Aaron J. Shenhar

Project Success: A Multidimensional Strategic Concept

Abstract This article presents projects as powerful strategic weapons, initiated to create economic value and competitive advantage. It suggests that project managers are the new strategic leaders, who must take on total responsibility for project business results. Defining and assessing project success is therefore a strategic management concept, which should help align project efforts with the short- and long-term goals of the organization. While this concept seems simple and intuitive, there is very little agreement in previous studies as to what really constitutes project success. Traditionally, projects were perceived as successful when they met time, budget, and performance goals. However, many would agree that there is more to project success than meeting time and budget. The object of this study was to develop a multidimensional framework for assessing project success, showing how different dimensions mean different things to different stakeholders at different times and for different projects. Given the complexity of this question, a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods and two data sets were used. The analysis identified four major distinct success dimensions: (1) project efficiency, (2) impact on the customer, (3) direct business and organizational success, and (4) preparing for the future. The importance of the dimensions varies according to time and the level of technological uncertainty involved in the project. The article demonstrates how these dimensions should be addressed during the project’s definition, planning, and execution phases, and provides a set of guidelines for project managers and senior managers, as well as suggestions for further research.

An empirical analysis of the relationship between project planning and project success

Abstract This paper examines the relationship between project planning efforts and project success. Three planning aspects are considered (requirements definition, development of technical specifications, and project management processes and procedures), along with three perspectives on project success (end-user, project manager, and contracting office). The study is based on data from more than a hundred defense research and development projects (aimed at the development of weapon systems and support equipment) performed in Israel and includes an analysis of the statistical correlation between the two sets of variables. The findings suggest that project success is insensitive to the level of implementation of management processes and procedures, which are readily supported by modern computerized tools and project management training. On the other hand, project success is positively correlated with the investment in requirements’ definition and development of technical specifications.

In search of project classification: a non-universal approach to project success factors

Abstract In this study we attempt to answer two questions: Is there a natural way to classify projects and what are the specific factors that influence the success of various kinds of projects? Perhaps one of the major barriers to understanding the reasons behind the success of a project has been the lack of specificity of constructs applied in project management studies. Many studies of project success factors have used a universalistic approach, assuming a basic similarity among projects. Instead of presenting an initial construct, we have employed a linear discriminant analysis methodology in order to classify projects. Our results suggest that project success factors are not universal for all projects. Different projects exhibit different sets of success factors, suggesting the need for a more contingent approach in project management theory and practice. In the analysis we use multivariate methods which have been proven to be powerful in many ways, for example, enabling the ranking of different managerial factors according to their influence on project success.

Beyond the Balanced Scorecard:: Refining the Search for Organizational Success Measures

Abstract Measuring organizational success is a continuous challenge for both managers and researchers. While financial measures were in wide use for many years, new frameworks have emerged in recent years that extend organizational perspectives beyond traditional financial measures. Among them the Balanced Scorecard is one of the most popular new frameworks. However, in spite of its wide usage, it has shown to be inadequate in various circumstances and across differing firm types. Additional studies are therefore needed to keep exploring a problem that has been relevant for at least thirty years. This study was dedicated to the question of how to assess the organizational success of commercial firms. It also tested specific measures that are relevant to different kinds of organizations, and provides managers with a useable template for assessing organizational success. We have identified twelve potential baseline measures across five major success dimensions (financial, market, process, people, and future) that can be examined as applicable to different firms and firm types. Specific firms can use this framework as a starting point from which to choose measures that would best fit their environment and strategic direction.

Risk management, project success, and technological uncertainty

In times of increased competition and globalization, project success becomes even more critical to business performance, and yet many projects still suffer delays, overruns, and even failure. Ironically, however, risk management tools and techniques, which have been developed to improve project success, are used too little, and many still wonder how helpful they are. In this paper we present the results of an empirical study devoted to this question. Based on data collected on over 100 projects performed in Israel in a variety of industries, we examine the extent of usage of some risk management practices, such as risk identification, probabilistic risk analysis, planning for uncertainty and trade-off analysis, the difference in application across different types of projects, and their impact on various project success dimensions. Our findings suggest that risk management practices are still not widely used. Only a limited number of projects in our study have used any kind of risk management practices and many have only used some, but not all the available tools. When used, risk management practices seem to be working, and appear to be related to project success. We also found that risk management practices were more applicable to higher risk projects. The impact of risk management is mainly on better meeting time and budget goals and less on product performance and specification. In this case, we also found some differences according levels of technological uncertainty. Our conclusion is that risk management is still at its infancy and that at this time, more awareness to the application, training, tool development, and research on risk management is needed.

Refining the Search for Project Success Factors: A Multivariate, Typological Approach

Although the causes for project success and failure have been the subject of many studies, no conclusive evidence or common agreement has been achieved so far. One criticism involves the universalistic approach used often in project management studies, according to which all projects are assumed to be similar. A second problem is the issue of subjectiveness, and sometimes weakly defined success measures; yet another concern is the limited number of managerial variables examined by previous research. In the present study we use a project-specific typological approach, a multidimensional criteria for assessing project success, and a multivariate statistical analysis method. According to our typology projects were classified according to their technological uncertainty at project initiation and their system scope which is their location on a hierarchical ladder of systems and subsystems. For each of the 127 projects in our study that were executed in Israel, we recorded 360 managerial variables and 13 success measures. The use of a very detailed data and multivariate methods such as canonical correlation and eigenvector analysis enables us to account for all the interactions between managerial and success variables and to address a handful of perspectives, often left unanalyzed by previous research. Assessing the variants of managerial variables and their impact on project success for various types of projects, serves also a step toward the establishment of a typological theory of projects. Although some success factors are common to all projects, our study identified project-specific lists of factors, indicating for example, that high-uncertainty projects must be managed differently than low-uncertainty projects, and high-scope projects differently than low-scope projects.

From theory to practice: toward a typology of project-management styles

Research literature on the management of projects has been quite slow in its conceptual development and still suffers from a scanty theoretical basis. One of the main impediments in the study of projects has been the absence of constructs and the little distinction that has been made between the project type and its managerial and organizational style. Based on the findings in a field study of 26 case projects, this research shows that there is a need to adopt a more project-specific contingency approach to project management in organizations. This study explores a two-dimensional theoretical model for the classification of technical (or engineering) projects. Projects are classified according to four levels of technological uncertainty at the time of project initiation and three levels of system scope, which is their location on a hierarchical ladder of systems and subsystems. Considerable differences were found in management style, project organization and operational practice when moving along each of the models two axes. Differences also were observed in simultaneous change in both dimensions. The findings suggest a handful of practical and managerial implications. They are based on the premise that a proper project classification prior to project initiation and a carefully selected management style may lead to better implementation and to an increased chance of project success.

The relative importance of project success dimensions

Traditionally, the success of a project is assessed using internal measures such as technical and operational goals, and meeting schedule and budget. More recently, it has been recognized that several other measures should be used to define project success. These measures reflect external effectiveness: the projects impact on its customers, and on the developing organization itself. In our study of 110 defense projects performed by Israeli industry, we used a multidimensional approach to measure the success of defense projects. Based on previous studies, we defined four dimensions of success: meeting design goals; benefits to the customer; benefits to the developing organization; and benefits to the defense and national infrastructure. For each project, we asked three different stakeholders (the customer, the developing organization, and the coordinating office within the Ministry of Defense) for their views on the relative importance of these dimensions of success. Analysis of the data revealed that the dimension benefits to the customer is by far the most important success dimension. The second in importance is meeting design goals. The other two dimensions are relatively unimportant.

Project Management Research—The Challenge and Opportunity

Project management is one of the fastest growing disciplines in organizations today. However, ironically, the statistics of project success suggests that most projects still fail and many projects do not accomplish their business results. This presents possibly a unique opportunity for substantial improvement. In this paper the authors offer their perspective about the challenge that the project management research community is facing today. The authors propose several research directions that may evolve as central in the next few years in order to stimulate the discussion and debate about the future of the discipline. They first look at project management research from a problem-driven perspective and than offer three central views with which project management could be perceived: the strategic/business view, the operational/process view, and the team/leadership view. For each one the governing thought pattern, the theories, and the related disciplines are presented. Although these views are certainly not unique, they may provide an integrated perspective of the discipline and a possible trigger for further discussion that may help attract scholars from other more established academic disciplines and improve the status of project management research.

The new taxonomy of systems: toward an adaptive systems engineering framework

Systems engineering is developing rapidly, while new standards are created and new tools are being developed. However, the theoretical understanding and the conceptual foundation of systems engineering are still in their early stages. For example, although real-world systems exhibit considerable differences, there is very little distinction in the literature between the system type and the description of its actual system engineering pursuit. We suggest here a new approach to systems engineering. It is based on the premise that the actual process of systems engineering must be adaptive to the real system type. Using this concept, we present a two-dimensional (2-D) taxonomy in which systems are classified according to four levels of technological uncertainty, and three levels of system scope. We then describe the differences found in systems engineering styles in various areas, such as system requirements, functional allocation, systems design, project organization, and management style. We also claim that adapting the wrong system and management style may cause major difficulties during the process of system creation. Two examples will be analyzed to illustrate this point: the famous Space Shuttle case and one of the system development projects we studied.