project success: success factor and success criteria
AN ESSAY ON
PROJECT SUCCESS DEFINED BY SUCCESS FACTORS AND SUCCESS
CRITERIA
by M. Shaw
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm
Winston Churchill
INTRODUCTION
1.
Since the 1960s there have been an increasing number of Project Management
scholars that have expressed concerns regarding the ways to manage the success or failure of a project. Crawford (2000) theorised that there are two major avenues of thought in this area being: how success is judged and the factors that contribute to the success. These two avenues were later crowned ‘success factors’ and ‘success criteria’ respectively of which both will be discussed in depth during this essay to provide an insight for future project management scholars.
SUCCESS CRITERIA
2.
The way by which a project is judged as to whether it is successful or not has
long since been deliberated by many Project Management scholars. Crawford’s
(2000) efforts to detail these criteria has helped however a better understanding is required such that each project manager or key stakeholder can choose as to what criterion will defined whether the project is a success or failure. This section will elaborate on Crawford’s (2000) studies by drawing on one of her principle advisers,
Atkinson. Atkinson uses the Iron Triangle as the foundation of the work and then building on it to develop a robust methodology for success.
2
Figure 1: Iron Triangle (Atkinson, 1999)
3.
Iron Triangle. Oilsen (1971) over fifty years ago stated that the Iron Triangle
(Atkinson, 1999) of Time, Cost and Quality were the key success criteria for any project. This triangle was reduced to just time and budget by Wright (1997) however
Turner (1993), Morris (1987), Wateridge (1998), deWit (1988), McCoy (1987), Pinto and Slevin (1988), Saarinen (1990), and Ballantine (1996) all agree that the Iron
Triangle should be used albeit not exclusively. Temporary use of criteria can
PROJECT SUCCESS DEFINED BY SUCCESS FACTORS AND SUCCESS
CRITERIA
by M. Shaw
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm
Winston Churchill
INTRODUCTION
1.
Since the 1960s there have been an increasing number of Project Management
scholars that have expressed concerns regarding the ways to manage the success or failure of a project. Crawford (2000) theorised that there are two major avenues of thought in this area being: how success is judged and the factors that contribute to the success. These two avenues were later crowned ‘success factors’ and ‘success criteria’ respectively of which both will be discussed in depth during this essay to provide an insight for future project management scholars.
SUCCESS CRITERIA
2.
The way by which a project is judged as to whether it is successful or not has
long since been deliberated by many Project Management scholars. Crawford’s
(2000) efforts to detail these criteria has helped however a better understanding is required such that each project manager or key stakeholder can choose as to what criterion will defined whether the project is a success or failure. This section will elaborate on Crawford’s (2000) studies by drawing on one of her principle advisers,
Atkinson. Atkinson uses the Iron Triangle as the foundation of the work and then building on it to develop a robust methodology for success.
2
Figure 1: Iron Triangle (Atkinson, 1999)
3.
Iron Triangle. Oilsen (1971) over fifty years ago stated that the Iron Triangle
(Atkinson, 1999) of Time, Cost and Quality were the key success criteria for any project. This triangle was reduced to just time and budget by Wright (1997) however
Turner (1993), Morris (1987), Wateridge (1998), deWit (1988), McCoy (1987), Pinto and Slevin (1988), Saarinen (1990), and Ballantine (1996) all agree that the Iron
Triangle should be used albeit not exclusively. Temporary use of criteria can
Bibliography: Alter S. Information Systems a management perspective, 2nd ed. Benjamin and Cummings, California, 1996. continues. Information Resources Management Journal, 1996, 9(4), 5-14. Cooke-Davies TJ. 2000. Towards improved project management practice, PhD thesis, Leeds Metropolitan University. Crawford, Lynn (2000) Profiling the Competent Project Manager. In: Project Management Research at the Turn of the Millennium: Proceedings of PMI Research Conference, 21 - 24 June, 2000, Paris, France, pp. 3-15. Sylva, NC: Project Management Institute Project Management, 1988, 6(3), 164-170. management institute. Paris: Project Management Institute, 2000. Lechler T. 1998. When it comes to project management, it’s the people that matter: an empirical analysis of project management in germany Morris PWG, Hough GH. The Anatomy of Major Projects. John Wiley, 1987. Morris PWG. The management of projects. London: Thomas Telford, 1994. Management Journal, 1988, XIX, 67-75. Saarinen, T, Systems development methodology and project success. Information and Management, 1990, 19, 183-193. Standish Group. 1995. Chaos. Available: http://standishgroup.com/ visitor/chaos.htm. Turner JR. The Handbook of Project-based Management. McGraw-Hill, 1993. Wateridge, J, How can IS/IT projects be measured for success? International Journal of project Management, 1998, 16(1), 59- 63. Wright, JN, Time and budget: the twin imperatives of a project sponsor. International Journal of Project Management, 1997, 15(3), 181-186.