Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
International Journal of Project Management Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 141-151, 1996
Copyright 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0263-7863/96 $15.00 + 0.00
0263-7863(95)00064-X
Only a few studies in the project management literature concentrate on the critical factors that
affect project success or failure. Whereas many of these studies generate lists of critical success
factors, each list varies in its scope and purpose. The success factors are usually listed as either
very general factors or very specific factors affecting only a particular project. However,
lacking a comprehensive list makes it difficult not only for project managers but also for
researchers to evaluate projects based on these factors. In this study, we suggest a new scheme
that classifies the critical factors, and describes the impacts of these factors on project performance. Emphasis is given to the grouping of success factors and explaining the interaction
between them, rather than the identification of individual factors. An empirical study is
conducted to test the practicality of using such a scheme. The statistical analyses of the results
demonstrate the differences between the critical success factors identified in a previous study
from literature and the factors identified with the use of our scheme. Many critical factors, such
as factors related to project managers' performance, factors related to team members and
environmental factors, became apparent with this study. The results are encouraging, in that
practitioners support the use of this scheme for determining and analysing critical success factors
and how systems respond to these factors. Copyright 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA.
Keywords: success/failure, factor groups, system response, a new framework
review
Empirical studies
Avotsj (1969)
Jonasont7 (1971)
ArchibaldIs (1976)
Martint6 (1976)
Markus19(1981)
HughesI (1986)
Schultz, Slevin and Pinto12 (1987)
142
Define goals
Make project
Project summary Projectmanager's
commitments known
competence
Project authority Operationalconcept Scheduling
from the top
Select project
organizational
philosophy
General management support
Organize and
delegate authority
Select project team
Allocate sufficient
resources
Provide for control
and information
mechanisms
Require planning and
review
Cleland and
King 25 (1983)
Sayles and
Chandler z6 (1971)
Controlsystems and
responsibilities
Monitoringand
feedback
Continuing involvement in the project
Market intelligence
(who is the client)
Project schedule
Executive
development and
training
Manpower and
organization
Acquisition
Information and communication channels
Project review
projects. Project managers would then have a clear understanding o f which aspects of projects might be critical for
their successful completion. As will be demonstrated in the
following section, some o f these factors might already be
in the literature, whereas the missing ones will become
apparent when representing the new framework. It is also
our intent in this paper to clarify what should be considered as critical factors, and their effects (called "system
responses") which lead to project success or failure.
Identification of this cause-effect relationship, initiated by
critical factors, constitutes an initial effort in this area.
A new framework
The framework in Figure 1 addresses many of the drawbacks in the literature. We grouped the factors into four
areas:
factors related
factors related
members,
factors related
factors related
to the project,
to the project manager and the team
to the organization, and
to the external environment.
Baker, Murphy
and Fisher 9 (1983)
Cleargoals
Goal commitment
of project team
On-site project
manager
Adequatefunding
to completion
Adequate project
team capability
Personnel
recruitment
Technical tasks
Client acceptance
Accurate initial
Monitoringand
cost estimates
feedback
Minimum start-up Communication
difficulties
Planning and
control techniques
Task (vs. social
orientation)
Absence of
bureaucracy
Politics
Community
involvement
Schedule duration
urgency
Financial contract
legal problems
Implement problems
Trouble-shooting
Characteristics of the
project team leader
Power and politics
Environment events
Urgency
Factor Groups
System Response
Factor Group
./
'
:ProjoetManager's
performance on the job
\\
"
//
\......
Project preliminary
~ estimates
/ .
/
." ~ } / ~
Technological
en','itonment
Nature
Client
Competitors
Sub-c0ntractors
I/J
/~'/
Av "labTt
__.
'
SUCCESSORFAILURE
Figure 1
framework to their specific situations and include the
factors that were found to be critical for their project's
success. As will be explained in the next section, many
project managers and managers involved in projects find
this framework to be a better tool for understanding critical
success factors.
Factors related to project
Project characteristics have long been overlooked in the
literature as being critical success factors whereas they
constitute one of the essential dimensions of project performance. Among the few studies, Morris and Hough II
identified schedule duration and urgency as critical factors.
Many projects, however, fail due to several other factors
inherent in projects In Figure 1, we list six of these
characteristics: the size and the value of a project, the
uniqueness of project activities (vs. standard activities),
the density of a project network, project life cycle and the
urgency of a project outcome In a recent study by Tukel
and Rom, 6 it was found that the durations of many largesize projects, those with more than 100 activities, exceed
their deadlines. There are usually penalties imposed on
projects when deadlines are exceeded. Monetary penalties
and "loss of credibility" are the most common ones. Thus,
if the project lifespan is being used as a measure to evaluate
project performance, one should be cautious about the size
144
Top mgt.
support
Client
consultation
Preliminary
estimates
Availability of
resources
PM performance
Others
Construction
Defense
MIS
Utilities
Environmental
Manufacturing
Others
1
3
I
2
3 (0.01)
2
1
5
5
1 (0.004)
2
3
5
5
4
4
4
4
5
3
3
3
1
3
1
1 (0.03)
1
2
2 (0.06)
2
5 (0.04)
4
2
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
Top mgt.
support
Client
consultation
Preliminary
estimates
Availability of
resources
PM performance
Others
Cost
Time
Quality
Client satisfaction
2
2 (0.05)
1 (0.06)
2
4
5
5 (0.02)
3 (0.001)
5
4
4 (0.001)
5
1 (0.05)
1
1
1
3 (0.05)
3
3 (0.07)
4
6
6
6
6
Table 5 The ranking of critical success factors according to the organizational structure (independent of industry)
Factors/org.
structure
Top mgt.
support
Client
consultation
Preliminary
estimates
Availability of
resources
PM performance
Others
Pure
Functional
Matrix
2
2
1
3
3 (0.03)
5 (0.04)
3
4
4
1
1
2
3
5
3
6
6
6
Table 6 The ranking of the critical success factors for moderate and large size projects
Factors/project
size
Top mgt.
support
Client
consultation
Preliminary
estimates
Availability of
resources
PM performance
Others
_<100 activities
> 100 activities
2
2
3 (0.06)
5 (0.04)
5
4
1
1
4
3 (0.02)
6
6
146
Table 7 The most critical success group according to the organizational structure (independent of industry)
Factors/org.
structure
Organization
Pure
Functional
Matrix
Table 8
Project
manager
Others
-
Descriptive statistics and frequency analysis. The distribution of the respondents across industries and the average
response rate to the questions in the first section are summarized in Table 9. The highest percentage of respondents
are from manufacturing, where product development
projects are common. The second highest number of
respondents are from a variety of different industries (considered as "others") including healthcare, education and
the pharmaceutical industries. The following common
project characteristics were noted: projects usually have
less than 100 activities (moderate sized) and were handled
within a functional department. Quality and client satisfaction are common measures used for the evaluation of
projects.
Next we analyse the critical success factors and the
groups that they belong to. The project managers are first
asked to identify groups that are critical for their projects'
success. Then, they are asked to identify critical factors
specific to their situation. A set of factors is listed under
each group. They are warned that the list under each group
is a subset of a complete group and if their most critical
factors are not in these lists they can add them to the related
group. As will be demonstrated shortly, project managers
responded to this questionnaire quite differently than to the
previous study. It is important to note that our purpose here
is not to make a direct comparison with the previous survey
results because the questions in these two studies are quite
different. Rather our purpose is to show that our new
scheme provides more complete and reliable information.
The three most commonly chosen factors in each group
are identified for further analysis. There is a total of five
groups and 15 factors. Similar to the previous frequency
analysis, we ranked the 15 factors independent of the group
that they belong to and reported the six factors with the
Industry/factors
Construc.
Organization
Project manager
Others
,/
.
Defense
MIS
Utilities
Environm.
Manufacturing
Others
e'
,/
Table 9
Industry
Average response
rate (%)
Organizational
structure
Average response
rate (%)
Success measure
Average response
rate (%)
Construction
Defense
MIS
Manufacturing
Environmental
Other
17.0
4.0
12.9
40.7
6.2
24.0
Pure
Functional
Matrix
16.9
62.2
24.5
Cost
Time
Quality
Client satisfaction
55.5
42.6
59.3
59.2
147
$
oL
o~
t"4
[-
oj
[-
&
&
.*d
C~
g~g~
E
E
E
"o
8~
6
oa
*d
,4
t.~
t'q
*d
=.
~=-;_
[.
148
~
vl~ A ~
Project
PM
Pure
Functional
Matrix
4
2
2
1 (0.04) 3
3
3
2 (0.008) 2
Team
Organization Environment
4
5
5
2
l
1
Project
Construction
4
Manufacturing 3
MIS
3
Others
2
PM
Team
Organization
Environment
2
1 (0.05)
1
1
3
2
2
4
2 (0.07)
1 (0.001)
5
1
5
commitment are most critical for project success. Environmental factors are vital, especially for MIS (technology)
and construction (economic and weather) projects.
Discussion and future research directions
References
I Avots, I 'Why does project management fail?' California Management
Review (Fall 1969) 77-82
2 Balachandra, R and Raelin, J A "When to kill that R&D project' Res
Management (July-August 1984) 30-33
3 Bedell, R I 'Terminating R&D projects prematurely' Res Management
(July-August 1983) 32-35
4 Hall, P Great Planning Disasters Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London
(1980)
5 Morgan, H and Soden J, 'Understanding MIS failures' Database
(1979) 5 157-171
6 Tukel, O I and Rom, W O Analysis of the Characteristics of Projects
in Diverse Industries Working Paper, Cleveland State University,
Cleveland, Ohio (1995)
7 Pinto, J K and Slevin, D P 'Critical success factors in R&D projects'
Res Technol Management (January-February 1989) 31-35
8 Rubin, I M and Seeling, W 'Experience as a factor in the selection and
performance of project managers' IEEE Trans Eng Management
(1967) 14 (3) 131-134
9 Baker. B N, Murphy, D C and Fisher, D 'Factors affecting project
success' ProjectManagementHandbook Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.,
New York (1983)
10 Hughes, M W 'Why projects fail: The effects of ignoring the obvious'
Ind Eng (1986) 18 14-18
11 Morris, P W and Hough, G H The Anatomy of Major Projects John
Wiley and Sons, New York (1987)
12 Schultz, R L, Slevin, D P and Pinto, J K 'Strategy and tactics in a
process model of project implementation' Interfaces (1987) 17 (3) 34-46
13 Pinto, J K and Prescott, J E 'Variations in critical success factors over
the stages in the project life cycle' J Management (1988) 14 5-18
14 Locke, D Project Management St Martins Press, New York (1984)
15 Meredith, J R and Mantel, S J Project Management: A Managerial
Approach John Wiley and Sons, Canada (1989)
16 Martin, C C Project Management Amaco, New York (1976)
17 Ionason, P 'Project management Swedish style' Harvard Bus Rev
(1971) 47 (6) 104-109
18 Archibald, R D Managing High-Technology Programs and Projects
John Wiley and Sons, New York (1976)
19 Markus, M L 'Implementation politics: Top management support and
user involvement' Systems Objectives Solutions (1981) 1 203-215
20 Pinto. J K and Slevin, D P "Critical factors in successful project
implementation' IEEE Trans Eng Management (1987) EM-34 22-27
21 Magal, S R, Carr, H H and Watson, H J 'Critical success factors for
information center managers' MIS Quarterly (1988) 12 413-426
22 Nutt, P C 'Sterling tactics to implement strategic plans' Strategic
Management J (1989) 10 145-161
23 Pinto, J K and Prescott, J E 'Planning and tactical factors in the
project implementation process' J Management Studies (May 1990)
305 -325
24 Pinto, J K and Slevin, D P 'Project success: Definitions and
measurement techniques' ProjectManagementJ (1988) XIX (1) 67-72
25 Cleland, D I and King, W R Systems Analysis and Project Management McGraw Hill, New York (1983)
150
Appendix
Survey
questions
Section 1
In what industries w o u l d most o f y o u r projects be classified?
construction
defense/aerospace
i n f o r m a t i o n systems
manufacturing
utilities
environmental
other (specify)
W o u l d m o s t o f y o u r projects have:
cost
time
quality
client satisfaction
o t h e r (specify)
Section 2
Please m a r k the factors that you c o n s i d e r to be the most
important factors for the successful i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f y o u r
projects (note that if y o u r factors are not listed b e l o w ,
please identify the g r o u p that they b e l o n g to and add them
to the areas p r o v i d e d below):
Factors related to the project:
Project champion
Technical background
Communication
Trouble shooting
Commitment
Political environment
Economic environment
Social environment
Technological environment
Nature
Client
Competitors
Sub-contractors
Oya lcmeli Tukel is an Assistant
Professor of Operations Management and Business Statistics
Department at Cleveland State
University. She holds a BS degree
in industrial Engineering from the
Middle East Technical University,
Ankara, Turkey and a PhD degree
in decision and information sciences
from the University of Florida. She
is currently doing research in project management and scheduling.
She has published in the Computers
and Operations Research Journat
of Operations Management, and
International Journal of Operations and Production Management.
151