What Should Be the Criteria for Evaluating Project Success - Coursework Example

PROJECT MANAGEMENT Name Institution Course Date What should be the criteria for evaluating project success? Introduction There is no any particular standardized process through which the accomplishment of a project can be measured. Project success covers several aspects and it is not easy to define it conclusively (PINTO, and SLEVIN, 1998). The dimensions of project success differ from one project to another and it is not clear which dimensions should be added to more complex projects. This is because the success factors of one project might not be the success factors of another project. What seem to be conventional in one project could have the contradictory outcomes in a different project. Several researchers have been attracted to investigate the dimensions of “Project success” or project effectiveness. Project success is defined by Wikipedia as “a level of social statues, achievement of an objective, the opposite of failure”. “Project success criteria are a set of values or principles by which project success can be evaluated” (Lim & Mohamed, 1999). For the last fifty years, the achievement of a project has been evaluated by meeting the time, cost as well as quality criteria, referred to as “the iron triangle”. Nevertheless, these three criteria have been criticized as being insufficient because of several reasons. For instance, a project may be delayed and thus incur more costs but upon completion be termed as successful. Yet still a project may be delivered on time, within the budget as well as the requested quality but not accepted by customers or the sponsors since it does not appear to provide enhanced effectiveness for the company. Thus the project can be termed as unsuccessful. Even though “the causes of project success and failure have been the subject of numerous researches” (Shenhar et al. 2002, p.111), “there has been little attempt in the past to define the criteria for success” (Wateridge 1998, p. 59). This paper discusses the model through which the effectiveness or success of projects can be measured. Components of project success In accordance with Baccarini (1999, p. 25), “project success consists of two separate components, namely project management success and project product success”. He further defines the components as follows: Project management success – “focuses on the project management process and in particular on the successful accomplishment of the project with regards to cost, time and quality”. These three elements show the level of the “efficiency of project execution” (Pinkerton 2003, p. 337). Project product success – “focuses on the effects of the project’s end-product”. Even though the two components can be differentiated, “the successful outcomes of them are inseparably connected. If the venture is not a success, neither is the project” ” (Pinkerton 2003, p. 344). Thus according to Baccarini (1999), “project success can simply be summarized as: Project success=project management success + project product success” Project management success For a long time, the accomplishment of project management has been measured on the satisfaction of the dimensions of time, cost (budget) and specifications (specified requirements) of a project as shown in the diagram below (the golden triangle or the iron triangle). Traditional view of project management success The three elements of time, cost and specification have been in several definitions of the criteria for project success. However, the three elements alone are not adequate to evaluate “project management success” since other elements like “satisfaction of the project stakeholder’s expectations also requires to be put into consideration” (Baccarini 1999, p.28). Thus, extending the traditional triangle (the figure above) to take account of “the quality of project management process and the satisfaction of key stakeholders” (as shown in the figure below) provides a more satisfactory view of “project management success”. Extended view of project management success Project product success Despite the close link between the outcomes of “project management success and project product success”, their fundamental connection between them is weak. Thus still the comprehensive form in the second figure is not adequate to evaluate project achievement since it excludes product related elements like: “product or added value success and user satisfaction. Hence there is need to integrate a product related aspect into the project management success model to offer a more comprehensive model of project success” (Kerzner, 2002). The quest for best criteria It is clear now that the Golden Triangle is not sufficient criteria for evaluating the project success and thus the need for a more inclusive model. The model of the triple constraint doesn’t consider the “fact that a successful project may deliver a project product that is not accepted by its users or does not satisfy their definite needs and requirements” (Kerzner, 2002). Such a project is considered as failed even when the three constraints are met. Each project stakeholder views the success of project in different way. Thus, project success could be measured from various points of views. The question then remains. Which criteria should be used to evaluate project success? The answer to this question “depends on the type of project as well as the special conditions (such as complexity of project, political environment, number of stakeholders involved, resources available, etc.)”. Thus, the best criteria for evaluating project success take into account the level of “satisfaction” shown by the significant stakeholders as well as the three core dimensions ” (Lim, & Mohamed, 1999). Other dimensions that must be considered when evaluating project success The human dimension From the studies that have been conducted, it has been shown that the human dimension is of immense significance to the achievement of any project. The human factor hugely impacts the outcomes of the projects and ought to be incorporated in the project evaluation methodologies. Lewis states that, “Projects are linked directly with persons and their outcome relies on the decisions these people make, their efforts as well as attitudes. Projects seldom fail because of tools. They fail because of people!” Lewis (2001, p. 35). Thus, it is vital to take account of measures regarding the human dimension in an advanced project evaluation criteria. Stakeholders’ satisfaction For us to have a more balanced and comprehensive picture of “project success”, it is important to evaluate the degree of the “key stakeholders’ satisfaction”. A project is termed as successful if it delivers value to the stakeholders who are “actively engaged in the project, are affected by its outcome and can influence its outcome” (Smith, 2000). Customers’ satisfaction For most of organizations, the client contentment is the mainly important decisive factor for “project success”. During project planning and initiation, there are several committees formed by customers who are concerned with evaluating the project deliverables. For instance, in IT projects, these committees decide whether the deliverables are acceptable in accordance with the customer’s standards and requirements. Thus, when planning a project, it is imperative to understand early enough the level of client’s contentment so as to concentrate all the efforts in the direction of a more looked-for result as well as more custom-built services. It can then be concluded that customer satisfaction ought to be incorporated in the project success evaluation model. It is important for project managers to listen and establish measures to determine the level of customer satisfaction. Since the needs and expectations of customers vary with time, it is important to regularly measure the level of customer satisfaction (Barkley, & Saylor, 2001). User’s satisfaction In IT projects and especially with the development of new software, it is important use the “user satisfaction” criterion in evaluating project success. In such cases, the users consider that the products delivered to them ought to satisfy their requests in addition to accomplishing their expectations and needs. Moreover, the “user satisfaction criterion is a valuable for any project team so as to develop a ‘successful’ project”. How consumers feel about the success of a project can offer useful information concerning the project setbacks as well as the level to which the project has fulfilled the customer’s needs (Barkley, & Saylor, 2001). Project team – personnel satisfaction The project team and the project personnel should as well be satisfied with their work for the project to be termed as successful. It is vital that organizations also measure the level of satisfaction of their employees after delivering a project. If the degree of staff fulfilment is poor, then it will be difficult for organizations to attain project success (Barkley, & Saylor, 2001). Significance of Project life Cycle Model in Project evaluation criteria All projects comprise of several diverse stages that produce the “life cycle (life span)” of each project. There is thus the need to have a holistic systems perspective of programs and projects so as to attain the full benefits of projects. Good criteria for evaluating project success should incorporate an all-inclusive “project life cycle model that recognizes that there is always project incubation/ feasibility phase preceding the currently existing project starting phase of most project management (PM) standards, and also recognizes that there have to be an additional post-project evaluation phase after the standard project close-out phase. The best criteria for evaluating project success should incorporate the Business Process Management (BPM) model as a holistic management approach. The BPM Model is the set of activities required to identify, optimize, supervise and incorporate business processes so as to produce the preferred result for each key stakeholder in a project” (Project Management Institute, 2004). It is the role of project administrators to be aware of the typical lifecycle of a project and how it applies to each particular project. They need to decide how the management activities of the lifecycle steps will be accomplished, and precisely who will be involved. Designing and documenting a comprehensive project life cycle process helps the concerned persons with “generating, planning and executing projects to understand the processes to be followed throughout the life of the project” (Lim, & Mohamed, 1999). A project comprises of sequential phases that are exceptionally helpful in planning a project since they offer a structure for budgeting, manpower as well as resource allocation, and for planning project milestones and project reviews ” (Lim, & Mohamed, 1999). The figure below shows the stages of a project life cycle. The best criteria for evaluating project success Having discussed the above issues, it is important to now focus on the best decisive factor that ought to be used to evaluate project achievement. We have seen that even though “time, cost and quality are significant for projects, they are only a part of the model of analysis. Projects should as well target at satisfying the needs of the key stakeholders” (Atkinson, 1999). The figure below shows the best model of success criteria. The first part of the criteria (the golden triangle) can be measured quantitatively while the other part (the stakeholders’ satisfaction) can be measured qualitatively. Conclusion Identifying project success as well as the institution of a series of success measures is of great significance for every project-oriented association. An association that do not make out in advance, in the project initiation, how it is going to gauge its business achievement will definitely face hardships in the end. Having a clear understanding of the criteria of success at the initial stages of a project helps the stakeholders to remain firm on set goals in addition to establishing objectives for assessing advancement. “The success criteria assist everyone involved in the project to have a common goal and see ‘the big picture’” (Lim, & Mohamed, 1999). The past studies have shown that “the use of the Golden Triangle for project evaluation is essential but also imperfect”. There is an accord that “project success” ought to be scrutinized from a number of angles such as human factor. I agree with the phrase of Cook-Davis (2002, p. 186) that: “It is people who deliver projects, not processes and systems”. Thus, apart from measuring “time, cost and quality, we should also measure the ‘satisfaction’ of the users, customers and the project personnel” (Cook-Davis 2002, p. 186). Bibliography 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, Vol. 17, pp. 337-342. Baccarini, D 1999, 'The Logical Framework Method for Defining Project Success', Project Management Journal, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 25-32. Barkley, B. T., & Saylor, J.H. 2001. Customer-driven project management: Building quality into project processes (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill. Cook-Davies, T. 2002. The “real” success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 20, pp.185-190. Kerzner, H 2002, Project management : a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling, 8th edn, Wiley, New York. Lewis, J.P. 2001. Project Planning, scheduling and control (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Lim, C., S., & Mohamed, M., Z. 1999. Criteria of project success: an exploratory re-examination. International Journal of Project Management, Vol.17, pp. 243-248. Pinkerton, WJ 2003, Project management : achieving project bottom-line success, McGraw-Hill, New York. PINTO, J.K. and SLEVIN, D.P. 1998. Project Success:Definitions and Measurement Techniques. Project Management Journal, vol. XIX, no. 1, p. 67. Project Management Institute. 2004. A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (3rd ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Author. Schlesinger, L.& Heskitt, J.1991. Breaking the cycle of failure in services. Sloan Management Review. Vol. 32, pp. 17-28. Shenhar, AJ, Tishler, A, Dvir, D, Lipovetsky, S & Lechler, T 2002, 'Refining the search for project success factors: a multivariate typological approach', R & D Management, vol.32, no. 2. Smith, L. 2000. "Project Clarity Through Stakeholder Analysis." Crosstalk: the Journal of Defense Software Engineering. Wateridge, J 1998, 'How can IS/IT projects be measured for success', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 59-63. Read More