Strategic Project Management Contemporary Issues and Strategies for Developing Economies Strategic Project Management Contemporary Issues and Strategies for Developing Economies Edited by Corlane Barclay Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group 6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300 Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742 © 2016 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business No claim to original U.S Government works Version Date: 20150713 International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4822-2513-6 (eBook - PDF) This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources Reasonable efforts have been made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the validity of all materials or the consequences of their use The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to publish in this form has not been obtained If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may rectify in any future reprint Except as permitted under U.S Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com (http://www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400 CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration for a variety of users For organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at http://www.taylorandfrancis.com and the CRC Press Web site at http://www.crcpress.com To my parents, Hermina Barclay and Caswell Barclay, who continue to be my inspiration and motivation Corlane Barclay To Joy Elizabeth Bryson (my youngest sister) and Michael Bryson (my youngest brother), who have through their lives taught me about project management, kindness, and courage Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson Contents Preface .xi Editors xv Contributors xvii The Role of Projects in Society CORLANE BARCLAY AND KWEKU-MUATA OSEI-BRYSON Section I CONSIDERATIONS IN MANAGING SUCCESSFUL PROJECTS A Dialogue on the Diversity in the Constituents of Project Success 13 CORLANE BARCLAY Decision Style Profiles of Project Managers: Preliminary Exploration of Idea versus Action Orientation 31 KWEKU-MUATA OSEI-BRYSON AND CORLANE BARCLAY A Framework for Developing Performance Objectives for Projects, Programs, and Portfolios 47 CORLANE BARCLAY AND KWEKU-MUATA OSEI-BRYSON Prioritizing Project Objectives in a Group Decision-Making Context 67 KWEKU-MUATA OSEI-BRYSON Project Management, Benefits Management, and Program Management 85 AMGAD BADEWI vii viii ◾ Contents Section II CHALLENGES AND CONSTRAINTS IN TEMPORARY ORGANIZATIONS The End of the Line: Project Management Challenges in Small Software Shops in Pakistan .107 SHAHID NADEEM SHAKIR AND JACOB NØRBJERG Information Systems Quality in English-Speaking Caribbean Software Development Firms 133 DELROY CHEVERS Program Risk Management: Making Strategy Possible 153 BRUNO RAFAEL DIAS DE LUCENA, LEONARDO J LUSTOSA, AND DAVID HILLSON 10 Reexamination of the Information Systems Project Escalation Concept: An Investigation from Risk Perspectives 179 NIPON PARINYAVUTTICHAI AND ANGELA LIN Section III OBSERVATIONS AND CASES FROM INDUSTRY 11 Improving Knowledge Movement in Building Design Projects 205 ZOHREH POURZOLFAGHAR 12 Knowledge Management Practices in Temporary Organizations .229 CORLANE BARCLAY 13 Who Should Champion E-Learning Projects in Educational Institutions? Emergent Roles of School Leadership in a National E-Learning Project in a Developing Country 249 CHRISTINE CHARLTON-LAING AND GERALD GRANT 14 Lawmaking Process through the Project Lens: An Exploration of a Cybersecurity Legislative Development Process in the Caribbean 269 CORLANE BARCLAY Section IV EVALUATING PROJECT SUCCESS AND PERFORMANCE 15 Introduction to the Project Performance Scorecard as a Technique in Determining Project Success .293 CORLANE BARCLAY Contents ◾ ix 16 Measuring the Success of Data Mining Projects: An Exploratory Application of the Project Performance Scorecard 305 CORLANE BARCLAY 17 Employment of Comparative Performance Evaluation Techniques in Government IT Projects: A Jamaican Case Study 323 JULIET BRADFORD, COURTNEY THOMPSON, ALVA MYERS, AND CORLANE BARCLAY Index 343 336 ◾ Strategic Project Management 17.8.3 Application of the Performance Evaluation Methods 17.8.3.1 Traditional Approach: Triple Constraint Method Based on the traditional view of the project, the project adhered to schedule and budget The key stakeholders viewed the project against these criteria mainly since additional or alternative dimensions were not formally tracked As a result of this, there were gaps in the evaluation process, and opportunities for learning from both failed and successful activities were diminished Despite this, however, members of the team, such as the project sponsor, felt that it was capable of measuring project success 17.8.3.2 Project Performance Scorecard The reevaluation of the project was done using the dimensions of the PPS (Table 17.5) and showed that while important activities occurred in the project, they were not tracked; thus, elements were not considered or were taken for granted, therefore missing the opportunity for project learning For example, the identification and monitoring of risks factors of the project were not formally considered; therefore, upon the occurrence of Hurricane Sandy, the response strategies employed to overcome its impact were not formally documented The method was able to formally identify project objectives that would be useful to monitor the achievement of these objectives throughout the project The reevaluation highlighted that the project did meet its critical objectives but missed opportunities, especially in the learning and innovation dimension of PPS 17.8.3.3 DeLone and McLean IS Success Model The assessment of the project using the IS success model is shown in Table 17.6 Similarities were found in some areas when the IS success model was applied, which can be explained by the fact that it is used to derive the PPS The observation was primarily focused on the evaluation of the system artifact (the project outcome) and its acceptance by the users 17.8.3.4 Summary Assessment of the Models There were generally positive reactions to the performance evaluation models A team member concluded that it was “good to look at different perspectives” in analyzing project performance and the alternative approaches were “useful to determine project benefits and user satisfaction.” Interestingly, despite the general negative perception of inadequacy of the traditional approach, all the participants felt it was able to determine or measure the success of the project However, some limitations were identified For example, the technical end user stated that “the traditional Comparative Performance Evaluation Techniques ◾ 337 Table 17.5 Project Performance Scorecard View of Upgraded AFTN Project PPS Dimensions Summary of General Project Objectives Project process • Timely delivery of system • Within budgeted cost • Identification of key project resources including contractor • Procurement of network equipment • Adherence to government procurement guidelines • Identification and management of risks • Timely communication to stakeholders Stakeholder: sponsor • Meet agreed system quality objectives (e.g., completeness, accuracy) • Achieve international standards and expectations Stakeholder: owner • Meet agreed system quality objectives (e.g., completeness, accuracy) • Achieve international standards and expectations • Maintain organizational cohesiveness Stakeholder: project team • Harmony among project team members • Clear chain of command • Clear project guidelines to follow Stakeholder: end user • Elimination of failures Learning and innovation • Develop team-building expertise • Improved understanding of the project process • Improved knowledge and sharing related to new system • Improved understanding of government’s procurement guidelines • Improved knowledge and sharing of international standards relating to flight plan Benefit • Implementation of system • Improved levels of efficiency at individual and organizational levels Quality • Achieve business and technical requirements • Achieve project requirements User • Acceptance and use • Ease of use • Training in system use 338 ◾ Strategic Project Management Table 17.6 IS Success View of Upgraded AFTN Project IS Success Dimension Project Objectives System quality • Elimination of previous equipment failures • Installation of switch • Elimination of all critical errors during testing Use • Acceptance of system by users • Increased functionality • Reduction in error rate and user complaints Net benefits: individual impact • A user-friendly interface • Increased functionality Net benefits: organizational impact • Adherence to international standards relating to flight plans • Adherence to government procurement guidelines model was unable to measure the end user happiness” because the stakeholders’ perspective was not taken into consideration This sentiment was supported by the end user who stated that the model did not facilitate formal capture of problems encountered by the end user The viewpoint may seem contradictory; however, it may point to the culture of success perspective still being viewed by some practitioners in a very limited light The PPS obtains positive reviews from the stakeholders as they felt it was more complete than the current standard used by them, including the traditional approach (Table 17.7) The project owner noted it provides additional perspective to assess the project that was not generally considered by the project team Similarly, a project team member remarked that the PPS perspective “looks at the bigger picture.” The sponsor further stated that “the model was forward looking and individuals who are aware of this model should begin to make the change in organizational culture.” The sponsor noted that there was not an awareness of PPS in the organization, which suggests a need for closer alignment between practice and academia along with finding strategies to share new emerging techniques with industry practitioners Because the principles of the IS success model were primarily embedded within the PPS, the stakeholders did not find any unique distinctions to compare it against the other models In essence, it was generally perceived to consider more dimensions than the traditional approach Comparative Performance Evaluation Techniques ◾ 339 Table 17.7 Stakeholders’ Perception of Evaluation Models Assessment of Models Owner Traditional Model Very successful using this model Quality control Project Performance Scorecard Model Additional perspective DeLone and McLean Model Good to look at different aspect of the project Look at the bigger picture Technical end user Unable to measure end user happiness More aspects to pay attention to Technical end user Unable to capture problems with end users More adequate than triple constraint Sponsor Capable of measuring project success Was not aware of this model; however, aspects of this model were incorporated in the project Useful to determine project benefits and user satisfaction 17.9 Conclusion The study underlined the importance of variegated measurement tools where decision makers can be better informed on the performance of the project The research utilized multiple performance evaluation techniques—namely, the traditional approach, the project performance scorecard (PPS) (Barclay, 2008) and the IS success model (DeLone and McLean, 1992, 2003) to assess a single government project in Jamaica The study was motivated by the persistent use of the traditional approach to evaluate project performance despite the growing pool of alternative techniques in the literature We argue that this type of study helps to strengthen the linkages between the academic and practice communities and inform them of developments such as alternative new project measurement models The application of these techniques is important to determine suitability of techniques in different contexts; to understand the implications of evaluation beyond the traditional methods that fit with the complexity and realities of projects; and to inform practitioners of best practices for organizational adoption The study also underlined the importance of a quality measurement system, because it is through the 340 ◾ Strategic Project Management measurement lens that the project is viewed and the opportunities for learning and growth can be determined It is important to state that the single project studied cannot be regarded as a sample for government projects, and so the findings may not be a true representation of government projects Additionally, the research has some limitations, particularly in the explication of the project objectives and the identification of suitable measures These issues will be addressed in future works Additional research will be necessary for additional success and failed projects to have a reasonable understanding of the criteria used by government organizations and to assess the adequacy of these criteria References Apolot, R., Alinaitwe, H., and Tindiwensi, D (2011) An investigation into the causes of delay and cost overrun in Uganda’s public sector construction projects In Second International Conference on Advances in Engineering and Technology (pp 305–311) Barclay, C (2008) Towards an integrated measurement of IS project performance: The project performance scorecard Information Systems Frontiers, 10(3), 331–345 Barclay, C and Osei-Bryson, K.-M (2010) An exploration of knowledge management practices in IT projects: A case study approach AMCIS 2010 Proceedings (p 452) Bromley, P D (1990) Academic contributions to psychological counselling A philosophy of science for the study of individual cases. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 3(3), 299–307 Collins, A and Baccarini, D (2004) Project success—A survey Journal of Construction Research, 5(02), 211–231 Creswell, J W and Miller, D L (2000) Determining validity in qualitative inquiry Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124–130 Darke, P., Shanks, G., and Broadbent, M (1998) Successfully completing case study research: Combining rigor, relevance and pragmatism Information Systems Journal, 8, 273–289 DeLone, W H and McLean, E R (1992) Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60–95 DeLone, W H and McLean, E R (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30 Fan, D (2010) Analysis of critical success factors in IT project management In Second International Conference on Industrial and Information Systems (IIS), 2010 (Vol 2, pp 487–490) IEEE Flynn, D and Du, Y (2011) A case study of the legitimation process undertaken to gain support for an information system in a Chinese university European Journal of Information Systems, 21(3), 212–228 Heeks, R R (2002) High failure of e-government in Africa: Promise and practice Information Polity, 7(2), 97–114 Hodsoll, F (1998) Measuring for success and failure in government and the arts Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 28(3), 230–239 Jamaica Gleaner (2012) Massive cost overruns for gov’t contracts—OCG Retrieved January 1, 2013, from http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20121101/lead/lead92 html Comparative Performance Evaluation Techniques ◾ 341 JIS (Jamaica Information Service) (2009) Government to introduce E-procurement services http://jis.gov.jm/government-to-introduce-e-procurement-services/ Jo, P A and Barry, M L (2008) The most important success factors for implementation of government projects in developing countries In Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, 2008 PICMET 2008 (pp 1400– 1409) IEEE Kaplan, R S., and Norton, D P (1999) The balanced scorecard for public-sector organizations. Balanced Scorecard Report, 15(11), 1999 McCormick, J (2005) Projects don’t fail, people Baseline, January 13 Retrieved January 2, 2013, from http://www.baselinemag.com/c/a/Projects-Management/ Projects-Dont-Fail-People-Do/ Meijer, P C., Verloop, N., and Beijaard, D (2002) Multi-method triangulation in a qualitative study on teachers’ practical knowledge: An attempt to increase internal validity Quality and Quantity, 36(2), 145–167 Miles, M B and Huberman, A M (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Niu, J M., Lechler, T G., and Jiang, J L (2010) Success criteria framework for real estate project Management Science and Engineering, 4(3), 10–23 Raz, T T., Shenhar, A J., and Dvir, D D (2002) Risk management, project success, and technological uncertainty R&D Management, 32(2), 101–109 Schwandt, T A (1997) Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Thomson, H J., and Thomas, S (2012) External validity in healthy public policy: application of the RE-AIM tool to the field of housing improvement. BMC Public Health, 12(1), 633 Wateridge, J (1998) How can IS/IT projects be measured for success? International Journal of Project Management, 16(1), 59–63 Wenjuan, T and Lei, Z (2011, January) Study on the success criteria of large-scale public sector development projects based on whole life cycle In 2011 International Conference on Management Science and Industrial Engineering (MSIE) (pp 135–139) IEEE Yin, R K (1994) Case Study Research: Designs and methods (2nd ed.) Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Yin, R K (2003) Case Study Research: Designs and methods (3rd ed.) Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Index A C Abduction, 33, 41 Absorptive capacity, 262 Action school, 88 Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunication Network (AFTN) project, Jamaica, 333 general issues, 335 performance evaluation methods application, 336–339 project background, 333–334 Aggregated risks, 165 AHP, see Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) American Institute of Architects (AIA), 209 Analytical decision style, 35 Analytic hierarchy process (AHP), 56, 69–70 group consensus estimation, 71–72 group synthesis and prioritization, 71 potential consensus builders identification, 73 problematic objects identification, 73 Anthony’s hierarchy, of management levels, 162–164, 174 Association of Project Management (APM), 2, 7, 50 Association of Thai Software Industry (ATSI), 187 Average variance extracted (AVE), 142–146 Canadian Council on Learning, 250 Capability, 86, 87 deployment success, 104 Capability maturity model integration (CMMI), 135, 138, 141 practices, 136–137 Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM), 137 Case study, definition of, 329 Change management practices, 104 Chief information officers (CIOs), 306 CMMI, see Capability maturity model integration (CMMI) Collaboration core culture, 235 Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO), 159 Commonwealth Caribbean, 273 Comparative performance evaluation techniques, in government IT projects, 324–325 findings and discussion AFTN project general issues, 335 DeLone and McLean IS success model, 336, 338 project background, 333–334 project performance scorecard, 336, 337 summary assessment of models, 336, 338–339 triple constraint method, 336 literature review Barclay’s project performance scorecard, 328–329 DeLone and McLean information system success model, 328 government projects in developing economies, 326–327 traditional project performance evaluation, 327–328 B Barclay’s project performance scorecard, 328–329 Behavioral decision style, 35 Benefit realization management, see Benefits management (BR) Benefits management (BR), 88, 93–94 practices, 104 stages and main activities of, 94 Business case, 93, 96, 98–100, 104 343 344 ◾ Index problem and opportunity statement, 325–326 project case selection and background, 330 data analysis, 331 data collection, 331 research process, 330–331 research validity, 331–333 research methodology, 329–330 research significance, 326 study purpose, 325 Competence core culture, 235 Composite reliability (CR), 142–146 Conceptual decision style, 35 Consistency indicators, 70 Construct reliability, 97, 98 Construct validity, 237, 333 Control core culture, 235 Corporate governance, COSO, see Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) CR, see Composite reliability (CR) CRISP-DM model, 308–309 Critical success criteria, 22 alternative project success criteria, 22–27 triple constraint methodology (TCM), 22 Critical success factor (CSF), 15, 20–21, 27 Cronbach’s alpha, 96, 97 CSF, see Critical success factor (CSF) Cultivation core culture, 235 Cultural knowledge, 234 Cybercrime understanding, 277, 284–286 D Data mining, 33 -based analysis, 41–44 Data mining projects, 306–308 critical success factors for, 311–312 data collection and analysis project background, 315 evaluation methods, 312–313 nature, 308–310 performance measurement of, 310–311 project performance scorecard and, 313 research contribution, 319–320 research methodology, 313–315 students’ examination performance assessment and, 315–319 Decision style, 32–33 data mining-based analysis results, 41–44 Decision Style Inventory (DSI) application, 36–37 description, 34–35 idea versus action orientation measurement, 36 measurement of, 36 related literature, 37–38 research methodology, 38 data analysis, 41 data collection, 39–40 demographic variables selection, 38–39 research problem description, 33 importance, 33–34 Decision Style Inventory (DSI), 34, 36–37, 39 Decision tree (DT), 33, 41–43 De-escalation process, 198, 199 DeLone and McLean information system success model, 328, 336, 338 Design phase, see Knowledge flow Directive decision style, 35 Discontinuous membership, 208 Domain knowledge, 234 Domain understanding, 275–277 DSI, see Decision Style Inventory (DSI) DT, see Decision tree (DT) Dynamic capabilities theory, 255, 257–258, 262 E Earned value analysis (EVA), 22 E-learning Jamaica Limited, 258, 260, 261 E-learning projects in educational institutions and champions, 250–254 discussion, 262 findings, 260–262 Jamaican case study, 255–256, 257, 258 research method, 256–260 theoretical underpinnings, 254–255 Enterprise resource planning (ERP), 87, 90 life cycle, 91, 92 Enterprise risk management (ERM), 159–160 ERP, see Enterprise resource planning (ERP) E-RPAF project, 186–187 Escalated risks, 165 Explicit knowledge, 222–225, 233, 242 External risks and program management, 165 External validity, 237, 332–333 G Global macro-knowledge, 238 Gola-Question-Metric approach, 55 Governance, Grounded theory (GT), 114 Index ◾ 345 Group decision making, see Project objectives prioritization (PoP), in group decision-making context GT, see Grounded theory (GT) H High consensus potential (HCP), 73, 77 HIPCAR cybercrime legislative development project, 279–280 model development process analysis, 281 scope, 281 I ICT, see Information communication technology (ICT) Idea vs action orientation, 34, 41 measurement, 36 Impact matrix, 97 Individual macro-knowledge, 238 Information communication technology (ICT), 252, 254, 263, 280 Information systems development (ISD), 184, 186–188 Information systems failure, see Information systems project escalation Information systems project escalation, 180–181 commitment, 182–183 discussion, 196–198 research findings antecedent conditions, 189–190 contract awarded and project planning, 190 database configuration, 193–194 division of labor, 192–193 making changes, 195 outcome, 195 requirements collection, 191 user resistance, 194–195 research methodology, 186–189 risk and risk management, 184–186 Information systems quality, in Englishspeaking Caribbean software development firms, 134–136 discussion, 147–149 findings, 141–143 measurement model, 143–146 structural model, 147 literature review, 136 process management, 136–137 product management, 137–138 methodology simplified software process maturity model for small firms (SPMM-S), 138–139 survey, 139–141 Information system success, 134–136, 138–140, 149 Institutional knowledge, 234 Integrated project management, 152 Internal validity, 237, 333 Interpretive research, 88 ISO/IEC 9126 quality standard, 138 ISO 31000:2009, 160 ITU, see International Telecommunication Unit (ITU) International Telecommunication Unit (ITU), 279–280 J Jamaican case study, of national e-learning project, 255–256, 257, 258 K KDDM, see Knowledge discovery and data mining (KDDM) model KM, see Knowledge management (KM) KMSs, see Knowledge management systems Knowledge discovery and data mining (KDDM) model, 273–274 Knowledge flow, 206–207 framework development for design process, 213, 214–216 business needs specification, 216 concept proposals firming up, 220–221 concepts transformation and combination, 220 details improving and cost proposal, 221 initial concept generation, 219–220 problems identification with existing solutions, 217–218 project characteristics determination, 219 proposal evaluation and choosing, 221 requirements development, 218 requirements setting, 219 stakeholders’ requirement assessment, 216–217 suitable combination selection, 220 theoretical validation, 221–224 improvement, during design process, 208–213 346 ◾ Index practical benefits of knowledge-based framework and, 225 problems, in construction industry, 207–208 Knowledge loss, 208 Knowledge management (KM), 32–33 effective, 234 Knowledge management practices, in temporary organizations, 230–232 research background, 232 perspectives on knowledge, 233–235 project management offices and roles in organizations, 232–233 research findings and discussions, 238 attitudes toward lessons learned, 241–242 knowledge process application, 242 knowledge risks, 243–244 office layout influence on knowledge sharing, 242–243 project knowledge management strategies, 238–240 project management standards, 240 reuse patterns, 241 research methodology, 235–236 data collection, 236 project case selection and background, 236 research validity, 237–238 Knowledge management systems (KMSs), 35 Knowledge transfer, 222 L Learning mode, 76 Legislative development in Caribbean, 270–272 domain understanding, 281–284 cybercrime understanding, 284–286 evaluation, 287–288 legislative development, 286–287 legislative implementation, 288 postimplementation review, 288 process preparation, 286 framework, 273–275 stages, 275–279 HIPCAR cybercrime legislative development project, 279–280 model development process analysis, 281 scope, 281 process, 272–273 projects nature, 271–272 Legislative drafting, 272, 273, 274 M Macmillan’s model, for knowledge flow improvement, 210, 211–212 Managing Successful Project (MSP), 91 MCDM, see Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem Measurement model, 143–146 Models/perspectives, on alternative success criteria, 25–26 MSP, see Managing Successful Project (MSP) Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem, 68–69 N Nine-step process, of data mining, 309–310 Nominal group technique (NGT), 139 O Office of the Contractor General of Jamaica (OCG), 327 Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (OPC), 273 Oracle Database Management Systems, 193–194 Organizational change, 155, 156 Organizational culture, 235 Organizational macro-knowledge, 238 Organizational risks, 165 Organization process definition, 152 Organization process focus, 152 Organization training, 152 Pairwise comparisons, 70, 71, 77, 81 P Partial least squares (PLS) Plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle, 166, 167, 272 PLS, see Partial least squares (PLS), 141 PMBOK®, 128–129, 240 PMI, see Project Management Institute (PMI) PMO, see Project management office (PMO) Portfolio, definition of, 50 Portfolio success, 19 PPDF, see Project performance development framework (PPDF) Practices, see project management, benefits management, and program management Principals, in schools, 253–254, 260–261 active involvement of, 261 Index ◾ 347 as facilitators, 261 measurement of characteristics of, 259 participatory, 261–262 Process knowledge, 234 Process management, 136–137 Process maturity, 144–147, 149, 152 Process model, 183, 187, 328 hypothetical example, for decision-making events in project, 188 illustrating E-RPAF development, 189 Process risks, 165 Product management, 137–138 Product success, 18, 311 Program, definition of, 158 Program, significance of, 50–51 Program management, 94–96, 164, 166, 175 as tool to implement strategy, 157–158 Program risk; see also Program risk management classification and treatment of, 164–170 definition, and program global risks, 160–161 Program risk management, 154–156; see also Program risk discussion, 173–175 enterprise risk management (ERM) and, 159–160 previous research, 156–157 program life cycle and risk management, 170 appraisal phase, 172–173 deployment phase, 172 dissolution phase, 173 formulation phase, 170–171 organization phase, 171–172 purpose and scope, 162–164 reasons for, 158–159 research methodology, 157 Program success, 19 Project, definition of, 50 Project coordinator, 187, 195 Project developer, 187 Project governance structure, 50 Project knowledge management strategies, 238–240 Project leader, 187 Project management, benefits management, and program management, 86–87 analysis questionnaires, 96–98 discussion, 98–100 literature review, 87–88 research methodology, 88–90 theoretical framework benefits management, 93–94 program management, 94–96 project management, 91–92 Project management, process groups in, 272 Project management challenges, in small Pakistani software shops, 107–110 discussion, 123 research implications, 124–125 research limitations, 125 VSSCs implications in developing economies, 123–124 global production small software shops, 110–111 VSSCs in global software marketplace, 111–112 research method, 112–114 study findings, 114–118 communication distortion and delays, 120–121 distributed projects, 119 local PM tools and practices, 122–123 no formal project management training, 119–120 responsibilities sharing, 121–122 small shops and many projects, 119 Project Management Institute (PMI), 2, 3, Project management knowledge, 234 Project management office (PMO), 156, 231, 236, 238–240 risks and challenges experienced in, 243–244 roles in organizations, 232–233 Project management success, 18, 136 Project managers, 33, 37, 39, 187, 216, 225 Project measurement dimensions, 26 Project monitoring and control, 152 Project objectives, see Project performance development framework (PPDF) Project objectives prioritization (PoP), in group decision-making context, 68–69 analytic hierarchy process (AHP), 69–70 group consensus estimation, 71–72 group synthesis and prioritization, 71 potential consensus builders identification, 73 problematic objects identification, 73 decision-making procedure and framework description, 74–75 justification, 75–77 preparation, 73–74 illustrative examples, 77–82 Project performance, 19, 20, 22–23 success, 18 348 ◾ Index Project performance development framework (PPDF), 48–49 development, 53 identification and structuring, 55 prioritization, 56 project measures elicitation and definition, 55–56 project stakeholders identification, 53–55 illustration measures identification, 62 objectives prioritization, 62 project background, 57 project objectives identification and structuring, 58–62 stakeholders identification, 57 stakeholders’ perception in project, 63 research background performance objectives role, 51–52 project, portfolios, and programs, 49–51 research contribution, 63–64 research methodology, 52–53 Project performance evaluation Barclay’s project performance scorecard, 328–329 DeLone and McLean information system success model, 328 traditional approach, 327–328 Project performance scorecard, 294–299, 313, 336, 337; see also Data mining projects Barclay’s, 328–329 procedure, 299–303 Project planning, 152 Project-related knowledge, 234 Projects role in society factors impacting project failure, 4–5 nature, 2–4 project benefits, 6–7 project management and governance, 5–6 Project success, 14, 136, 137–138, 294, 311 and critical success criteria, 22 alternative project success criteria, 22–27 triple constraint methodology (TCM), 22 and critical success factors, 20–21 determination of, 16–19 perception of, 15–16 stakeholders’ influence on, 19–20 Project team macro-knowledge, 238 Psychological school, 88 R Requirement risks, 196 Requirements management and development, 152 Risk and escalation commitment, dynamic relationship between, 197 Risk management, 152, 160, 161; see also program risk management Rubber Producing Aid Funds (RPAF), 186 S School e-Learning Implementation Committee (SEIMC), 260 SimVision software, 224 Single case study approach, 330 Software process improvement (SPI), 135, 136 Software process maturity model for small firms (SPMM-S), 138–139 SPI, see Software process improvement (SPI) SPMM-S, see Software process maturity model for small firms (SPMM-S) Stakeholders identification, 53–55, 57, 301 influence, 19–20 involvement approach, 283 perception of evaluation models, 338, 339 perception, 63 requirement assessment, 216–217 Strategic mode, 76, 77 Strategy, 154–157, 162; see also Program risk management program management as tool to implement, 157–158 Structural model, 147 Success, 88, 96, 97–98, 101; see also Project success in developing new capability, 87 and project management, 87 System analyst, 187 T Tacit knowledge, 207–208, 221–224, 226, 233, 242 TCM, see Triple constraint methodology (TCM) Technical knowledge, 233–234 Index ◾ 349 Technical solution, 152 Triple constraint methodology (TCM), 17, 22, 336 V Value-focused thinking (VFT), 276 Verification and validation, 152 Very small software companies (VSSC), 108, 110; see also Project management challenges, in small Pakistani software shops in global software marketplace, 111–112 global software production chains of Pakistani, 118 implications in developing economies, 123–124 model, in Pakistan, 117 PM practices in Pakistani, and comparison with PMBOK recommendations, 128–129 software engineering practices, 130–131 VFT, see Value-focused thinking (VFT) VSSC, see Very small software companies (VSSC) W Waterfall process model, 122, 130–131, 190 Work breakdown structure (WBS), 63 ... Strategic Project Management: Contemporary Issues and Strategies for Developing Economies, we seek to provide answers to the following questions: What are some of the principal contemporary issues. .. to project management factors, human factors, technical factors, and legal and regulatory factors Sound project management and governance practices are 2 ◾ Strategic Project Management strategies. .. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, Information Sciences, Information and Management, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Journal of Database Management, Computers and Operations