Project success vs Project management success

Revision as of 17:53, 20 February 2022

Two perspectives need to be considered when evaluating a project’s performance: project success and project management success. Project success answers the question “Was the right project done”? This relates to the effectiveness of the project, which translates into the long-term benefits and value of the project. Some of the factors that enable project success are the cooperation of both project management and line management and aligning projects with the organization's strategy and goals. On the other hand, project management success responds to the question “Was the project done right”? This relates to efficiency in the project which translates into delivering the project within the constraints: scope, quality, and time. Some activities that enable project management success are planning and scheduling, cost, and risk management. Even though one kind of success does not guarantee that the project will be completely successful, several studies have shown a correlation between these two kinds of success. The chances of the overall project's success rise when the right planning, budgeting, and scope are defined in advance. Many frameworks have been developed to measure project success. Some of them focus on overall success, such as "The relative importance of project success dimensions” developed by Stan Lipovetsky. It suggests measuring project success by evaluating four different dimensions: meeting design and planning goals; customer benefits; benefit to the implementing organisation; and benefit to the infrastructure. Alternatively, other frameworks only focus on one kind of success, such as the Iron Triangle of Projects, which involves the three main constraints in Project Management: cost, quality and cost. One of the main limitations when evaluating project success is that it can be very challenging defining success criteria. As viewpoints and priorities differ, individuals will perceive success differently. Furthermore, effectiveness measures are less tangible and, as they are focused on long-term benefits, they are more difficult to estimate.

Big idea

The way in which a project's success is measured has evolved over time. Traditionally, projects were measured using a classic approach. Nowadays, we are moving towards using a state-of-the-art approach.

• The classic view focuses on the requirements of the project, short-term output and time, cost and scope
• The state-of-the-art view evaluates the overall business case, the vision, long-term benefits, and success criteria.

A state-of-the-art view makes it harder to assess a project's success as it is vaguer and harder to quantify.

A common description of a project manager’s goal is to manage projects in such a way that brings completion on time, within budget and that ensures the intended quality ^[1]. Hence, one would assume that quality and scope have been defined from the very beginning of the project. Even though the right planning of the project does not guarantee success, the lack of planning will most likely cause it to fail. Therefore, one would assume that defining the right planning, budgeting, and scope clear in advance would at least, increase the chances of a project’s success. However, there have been many projects that followed the initial plan, leading to completion within time and budget while meeting previously defined success criteria but ended up failing. These projects failed to provide long-term value for the company or produce any benefits for stakeholders. Therefore, to assess a project’s success, two perspectives have been defined:

• Project success is based on the long-term benefits and value of the project. It is associated with effectiveness, which is the capability of delivering the desired result
• Project management success is based on delivering the requirements on time within budget. It is associated with efficiency, which is doing things right. Successful project management means planning in the right way and following the plan.

Application

(1000 words)

• How to measure them
• Examples?

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.453.5945&rep=rep1&type=pdf (table1)

//Provide guidance on how to use the tool, concept or theory and when it is applicable

Limitations

(500 words)

• When does it make sense to talk about project management/project success? Fex if a company is not project management driven
• When is only one success enough? Do we always need to have both kinds of success?

• The value of a project and its long term benefits might be very difficult to estimate

//Critically reflect on the tool/concept/theory and its application context. What can it do, what can it not do? Under what circumstances should it be used, and when not? How does it compare to the “status quo” of the standards – is it part of it, or does it extent them? Discuss your article in the context of key readings / resources provided in class. Substantiate your claims with literature

Annotated bibliography

Provide key references (3-10), where a reader can find additional information on the subject. The article MUST make appropriate references to the and reference material provided in class – either incorporating it as a source, or critically discussing aspects that are missing from it but covered by this article. Summarize and outline the relevance of each reference to the topic (around 100 words per reference). The bibliography is not counted in the suggested 3000 word target length of the article

References

^[1]