The competencies needed by a project manager to successfully manage projects are defined in ‘The Project Manager Competency Development Framework’ (also from PMI). The framework is designed to guide individuals as they build their capabilities, skills and knowledge to effectively manage projects. As their knowledge increases, people working in the project or project support environment (eg, the PMO) can acquire either the Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM) credential if they are working as team members or Project Management Professional (PMP) credential if they have been ‘directing and leading’ project teams for a minimum period of 36 months. Both credentials require the candidate to demonstrate specific training and/or experience to apply for the exam and then pass a rigorous
Projectgovernance is a sub-set of overall corporate governance. The aim should not be the blind conformance to the minimum requirements of the legislation. The objective should be to leverage the minimums of good governance imposed by regulation and legislation to create a system that can generate real benefits. The tools needed to deliver accurate and robust project analysis have been around for years (Primavera, Open Plan, Microsoft, etc). These tools are supported by effective techniques that accurately predict overall project performance and are reinforced by recognised Standards (Earned Value, ITIL, PMBOK ® Guide, PRINCE2, etc) 4 .
Despite conventional wisdom and current naming conventions, none of the so-called project control tools actually control anything. Changing numbers in a cost plan will not influence the movement of money into or out of an organisation’s bank account – people writing cheques or processing funds transfers do that. Similarly changing the duration of a scheduled activity has absolutely no effect on the time the work actually takes to perform. The most these project control tools can achieve is to influence the thinking of workers in a way that may change their future actions. Nothing can change what’s already happened!
To manage a project effectively three types of communication occur: vertical communication, the up and down flow of communication based on hierarchical relationships; horizontal communication, based on communication with peers; and diagonal communication, the upward relationships with managers and diagonal communication with contractors and/or suppliers or team members of other departments (Campbell, 2011). Influential team members often realise that people making the most noise have little relevance and efforts should be made to encourage the reluctant communicators to participate (Gorse and Whitehead, in Emmitt and Gorse, 2007). Those project leaders with considerable communication skills and influence emerge as the dominant communicators, thus the attributes of dominant communicators may be closely associated with those of leaders (Emmitt and Gorse, 2007). Leaders lead through effective communication. Good communication skills enable, foster and create the understanding and trust necessary to encourage others to follow a leader. Without effective communication, a manager accomplishes little. Without effective communication, a manager is not an effective leader. In fact, being able to communicate effectively is what allows a manger to move to a leadership position (Zulch, 2014). As stated by Kouzes and Posner in Kellerman (2012, p. 269) leadership “is not a solo act, it’s a team effort.” Communication therefore is a strong force that influences projectsuccess. The project leader needs to develop a leadership style that fosters effective and efficient communication with stakeholders.
Secondly, the concept that ‘projectgovernance’ is somehow special and a function of middle level manager can also result in conflict of interest. This threat comes from middle management’s generally held misconception that governance is focused on due process and control. Peterson et al. (2002) argued that a focus on tools and frameworks is insufficient to guarantee effectiveprojectgovernance. For example, many organizations appoint a project sponsor or Project Control Board (PCB) as a ‘governance’ agent and the focus will be on ensuring the project manager follows ‘due process’. The limitation of this approach is the risk that, if this due process is followed, the sponsor or PCB may consider that all ‘governance’ responsibilities have been met – and that someone else – typically the project manager – has the responsibility to ensure that the project meets its objectives. The conflict occurs when the same people have an organizational responsibility for ensuring the achievement of the stated outcomes and a responsibility for over-sighting the same processes. In such circumstances, it will be difficult for this management group to maintain a balanced perspective in their decision- making.
From the public perspective, success is implementing useful projects that have sustainable positive impacts in the years ahead [4, 5]. This means, a public investment project is successful if the social welfare of the society is increased by implementing the project, the environmental impacts of the project are minimum and the net economic value of the project is positive. The need for ensuring projectsuccess or the need to ensure the relevance and sustainability of public investment projects at the projects’ preparation stage has challenged the traditional decision-making and the project development processes. Understanding the nature of these challenges and putting in place the most effective form of governance in response has emerged as a new paradigm for developing successful public investment projects. In this regard, some industrialized countries have changed their planning and decision-making procedure of public investment projects. They have established formal front-end projectgovernance systems in order to provide the right information to decision-makers. This paper aims to discuss front-end projectgovernance system as a critical success factor for developing successful public investment projects. It begins with discussing front-end projectgovernance system. Then the second part elaborates the success of public investment projects and finally it presents front-end projectgovernance system as a success factor for developing successful public investment projects.
In recent years, organisations are making considerable IT investments in their projects to achieve a maximum return by realising benefits from one or more projects (Westland, 2007). By making such investments, ERP projects failure rates have considerably decreased, which plays an important role in organisational success (Serra & Kunc, 2015; Hughes et al., 2015; Lindstrom, 2014). Serra and Kunc (2015) have recently examined correlation between Benefit Realisation Management (BRM) and ERP projectsuccess. However, the process through which BRM shape projectsuccess has found limited attention in the literature. Several researchers have suggested that BRM enhances projectgovernance. For example, Bradley (2010) and Jenner (2010) stated that BRM creates high values in a project which overall enhance the projectgovernancetools and overall effectiveness. Consequently, the projectsuccess increases with projectgovernance (Joslin and Müller, 2016). In line with the gaps in the existing literature on BRM, the focus of the current study is to explore the role of BRM on projectgovernance and projectsuccess. The authors questioned “ whether or not BRM is beneficial for ERP projectsuccess through projectgovernance and how? ” .
Schedule analytics tools As capital project spend increases and aggressive deadlines are built into project schedules, the reliance on accurate, transparent and meaningful schedule practices is growing. Too often, major projects suffer from missed milestones, schedule slippage and delays with no way of determining recovery plans or realistic forecast completion dates.
In most organizations, project managers are accountable for the successful delivery of complete projects. Increasingly, this success depends on project managers’ possessing and utilising skills and competencies that may initially appear contradictory. One of the central themes of this paper is that a successful project manager must demonstrate flexibility and competency in many areas – “hard” and “soft” skills, introverted and reflective, extroverted and social behaviours. Until recently, many of the initiatives for improving the practice and profession of project management have been focussed upon enhancing techniques and methods associated with skills that included effective management of time, cost, and scope. The Project Management Institute’s (PMI) Guide to the PM Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) tends to be primarily concerned with management competencies (craft) and the “hard” skills expected of practicing project management professionals with knowledge areas such as project human resource management and project communication management (the essential relationship- focussed areas) relegated to secondary (and less important) roles (PMI, 2000).
The data in Table 1 is supported by research that shows that projectsuccess and failure is located in the ‘softer’ side of project management responsibilities – success is created by effective leadership, team management, stakeholder management (Pinto and Kharbanda 1995; Thomas, Delisle et al. 2001; Crawford and Da Ros 2002; Turner and Veil 2002, and through understanding the importance of value, risk and relationships, and the language of business (Thomas, 2002; Bourne and Walker 2003; Crawford 2004; Bourne and Walker 2005). These skills are acquired through many years and over many projects and are rarely displayed by the ‘conscripted’ accidental PM or the novice PM. Therefore, a career project manager who has acquired these skills and experience will have a better chance of being successful than either an interim ‘accidental’ PM or a novice PM.
Objectives of the study include: 1) to study effect of learning support and use of project management tools on projectsuccess; and 2) to test mediation effect of learning support between use of project management tools and projectsuccess. Context of the study is the aid industry in Pakistan which is spread over sectors like health, education, information technology (IT) and telecommunication, infrastructure, agriculture and rural development, governance, and community development. Major aid agencies operating in Pakistan are World Bank, Asian Development Bank, USAID, European Union, and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
During the last five years legislative, regulatory and other changes have forced a dramatic shift in governance practice causing a transition from a relatively secret, unstructured system to a regulated, public process. The leading change was the introduction of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 (SOX), in the USA followed by similar legislation and regulation in the UK, Europe, Australia and many other jurisdictions. These changes firstly focused attention on corporate governance, which in turn significantly changed the expectation of shareholders and others, and has then flowed on to influence the expectations and actions of people and organisations world wide.
The Royal Commissioners demonstrably achieved those objectives by ensuring adequate compensation to the builder and ensuring the preservation of the Crystal Palace despite Parliament voting against retaining it in its original location. Flexibility was shown when needed allowing work to start months ahead of the contract signing which in turn allowed the exhibition to open on time but financial and quality controls were strict and effective.
Pinto J.K and Slevin D.P (1988) offer two main reasons for the ambiguity: First, it is still not clear how to measure projectsuccess because the parties who are involved in projects perceive projectsuccess or failure differently and thus they value the outcome differently. Second is that lists of success or failure factors vary in various studies in the literature. Many of these factors do not, in practice, directly affect projectsuccess or failure. Usually a combination of many factors, at different stages of project life cycle results in projectsuccess or failure. Shenhar A.J et all (2002) suggest three reasons for the ambiguity namely due to the universalistic approach used in most project management studies that all projects assumed to be similar, the subjectiveness of the success measures and the limited number of managerial variables examined by previous researches. Munns A.K and Bjeirmi B.F (1996) further postulate that this ambiguity will continue to exist if distinction is not established between projectsuccess and project management success. Projectsuccess tend to be long-term nature oriented towards the expected total life span of the completed projects while in contrast, project management success is oriented towards planning and control in the context of the short-term life of the project development and delivery.
However, we demonstrated that increasing the proportion of independent trustee-directors is unlikely to bring about increased levels of diversity, lower levels of potential and actual conflicts of interest, and improved fund performance for the benefit of members. Conversely, introducing non-associated trustee-directors as per the Cooper Review’s recommendations is likely to exacerbate existing issues surrounding a lack of suitable trustees. We found that the representative trustee governance structure has produced significantly better returns for fund members over a long period, compared to appointed trustee governance funds. We showed that the effect of this better performance can be measured in terms of a larger pool of superannuation savings on which to retire, or in terms of the number of years extra a person in a retail fund would have to work to attain the savings amount of a representative trustee fund. In both cases, the differences are stark.
The corporate governance framework in Sweden states that the aim of the code is to increase the overall confidence, as well as the supply of risk capital (CG code, 2010). Theoretically, the interpretation is that non-compliance should result in lower confidence and less supply of risk capital, portrayed as a higher cost of capital. As stated in the previous section, the majority of studies into the relationship between adherence to governance and the cost of capital have yielded a significant outcome. In fact, studies in a European setting are almost exhaustively found to have a significant impact. North American studies are, however, a bit more ambiguous. The Swedish context offers the comply-or-explain approach that Bozec & Bozec (2010) used to explain the strong significant relationship between governance and cost of capital in an emerging market setting. The argument was that this creates larger inter-firm variations. However, the Swedish judicial system is very strong, meaning that the governance system does not have to bridge a gap in the same extent as in countries with weak investor protection and a weak overall legal system. In general, the difference between a fully- compliant firm and non-compliant firm in Sweden is not as large as it would be for the equivalent firm in an emerging country, using an argument in line with Bozec & Bozec (2010) and Zhu (2009). The risk-spread is therefore lower for the Swedish market. Nonetheless, in line with conclusions of previous studies, combined with the statements in the corporate governance framework, the expectation is to find a significant relationship between the governance variables and the overall cost of capital, as it should lower the risk profile of the firm.
The supply-side of proactive declaration of government data in India faces much difficulty due to insufficient cross-agency harmonisation of data operations. This issue is symptom of a more general challenge. National e- governance situation in India greatly suffers from lack of government-wide interoperability framework and national enterprise architecture. As NeGP does not propose implementation of standard frameworks to ensure cross-agency semantic and system interoperability, in reality the implementation of NDSAP may create a backwards press for the agencies to re-organise their data management practices. This provides a great opportunity to harmonise data management processes including both technical and semantic characteristics, across agencies. It is crucial to note that NDSAP conceptualises <data.gov.in> both as a portal for citizens to access government data, as well as for intra-governmental data sharing (often of 'sensitive' data). Thus, realisation of a more integrated OGD agenda may lead to re-engineering of agency-specific data management processes to align them to interoperability requirements for contribution to the data portal, and can produce highly cost-reducing and process-streamlining outcomes.
Pre-Implementation is a transition period from sales and includes activities where knowledge, information is gathered to allow the Infinite Campus Manager to make preparations to implement the core product of Infinite Campus along with any other items that may be within the scope of the project. For this implementation those activities will occur in addition to a Fit/Gap Analysis.
The frequency distributions of items relating to commitment in respect of project managers, as indicated in Table 6, reveal that the items comprising the commitment dimension were regarded as ‘extremely important’ in over 80% of the instances. As reflected in Table 7, at least 82% of contractors regarded the items that constitute competence as being ‘extremely important’. Thus, the vast majority of respondents identified the commitment dimension as a critical success factor for the successful completion of construction projects. Project managers ranked political support as being the most important factor, whereas the support of top management was considered most important by contractors. Both parties ranked political support very highly, understandably, considering that the majority of projects are based in the public sector. Projects, especially public projects, are influenced by the politics of the day, hence the need for political support. Jacobson & Choi (2008: 646) identify non-governmental organisations and political parties as the key political players. According to Johnson, Scholes & Whittington (2006: 504), projects come about due to a strategic objective that the organisation has to achieve. The support of top management is, therefore, essential. Commitment to the project is vital. Having clear objectives and scope are key elements. Lindahl & Ryd, 2007: 152) believe that project objectives have to be iterated and validated on an ongoing basis. Forsythe (2008: 480) indicates that construction clients make quality judgments progressively throughout the project, hence the need for clear objectives and scope.