaga tinggi negara dan departemen-departemen dibawahnya, pemerintah daerah, BUMN, BUMD, LSM danyayasan sosial, maupun pada proyek- proyek kerjasama sektor publik dan swasta”. 

Penerapan Akuntansi Sektor Publik di Indonesia 

Salah satu bentuk penerapan teknik akuntansi sektor publik adalah di organisasi BUMN. Di tahun 1959 pemerintahan orde lama mulaimelakukan kebijakan-kebijakan berupa nasionalisasi perusahaan asingyang ditransformasi menjadi Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN). Tetapikarena tidak dikelola oleh manajer profesional dan terlalu banyaknyapolitisasi’ atau campur tangan pemerintah, mengakibatkan perusahaantersebut hanya dijadikan ‘sapi perah’ oleh para birokrat. Sehinggasejarah kehadirannya tidak memperlihatkan hasil yang baik dan tidakmenggembirakan. Kondisi ini terus berlangsung pada masa orde baru. Lebih bertolak belakang lagi pada saat dikeluarkannya PeraturanPemerintah Nomor 3 Tahun 1983 tentang fungsi dari BUMN. Denganmemperhatikan beberapa fungsi tersebut, konsekuensi yang harusditanggung oleh BUMN sebagai perusahaan publik adalah menonjolkankeberadaannya sebagai agent of development daripada sebagai business entity. Terlepas dari itu semua, bahwa keberadaan praktik akuntansisektor publik di Indonesia dengan status hukum yang jelas telah adasejak beberapa tahun bergulir dari pemerintahan yang sah. Salah satunyaadalah Perusahaan Umum Telekomunikasi (1989).

Sumber : http://www.himatansi.org/news183-akuntansi-sektor-publik.html

BKPM: Kuartal I 2015, Sektor Tambang Serap Investasi Terbesar

Penanaman modal di Indonesia selama tiga bulan pertama 2015 mencapai Rp 124,6 triliun atau meningkat 16,9 persen dibandingkan dengan perolehan kurtal I 2014 yang sebesar Rp 106,6 triliun. Badan Koordinasi Penanaman Modal (BKPM) mencatat angka realisasi investasi kuartal I tersebut sudah 23,98 persen dari target sepanjang tahun Rp 519,5 triliun. 

Kepala BKPM Franky Sibarani menjelaskan investasi yang masuk selama periode Januari-Maret 2015 berasal dari penenaman modal asing (PMA) sebesar Rp 72 triliun dan penanaman modal dalam negeri (PMDN) Rp 34,6 triliun. Sektor usaha yang menyerap investasi terbesar adalah sektor pertambangan, yakni mencapai Rp 15 triliun atau 12 persen dari realisasi penanaman  modal kuartal I 2015. 

"Realisasi investasi kuartal pertama tahun ini memberikan gambaran positif investasi di Indonesia, di mana kita mengalami pertumbuhan 22,8 persen untuk PMDN dan 14 persen untuk PMA dibandingkan periode yang sama pada tahun lalu," ujar Franky di Jakarta, Selasa (28/4).

Berdasarkan destinasi modal, BKPM melaporkan investasi di luar Pulau Jawa mencapai Rp 106,6 triliun atau 43,5 persen dari total keseluruhan. Kontribusinya meningkat dibandingkan dengan realisasi penanaman modal kuartal I 2014 di luar Jawa  yang sebesar 41,8 persen dari total ibvestasi. 

"Semoga persentase lokasi investasi di luar Jawa akan meningkat seiring dengan kebijakan pemerintah untuk memberikan insentif bagi reinvestasi, sesuai dengan yang tercantum di Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 18 Tahun 2015," jelas Deputi Bidang Pengendalian Penanaman Modal BKPM Azhar Lubis. 

Data BKPM menunjukkan PMA terbesar masih berasal dari Singapura, dengan nilai investasi mencapai US$ 1,23 miliar dengan 610 proyek. Di susul kemudian Jepang dengan nilai US$ 1,20 miliar dari 343 proyek.

Secara kuartalan, Azhar Lubis mengatakan realisasi investasi Tiongkok menurun dibandingkan dengan kuartal IV 2014, dari US$ 500 juta menjadi US$ 146,5 juta. Tiongkok berada di peringkat ke-10 negara dengan jumlah PMA terbesar.

"Proyek dari Tiongkok kebanyakan bergerak di bidang Mineral seperti pengolahan nikel di Sulawesi dan pengolahan Bauksit di Kalimantan. Harapannya semoga komitmen proyek-proyek mereka yang tercipta di tahun ini bisa segera terelisasi," tuturnya.

Sumber : http://www.cnnindonesia.com/ekonomi/20150428131033-92-49710/bkpm-kuartal-i-2015-sektor-tambang-serap-investasi-terbesar/