8/11/2019 critical success factors in project management

1/3

Success Factors

of

Project Managem ent: The Critical Few

- An Empirical Investigation -

Prof. Dr. Hans Georg Gemuenden

Dr. Thomas Lechler

I. INTRODUCTION projects (about 1,800 successful, 1,200 unsuccessful and

- -

about 276 0 unclassified projects). The basic structure of this

conceptual research frame differentiates between four classes

of variables: Peo ple, Activities, Barriers and Success.

During recent years, project management has been firmly

established as a co ncept for organ izing extraordinary,

innovative as well as strategic endeavors. However, still

many of these projects fail. What are the recommendations

that research can provide to practicing managers?

The following contribution aims at providing general

recomm endations regarding project manag ement. This effort

is based on the assumption, that the project success depends

on a relatively small number of variables, the so-called

success factors. For the purpose of this study, success factors

of project managem ent be defined after BOYNT ONnd ZMUD:

,,Critical success factors are those few things that must go

well to ensure success for a m anager or

an

organization .. [or

a project]. l

11.

THECONCEPTUAL

FRAMEWORK

In order to select the most relevant variables for testing, a

comprehen sive review o f the em pirical research on su ccess

factors of project management was conducted. This review

included

44

studies, which investigated a total of 5,760

Figure

1

The conceptual research frame

People:

The factor top management includes direct support as

well as the general interest of the top m anagement for an

individual project.

The factor project leader refers to the formal authority of

the project leader.

The factor project team describes know-how and the

social skills of the project team.

Activities

The factor participation refers to the involvement of the

project team in decision making.

The factor information/communication describes the

formal information system as well as the effectiveness of

communication.

The factor

planning/controlling

focuses on effectiveness

of planning an d controlling.

Information

Communication

Boynton und Zmud (1984), p 17 Additions by

the authors.

cf.

Fritz

(1992)

375

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Chung Cheng University. Downloaded on December 28, 2009 at 06:37 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

8/11/2019 critical success factors in project management

2/3

Barriers:

Success:

The factor

conflicts

pertains to both the intensity and the

kind

of

the conflict.

Changes o project goals

refers to the extent, importance

and frequency of changes.

The determination of project success is a very complex and

multidimensional issue.The present study examines the total

impact of each individual su ccess factor on overall projetct

success. For a detailed analysis of the factors influences on

the three sub-dimensions (effectiveness, efficiency, social

success) of project su ccess cf. LECHLER2

111. RESEA RCH DESIGN AND DATA ANALYSIS

The data for this research was gathered through a

questionnaire which was distributed to the members of the

German Project Management Society (Gesellschaft fur

Projektmanagement (GPM)). After the initial contact by

telephone, two questionnaires3 were mailed out to each

respondent, asking them to report on one project they regard as

successful, and one project they regard as f a i l ~ r e . ~he data

collection effort achieved an overall response rate of

43 ,

resulting in a sample of

N=448

projects. The literature on

project management features only one study with a larger

ample.^ The sample fo r the present investigation contains data

on 248 successful and 190 unsuccessful projects. These two

sub-groups are not entirely balanced because som e respondents

were unwilling to report on an unsuccessful project or didnt

have any experiences in that regard.

The data analysis was conducted using the LISREL-

Approach (Linear Structural Relationships). using LISREL

version 7.13 6

I v .

EMPIRICAL

ESULTS

The present model displays considerable explanatory power.

The eight success factors explain approximately 59 of the

variance in project success (r2=.59).

The individual success factors exert their influence on project

success in different ways, as will be explained below:

Top management directly promotes project success as

customer and highest organizational authority yl .24).

Through

transferring formal authority

to

the project leader

yzl

.65) and by influencing the design of the project team ( ~ 3 1

.3

5), Top management provides the organizational environment

for the successful completion of the project. Top management

also impacts the process directly through the factor participation

Gemuenden (1990); Hauschildt, (1991); Lechler (1997).

A part of the questionnaire was taken from the surve y of Pinto

(1

Cf.: Rothwell et al. (1974).

Baker, Murphy and Fisher (1974).

Joreskog,

K.;

Siirbom

D. (1989).

986 .

y4] .47). The considerably high impact of top m anagement on

project success can also be interpreted from a more critical point

of view, as it could indicate an overly strong involvement of top

management in the process of the project itself.

The project leader exerts influence over the factor

informatiodcommunication

( P 6 2

.lo). The impact of the

project leader on planning/controlling, however, was not

supported by this data,

so

that this hypothesis has to be rejected.

Additionally, there was no significant direct influence of the

factor project leader on project success, so that this hypothesis

had to be rejected too.

The

project team

is the main driving force for project

operations and thus directly promotes project success

P I 3

.36). A good team actively utilizes its decision m aking authority

Pd3 .33). Its know how leads to better planning and more

adequate and flexible controlling of the project

PS3

.36) in

addition to improved information flows/communication within

and outside the team (P63 .65).

This data does not display a significant relationship between

participation

and project success,

so

that the hypothesized direct

impact is not supported. However, participations strong

influence on communication

( P64

.32) gives evidence to the

assumption that participative leadership enhances the formal

and informal exchange of information within the project.

Additionally, the project team participating in project relevant

decisions does improve on the quality of planning and

controlling PS4 .29).

Out of the group of activities the factor

inform tiodcommunic tion

shows the strongest direct impact

on project success ( D l 6 .13). Its influence on planning and

controlling ( p 56 .20) documents the importance of free

information flows on that success factor.

Surprisingly low is the direct impact of planningkontrolling

on project success PI2

. lo).

This result contradicts the

widespread opinion that plannin ghon trolling is one of the most

important success factors. The relatively weak influence could

be attributed to high levels of uncertainty, that force the project

team to take ad hoc actions as reactions to ever changing

situations. In such cases, the need to react may outweigh the

benefits of the preset project plans. Another explanation for this

weak influence could be that the project team does not take the

plan seriously, in which cas e the plan would serve as an alibi.

The strong negative impact of

conflicts

on project success

demonsaates the significance of effective conflic

management to projects. Oftentimes the causes for conflicts

come from outside the project. For instance, differences

between project and line management over authority as well

as political activities are frequently being carried into the

project from outside. Conflicts are particularly likely to occur

in so-called week project organizations, where projec

decisions have to be approved by numerous departments and

hierarchical levels. Additionally, projects

in

these

organizations are more apt to experience high personne

376

8/11/2019 critical success factors in project management

3/3

Figure

2:

Path diagram of the empirical model Level of significance

)

y1 =.19

turnover, which, in turn, may increase the chances for

changes in goals (another obstacle to project success).

The second barrier,

changes

n

goals, also displays a

strong negative impact on project success. Because of

complexity and uncertainty, project goals are often difficult

to determine. However, our data documents that a lack of

continuity in goals is significantly related to unsuccessful

projects.

Ow research also suggest, that the potentials for

conflicts and changes in goals are built up before project

start, and thus are hardly controllable during the cou rse

of

the

project.

CONCLUSIONS AND OUTLOOK

Making use of LISREL, a structural model was developed

which explains 59 of the variance in project success while

taking into account causal effects among the eight success

factors. The demonstrated indirect effects underline the

importance of accounting for interrelationships in

determining the relative impact of the eight factors on project

success. Recognizing these structural issues, the analysis

shows all eight factors to be significantly related to project

success.

1.

2.

3.

8

9.

REFERENCES

Boynton, A.; Zmud, R. (1984)An Assessment of Critical Success

Factors. In: Sloan Management Review ,

Nr.

2, S.17-27.

Fritz, W (1992)Marktorientierte Untemeh mensfuhru ng und

Untemehmenserfolg, Grundlagen und Ergebnisse einer empirischen

Untersuchung.

Gemuenden, H.G. (1990)Erfolgsfaktoren des Projektmanagements-

eine kritische Bestandsaufnahm e der empirischen U ntersuchungen. In:

Projekt Managemen t, Nr. 1,2, S.4-15.

Hauschildt, J. (19 91)Zur Messun g des Innovationserfolgs. In: ZfB,

Nr.

Lechler, T. (1 997)Zu r Messung des Innovationserfolgs. Lang Verlag,

Frankfurt.

Joreskog, K.; Stirbom, D. (1989)LISREL 7 User's Reference Guide,

Scientific Software, Inc.

Murphy, D.; Baker, N.; Fisher, D. (1974)Determinants of Project

Success, Boston College, National Aeronautics and Space

Administration, Boston

.

Pinto, J.K. (1986)Project Implementation: A Determination Of

Its

Critical Success Factors, Moderators And Their Relative Importance

Across The Project Life Cycle, Dissertation at the University of

Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.

Rothwell, R.; Freeman, C.; Horsley, A.; Jervis, V.; Robertson, A.B.;

Townsend, J. (1974)SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase

11

In:

Research Policy, Nr

,

S.258-291.

4, S.451-476.

377

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Chung Cheng University. Downloaded on December 28, 2009 at 06:37 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.