See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282337521

SUCCESS OF PROJECTS, PROGRAMS & PORTFOLIO

Research · October 2015

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3519.0243

CITATIONS READS
0 3,919

1 author:

Syed Ehtesham Husain

Zuhair Fayez Partnership Consultants
29 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

A commercial Mall at Khobar, Saudi Arabia View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Syed Ehtesham Husain on 01 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 KMGT 702 – Sustainable Programme and Portfolio Management
1
Week 7 – Individual Assignment Part - 02

SUCCESS OF A PROJECT, PROGRAM & PORTFOLIO

Introduction

The measurement of success varies from project to program level of management since project
management is focused towards time, cost and quality whereas program management is oriented
towards the fundamental and transformational changes within an organization (Maylor et al., 2006).
Price Waterhouse Coopers (2007) declare project success as a vital component of business success. The
project success which is normally measured in terms of time, cost and quality, i.e. the golden triangle,
builds the repo of an organization with its clients thus leading to repeat orders and serving as a future
reference for bigger and more competitive markets. Baker et al. (1988) consider functionality and
stakeholder satisfaction as main indices of a successful project besides the golden triangle. Morris
(1988) proposes commercial success and termination efficiency as determinants of project success.
Attkinson (1999) and Baccarini (1999) add organizational benefits and team development to the list.
Serra & Kunc (2015) endorse the importance of project success in order to achieve organizational
strategy thus turning their vision into reality.

Success Measurement

Program management standards established by PMI (2008) and OGC (2007) suggest that the
measurement of success of programs should be carried out on the basis of value creation and learning.
Pellegrinelli (1997), Lycett et al. (2004), and Reiss et al. (2006) regard organizational change as the key to
measure program success. Partington (2000) and Maylor et al. (2006) consider achievement of
organizational strategy as the true measure of program success.

Baccarini (1999) and Pinto & Mantel (1990) suggest two approaches for assessment of project success:

1. Project Management performance

2. Benefit Delivery to the business and stakeholders.

Ika (2009) proposes that the benefit delivery assessment be split into ‘Project/Product Success’, i.e. end-
user satisfaction and stakeholders and project staff benefits, and ‘Strategic Project Management’, i.e.
business success and strategic objectives achievement.

Success Factors

A lot of research has been conducted to determine the factors on which the success of a project,
program or portfolio depends.

Shenhar et al. (2001) propose four success dimensions:

1. Efficiency in delivering the project in time within the allocated funds.

2. Customer Impact ensuring satisfaction of various stakeholders consisting of end users, clients,
suppliers, sponsors, customer satisfaction and loyalty, etc.

Syed Ehtesham Husain, MPM – H00021914, University of Liverpool

 KMGT 702 – Sustainable Programme and Portfolio Management
2
Week 7 – Individual Assignment Part - 02

3. Business / Organizational Success is related to the rise in value of market shares, return on
investment, repeat clientele and increase of credibility of the organization in the commercial
market.
4. Future Preparation addresses the technological upgradation of the organization, increase in
production capability, efficiency of organizational processes and penetration into new markets.

Contrary to the proposal by Shenhar et al. (2001), Shao et al. (2012) suggest that focus of project success
has shifted from efficiency to effectiveness.

Chan et al. (2004) categorize the factors affecting project success into five categories:

1. Scope of Work comprises of the attributes like project typology, complexity, nature and size of
the project.
2. Procurement process is dependent primarily on two attributes, i.e. tendering process and
procurement methodology.
3. Management includes communication, effective decision making, follow-up of the schedule,
organizational structure, trouble shooting, monitoring and control (Walker & Vines, 2000).
4. Stakeholders are the key players consisting of the project manager, client, consultant,
contractor, sub-contractor, supplier, manufacturer (Chau et al., 1999).
5. External Environment represents the socio-economic and political circumstances.

I find all these theories strings of the same philosophy in contrast to Shenhar and Wideman (2010) who
reiterate that there is no agreement between various researchers regarding the factors and measure of
success of a project. Over the period of time, as an organization moves on from one project to another
within a program or portfolio, changes are proposed on the basis of the lessons learnt. Incorporating
these changes adds value to the organizational systems thus maturing the organizational strategy and
this process leads to achievement of greater organizational goals.

Cervone, H.F. (2014) identifies effective communication as another factor which plays a very important
role in the success of a project. While highlighting the importance of engineering processes and detailed
design in the success of a project, Mortaheb et al. (2013) support the importance of effective
communication, involvement and satisfaction of stakeholders by linking them to timely completion of
the projects. Other factors identified by Mortaheb et al. (2013) are style of management and
professional competence.

Davis, K. (2014) presents the case study of Heathrow Terminal 5 which was a successful project but
received a tainted perception due to minor commissioning issues faced by the passengers (Brady &
Davies, 2009). Morris & Hough (1987) emphasized the importance of multiple stakeholders’ perception
in project success. Turner et al. (2009) stress the need for setting the success criteria with the
stakeholder before beginning the project.

Chan and Kumaraswamy (1997) elaborate the client - related factors as their characteristics, typology,
experience, knowledge about the organizational structure for construction projects, project finance,
confidence over the construction team, construction sophistication, well-defined scope, risk aversion
and project management. They further discuss the importance of the Design team which plays an

Syed Ehtesham Husain, MPM – H00021914, University of Liverpool

 KMGT 702 – Sustainable Programme and Portfolio Management
3
Week 7 – Individual Assignment Part - 02

integral role from inception to completion of the project. Contractor, sub-contractor and suppliers play
the key important role during the execution phase.

Pinto and Slevin (1987) present a list of ten factors which influence the success of a project:
1. Mission (or Scope as other researchers put it)
2. Top Management Support (proposed by others as Management)
3. Schedule & Plans
4. Client Consultation (discussed earlier as Communication)
5. Personnel
6. Technical Tasks (mentioned by others as Engineering processes)
7. Client Acceptance (or Stakeholder satisfaction)
8. Monitoring & Feedback
9. Communication
10. Trouble-shooting

This list shows the similarity between approaches of various researchers and determines the importance
of some factors which have repeatedly been mentioned as having considerable impact on the progress
of a project.
Shao & Muller (2011) proposed a preliminary set of dimensions based on qualitatively grounds for
program context, which included three aspects, i.e. typology, scope, and context. They further identified
four sub-dimensions, i.e. stability, harmony, support, and adaptability of context. These dimensions
provide the basis to test the inter-relationship between the success and context of a program. Stability
relates to the organizational structure, processes and relationship with the stake holders. Harmony
discusses the relationship amongst the project managers and between the program managers and top
management / functional departments. Availability of resources, funds and organizational learning form
the required support besides assistance from the top management in getting timely approvals.
Serra & Kunc (2015) suggest that benefits management strategy should be integrated into the corporate
governance processes in order to help organisations enhance their ability to define and manage their
success criteria.
Thorp (2007) declares portfolio management as an organizational governance system which is both
dynamic and strategic in nature. Kwak & Anbari (2009) add that portfolio management aims towards
ensuring return on a strategically aligned set of investments by organizing and managing resources.
Patanakul & Shenhar (2012) endorse the strong role played by the BRM practices in the creation of
business value but at the same time they highlight that high levels of project management performance
cannot be achieved solely on the basis of these practices.
Payne (1995) while discussing the importance of portfolio management mentions that its absence leads
to poor control and lack of coordination between projects, missing dead-lines, change resistance within
the organization, conflict of objectives and lack of benefit realization. McGrath and Macmillan (2000)
add that an absence of portfolio management can further cause loss of revenue, inefficient use of
resources, absence of strategic alignment and an unbalanced set of projects within the portfolio.
Petro & Gardiner (2015) evaluated from their research that there exists a strong relationship between
the influence of the project manager within an organization and effectiveness of the program portfolio
management, thus resulting in the success of the portfolio.

Conclusion

I would conclude with the comments that project success is the key to program and portfolio success
though their success evaluation criteria may differ due to the variety in scope but the overall factors
remain the same. In addition to the golden triangle rule which based success of a project on the basis of

Syed Ehtesham Husain, MPM – H00021914, University of Liverpool

 KMGT 702 – Sustainable Programme and Portfolio Management
4
Week 7 – Individual Assignment Part - 02

time, cost and quality; business success and organizational value addition have emerged as important
factors which play their role at the program and portfolio level. Management styles, support and
leadership skills of the top management play a key role in not only the success of the project but the
program and portfolio as well. Communication, interaction and an active role of the client or sponsor of
the project is also a mandatory requirement.

Role of the Design Teams or the quality of engineering processes help in completion of the projects in
time besides assisting in controlling the cost of the project by controlling wastage factors and ensuring
quality. Same factor is considered as personnel related by other researchers. Adequate knowledge of
the scope of the project and written confirmation from the client regarding success of the project has
also been deemed equally important. Speaking of personnel, the set-up of functional departments at
the Head Quarters to maximize the utilization of resources, be it human, equipment, material or funds,
has also been proposed to enhance the efficiency at project as well as organizational level.

External environment may not directly affect the project success but it certainly has an indirect impact.
However, environmental factors do play a direct role in the success of programs and portfolio. The
socio-political and economic factors have direct impact on an organization’s business strategy. The
Benefit Realization Management system has also been introduced lately as an important futuristic value
addition to an organization.

The measurement of success of a project, program or portfolio is suggested to be carried out on the
basis of the achievement of the organizational benefits and value addition; this may be in terms of
business success or learning from past experiences to further enhance and mature the organizational
operational systems and procedures.

References:
Atkinson, R., (1999) “Project management: Cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, it’s time to accept
other success criteria”, International Journal of Project Management, 17(6), pp. 337 - 342.

Baccarini, D., (1999) “The logical framework method for determining critical success/failure factors in projects”, International
Journal of Project Management, (14), pp. 141-151.

Brady, T., & Davies, A., (2009) “They think it's all over, it is now: Heathrow terminal 5”, The Proceedings of EURAM 2009, The
9th Conference of The European Management Review, May, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Chan, A.P.C., David, S. & Chan, A.P.L. (2004) “Factors affecting the success of a construction project”, Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 130(1), pp.153-155.

Chan, D.W.M., and Kumaraswamy, M.M. (1997) “A comparative study of causes of time overruns in Hong Kong construction

Projects”, International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), pp. 55 – 63.

Chua, D.K.H., Kog, Y. C., and Loh, P.K. (1999) “Critical success factors for different project objectives”, Journal of Construction
Engineering Management, 125(3), pp. 142 – 150.

Cervone, H.F. (2014) “Effective communication for project success”, OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library
perspectives, 30(2), pp. 74 – 77.

Syed Ehtesham Husain, MPM – H00021914, University of Liverpool

 KMGT 702 – Sustainable Programme and Portfolio Management
5
Week 7 – Individual Assignment Part - 02

Cooke-Davies, T. (2002) “The real success factors on projects”, International Journal of Project Management, 20(3), pp.185–
190.

Davis, K. (2014) “Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success”, International Journal of Project
Management, (32), pp. 189 – 201.

Ika, L. A. (2009) “Project success as a topic in project management journals”, Project Management Journal, 40 (4), pp. 6–19.

Kwak, Y.H., Anbari, F.T., 2009b. Availability-impact analysis of project management trends: perspectives from allied disciplines.
Proj. Manag. J. 40(2), 94–103.

Lycett, M., Rassau, A., & Danson, J. (2004) “Programme management: A critical review”, International Journal of Project
Management, 22(4), pp. 289 – 299.

Maylor, H., Brady, T., Cooke-Davies, T., & Hodgson, D. (2006) “From projectification to programmification”, International
Journal of Project Management, 24(8), pp.663 – 674.

McGrath, G.R., & Macmillan, I.C. (2000) “Assessing technology projects using real options reasoning”, Residential Technical
Management, 43 (4), pp. 35 – 49.

Mortaheb, M.M., Amini, Y., Younesian, A.H., & Soltani, P. (2013) “Impacts of engineering work quality on project success”,
Proceedings of 26th IPMA World Congress, Crete, Greece. Available in: Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, (74), pp.429 –
437.

Office of Government Commerce (OGC) (2007) Managing successful programmes (MSP™). Norwich, UK: TSO.

Patanakul, P., & Shenhar, A. J. (2012) “What project strategy really is: the fundamental building block in strategic project
management”, Project Management Journal, 43(1), pp. 4 – 20.

Partington, D. (2000) “Implementing strategy through programmes of projects”. In: J. R. Turner & S. J. Simister (Eds.), Gower
handbook of project management, 3rd ed., pp. 33 – 46. Aldershot, UK: Gower.

Payne, H. (1995) “Management of multiple simultaneous projects: a state-of-the-art review”, International Journal of Project
Management, 13(3), pp. 163 – 168.

Pellegrinelli, S. (1997) “Programme management: Organizing project based change”, International Journal of Project
Management, 15(3), pp. 141–149.

Petro, Y. & Gardiner, P. (2015) “An investigation of the influence of organizational design on project portfolio success,
effectiveness and business efficiency for project -based organizations”, International Journal of Project Management, Aug.,
pp.1-13. (Article in Press)

Pinto, J. K., & Mantel, S. J. (1990) “The causes of project failure”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 37 (4), pp.
269–276.

Pinto, J. K., & Slevin, D. P., (1987) “Critical factors in successful project implementation”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 34 (1), pp. 22–28.

Project Management Institute (PMI) (2008) “The standard for program management”, 2nd ed., Newtown Square, PA: Author.

Reiss, G., Anthony, M., Chapman, J., Leigh, G., Payne, A., & Rayner, P. (2006) Gower handbook of programme management.
Aldershot, UK: Gower.

Serra, C.E.M., & Kunc, M. (2015) “Benefits Realization Management and its influence on project success and on the execution of
business strategies”, International Journal of Project Management, (33), pp.53-66.

Syed Ehtesham Husain, MPM – H00021914, University of Liverpool

 KMGT 702 – Sustainable Programme and Portfolio Management
6
Week 7 – Individual Assignment Part - 02

Shao, J. & Müller, R. (2011) “The development of constructs of program context and program success: a qualitative study”,
International Journal of Project Management, 29(8), pp. 947-959.

Shao, J., Müller, R. & Turner, J.R. (2012) “Measuring program success”, Project Management Journal, 43(1), pp.37-49.

Shenhar, A.J., Dvir, D., Levy, O. & Maltz, A.C. (2001) “Project Success: A Multi - dimensional Strategic Concept”, Long Range
Planning Journal, (34), pp.699 – 725.

Shenhar, A. J., & Wideman, M., (2010) “Optimizing Project Success by Matching PM Style with Project Type”. In: Mortaheb,
M.M., Amini, Y., Younesian, A.H., & Soltani, P. (2013) “Impacts of engineering work quality on project success”, Proceedings of
26th IPMA World Congress, Crete, Greece. Available in: Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, (74), pp.429 – 437.

Silvius, A.J.G. and Schipper, R. (2015) “A conceptual model for exploring the relationship between sustainability and project
success”, Procedia Computer Science Journal, (64), pp.334 – 342.

Thorp, J., (2007) The Information Paradox. (Revised ed.), Fujitsu Consulting Inc., Toronto. In: Serra, C.E.M., & Kunc, M. (2015)
“Benefits Realization Management and its influence on project success and on the execution of business strategies”,
International Journal of Project Management, (33), pp.53-66.

Turner, J.R., Zolin, R., & Remington, K., (2009) “Modelling success on complex projects: multiple perspectives over multiple time
frames”. In: Gemuenden, H.-G. (Ed.), The Proceedings of IRNOP9, the 9th Conference of The International Research Network of
Organizing by Projects, Berlin, June. Technical University of Berlin, Berlin.

Walker,D.H.T., & Vines,M.W. (2000) “Australian multi-unit residential project construction time performance factors”,
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 7(3), pp. 278 – 284.

Syed Ehtesham Husain, MPM – H00021914, University of Liverpool

View publication stats