Practitioner views on project management methodology (PMM) effectiveness
Keywords:
project management methodology implementation, PMM, project governance, change management, PMBOK, PRINCE2Abstract
This paper reports the results of a study investigating the organisational conditions that impact the effectiveness of project management methodology (PMM) implementation. It was conducted with a sample of experienced practitioners across a range of industries and disciplines covering engineering infrastructure and IT in Queensland, Australia. The implementations covered generally aligned with either the American PMBOK or the British PRINCE2, while some attempts had been made to hybridize.
The study found general practitioner agreement on the effectiveness of having a methodology. It synthesised from the data collected a list of six organisational conditions impacting the effectiveness of PMM implementation, providing a guide to practitioners looking to implement a PMM. Evidence of quantification of PMM benefits was found in two large organisations whose PMBOK based PMMs had been delivering better than 90% on time and budget across all their infrastructure projects. This study included but did not focus on IT and did not uncover any information on actual performance of PRINCE2 implementations. It indicated a need for research on the effectiveness of PMM implementation and found that this could be facilitated by analysing internal organisational project performance data records, which are sometimes published in annual reports. It also found the PRINCE2 claim of suitability for application to all project types was disputed for physical engineering infrastructure. The paper also puts a case for defining Project Management Methodology (PMM) as an organisation’s process for the whole lifecycle of its projects, which would exclude PMBOK and PRINCE2 from being so labelled.
References
Ahimbisibwe, A., Daellenbach, U., & Cavana, R. Y. (2017). Empirical comparison of traditional plan-based and agile methodologies: Critical success factors for outsourced software development projects from vendors’ perspective. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 30(3), 400-453.
AXELOS. (2017a). Axelos website. Retrieved from https://www.axelos.com/
AXELOS. (2017b). Managing successful projects with PRINCE2. In (pp. 430). Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy.usq.edu.au/lib/usq/detail.action?docID=4863041.
Barriball, K. L., & While, A. (1994). Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: A discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19(2), 328-335. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01088.x
Bredillet, C. N. (2010). Blowing hot and cold on project management. Project Management Journal, 41(3), 4-20. doi:10.1002/pmj.20179
Christiansen, C. H. (2016). The state of project management - an inductive study of danish project organizations. (Masters Masters), Denmark Technical University, Denmark.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. California: Sage Publications.
Duffield, S., & Whitty, J. (2012). A systemic lessons learned and captured knowledge (sllck) model for project organizations. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 9th Annual Project Management Australia Conference (PMOz 2012).
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1998). The triple helix as a model for innovation studies. Science and Public Policy, 25(3), 195-203.
Fontana, A., & Prokos, A. H. (2007). The interview : From formal to postmodern. Walnut Creek, UNITED STATES: Taylor and Francis.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough?: An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. doi:10.1177/1525822X05279903
Joslin, R. (2017). Governance and project success. In R. Muller (Ed.), Governance and Governmentality for Projects : Enablers, Practices, and Consequences (pp. 159-172). New York: Routledge.
Joslin, R., & Müller, R. (2015). Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts. International Journal of Project Management, 33(6), 1377-1392. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.03.005
Joslin, R., & Müller, R. (2016). The impact of project methodologies on project success in different project environments. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(2), 364-388. doi:10.1108/IJMPB-03-2015-0025
KnowledgeTRAIN. (2017). Knowledgetrain prince2online courses. Retrieved from https://www.knowledgetrain.co.uk/courses/prince2/elearning#how-many-people-have-taken-examinations
Kummerow, E., & Kirby, N. (2013). Organisational culture : Concept, context, and measurement (in two volumes). Singapore, SINGAPORE: World Scientific Publishing Company.
Łuczak, J., & Górzna, M. (2012). Evaluation of the effectiveness of the project management methodology PRINCE2 in the public administration. Research Papers of the Wroclaw University of Economics(264), 282-299.
McGrath, S. K., & Whitty, S. J. (2015). Redefining governance: From confusion to certainty and clarity. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 8(4), 755-787. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-10-2014-0071
McGrath, S. K., & Whitty, S. J. (2017). Stakeholder defined. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 10(4), 721-748. doi:doi:10.1108/IJMPB-12-2016-0097
McGrath, S. K., & Whitty, S. J. (2019). What is a program: An examination of terminology in practitioner reference documents. Journal of Modern Project Management(18), 6-27. doi:10.19255/JMPM01801
McKenna, T., & Whitty, S. J. (2012). Reconceptualising project management methodologies for a post-postmodern era. Paper presented at the proceedings of the Annual Project Management Australia Conference Incorporating the PMI Australia National Conference (PMOz), Melbourne, Australia.
Muller, R. (2017a). Governance mechanisms in projects. In R. Muller (Ed.), Governance and Governmentality for Projects : Enablers, Practices, and Consequences (pp. 173-180). New York: Routledge.
Muller, R. (2017b). Private sector practices. In R. Muller (Ed.), Governance and Governmentality for Projects : Enablers, Practices, and Consequences (pp. 107-128). New York: Routledge.
Oxford. Dictionaries online. Retrieved from http://oxforddictionaries.com
Patah, L. A., & de Carvalho, M. M. (2012). Methods of project management and success of projects: A study of the quantitative relationship between these concepts Journal of Management and Projects, 3(2), 178-206.
Popper, K. R. (1979). Objective knowledge : An evolutionary approach (Rev. ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Project Management Institute. (2013). Guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide). In. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.usq.edu.au/login?url=http://library.books24x7.com/library.asp?^B&bookid=51356
Project Management Institute. (2017). Guide to the project management body of knowledge (pmbok guide) (Sixth ed.). Newtown Square PA: Project Management Institute.
Romney, A. K., Weller, S. C., & Batchelder, W. H. (1986). Culture as consensus: A theory of culture and informant accuracy. American Anthropologist, 88(2), 313-338. doi:10.1525/aa.1986.88.2.02a00020
Tripp, J. F. (2012). The impacts of agile development methodology use on project success: A contingency view. ProQuest LLC, Retrieved from http://ezproxy.usq.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED546593&site=ehost-live
http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3523854 Available from EBSCOhost eric database.
Wells, H. (2012). How effective are project management methodologies? An explorative evaluation of their benefits in practice. Project Management Journal, 43(6), 43-58. doi:10.1002/pmj.21302
Wengraf, T. (2001). Concepts and approaches to depth interviewing. In Qualitative Research Interviewing. Retrieved from http://methods.sagepub.com/book/qualitative-research-interviewing doi:10.4135/9781849209717
Wright, G. P. (2014). Success rates by software development methodology in information technology project management: A quantitative analysis. (74), ProQuest Information & Learning, US. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.usq.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2014-99120-506&site=ehost-live Available from EBSCOhost psyh database.
Yates, R., & Hughes, R. (2018). AIPM Webinar: Perfect Fit? Strategy and Governance. Retrieved from https://www.aipm.com.au/resources/pm-webinars/library/perfect-fit-strategy-and-governance
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Stephen Keith McGrath, Stephen Jonathan Whitty
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.