Project Management Journal

Project success is a core concept of project management but its definition remains elusive. The project team must have a clear understanding of their project success objectives. This paper uses the logical framework method (LFM) as a foundation for defining project success. Using LFM, four levels of project objectives are identified: goal, purpose, output, and input. It is proposed that project success consists of two components—product success and project management success. Product success deals with goal and purpose; project management success deals with outputs and inputs.

The Project Management Institute has commissioned the authors to conduct research into whether the project manager's leadership style is a success factor on projects, and whether its impact is different on different types of projects. In this paper, we review the literature on the topic. Surprisingly, the literature on project success factors does not typically mention the project manager and his or her leadership style or competence as a success factor on projects. This is in direct contrast to the general management literature, which views effective leadership as a critical success factor in the management of organizations, and has shown that an appropriate leadership style can lead to better performance. Since, unlike most literature on project success factors, project management literature does consider the role of the project manager, we also review what it says about his or her leadership style and competence.

Mục tiêu của chúng tôi là phát triển một bộ chỉ số hiệu suất hàng đầu để cho phép các nhà quản lý dự án lớn dự đoán trong quá trình thực hiện dự án rằng các bên liên quan sẽ đánh giá thành công như thế nào trong nhiều tháng hoặc thậm chí nhiều năm tới sau khi đầu ra hoạt động. Các dự án lớn có nhiều bên liên quan với các mục tiêu khác nhau đối với dự án, đầu ra và mục tiêu kinh doanh mà họ sẽ thực hiện. Đầu ra của một dự án lớn có thể kéo dài nhiều năm, hoặc thậm chí nhiều thập kỷ, và có tác động đến cuối cùng vượt ra ngoài hoạt động ngay lập tức của nó. Cách các bên liên quan khác nhau đánh giá thành công có thể thay đổi theo thời gian, do đó nhà quản lý dự án cần các chỉ số hiệu suất hàng đầu vượt ra ngoài ràng buộc ba chất lượng truyền thống để dự đoán xem các bên liên quan chính sẽ đánh giá thành công như thế nào trong nhiều tháng hoặc thậm chí nhiều năm tới. Trong bài báo này, chúng tôi phát triển một mô hình cho thành công dự án để xác định cách các bên liên quan đến dự án có thể đánh giá thành công trong nhiều tháng và năm sau khi một dự án hoàn thành. Chúng tôi xác định các yếu tố thành công hoặc thất bại sẽ tạo điều kiện hoặc làm giảm sự đạt được các tiêu chí thành công đó và một bộ chỉ số hiệu suất hàng đầu có thể dự đoán cách các bên liên quan sẽ đánh giá thành công trong suốt vòng đời của đầu ra dự án. Chúng tôi đã thực hiện một nghiên cứu phát triển thang đo với 152 quản lý dự án lớn và xác định hai thang đo yếu tố thành công của dự án và bảy thang đo sự hài lòng của bên liên quan mà có thể được nhà quản lý dự án sử dụng để dự đoán sự hài lòng của bên liên quan với các dự án, do đó, có thể được sử dụng bởi các nhà quản lý dự án lớn làm cơ sở điều khiển dự án.

This paper describes the methodology and results of a research effort that identified the project management research published in English since 1960. An annotated bibliography was created of 3,554 articles, papers, dissertations, and government research reports. Trends were identified in each of the nine A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) knowledge areas. A workshop was conducted with experienced practitioners to help interpret the identified trends and to predict future directions for project management research.

Many researchers have suggested that meeting time, scope, and budget goals, sometimes called ‘project efficiency,’ is not the comprehensive measure of project success. Broader measures of success have been recommended; however, to date, nobody has determined empirically the relationship between efficiency and overall success or indeed shown whether efficiency is important at all to overall project success. Our aim in this article is to correct that omission. Through a survey of 1,386 projects we have shown that project efficiency correlates moderately strongly to overall project success (correlation of 0.6 and R² of 0.36). Efficiency is shown through analysis to be neither the only aspect of project success nor an aspect of project success that can be ignored.

This systematic literature review explores the megaproject management literature and contributes by improving our understanding of the causes and cures of poor megaproject performance. The review analyzes 6,007 titles and abstracts and 86 full papers, identifying a total of 18 causes and 54 cures to address poor megaproject performance. We suggest five avenues for future research that should consider examining megaprojects as large-scale, inter-organizational production systems: (1) designing the system architecture; (2) bridging the gap with manufacturing; (3) building and leading collaborations; (4) engaging institutions and communities; and (5) decomposing and integrating the supply chain.

Project success rates have improved, and much of the credit can be given to the knowledge, practices, and standards that have contributed to the professionalization of the field. Unfortunately, too many failures still occur. Because many of them can be traced to management and decision-making practices, it might be useful at this stage to explore a set of systematic biases to determine if understanding them can help diagnose and perhaps even prevent failures from occurring. This article begins with a framework identifying the influences on project outcomes, defines the systematic biases that may derail projects, summarizes eight project failures, uses the framework to diagnose those failures, and concludes by suggesting how organizational and project culture may contribute to these very common and natural biases.

This paper describes the methodology and results of content analysis research on culture within the leading project management peer review journals and recent published project management books. A review of 770 journal articles and 93 books was conducted, extending four earlier project management literature reviews while focusing on culture within project management. Emerging from this research are three primary themes: (1) knowledge and awareness of culture is important for project management professionals, (2) the percentage of culture-related articles remained fairly constant with earlier research, and (3) empirical-based project management research continues to be limited.

This article addresses the research question: How is uncertainty affecting project portfolios managed in dynamic environments? The management of four portfolios was studied in two large multidivisional corporations. The portfolios were characterized by a high degree of uncertainty and many interdependencies between the projects. The results of this research indicate that the sources of change go beyond the two groups identified in The PMI Standard for Portfolio Management (Project Management Institute, 2006), that is, (a) Portfolio Performance and (b) Business Strategy Changes. The sensing mechanisms put in place by both companies primarily addressed uncertainty related to project scope.

This paper addresses two important current trends in project management research: the first relating to the changing emphasis of project-based research output, and the second relating to the development of a theory of project management. The first aspect is driven by evidence of a move from process-based research toward the interactions between people and projects. The second involves the alignment of certain aspects of the management of projects with more established theoretical domains. This paper applies a theoretical lens to some elements of the management of project-based work, in order to embed it within more robust theoretical imperatives.