Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success

Davis, Kate

doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.02.006

Cited by 416 publications

(371 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

343

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the word's meaning is not universal; it can mean different things to different assessors (Andersen et al 2006;Davis 2013).Unspecified goals are not achievable; therefore, to achieve success, the exact meaning of the term should be specified upfront (Hamidovic & Krajnovic 2005;Thomas & Fernández 2008;Davis, 2013). This can be achieved in any particular project using the various tools available for defining success, such as the iron triangle.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The four-level project success framework: application and assessment

Howsawi

Eager

Bagia

et al. 2014

Organisational Project Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Success is one of the ultimate goals of any project endeavour. Thus, clarifying the meaning of success is a vital step in achieving the desired success. In this study, the authors reviewed the project success literature and provided a framework for defining and evaluating project success. The framework consists of four levels that contain the possible criteria for assessing and evaluating success. The authors demonstrate the framework by case application. Further, experts in the field of project management conducted an external evaluation of the framework to assess its merits.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These attitudes continue today and they comply more effectively with the multidimensional nature of projects. Projects usually have multiple stakeholders with different points of view who perceive project success differently (Andersen et al 2006;Davis 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The four-level project success framework: application and assessment

Howsawi

Eager

Bagia

et al. 2014

Organisational Project Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Davis (2014) mentioned there were no common project success factors for some group and recognized that success was rarely evaluated across multiple stakeholder groups [4]. And he also summarized the dimensions of project success identified in the literature.…”

Section: Critical Success Factors Of Project Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Practical 1 Page Contextual Diagram for Monitoring Multiple Projects: An Empirical Study of an IT Organization

Lee¹,

Jeong²

2016

Journal of Internet Computing and Services

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Company A, an embedded system manufacturer, has been managing multiple development projects. Executives need to understand the risk level of every project and prioritize resource distribution. Traditional project monitoring tools or excel sheets are too complex for calculating the risk factors across a functional organization. Two new charts, "Spear-head Chart" and "Float Chart" were designed to assist high level decision making processes. Two charts were used for weekly executive meetings in order to monitor project progress and rectify project direction. One page graphical monitoring tools in Company A are good enough for high management decision making. Authors explain the characteristics of two charts and propose its practical implementation in real working environment. Spear-head chart was also implemented as a system.

show abstract

“…Hides (2000) showed that the effective implementation of TQM needs to have accurate PMS. To end with, Davis (2014) investigated the important role of all stakeholders in PMS success. In order to evaluate PMS performance one needs to accomplish a comprehensive framework.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance evaluation of project management system based on combination of EFQM and QFD

Digehsara¹,

Rezazadeh²,

Soleimani³

2018

10.5267/j.jpm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Project management system (PMS) is broadly recognized as the effective management tool for several organizations. European Foundation of Quality Management (EFQM) model provides some advantages for companies to be successful in current competitive environment. This paper is based on the combination of EFQM and Quality function deployment (QFD) in order to evaluate a PMS in an aviation organization. Although, an integration of these models increases the system complexity, the implementation of EFQM-QFD helps us identify all noteworthy success factors of PMS within the organization. In addition, the current status of PMS performance is evaluated based on these factors. This study attempts to find out how organizations ought to be managed to take full advantage of PMS tools. This study uses a comprehensive questionnaire to find all critical factors influencing on the success of the organization. The method of this paper is implemented in an organization in aviation industry with several management departments.

show abstract

Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success

Cited by 416 publications

References 40 publications

The four-level project success framework: application and assessment

The four-level project success framework: application and assessment

A Practical 1 Page Contextual Diagram for Monitoring Multiple Projects: An Empirical Study of an IT Organization

Performance evaluation of project management system based on combination of EFQM and QFD

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About