Investigating Project Management Practices in Public ... 1_1497444903.… · A. Bunyaminu & F....

© 2016 Research Academy of Social Sciences

http://www.rassweb.com 99

International Journal of Management Sciences

Vol. 7, No. 3, 2016, 99-129

Investigating Project Management Practices in Public Sector

Organisations in Ghana

Alhassan Bunyaminu1, Fuseini Mahama2

Abstract

This research investigates the project management practices in The Electricity Company of Ghana (E.C.G.)

The Electricity Company of Ghana (E.C.G.) is the sole power distributing company in all the ten regions in

Ghana. It carries its mandate through a number of projects aimed at building substations and distribution

networks. The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which project management processes are

practiced in public sector and thee case is on ECG. It was also to investigate the success rate of projects

undertaken by ECG and find out the causes of project failure in the company. The method used to carry out

this research was solicitation of information from the engineers, managers and contractors who supervise

projects through questionnaires. Data gathered was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Science

(SPSS). The major findings of the research indicated that the project management processes of initiation,

planning, execution, monitoring and controlling and closing were adopted in the implementation of projects

in the Accra West Region of ECG. It was highly recommended that management of ECG ensures that it

implement projects using the standard processes to the letter for a high success rate of its projects.

Keywords: Hybrid projects, project management practices, public sector, Private sector organisations,

complex project management

1. Introduction

This research is exploratory and qualitative in nature. It investigates the project management practices in

the public sector in Ghana. The main objective of this research is to identify the governance and management

practices of the public sector in Ghana. In addition, the aim is to explore the issues and difficulties that the

public sector organisations encounter during the process of managing a project. This is essential for the

reason that identification of the causes for projects failure may help the similar projects in the future.

The public sector in Ghana was in complete disarray by the mid-1980s. A combination of devaluation

and inflation led to a significant decline in real salaries between 1960 and the late 1980s. For example, the

minimum wage that has been falling since the 1960s, reached its lowest level in 1983, and although real

wages improved between 1986 and 1989, even at its peak in 1989, it was only 42% of the level in 1960

(Owusu, 2001). Public sector employees were not exempted from this precipitous decline in wages. Between

1976 and 1984, public-sector real wages in Ghana declined by 73 percent for unskilled labor and 93 percent

for skilled labor. Moreover salaries were not only inadequate, but payment was also erratic. To make matters

worse, most offices, especially those outside the capital city, Accra, were dilapidated and lacked the basic

necessities of a functioning office such as paper, pencils, telephones, light bulbs, etc.

Employees became demoralized; effectiveness and productivity concerns were relegated to the

background as work effort declined, absenteeism and moonlighting increased, and corruption, political

hiring, and rent-seeking became widespread (Owusu, 2005). These conditions made it extremely difficult to

1Lecturer, Banking and Finance Department, University of Professional Studies, Accra, Ghana 2Lecturer, Accounting Department, Bolga Polytechnic, Bolgatanga, Banking and Finance Department, University of

Professional Studies, P.O. Box LG 149, Legon, Accra, Ghana

A. Bunyaminu & F. Mahama

100

recruit and retain technical and professional staff. Gradually the bloated public sector became increasingly

incapable of performing basic tasks, let alone to facilitate national development efforts and this has really

affected Electricity Company of Ghana. The ineffectiveness of the public sector became a serious hindrance

when the government embarked on economic reforms in 1983. As a result, the government was compelled to

initiate public sector reforms to support the implementation of the economic policies.

As at August 2005, the government of Ghana was still in the process of developing a new public sector

reform strategy. In addition to developing a new working document for the reform, the government had also

created a new ministry in May 2005 called the Ministry of Public Sector Reform (MPSR) to provide

institutional home for all public sector reforms. The MPSR has held a number of working sessions to

establish the key focus of its reforms efforts.

The structure of the research is predominantly qualitative in nature, involving an in-depth exploration of

public sector project management practices in Ghana. This chapter provides an overview and summarises the

scope of the research. It explains the research background, the rationale for the research, research objectives,

research questions, research methods and scope and limitation of this research.

2. Literature Review

Definition of Project

The term project is described in different ways in the research literature. This is illustrated below:

• Project is defined as a temporary endeavour undertaken to create a unique product or service,

temporary means that the project has a definite ending point, and unique means that the product or service

differs in some distinguishing way from all similar products or services (PMI, 1996, p.4)

• Project has been termed as a human endeavour and may legitimately be regarded by its stakeholders as

a project when it encompasses a unique scope of work that is constrained by cost and time, the purpose of

which is to create or modify a product or service so as to achieve beneficial change defined by quantitative

and qualitative objectives (Cooke-Davies, 2001, p.20).

• Project is described as a “value creation undertaking based on specifics, which is completed in a given

or agreed timeframe and under constraints, including resources and external circumstances” (Ohara, 2005,

p.15)

• A project is a regarded as a business case that indicates the benefits and risks of the venture,

demonstrating a unique set of deliverables, with a finite life-span, by using identified resources with

identified responsibilities (Bradley, 2002).

The common themes in these definitions is that projects are unique in their output, having a definite

starting and ending point, are temporary in nature and are carried out to manifest the organisation’s strategic

objectives. These temporary structures are playing a vital role in today’s modern organisations and a growing

interest is recorded in the significance of these temporary structures in organisations.

Types of Projects

Projects are carried out in a wide variety of situations and they differ from each other in size, scope,

industry etc. This variation makes it difficult to create a single comprehensive taxonomy for the projects

(Shenhar and Dvir, 2004). There are two well-known approaches for the classification of projects. These are:

i) goal-and-method matrix presented by Turner and Cochrane (1993) and ii) the four dimensional NCTP

(novelty (N), complexity (C), technology (T) and pace (P)) framework presented by Shenhar and Dvir

(2004). The goal and mixed method classifies the projects into four types. This classification is based on the

principle of how well the goals and methods of the project is defined.

Turner and Cochrane (1993) defines that the type 1 projects in goals and methods matrix are the ones in

which the goals and methods are well defined. Typical projects in this classification are the engineering


101

projects. The type 2 projects according to them are the ones in which the goals are well defined but the

method are vague. The projects in this category are usually related with the development of a product. They

perceive that the type 3 projects are the kind of projects in which the methods are well defined but the goals

are not that clear. Projects such as software development fall in this category. The type 4 projects in the goal

and method matrix are those in which both the goals and methods are not well defined. Projects related to

research and organisational change falls in this type of projects.

After a series of research studies Shenhar and Dvir (2004) developed four dimensions and they are the

following; novelty (N), complexity (C), technology (T) and pace (P). Each dimension includes at least three

different types of projects.

The first dimension of novelty is defined as a product novelty: which means that how the new product is

to its potential. It also means that how much the customers are familiar with this kind of product and how

much they will use and benefit from it. In this dimensions there are three kinds of project types, which are:

derivate product, platform product and breakthrough product. In first type of projects (that is: derivate

products) the existing product is improved and extended. This kind of projects includes cost reduction,

product improvement, product modification and additions to existing line of products. The second type of

projects (that is: platform products) are the ones in which a new generation of an existing product is

developed/created. This kind of projects includes the development/creation of new families of product to

form the basis for numerous derivate. The third kind of projects in this dimension are the ones in which a

new concept, idea or a new use of a product is introduced in the market (Shenhar and Dvir, 2004, p1271-

1272).

The second dimension is of technological uncertainty. The types of projects which fall in this dimension

are the low-tech projects, medium-tech projects, high-tech projects and super high-tech projects. The higher

the technological uncertainty at the time of project initiation requires longer development phase, more design

cycles, more testing etc (Shenhar and Dvir, 2004, p1272).

The third dimension is of complexity. The types of projects in this dimension are of assembly level,

system level and array level projects. The assembly level projects involve in creating a collection of

components which at later a stage combined into a single unit. This single unit is involved in performing a

single function such as a standalone product or service. The system level projects involve a complex

collection of interactive elements and subsystem. These jointly dedicated to a wide range of functions to

meet a specific operational need. The array level projects in this dimension are the projects which deals with

large, widely dispersed collection of system that works together to achieve a common purpose. The examples

of this kind of projects are the city public transportation system, national air defence system, or interstate

telecommunication infrastructure (Shenhar and Dvir, 2004, p1277-1278).

The fourth dimension is of pace. The types of projects in this dimension are the projects which differ by

urgency, time and goals.

Apart from these two well-known approaches, Khazanchi and Zigurs (2004) categorise the projects into

three types based on their complexity. The complexity is defined in terms of attributes of team size, culture,

language, gender composition, personal characteristics, resources and knowledge (Khazanchi and Zigurs,

2004). The three main types of projects are as follows:

1. Lean Projects

2. Hybrid Project

3. Extreme Projects

1) Lean Projects

Lean projects are defined as having low capacity, narrow scope and relatively low risks. Such projects

tend to be easily subdivided into manageable parts due to relatively clear and tangible requirements or


102

outcomes. The goals in these projects are usually unambiguous and therefore the outcome is achieved in

short time using known methodologies. (Khazanchi and Zigurs, 2004).

2) Hybrid Projects

Hybrid projects are defined as having varying level of complexity, scope and risks. These projects

require a management approach that emphasises coordination between people and the activities. Therefore in

hybrid projects a special emphasis should be given to the technologies that enhance coordination (Khazanchi

and Zigurs, 2004).

3) Extreme Projects

Extreme projects are defined as having high complexity, broad scope and high risk. Such projects are

generally missioned critical. Consequently, extreme projects require intense activity and participation by a

number of teams and stakeholders. Therefore an extreme project requires a management approach that

emphasis on communication. Communication is required not only to develop a shared understanding of the

problem before any work can begin, but also at all stages of the project (Khazanchi and Zigurs, 2004).

Project Development Stages or Life Cycle

Traditionally, a project is divided into three or four phases during its development stage. These phases

can also be called as project life cycle. These development stages remain the same regardless of the

methodology being used. These stages can be categorised as:

• Initial Phase

• Intermediate Phase

• Final Phase (PMI, 2004)

Project Management (PM)

o Background

The foundation of the project management can be traced back to as early as civilization itself. But the

modern project management has its roots in the Second World War and is developed in construction and

defence industry during the industrial revolution. Most recently the demand for project management has

increased as number of projects is increased dramatically in a broad range of industries (Cooke-Davies and

Arzymanow, 2003).

o What is Project Management?

Project management is defined in different ways in the research literature. Some of these definitions are

as follows:

• Project Management is describe as a collection of tools and techniques to direct the use of diverse

resource toward the accomplishment of a unique, complex, one time task within time, cost and quality

constraint. Each task requires a particular mix of these tools and techniques structured to fit the task

environment and life cycle (from conception to completion) of the task (Oisen, 1971: Cited in Atkinson,

1999).

• Project Management is express as planning, organising, monitoring and controlling of all the aspects

of a project and the motivation of all the involved stakeholders to achieve the project objectives safely and

within agreed time, cost and performance criteria. (APM, 1995).

• Project management is term as an application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to project

activities to meet project requirements. Project Management is accomplished through the application and

integration of the project management processes of initiation, planning, executing, monitoring and

controlling and closing. (PMI, 2004).


103

• Project management is also articulated as a professional’s capability to deliver, with due diligence, a

project product that fulfills a given mission, by organising a dedicated project team, effectively combining

the most appropriate technical and managerial methods and techniques and devising the most efficient and

effective breakdown and implementation routes (Ohara, 2005).

Turner (1996) suggested that project management could be described as the art and science of

converting vision into reality whereas Atkinson (1999) argues that perhaps project management is simply an

evolving phenomenon, which will remain vague enough to be non-definable. This flexibility can be regarded

as its strength. In its early days the project management was solely concerned with the implementation of

single project in that era (Kartam et al. 2000). But, today many organisations have embraced the concept of

project management. This is mainly because of its systematic approach of managing the projects (Morgan,

1987). It’s a way to generate consistent results when undertaking new initiatives and a powerful business tool

that can transform an organisation’s ability to perform well (Artto et. al, 2008). Project management can also

be used throughout the organisation to boost personal and collaborative productivity. This can be done by

building a standardised system that embeds best practices into the way projects are managed (Milosevic and

Patanakul, 2005).

o Evolution of Project Management

The industrial revolution marked the beginning of what is referred to today as the modern organisation

in early 50s. This is the era in which the economic activity was in full swing in many western countries, with

engineering and construction project making a major impact on the environment. This rapid growth

demanded a tool and technique which is capable of organising and managing projects at various locations

(Abbasi and Al-Mharmah, 2000). During this era, network analysis and planning techniques, like Program

Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) and Critical Path Method (CPM) formed the focus of

development in project management. In 1960s, these techniques continued to be popular in the construction

industry (Crawford et al 2005). Development in the field of project management in the 1960s also included

the formation of two major professional associations. Shenhar (1996) cited in Crawford et al (2006) noted

that the focus on teamwork was the defining feature of project management in 1970s. While Stretton (1994)

cited in Crawford et al (2006) notes 70’s era as an emphasis on work breakdown structures and systems

concepts. The 1980s were typified by a focus on project organisation, project risk and the external influences

(Crawford et al. 2006). This era also led to the development of the international standards for project

management. Although project management grows in term of a profession until 1980 but still it was

perceived as the sole domain of engineers, finding a niche specifically in the civil engineering industry (Van

Der Merwe, 2002).

Other Approaches to Project Management

All of the above approaches to project management are based on the process based methodologies. A

part from these process based methodologies other paradigms for managing projects has also surfaced the

research literature. Some of these approaches are as follows:

• Critical Chain Project Management

• Complex Project Management

• Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM)

o Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)

Critical Chain project management which was developed and publicized by Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt in

his book ‘Critical Chain’ is a novel approach for managing projects (Raz et al., 2003). Goldratt is well known

in the operations management community as the inventor of the Theory of Constraints (TOC). TOC is a tool

for managing repetitive production system based on the principle that every system has a constraint, and

system performance can only be improved by enhancing the performance of the constraining resource (ibid).


104

CCPM is an extension of the TOC designed specifically for project environment. In CCPM the first step

is to identify the critical chain activities by using the critical path method. The next step is to recalculate the

project schedule based on shortened task duration estimates for the critical activities. The difference between

the project duration based on new estimates and the original is called the project buffer. The same procedure

applies for calculating the activities which are not critical and a buffer is created which is called feeding

buffer. This buffer is placed in the path where it feeds back into the critical chain path. According to CCPM a

feeding buffer represents the extent of protection of the critical chain against the uncertainty. The third type

of buffer used by CCPM is called a resource buffer, which is a virtual task inserted prior to critical chain

tasks that require critical resources. Its purpose is to issue a signal to the critical resources that a critical task

to which they are assigned is due to start shortly.

The resource buffer does not actually consume any resources and it adds neither time nor cost to the

project. As progress is reported the CCPM schedule is recalculated, keeping the final due date of the project

constant by adjusting the buffer sizes (Raz et al., 2003). In other words in a CCPM the flexibility in the start

time of the resources and the ability to quickly switch between the activities and activities chains keep the

whole project on schedule.

The opponents of CCPM methods dismiss the hype that CCPM can lead to superior performance and

argues that experienced project managers have known the principles behind CCPM for decades and CCPM’s

uniqueness is in the terminology rather than in its substance (Raz et al., 2003).

o Complex Project Management

A recent addition in the list of professional organisation in the field of project management is the

college of complex project managers. The college of complex project managers has developed their own

standards to manage the complex projects and called it as The Competency Standards for Complex Project

Managers (CSCPM). The principle behind this is that the complex system is formed out of many components

whose behaviour is emergent and the behaviour of the complex system cannot be simply inferred from the

behaviour of its components (Whitty and Maylor, 2009). So, to manage this complex system a complex

project manager is required who by understanding complexity and accepting it, can gain insight and have a

capability to steer a project towards its intended outcomes. The Complex project managers need to focus on

aspects of complex projects that distinguish them from traditional projects. Whitty and Maylor (2009)

articulate that the opponent of this standard argues that the definition of complex does not stand up to any

scrutiny. They further argue that there has been no analysis of the problems that the establishment of this

initiative is intended to solve. In addition to this the process by which the college and the standards have

progressed has gone un-checked; and that the standard is not established on evidence based practice.

o Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM)

The structured systems analysis and design method (SSADM) is the standard structured method used for

computer project in UK government departments. SSADM has also been adopted as a standard by public

utilities, local government, health authorities, foreign governments and several large private sector

organisations. The basic principles of SSADM are shared, to a varying degree, by many of the modern

structured methods of system analysis and design (Ashworth, 1988).

Current Practices in Project Management

Numerous methods and techniques have been developed, covering all aspects of managing projects

from their genesis to their completion, and these have been disseminated widely in books and journals

through the work of professional bodies. But how these techniques are currently practiced in the real world

and to what extent these techniques are used in the management of projects is presented by the research

conducted by Abbasi and Al-Mharmah (2000) in the less developed countries and by White and Fortune

(2002) in the developed countries. Abbasi and Al-Mharmah (2000) conducted a study on project

management practices in Jordan and selected a sample of 50 firms. The data was collected through a


105

questionnaire which was filled out by interviewing the person in charge of the planning and management

department. The main part of the questionnaire was focused on investigating the most implemented

techniques of project management in these firms.

Project Management in Public Sector

o Understanding Public Sector Organisations

Public sector organisations are structured as pyramids: the policies and decisions are formulated at the

top, responsibilities and tasks are also decided at the upper level of the pyramid and assigned to the lower

levels through a hierarchical chain of command. Power rests at the top of the hierarchy (Sotirakou and

Zeppou, 2005). Public sector organisations are different than their private sector counterpart because of the

complex organisational environment, goals, structure and managerial values (Boyne, 2002). These variables

create differences in how the basic functions of management are carried out in the public and private sector

organisations. The table below highlights the key differences in the public and private sector organisations.

Table 1: Differences in Public and Private Sector Organisations (Adapted from: Boyne, 2002)

Public Sector Organisations Private Sector Organisations

Ownership: Public sector organisations are

owned collectively by members of political

communities

Private sector organisations are owned by

entrepreneurs or stakeholders (Rainey et al., 1976)

Funds: Public sector organisations are funded

largely by taxation from public

Private sector organisations are funded by the fees

paid directly by customers (Walmsley and Zald,

1973)

Control: Public sector organisations are

controlled predominantly by political forces

Private sector organisations are predominantly

controlled by the market forces (Dahl and

Lindblom, 1953)

Complexity: Public sector organisation faces a

variety of stakeholders

In the private sector organisations the stakeholders

are limited than the public sector organisations

(Metcalfe , 1993)

Permeability: Public sector organisations are

open systems that can be easily influenced from

external events

Private sector organisations may ignore the demand

from external parties towards policy formulation

and implementation (Ring and Perry, 1985)

Instability: Public sector organisations are more

influenced by the political instability

Private sector organisations are less influenced or

affected than their public sector counterparts

(Bozeman , 1987)

Competition: Public sector organisations

have less competitive pressure

Private sector organisations have more competitive

pressure (Boyne, 1998)

Goals: Public sector organisations have

distinctive and multiple goals imposed upon them

by the numerous stakeholders that they must

attempt to satisfy

Private sector organisations have more focused

goals (Flynn, 1997)

Structure: Organisation in the public sector have

more formal procedures for decision making and

are less flexible and more risk averse

Private sector organisations are flexible in their

decision making and are less risk averse than their

public sector counterparts (Bozeman and Kingsley,

1998)

Red Tape: The red tape implies an unnecessary

and counter-productive obsession with rules rather

than results. Public sector organisations are rigid

in following the rules

The private sector organisations are not that rigid in

following the rules and processes as does the public

sector they are more concerned with the results and

outcomes (Bozeman and Scott, 1996)


106

Autonomy: Managers have less freedom to react

to the circumstances

Much more freedom than their public sector

counterparts (Allison, 1979)

Managerial Values: Less materialistic

More materialistic (Pratchett and Wingfield, 1996)

Commitment: Stronger desire to serve the public More concerned with the demand of the individual

customer (Perry and Porter, 1982)

Spittler and McCracken (1996) perceive that most public sector organisations are functionally divided

and bureaucratic. They further state that this division into functional areas can be for a variety of reasons.

One obvious reason is that it maintains specialisation. Sometimes it is undertaken to segregate the steps in

procurement and sometimes to maintain the chain of command. This is done for the reason that the

responsibility is readily understood and accountability is easily traced. In addition to this the process of

conceptualising, funding, designing, constructing and operating a project involves functional division of the

organisation (ibid). This structure of public sector organisations tends to bring with it a set of challenges.

These challenges arise from the behaviour of the employees in the functional areas.This happens in a manner

that the employees specifically focus on their own area of expertise with little understanding of how their

actions will impact others (Brunetto and Farr-wharton, 2003). Some of the problems that arise due to these

conditions are as follows:

• Lack of information flow

• Incorrect decision making

• Short term outlook etc (Spittler and McCracken, 1996).

Public Sector Environment

Global competition and market liberalisation, the information technology revolution and the emergence

of knowledge society have created an unpredictable and complex working environment for public sector

organisation (Sotirakou and Zeppou, 2005). The last decade has been characterised by an intense analysis of

what government pursues and what are the practices it uses to realise its efforts. Public administration, in

particular has been vilified for being inflexible in performing its roles (Zajac, 1997; Box, 1999; Glyn, 2006).

According to recent public opinion polls, confidence in public institutions is in decline throughout the world.

Public sector organisations are experiencing continuing pressure from the public to modernise and to make

government more efficient (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992; Frederickson, 1996; Durst and Newell, 1999).

To eschew this pressure, public managers try hard to enhance performance through the implementation

of various modernisation and change reforms (Haque, 2003).These reforms are often termed as re-

organisation, re-engineering and as organisational change in the literature (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992;

Drucker, 1989). In public sector often these reforms are undertaken to reduce public spending, to improve

effectiveness, to respond to new social demands etc (Andrews, 2008). These calls for the reforms in the

public sector lead to a new paradigm of managing public sector often referred to as New Public Management

(NPM). Common and Minogu (1998) cited in Sarker (2006) observe the factors that led to the emergence of

the NPM model. Some of these factors are as follows:

• The fiscal crisis of government,

• Poor performance of the public sector in different arenas,

• Bureaucracy,

• Lack of accountability,

• Corruption,

• Change of people’s expectations and

• The emergence of better alternative forms of service delivery

The next section explains NPM in more detail.


107

New Public Management (NPM)

NPM is an answer to the call of ‘reinventing the government’ (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992) on the basis

of market base economy. It represents a major shift from the conventional public administration in various

ways. Some of the key characteristics of NPM are as follows:

•A change in the focus of management systems and management effort from inputs and processes to

output and outcomes;

•A move towards greater measurement;

• A preference for more specialised lean and autonomous organisational forms rather than old

bureaucratic structure;

•A widespread substitution of contract or contract-like relationships for hierarchical relationships;

• The use of market and market-like mechanism for the delivery of public services (including

privatisation, contracting out, the development of internal markets and so forth);

•A broadening relationship between the public and private sectors (characterized by the growth of

public/private partnerships) and

• A swing of priorities from universalism, equity, security and resilience towards efficiency and

individualism (Pollitt, 2001 cited in Sarker, 2006).

NPM advocates the adoption of management techniques which are proved useful in the private sector.

Project Management is one of those techniques which have recently attracted a lot of attention in the privet

sector. It is a systematic effort through which an organisation can achieve its goals efficiently. But for project

management to work in the public sector the officials and managers of these organisations must understand

the different facets of the project management body of knowledge in public sector context (ibid). The next

section will discuss about the project management in public sector.

Project Management in Public Sector

Spittler and McCracken (1996) states that ever since humans began building major projects for public

good, the search to manage these projects effectively has continued. The public sector requires that its

projects be managed with simplicity and with minimum possible costs. However, public sector organisations

tend to be conservative with slow response time and with bureaucratic culture. These are commonly believed

to be undesirable qualities and detrimental to effective project management. They further perceive that

project management within the public sector is aimed at ensuring that the organisations resources are being

used in ways consistent with its disparate goals and objectives. Therefore to achieve these disparate goals and

objectives with minimum cost a suitable practice for the right job should be chosen.

o Management of Public Sector Projects in Ghana

In Ghana, the public sector is poorly managed and lacks the capacity to provide social and

infrastructural services (Dlakwa, 1990). The crux of the problem lies in a paucity of resources and weak or

inadequate incentives for the public officials to deliver services efficiently (Kulshreshtha, 2008). Johnston

and Dyrssen (1991) argue that it is not sensible to deny that numerous social factors make the work of

management in Ghana difficult and unrewarding. It is probable that the wealthier a society, the better its

management is likely to be. Therefore, Ghana face a growing need to reform its public institutions to provide

better performance incentives to their public officials and to reduce the service delivery time by ensuring

greater transparency and accountability in decision making (Kulshreshtha, 2008).

In Ghana, the initial growth and development projects for the economy are focused on infrastructure

development, transportation, irrigation and agriculture (Muspratt, 1987). The next phase of the development

is then concentrated in the construction for manufacturing services and communications (ibid). The lack of

knowledge and tools of the new techniques in the growing field of project management is common in Ghana


108

especially in the public sector which results in the failure of the project with respect to scope, time and cost

(Chan, 2001; Sonuga et al. 2002). The irony of the situation is that even the projects used extra time and

money but still mostly did not complete the scope which is mentioned in the initial project document (ibid).

Struckenbruck and Zommorrodian (1987) perceive that project management is an efficient approach for the

optimum utilization of the scarce resources and for better fulfilment of development project in Ghana. This is

because it uses an integrated planning and control system with a single point of responsibility and

accountability (i.e. the project manager) (ibid). Several other authors Abbasi and Al-Mharmah, (2000);

Kartam et al., (2000); Partington, (1996); Bryde, (2008); Sonuga et al., (2002) identify different barriers

which hinders the project success. These are:

• Lengthy approval procedures

• Existing administrative system

• Change orders

• Lack of ownership

• Lack of authority

• Poor estimation of activity cost etc.

However, all of them have emphasised on further research to investigate the limitations and potential for

project management system in different environment.

3. Methodology

Research Design

The study utilized a survey design. This design was appropriate because the study sought to investigate

engineer’s views or opinions regarding some of the project management practices of the Electricity Company

of Ghana.

A quantitative research approach was adopted to achieve the research objectives. This approach was

chosen because the study collected numeric data instead of non-numeric. Quantitative approach was also

appropriate because questionnaire instead of interview was used to collect the data in the study.

Method of Data Collection

The researcher sought permission from the head of each of the department that handles projects by

explaining the purpose of the study to the various heads. This was appropriate as required by research ethics.

After approval is given, the researcher would seek the consent of the participants who agree to take part in

the study before delivering the questionnaires to them to fill. Participants would be assured of confidentiality

of information that they will provide. Data collection would take one month.

This has been done to get as much data as possible for the research from the participants and

intervention was only made if the discussion is going too far from the topic. The interviews were done from

the planning sector organisations. The interviews remained focus on initiation, planning, monitoring &

controlling phases of the project. This was done because the planning in ECG mostly deals with these phases

of the projects but any useful data that is contributed by the participant for any other phase was also collected

to get a better understanding of the processes.

Data Analysis

Data collected were screened, coded and entered into the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)

version 19.0 for windows. This software was used to facilitate the data analysis process. Using this software,

frequencies, percentages, tables and charts were generated to explain the data.


109

4. Results and Discussion

Project Management Implementation Practices

Project implementation usually goes through five phases. The study sought to determine the extent to

which this was applicable in ECG. The views of respondents were sought regarding each of the phases. As

shown in the figures below, the Company fully adopted and implemented the initiation and execution phases

while the planning, monitoring and closing were not always entirely implemented. Specifically, all the

respondents surveyed (n=13) indicated that the initiation process (100%) and the execution (100%) processes

of project management were fully implemented by the Company.

Table 4.1: Initiation Process _____________________________________________________________________________

Frequency Percent

____________________________________________________________________________

Yes 13 100.0

Total 13 100.0

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.2: Execution Process ______________________________________________________________________________

Frequency Percent (%)

Yes 13 100.0

Total 13 100.0

_______________________________________________________________________________

Regarding the other three phases namely; planning, monitoring/control and closing phases, it was observed

that respondents did not endorse complete implementation by the Company.

Regarding planning, 76.9 percent (n=10) reported that it was implemented with 23.1 percent (n=3)

expressing different opinions.

Fig. 4.7: Planning process


110

Further, it was observed that, while the majority 10(76.9%) indicated that as part of project management

of the Company, monitoring and control processes were implemented, 23.1 percent (n=3) indicated

otherwise

Fig. 4.8 Monitoring/Control process

Finally, it was revealed that, the closing phase was mostly implemented. 92.3 percent of respondents

reported that, ECG implemented the closing phase of project management while 7.7 percent (n=1) said this

phase is not implemented.

Fig. 4.9 Closing Process

Following from the above analysis, it can be said that Electricity Company of Ghana, adopts and

implements project management practices such as initiation, planning, and execution, monitoring/control,

and closing processes though planning, monitoring and closing phases were sometimes not implemented.


111

Processes Used in Implementation of Projects in ECG

Further to the adoption of project management practices by ECG, the study sought to determine the

various processes in each of the phases and whether ECG followed them. Each of the phases involved some

processes. For instance, the initiation phase involved three main processes such as product/project

description, project charter and identification of project constraints.

o Initiation Phase

This phase involved three processes. The first process which deals with product or project description

was found to be followed by ECG. The majority of respondents expressed strong agreement (46.15%) with

the view that product or project description is done at the initiation phase with 38.46 percent agreeing with

the statement. Only 7.69 percent of respondents disagreed with the statement with 7.69 percent indicating

that they were not sure.

Fig. 4.10 Product/Project description

Similarly, it was observed that, the majority of respondents indicated strongly that project charter or

definition of project objectives took place at the initiation stage of ECG projects (38.46%) with 30.77 percent

agreeing with the statement. However, 15.38 percent of respondents expressed disagreement while 15.38

percent were undecided.

Fig. 4.11 Product/Project description


112

Further, identification of project constraints was reported by majority of respondents to take place

during the initiation phase of project implementation at ECG. Specifically, 30.77 percent of respondents

expressed agreement with the statement that project constraints are identified at the initiation phase with

23.08 percent strongly agreeing. However, 46.15 percent disagreed with the statement. Thus, though not all

the respondents suggested that project constraints are identified at the initiation phase, the majority expressed

that view.

Fig. 4.12 Identification of project constraints

Planning Phase

Within the framework of project management, planning involves, project scope definition, activity

definition (timing), product analysis, cost-benefit analysis and alternative identification (i.e. brainstorming

and lateral thinking). The study revealed that these elements under the planning phase were followed in

project implementation at ECG. Specifically, analysis of scope definition as an element under planning

showed that, the majority of respondents strongly agreed that (45.45%) it was part of the planning phase with

36.36 percent also agreeing with the statement. In addition, 9.09 percent were undecided while 9.09 percent

expressed disagreement with the statement.

Fig. 4.13 Scope verification


113

The study also revealed that team development was an important element in the project execution phase.

In relation to team development, 38.46 percent of respondents expressed agreement with the issue while

30.77 percent strongly agreed with the issue. However, 23.08 percent said they were not certain whether

team development was an element in the execution phase or not while 7.69 percent of them disagreed with

the issue.

Fig. 4.14 Team development

Similarly, contract administration was reported by the majority of respondents as part of the execution

phase of project implementation (46.15%). In addition, 38.46 percent indicated that contract administration

was part of the execution phase of project implementation while 15.38 percent said they were not sure

whether it was part of it or not.

Fig. 4.15 Contract administration


114

Quality assurance was reported as an element under project execution with 30.77 percent agreeing with

the issue while 15.38 percent expressed strong agreement with the statement. However, 30.77 percent

indicated that they were not certain whether quality assurance was implemented at the execution phase of

projects or not while 23.08 percent said it was not part of the execution phase of project implementation.

Fig. 4.16 Quality assurance

Finally, it was observed that project execution plan was an element under the execution phase of project

implementation. Specifically, 46.15 percent of respondents strongly stated that this issue was part of the

execution phase of project implementation with 46.15 percent agreeing with the issue. Only 7.69 percent of

respondents reported that they were undecided on the issue.

Fig. 4.17 Project plan execution

Monitoring and Control

Another important phase of project implementation is monitoring and control. Under this phase several

activities are carried out to ensure that projects implemented are successfully monitored and controlled. The

study found that, most respondents strongly agreed that at the monitoring and control phase ongoing projects


115

are measured against variables with 38.46 percent also agreeing with the issue. However, 15.38 percent

disagreed with the issue while 7.69 percent said they were not certain.

Fig. 4.18: Measuring ongoing project activities against variables

In addition, it was observed that control scope, cost, time and quality were carried out in an attempt to

monitor and control projects. The majority of respondents agreed that (53.85%) scope, cost, time and quality

were part of the monitoring and control phase. Also, 23.08 percent strongly agreed with the issue while 7.69

disagreed with the issue. However, 15.38 percent were undecided about the issue.

Fig. 4.19 Control scope, cost, time and quality of projects

Further, as part of monitoring and control phase of project implementation, it was observed that change

management was integrated. The analysis showed that, 30.77 percent of respondents strongly agreed that

change management was integrated into the monitoring and control phase with 23.08 percent also agreeing

with the issue. However, 38.46 percent expressed uncertainty about whether it was part of the monitoring and

control phase or not while 7.69 percent disagreed with the issue.


116

Fig. 4.20 Integrate change management

Finally, the analysis revealed that project performance was reported as part of the monitoring and

control. Most respondents agreed that project performance was reported (45.45%) with 27.27 percent also

expressing strong agreement with the statement. However, 27.27 percent of respondents expressed

uncertainty about whether project performance was reported or not.

Fig. 4.21 Report performance


117

Closing Phase

The last phase of project implementation which talks about closing of projects consists of two elements:

contract close out and settlement of contract. The results showed that the majority of respondents agreed

strongly that (53.85%) that contract close out takes place at the closing phase of project implementation,

38.46 percent agreed with the issue with only 7.69 percent of respondents disagreeing with the issue.

Fig. 4.22 Contract close out

Similarly, the majority of respondents expressed strong agreement that settlement of contracts occur at

the closing phase of project implementation (53.85%) while 38.46 percent expressed agreement with the

issue. However, only 7.69 percent expressed strong disagreement with the issue.

Fig. 4.23 Settlement of contracts


118

Success or Failure rate of Projects

The study sought to determine whether the adoption of project management processes led to project

success of failure of ECG. The study found that, projects were successful when the processes such as

initiation, planning, execution, monitoring/control and closing were adopted and implemented. Specifically,

success rate of more than 75 percent (61.54%) and between 51 and 70 percent success rate respectively were

accomplished when project management processes were adopted and implemented. This implies that, the

adoption of process management processes would always produce an above average performance or success

rate.

Fig. 4.25 Rating of success of projects executed within the last three years

Factors that Contribute to Success of Projects

Factors that contribute to the success of projects were explored. A number of factors were reported by

respondents as contributing to the success of projects. The analysis showed that, executive management

support and adequate communication channels contributed significantly to project success while realistic

expectations contributed less to success.

Executive Management Support

Regarding executive management support, the majority of respondents expressed agreement that it

contributed to project success (69.23%) with 30.77 percent strongly agreeing with the statement. This shows

that, all respondents found management support as a critical factor in project success.


119

Fig. 4.26 Executive management support

Competent Project Team Members

The contribution of project team to project success was also explored. The study found that, the

availability of competent project team members was a critical factor to project success. 53.85 percent of

respondents expressed strong agreement that competent project team members determined project success

while 30.77 percent also endorse the issue. However, 7.69 percent expressed contrary views while 7.69

percent were not sure of the contribution of competent project team members to project success.

Fig. 4.28 Competent project team members

Control Mechanisms

The majority of respondents agreed that control mechanisms significantly resulted in project success

(46.15%) with 23.08 percent expressing strong agreement with the issue. However, 23.08 percent expressed

uncertainty about the contribution of control mechanisms to project success while 7.69 percent of them

disagreed with the impact of control mechanisms on project success.


120

Fig. 4.29 Control mechanisms

Clearly Defined Goals

The results obtained in the study suggest that, clearly defined project goals were critical to project

success. Specifically, 46.15 percent of respondents agreed with the statement that clearly defined goals lead

to project success with 15.38 percent strongly endorsing the statement. However, 23.08 percent of

respondents expressed contrary views while 15.38 percent expressed uncertainty about the impact of clearly

defined project goals on project success.

Fig. 4.30 clearly defined goals

Causes of Project Failure

Several factors ranging from lack of executive management support and commitment to lack of client or

customer involvement in projects have been documented as major reasons for project failure.


121

Lack of Management Support and Commitment

This factor was reported to be a major contributing factor to project failure. Most respondents agreed

that lack of management support and commitment significantly accounted for project failure (53.85%) with

7.69 percent expressing strong agreement with the issue. However, 23.08 percent disagreed with the

statement. Subsequently, 15.38 percent expressed strong disagreement. Despite this, it can be concluded that,

lack of management support and commitment significantly accounted for project failure in ECG.

Fig. 4.31 Lack of management support and commitment

Lack of Clear Statement of Project Requirements

Lack of clear statement of project requirements was not found to be a major determinant of project

failure in ECG. In particular, 38.46 percent of respondents expressed disagreement with the view that lack of

clear statement of project requirements accounted for project failure while 15.38 percent also supported the

notion by strongly indicating that lack of clear statement of project requirements did not account for project

failure. However, 15.38 percent expressed agreement that lack of clear statement of project requirements

accounted for project failure with 7.69 percent of them strongly supporting. However, 23.08 percent

expressed uncertainty about the contribution of the factor in determining project failure.

Fig. 4.32 Lack of clear statement of project requirements


122

Lack of Proper Planning

The majority of respondents reported that lack of proper planning accounted for project failure.

Specifically, 30.77 percent of respondents agreed that lack of proper planning was a major determinant of

project failure with 30.77 percent supporting the notion by expressing strong agreement with the issue.

However, 15.38 percent expressed strong disagreement with the view that lack of proper planning resulted in

project failure. 15.38 percent of respondents were not sure whether this factor accounted for project failure or

not.

Fig. 4.33 Lack of proper planning

Poorly Defined Project Goals

On the average, most respondents did not find this factor as a major determinant of project failure. 15.38

percent of respondents strongly disagreed with the view that poorly defined project goals account for project

failure while 23.08 percent also endorsed the same view. However, 23.08 percent agreed that it accounted for

project failure with 7.69 percent strongly supporting. 30.77 percent of respondents were not certain about the

contribution of this factor to project failure.

Fig. 4.34 Poorly defined project goals


123

Lack of Control Mechanisms

Project failures have been attributed to lack of control mechanisms. The study revealed that, 38.46

percent of respondents agreed that lack of control mechanisms were determinants of project failures with

15.38 percent expressing strong agreement with the statement. However, 15.38 percent of respondents

disagreed that project failures could be attributed to lack of control mechanism and another 15.38 percent

expressed strong disagreement with the statement. Also, 15.38 percent indicated their uncertainty about

whether lack of control mechanisms accounted for project failure.

Fig. 4.35 Lack of control mechanisms

Lack of Sufficient Project Resources

The study found that lack of sufficient project resources accounted for project failures. The impact of

sufficient project resources was reported noted as a relevant factor in project success. Thus, the majority of

respondents agreed that lack of sufficient resources account for project failure (46.15%). This was supported

by 30.77 percent of respondents who expressed strong agreement with the statement that lack of sufficient

project resources accounted for project failure. However, 15.38 percent of respondents disagreed with the

statement while 7.69 percent also expressed strong disagreement with the statement.

Fig. 4.36 Lack of sufficient project resources


124

Poor Communication

Communication is vital in project implementation and management. The study revealed that, poor

communication resulted in project failure (38.46%). Similarly, 15.38 percent of respondents strongly agreed

that, poor and inadequate communication resulted in project failure. However, 15.38 percent expressed

strong disagreement with the issue with another 15.38 percent expressing disagreement with the view that

poor communication resulted in project failure. 15.38 percent were however undecided as to whether project

failure was as a result of poor communication or not.

Fig. 4.48 Poor communication

5. Conclusion

Based on the outcome of the study, it can be concluded that the objectives of the study were achieved.

In particular, Project Management processes were found to be adopted in the implementation of projects in

ECG. Adherence to these Project Management processes was found to produce significantly high levels of

project success than non-adherence to the processes. It was also observed that failure of ECG projects were

attributable to factors such as lack of management support and commitment, poor communication, lack of

sufficient project resources, lack of control mechanisms and poor planning.

References

Abbasi, G. Y. and Al-Mharmah, H. (2000) Project management practice by the public sector in a developing

country, International Journal of Project Management, 18, 105- 109.

Abrahamson, M. (1983). Social Research Methods. Englewood Cliffs: NJ, Prentice Hall.

Adler, N. J. (1991) International dimensions of organisational behaviour, PWS-Kent Publishing Company,

Boston.

Allison, G. (1979) Public and private management: are they fundamentally alike in all unimportant respects?

In Shafritz, J. and Hyde, A. (Eds.) Classics of Public Administration, Belmont: Wadsworth: Cited in

Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and Private Management: What's the difference? Journal of Management

Studies, 39, 97-122

Andres, E. M. (1994) Public Sector Employment in Developing Countries: An Overview of the past and the

present trends, International Journal of Public Sector Management 7, 50-68.

Andrews, C. W. (2008) Legitimacy and context: Implications for public sector reform in developing

countries, Public Administration and Development, 28, 171–180.


125

APM (1995) Project Management Body of Knowledge, (1st Ed.), APM, UK

APM (2006) Project Management Body of Knowledge, (5th Edition), APM, UK

Arnaboldi, M., Azzone, G. and Savoldelli, A. (2004) Managing a public sector project: the case of the Italian

treasury ministry. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 213-223.

Artto, K. and Kujala, J. (2008) Project business as a research field, International Journal of Managing

Projects in Business, 1, 469-497.

Artto, K., Kujala, J., Dietrich, P. and Martinsuo, M. (2008) What is project strategy? International Journal of

Project Management, 26, 4-12. 215

Ashworth, C. M. (1988) Structured Systems Analysis and design method (SSADM), Information and

Software Technology, 30, 153-163.

Atkinson, R. (1999) Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its

time to accept other success criteria, International Journal of Project Management, 17, 337-342.

Avotis, I. (2000) Project in developing countries - Improving the odds, Business Horizons, 15, 69.

Baker, R. W. (1986) Handling uncertainty. International Journal of Project Management, 4, 205-210: Cited

in Dey, P. K. (2000) Managing projects in fast track: a Case of public sector organisation in India.

The International journal of public sector management,13, 588-609.

Baker, B.N., Murphy, D.C., and Fisher, D. (1974) Determinants of Project Success. NGR 22-03-028.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Cited In Morris, P. W. G. and Pinto, J. K. (Eds.)

The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New Jersey.

Baker, B.N., Murphy, D.C., and Fisher, D. (1988) Factors affecting Project Success. In Project Management

Handbook. ed. D.I. Cleland and W.R. King, 2nd ed. 902-919. Ney

York: Wiley : Cited In Morris, P. W. G. and Pinto, J. K. (Eds.) The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects. John

Wiley and Sons, Inc. New Jersey

Bakhshi, B. K. (1991) Developing People and Organisations in the Third World. The Journal of Management

Development, 10, 4-11.

Baldry, D. (1998) the evaluation of risk management in public sector capital projects.International Journal of

Project Management, 16, 35-41.

Bastani, H. (1988) Application of the PM Model to Constructed Projects in Developing Areas. Project

Management Journal, 19, 49-60.

Batley, R. (1999) the new public management in developing countries: implications for policy and

organisational reform. Journal of International Development, 11, 761- 765.

Belout, A. and Gaureau, C. (2004) Factors influencing project success: the impact of human resource

management. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 1-11.

Benitez Codas, M. M. (1987) Development of project management in Brazil - ahistorical overview.

International Journal of Project Management, 5, 144-148.

Berg, B. L. (2007), Qualitative research methods for the social sciences, (6th Ed.), USA: Pearson Education.

Berg, B. L. (2004), Qualitative research methods for the social sciences, (5th Ed.), Boston, MA: Allyn and

Bacon.

Bodgan, R. C. and Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education (2nd Ed), Boston: Ally & Bacon.

Bodgan, R and Taylor, S. (1975). Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: a phenomenological

approach to the social science, New York: Wiley and Interscience:


126

Cited in Berg, B. L. (2004), Qualitative research methods for the social sciences, (5th Ed.), Boston, MA:

Allyn and Bacon.

Boland, T. and Fowler, A. (2000) A systems perspective of performance management in public sector

organisations. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13, 417-446

Box, R. (1999) Running government like a business: implications for public administration theory and

research. American Review of Public Administration, 29, 19-

Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and Private Management : What's the difference ?, Journal of Management

Studies, 39, 97-122.

Bozeman, B. (1987) All organisations are Public, London, Jossey-Bass : Cited in

Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and Private Management : What's the difference ?, Journal of Management

Studies, 39, 97-122 217

Bozeman, B. and Kingslay, G. (1998) Risk Culture in public and private organisations. Public

Administration Review, 58, 109-118 : Cited in Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and Private Management

: What's the difference ?, Journal of Management Studies, 39, 97- 122

Bozeman, B. and SCOTT, P. (1996) Bureaucratic red tape and formalisation: untangling conceptual knots.

American Review of Public Administration, 26, 1-17: Cited in Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and

Private Management: What's the difference ?, Journal of Management Studies, 39, 97-122

Bradley, K. (2002) Understanding PRINCE2. SPOCE Project Management Limited. Poole, Doorset.

Bredillet, C. N. (2007) Shikumidukuri Vs. One Best (No) Way ! Project and Program Managaement For

Enterprise Innovation (P2M) : Toward A new Paradigm ?, in: IRNOP (Ed.) Projects in Innovation.

Brighton , UK, IRNOP.

Brunetto, Y. and Farr-Wharton, R. (2003) The impact of government practices on the ability of project

managers to manage. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 125-133.

Bryde, D. (2008) Perceptions of the impact of project sponsorship practices on project success. International

Journal of Project Management, 26, 800-809.

Bryman, A. (1988), Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London: Unwin Hyman.

Caiden, N. and Wildavsky, A. B. (1980) Planning and budgeting in poor countries, New Brunswick, NJ,

Transaction Publisher.

Cagno, E., Caron, F. and Perego, A. (2001) Multi-criteria assessment of the probability of winning in the

competitive bidding process. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 313-324.

Chan, A. P. C. (2001) Time-cost relationship of public sector projects in Malaysia. International Journal of

Project Management, 19, 223-229. 218

Chapman, J. D. (2004) A Critical Analysis of the Application of Western Project Management Theories in

the Middle East PMI Research Conference, Project Management Institute.

Cicmil, S., Williams, T., Thomas, J. and Hodgson, D. (2006) Rethinking Project Management: Researching

the actuality of projects International Journal of Project Management, 24, 675-686.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007) Research Methods in Education (6th Ed.) Abingdon:

Routledge.

Common, R. K. (1998) Convergence and Transfer: a review of the globalisation of new public management.

The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 11, 440-450 : Cited in Sarker, A. E. (2006)

New public management in developing countries: An analysis of success and failure with particular

reference to Singapore and Bangladesh. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 19,

180


127

Cooke-Davies, T. (2004a) Project Management Maturity Models In: Morris, P. W. G. and Pinto, J. K. (Eds.)

The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects. John Wiley and Sons Inc.

Cooke-Davies, T. (2004b) Project Success. :In Morris, P. W. G. and Pinto, J. K. (Eds.) The Wiley Guide to

Managing Projects. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Cooke-Davies, T. J. (2001) Towards Improved Project Management Practice: Uncovering the evidence for

effective practices through empirical research. PhD Thesis, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds.

Cooke-Davies, T. J. (2002) The real success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management

20(3): 185-190: Cited In Morris, P. W. G. and Pinto, J. K. (Eds.) The Wiley Guide to Managing

Projects. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New Jersey

Cooke-Davies, T. J. and ARZYMANOW, A. (2003) The maturity of project management in different

industries: An investigation into variations between project management models. International

Journal of Project Management, 21, 471-478. 219

Cooper, D. R. and Schindler, P. S. (2003), Business Research Methods, (8th Ed), New York: McGraw-Hill,

Irwin.

Cooper, D. R. and Schindler, P.S. (2006), Marketing Research, New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin

Crawford, L. (2001) Project Management Competence: The Value of standards. PMI Research Conference.

Newton Square PA, Project Management Institute.

Crawford, L., Costello, K., Pollack, J. and Bentley, L. (2003) Managing soft change projects in the public

sector. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 443-448.

Crawford, L. (2004) Global Body of Project Management Knowledge and Standards. :In Morris, P. W. G.

and Pinto, J. K. (Eds.) The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New

Jersey.

Crawford, L. and Pollack, J. (2008) Developing a Basis for Global Reciprocity : Negotiating Between the

Many Standards for Project Management. International Journal of IT Standards and Standardisation

Research, 6, 70-84.

Crawford, L., Pollack, J. and England, D. (2006) Uncovering the trends in project management: Journal

emphases over the last 10 years. International Journal of Project Management, 24, 175-184.

Creswell, J. W. (1998), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five traditions, USA:

SAGE.

Creswell, J. W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five approaches, (2nd

Ed). USA: SAGE.

Creswell, J. W. (2009) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches, (3rd Ed),

USA: SAGE.

Dahl, R. and Lindblom, C. (1953) Politics Economics and Welfare, University of Chicago Press, Chicago :

Cited in Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and Private Management : What's the difference ?, Journal of

Management Studies, 39, 97-122 220

Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, Los Angeles: SAGE.

De WIit, A. (1988) Measurement of project success. International Journal of Project Management, 6, 164-

170.

Dey, P. K. (2000) Managing projects in fast track: a Case of public sector organisation in India. The

International journal of public sector management,13, 588- 609.

Duncan, W. R. (1995) Developing a project-management body-of-knowledge document: the US Project

Management Institute's approach, 1983-94. International Journal of Project Management, 13, 89-94.


128

Durst, S. L. and Newell, C. (1999) Better, faster, stronger, government reinvention in the 1990s. American

Review of Public Administration, 29, 61-75.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Lowe, A. (2002), Management Research: An introduction, (2nd Ed.),

London: SAGE.

ENNA (2005) Project and Program Management in Enterprise Innovation (P2M), available at

http://www.enaa.or.jp/EN/about/index.html

Fellows, R. and Liu, A. (2003). Research Methods in Construction. UK: Blackwell Science.

Flynn, N. (1997) Public Sector Management, London, Prentice Hall: Cited in Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and

Private Management: What's the difference? Journal of Management Studies, 39, 97-122

Fortune, J. and White, D. (2006) Framing of Project Critical Success Factors by a system Model.

International Journal of Project Management, 24, 53-65. 221

Fox, C., Wilkinson, J. and Pieper, M. (2007) Prince2 a no nonsense management guide, Van Haren

Publishing.

Frederickson, H. G. (1996) Comparing the reinventing government movement with the new public

administration. Public Administration Review, 56, 263-270.

Frischtak, L. L. (1994) Governance capacity and economic reform in developing countries. World Bank,

Washington, DC.

Galbraith, J. (1973) Designing Complex organisations, Addison-Wesley : Cited in

Youker, R. (1992), Managing the international project environment. International Journal of Project

Management, 10, 219-226.

Gerring, J. (2007) Case Study Research Principles and Practices, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Glyn, J. (2006) Why public sector reform does not transform: A procedural explanation of the 1989-1997

French experience. International Journal of Public Sector Management 19, 79-94.

Harpum, P. (2004) Project Control. : In MORRIS, P. W. G. and PINTO, J. K. (Eds.) The Wiley Guide to

Managing the Projects. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Hellsten, S. and Larbi, G. A. (2006) Public good or private good ? The paradox of public and private ethics

in the context of developing countries. Public Administration and Development 26, 135–145.

Hofstede, G. (1982) Culture's consequences, international difference in work-related values, London, SAGE

Labuschagne, C. and Brent, A. C. (2005) Sustainable Project Life Cycle Management: the need to integrate

life cycles in the manufacturing sector. International Journal of Project Management, 23, 159-168.

Lancaster, G. (2005) Research Methods in Management: A concise introduction to research in management

and business consultancy, Burlington: Elsevier Butterworth- Heinemann.

Lapsley, I. and Pallot, J. (2000) Accounting, management and organisational change: a comparative study of

local government. Management Accounting Research, 11, 213- 229.

Morse, J. M. (1991), Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research,

Vol 40, no 1, 48-76

Muller, R. and Turner, J. R. (2004) Cultural Difference in Project Owner – Manager Communication. PMI

Research Conference.

Muriithi, N. and Crawford, L. (2003) Approaches to project management in Africa: implications for

international development projects. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 309-319.

Muspratt, M. A. (1987) Conditions affecting projects in less developed countries.International Journal of

Project Management, 5, 45-53.


129

Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook. USA: SAGE.

Ohara, S. (2005) Project and Program Management for Enterprise Innovation, PMAJ.

Oisen, R,P. (1971) Can Project Management Be Defined? Project Management Quarterly, 2(1), 12–14. In:

Atkinson, R. (1999). Project Management: Cost, Time and

Raiden, A. B., Dainty, A. R. J. and Neale E, R. H. (2004) Current barriers and possible solutions to effective

project team formation and deployment within a large construction organisation. International

Journal of Project Management, 22, 309-316.

Rainey, H., Backoff, R. and Levine, C. (1976) Comparing public and private organisations. Public

Administration Review, 36, 233-244: Cited in Boyne, G. A. (2002) Public and Private Management:

What's the difference ?, Journal of Management Studies, 39, 97-122

Ram, D. (1996) Project ownership in the third world. Transactions of AACE International, Int 4-1.

Soderlund, J. (2004b) On the broadening scope of the research on projects: a review and a model for

analysis. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 655-667.

Soeters, J. L. and Tessema, M. T. (2005) Public management in developing countries: some notes on Eritrea.

International Review of Administrative Sciences, 70, 623-635.

Sonuga, F., Aliboh, O. and Oloke, D. (2002) Particular barriers and issues associated with projects in a

developing and emerging economy. Case study of some abandoned water and irrigation projects in

Nigeria. International Journal of Project Management, 20, 611-616.

Yin, R. K. (2009), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, (4th Ed.), USA: SAGE.

Youker, R. (1992), Managing the international project environment. International Journal of Project

Management, 10, 219-226.

Zajac, G. (1997) Reinventing government and reaffirming ethics: implications for organisational

development in the public sector. Public Administration Quarterly, 21, 384-404.

Zwikael, O., Shimizu, K. and Globerson, S. (2005) Cultural differences in project management capabilities:

A field study. International Journal of Project Management,

Investigating Project Management Practices in Public ... 1_1497444903.… · A. Bunyaminu & F....

Documents

Transcript of Investigating Project Management Practices in Public ... 1_1497444903.… · A. Bunyaminu & F....