The magic triangle as a project management tool

Revision as of 00:42, 6 March 2022

Abstract

The definition of project success to many has been limited to only three main measurement criteria popularly known as ‘The iron/magic triangle’ (Atkinson, 1999). According to Freeman & Beale,1992 - these are the three key pillars of the triangle and includes ‘Cost’ –measured in terms of meeting the budget, ‘Time’ – measured in terms of meeting the schedule, and ‘Quality and Scope’ – measured in terms of meeting the requirements and scope, adhering to functional and technical specifications, defects, and reliability at the commencement of the execution phase. This article focuses on the magic triangle as a project management tool for delivering the scope of a project taking into account cost estimation and some limitations of this triangle in project management. Some modifications by PMBOK have also been given in this article.

Based on statistics, project managers tend to focus on cost and time for project delivery as they are the main criteria by which they are assessed. Many consider a project as success when it is delivered under budget, time and all the requirements and quality of the project are met. These three pillars even though are very important but have some limitations because the success of a project cannot be narrowed to only cost, when it was completed and quality. Project managers may need some other important tools like key performance indicators that serve as a guide in the execution of projects. This article also delves into a few type of cost estimation methods used for budgeting projects, the applications as well as the limitations of the magic triangle as a project management tool. The terms magic triangle, iron triangle and the triple of constraints are used interchangeable in this article to mean the same.

<opperproject.com/2017/12/iron-triangle ^[1]