., Research of the needs of methodological support in project management,

Załącznik

ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

NO. 5 (148) YEAR 2011

THE COM.\UTlEE ON Oł"G\NIZATlCX'W... A'lOMANACEAtENTSCIENCf.S cXJ PAN

!

� ,._.

WARSAW SCHCX>LOF ECONO\UCS „.„;;,,;:

Wyrozębski

P

., Research of the needs of methodological support in project management,

The Com1nittee on Organizational and Management Sciences

&

Warsaw School ofEconomics, „Organization and Management"

2011, Number 5 (148)

PAWEŁ WYROZEBSKI*

10.24 78/v10166-011-0013-3

RESEARCH ON THE NEEDS OF METHODOLOGICAL SUPPORT IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT

1. lntroduction

Inc reasing dynamics in the environment and rising demands of the mark et, in o rder to reach perfection in c arrying o ut internal proc esses, are the main reaso ns why o rga­

nizatio ns now face many new challenges. I n the present state o f the Eco nomy, the oc­

c asional project implementatio n, based only o n experienc e and intuitive actio ns, lead­

ing to medioc re success of the venture is not satisfacto ry. I n order to gain and maintain a h igh level of co mpetitiveness, mo dern o rganizatio ns have to ensure that the success o f th e implemented projects w ill be permanent and repea ted. To ach ieve that aim, the o rganizations are reac hing up for th e b est practices and trusted metho ds that wo uld be o f w idest use in solving complex pro blems in the field o f project management. In o th er words, they are look ing for metho ds and projec t management metho dologies.

TI1e sc ientific ach ievements and experie nc e, gained over many years, in the field o f project management, co ntributed to the exi stence o f a w ide range of metho do lo gic al suppo rt solutio ns. Activity o f international o rganizations, government agenci es, pro­

fe ssional o rganizatio ns and associatio ns, universities, and global enterprises h elped to devise many detailed, diff erentiated (in variou s aspec ts) and complex metho ds o f projec t management. Organizatio ns th at want to benefit from them, at first, h ave to mak e an impo rtant and, at th e same time, diffic ult decision. T hey have to assess th eir own needs and choose the righ t metho dolo gic al support fo r th e ongo ing projec ts.

TI1 ese arguments co nvinced the team at th e Department of Projec t Managemen t, W arsaw School o f Econo mic s, to tak e the initiat ive and develop a research projec t

• Paweł Wyrozebski, PhD ^-Department of Project Management, Collegium of Management and Fi­

nance, Warsaw School of Economics.

ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT No. 5/2011 ^{(1 48)} 193

Pawet Wyrozebski

wh ose aim w as to regulate th e pr ocess of implementation of project management meth odology. To ach ieve th at, it w as necessar y to conduct a study about th e needs and possibilities of methodological suppor t for Project Management in different Pol­

ish organiz ations. TI1e aim of this article is to present a synthesis of ach ievements and th e major conclusions of th e carr ied out r esear ch .

2. Process and research model

Taking in to account the w ide- spread popular ization of projects as tools to ach ieve the organizations' and enter pr ises' goals and the existing var iety among methods and meth odologies in project management, it is well wor th cr eating a model th at w ould fa cilitate carrying out r esear ch and a selection of the proper methodology suppor t for different organizations. In order to achieve these objectives th e following r esear ch progr am w as adopted:

1.

I nitial study w ith the aim of identifying expectations tow ards the project man­

agement meth odology;

2.

A detailed analysis of selected projec t management meth odologies and an addi­

tional analysis of oth er standar ds connected w ith project management

3.

Preparation of a model of assessment and selection of methodological suppor t tools for project management (on th e basis of point

1

_and

2)

4. Application of th e model in the analysis of th e needs for the methodological sup­

p or t in project management

5.

Application of th e model in the analysis of project management meth odologies 6. Conclusions from th e compar ative analysis of th e defined needs and the deter ­

m ined r ange of meth odological suppor t.

3. lnitial study: identification of the expectations towards the project management

methodologies and an analysis of the project management standards

The aim of th e initial study w as to elaborate a preliminar y ver ifi cation of the stud­

ied group expectations and to provide an empir ic al mater iał wh ich w ould help to identify, correctly, all th e pr oblem areas - cr iter ia for th e follow ing analysis of th e needs and meth odologies. For this pur pose a method of statistical survey w as ch o­

sen. Th e q uestionnaire w as filled out by a group of specialists from the field of project management that attended the Postgr aduate Project Management Studies conducted

194 ORG.l\NIZATION AND MANAGE MENT No. 5/2011 (148)

Research on the needs of methodological support in project management

by the Department. 13 4 questionnaires were collected, 106 of them fully completed (with answ ers to all the questions).

·n1 e studicd group, in the majority, was fo rmed by the members of project tcams ( 60% ) and proj ec t managers (30%) . There w ere also 4 mem bers of steering commit­

tees and

8

persons with other posts related to project management. More than a half (56% ) had experience from 1 to 3 years in project management. The percentage share of respondents having experience less than 1 year and f rom 3 to 5 years was similar and amounted to 17%. Only one out of ten respondents declared having experience of over 5 years in project management.

All respondents agreed with the fact that the use of proj ect management meth­

o dology has a positive influence on successful project implementation (ex hibit

1).

Over h alf of the responden ts (55% ) described this influence as big, wh il e 43% as­

sessed it as av erage. Only tw o answ ers described the influence of methodology on project success as small. At the same time a certain tendency has becn noticed: the more experienced in the fi eld of project m anagement respondents were, the less im­

portant fo r them was the inf luence of methodology. Th at observation can be a start­

ing point fo r other more profound scientifi c research.

Exhibit 1. Does, in your opinion, the use of a project management methodology influence, in a positive way, the possibility of the project success?

Source: own study.

2% 0%

a yes, to a great extent lfj yes, to a moderate extent

·· yes, to a small extent

The obtained findings confinn ed the relevance of the interest in p roject manage­

ment methodologies as a crucial fa ctor of project success.

In order to identify importan t aspects of project management methodology, the questionnairc contained open questions that enabled the respondents to answer in an unconstra ined way. 111e analysis of the received answers helped to elaborate a synthetic list of the 3 0 most desired attr ibutes of project management methodol­

ogy (listed in random order) (ex hibit

2).

ORGANIZATION AND MA NAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (148) 195

Paweł Wyrozebski

Exhibit 2. lmportant attributes of project management methodology from the point of view of the survey participants.

1 . Adapted to the character of a project (of an enterprise, branch) 2. Easy to understand and learn (easy to implement in the project) 3. That takes into consideration the frequent changes in a project 4. Universal (selection of the right tools for each project)

5. Practical

6. Coherent, consistent

7. That ensures comparability of projects

8. That contains the project management techniques

9. That defines the relation between project and functional management 1 0. That includes project environment analysis

1 1. That defines the decision processes in a project (decision-makers, scope of decisions, etc.) 1 2. Based on project implementation stages

13. That includes the whole Project Cycle Management (with ex post evaluation) 14. That defines clearly the goals and requirements of a project

1 5. That includes feasibility study and cost-effectiveness of a project (for business motives)

1 6. That includes project management aspects such as motivating the team, resolving conflicts, etc 1 7. That includes selection, work organization and leading a project team

18. That facilitates monitoring and control of project implementation 19. That facilitates the control of project costs (budget and cash flow)

20. That includes risk management (analysis of the risk, prevention, reaction to the risk) 21 . That includes project scope management

22. That includes planning of the project implementation process (relations among components, schedule) 23. That includes quality aspects in a project

24. That includes resource management in a project 25. That makes the project communication more efficient 26. Based on IT tools

27. That helps to make a elear assessment of project results

28. That facilitates to learn from the project (gain experience, draw conclusions) 29. Thai includes an unified documentation

30. With an adequate amount of documentation (without reclundant bureaucracy) Source: own study.

1h e li st from the Exhibit

2

con tains both attribu tes connect ed with t he subst ance of t he methodology (problem areas) e.g. "project scope management", and expres­

sions describing its cha ra cterist ics such as "pract ical" . It is important to tak e notice of the wide range of areas mentioned in the answers, which shows the high level of proj­

ect m aturity among t he respondents. Characterist ics such as " ada pted t o the character of a proj ect (of an ent erprise, branch)': "easy to underst and and t o learn" and " with adequate amou nt of document ation'' strongly correspond wit h the aim of the study, whose lea ding motive is to adapt methodology to the real needs of organizations.

The initial st udy provided empirie mat eriał which allow ed the construction of a model to commence. H owever, facing the risk of omitting important elements that were not ment ioned by the respondents a nd in order to add new attributes and enrich the substa nt ial content of the project mana gement methodology, an analysis of the

196 ORG.Ą NIZATIO N AND MANAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (1 48)

Research on the needs of methodological support in project management

literature concerning methodologies and other project management standards w as conducted. The standards were related to some loca} and branch project management methodologies, main norms of project manage ment, and some chosen international competence models for project managers. A detailed list of standards, wh ose scope and content were taken into consideration during the analysis and the construction of the assessment and selection model is show n below ( exhibit

3).

Exhibit 3. Project management standards taken into account in the analysis

No. Organization

^Standard

j

American Society for the Advancement of

USA National Competency Baseline v1 .5 1 ·

!

Project Management

!

I

Associagao Brasileira

2· i De Gerenciamento De Projetos l

Referencial Brasileiro de Competencias em Gerencia­

mento de Projetos (Brazilian National Competence Base­

line) v1 .1

;

3.

J

Association for Project Management 4.

I

Australian Institute of Project Management

I

APM Body of Knowledge 5th ed.

Professional Competency Standards for Project Management Exposure Draft V1 .O

5. British Stanclarcls Institution BS 6079-4 Construction Project Management Processes 6. European Commission Project Cycle Management methodology

7. German Association of Project Management Project Management Canon

8. German Institute for Norms and Standards DIN 69904 Project Management Elements 9. International Organization for Standa1·dization Norma ISO 10006:2003

, International Project Management 1 O.

i

Association

11 . Office of Govemment Commerce

12. Project Management Association of Japan 13. Project Management Austria

IPMA Competency Baseline 3.0

PRINCE2 (version 2005) methodology

P2M: Project & Program Management methodology Project Management Baseline v2.3

14. Project Management Institute PMI Project Management Body of Knowledge (third edi­

tion)

15. i Stowarzyszenie Project Management Polska NCB National Competence Baseline - IPMA Version 1.2

16.

i

^{Ten Step} Ten Step Project Management methodology

4. A morphological matrix for the assessment of the needs of methodological

support for project management

The morphological analysis w as used to create a tool to assess the needs and the of­

fer ed methodological support. The morphological analysis is a problem-solving tech­

nique that uses a systematic analysis of all elements that fo rm part of a solution of

ORGANIZATIO N AND MA NAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (148) 197

Paweł Wyrozebski

the problem. I t was dev eloped in th e l 94 0 s and, initially, it w as used only in new product projects. Ev entually, as it w as a univ ersal technique, it started to be used to solv e multi-dimensional and complex prob lems of technical, organizational or other chara eter [ 14 , p.

282].

TI1e selection of a morphological analysis as a research tool w as motiv ated by the multi-dimensional and complex character of the question of methodological support fo r project management.

Morphological analysis is divided in to v arious stages

[ 1

^O, p.

156-158]:

1 . I dentifi cation and definition of the problem, for which a solution is being searched

2.

I ndication and definition of parameters and their constituents that are parts of a solution of the problem. Parameters, also called v ariables, are mark ed w ith cap­

ital letters, and their parts (values, characteristics, possible conditions of each pa­

rameter) are mark ed with small letters. An unlimited number of v alues can be determ ined for each parameter .

3.

Organizing and compiling the v ariables and their values in a chart, called a ta­

ble, or a morphological matrix ( ex hibit 4 )

Exhibit 4. The morphological matrix structure

Variable values Variable

2 3 m

A: a, a2 as

B: bi b2 b3

N:

Source: Trocki M., Morphological analysis "Przegląd organizacji", 1975, No. 8-9.

4 . Creating diff erent solutions to the problem through a combination of diff erent variables' v alues.

5.

An assessment of elaborated v ariants of solutions and choosing the best ones fo r further and more detailed analysis.

111e initial study, together with the analysis of methodologies and project man­

agement standards, allowed the preparation of a unifi ed combination of

18

vari­

ables - criteria fo r the analysis of the needs and for project management methodol­

o gy support.

TI1e abov e mentioned criteria included:

1.

Stages and L ife Cycle of the p roject - attitude towards a model of a process of project implementation that determines diff erent actions taken in various proj­

ect stages

2.

P roject Initiation - initial project phase that includes actions tak en in order to develop th e idea of the project and obtain the initial acceptation

198 ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEME NT No. 5/2011 (148)

Research on the needs of methodological support in project management

3 . P roject defi. nition, setti ng the goals, defi ning li mits and requirements of the proj­

ect - elaborating a detailed project conception including goals, premises, b ene­

fits, limits and feasibility of the project; obtaining project approval

4. Project environment and contex t - relating the project to its implementation en­

vironment which refers to the strategie level of the organization, programs and portfolio of the projects, enterprise environment, project stakeholders and oth­

ers.

5.

Giving structure to the project and scope management - way of describing and managing the scope of operations and results produced during the project im­

plementation

6.

P roject time management - attention to scope, detail and scale of emphasis on planning activities in the project

7.

Organizing and l eading a proj ect team - attitud e towards project team building, task assignment, responsibilities and powers

8.

Monitoring and control of project - degree of burdening the project with moni­

toring actions

9 . Closeout and project evaluation - attitu de towards the l ast phase of the P roject L ife Cycle which includes closure of th e project activities, reviewing the proj ect, assessing the ex penditures, measuring the b enefi ts and eventual post- project ac­

tivities

10.

Risk management - methods of condu cting activities connected with risk iden­

tification, assessment, prevention and m onitoring of situations that could put the successful implementation of the project in jeopardy

11.

Q uality management - manner of carrying out activities in order to ensure proj ­ ect conf orm ity with the quality requirements

12.

Communication management - ensur ing that the information f low in the p roj ­ ect is well organized, proper and effi cient

13. P roject cost management - attitude towards the project cost-e.ffe ctiveness, th e budget, monitoring the ex penses and project financial l iquidity

14.

P roject resource management - attitude towards management, identifi cation and acquisition of the resources required in the project implementation

15.

P roject procurement management - method of collaboration with outside p art­

ners and suppli ers of the proj ect

16.

Change management (at titude toward s changes, flex ibility) - means of p erceiv­

ing the change in the project, change implementation process and change docu­

mentation standards

17.

P roject documentation - amount of documentation in which the project imple­

mentation is reflected

18.

IT support fo r the m ethocl ology - degree of using IT tools in project manage­

ment

ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT No. 5i201 1 (1 48) 199

Pawet Wyrozebski

According t o t he met hod of morphological analysis, t he correspondi ng values w ere defi ned and prepared for each vari able. TI1 e adopt ed scale of t he assessment o f meth odologi cal support soluti ons was based on st andardi zed fo rms of activiti es, liste d i n orde r of confo rmity with the increasing scope and accuracy of problem solv­

i ng met hods used i n a given area (v ari able) .

Identifi cati on of t he values of vari ables t hat described t he st age, complexity and rigor of management solutions i ncluded i n t he giv en v ari able, allowed completion of t he work wit h t he morphologi cal mat ri x of problem areas in project management . TI1e use of a morphologi cal mat ri x as a research t ool permit s t he carryi ng out of a complex and det ai led analysi s of needs concerni ng parti cular problem areas i n an o rgani zation, and a compari son of t he pr ofile of needs wit h t he profile of soluti ons offered by respective met hodologi es. Tirn nks t o t he morphologi cal mat rix, it was p ossi ble to de.fine combi nati ons of vari ous support levels fo r each vari able, whi ch co nt ri but ed to the elaborati on of all possi ble vari ant s of soluti ons t o the problem.1

5. Findings of the analysis of the needs for

project management methodological support

Exhibit 5. A research model of the profile of the needs for project management methodological support

Source: own study.

Size of the organization

ro·ects

1

^· Organization A ^-Needs profile.

I

c o E

. .. �·· ---

I For 18 variables and 4 values of cach of them it is possible to dcfinc 418 ⁼ 68.719.476.736 potcntial variants (profilcs) of the needs for project management methodological support.

200 ORG1\ NIZATION A N D MANAGE MENT · No. 5/2011 (1 48)

Research on the needs of methodological support in project management

1he analysi.s was co nduct ed by a met ho d o f st at ist ical survey. T he main p art o f it w as a mo rpho lo gical mat rix . 1 he questio nnaire also cont ained a list o f quest ions t hat allowed a descript io n o f t he analyzed o rganizat ions to be made, acco rding to t he paramet ers t hat co uld po ssibly inf luen ce t he pro file o f t he metho do lo gical needs

(exhibit

5).

1h e carr ied o ut quest io nnaire analyzed a gro up o f o rganizat io ns t hat implement p roject s. 'TI1e o rganizat io ns were represent ed by project management specialist s fro m t he Po st graduate P roject Management St udies conduct ed by the Depart ment o f P roject Management , Warsaw Schoo l o f E co no mics.

282

co mplet ed quest io n­

naires were obt ained.

T I1e analyzed gro up showed a relat ively equal represent at io n o f business act ivit y branches. TI1e biggest gro up fo rmed const ruct io n branch

(15,7%),

i n seco nd place t elecommunicat ions

(14,6%),

t hen IT branch

(12,5%)

and pro duct io n-t echno lo gy branch

(11,4%).

Ot her branches, such as public administ rat ion

(8,2%),

power indus­

t ry

(7,9%),

bank ing and fi nances

(7,5%)

and represent at ives o f co nsult ing co mpanies

(5,7%)

were less popular. Amo ng t he branches classified as "others" it's vm rt h men­

t io ning t he pharmaceut ical indust ry, indicat ed by

5

respondent s

(1.8%;

_{ex hibit}

6).

Exhibit 6. Business branch profile of the analyzed organizations

Somce: ^own study.

ra Construction

• Telecommunications

•IT

u Production/Technology

"" Public administration

11 Power industry Finances/Banking

o Consulting/Counselling

l!!i lnsurance

l!I Logistic/Transport NGOs

• Others

Th e degree o f intensity o f project act ivity provided very impo rt ant informatio n abo ut t he analyzed group (ex hibit

7).

TI1is degree ident ified the number and im­

po rt ance o f t he project s implement ed by t he o rganizat ions. Almo st 2h o f t he ana­

lyzed o rganizat io ns described t his degree as very high

(32,3%)

_{o r high}

(33,3%).

_Ev­

ery fifth o rganizat ion described the int ensit y degree as mo der ate

(23,0%).

Fo r t hese

ORGA NIZATIO N A N D MA NAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (148) 201

Pawet Wyrozebski

o rganizations, the proj ects were important but not essential in their business strat­

egy. Approx imately, in one out of every eight organizations, the project activ ity w as o ccasional, on a small scale and of little impact.

Exhibit 7. The profile of intensity of implemented by the organizations projects

Very high

High

Moderate

Low

Total

Source: own study.

I

Project-oriented organization, all its business ac­

! tivity is oriented towarcls project implernentation

Organization carries out many projects !hat are essential for its strategy realization

Projects are considered an important part of orga­

nization activity

Few and occasional project implernentations

32.3% 91

33.3% 94

23.0% 65

11.3% 32

100% 282

Analysis of the data contributed to the creation of a synthetic, general needs pro­

file fo r methodological support in the studied organizations (ex hibit

8).

It also per­

mitted a cross- sectional analysis, which created profiles that reflected diff erent needs according to the particular characteristics of the organizations. T he percentage indi­

c ators inform about the f requency of choosing the particular value w ithin the given variable (values in c ach line sum up to

100%).

By analyzing the generał profile of needs f or rn ethodological support in project management, as far as the studied organizations are concerned, one can observe that the fi elds from the third column of the morphological matrix were defi nitely more chosen. In spite of limitations fo r the conclusions, which are caused by analyzing a purposive sample, the obtained results prov ed that there was a need fo r dev eloped p roject management support, but, at the same time, that there w as a general reluc­

tance towards very detailed and exhaustive regulations, with only a few ex ceptions.

Among the domains in w hich the most detailed support is expected prevails the project definition (52% of respondents indicated a detailed and precise identifi­

cation of goals and a basis and requirements related to the project realization).

I n second position is project documentation

(38%

of respondents indicated a high level of documen tation of the project, full and complex documentation of the proj ­ ect implementation process), then Proj ect cost management

(35%

of respondents in dicated detailed processes of cost management) and C loseout and project evalu­

ation

(33%

of respondents indicated complex and precise p rocedures of closing out and reviewing the project).

202 ORG,Ą NIZATIO N A ND MANAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (148)

o Exhibit 8. General needs profile for the methodological support in studied organizations JJ Cl

)>

Profile of the needs for the methodological support z Problem areas I vari-

N � ^{ab I es}

o 1 2 3 4

z 3.9% Deterrnining diffe1� Complete and de-

)> Stages and Life

z insignificant Determining different ent project stages and tailed description of the

o A Cycle of the proj- a1 a2 21.4% a3 58.6% a4 16.1%

� /not present project stages a description of the stages and processes

)> ect ^::D

z rnain milestones in the Project Life Cycle ^CD

)> Cf)

G) CD

rn General rules of proj- Detailed procedures ^m

� insignificant General rules of o

rn B Project lnitiation b1 6.4% b2 28.5% b3 ect initiation with the 46.6% b4 and Project lnitiation 18.5% ^::r

z /not present project initiation

-I o

main decision points Documentation ^::J

z s:

o P1·oject defini- ^CD

.g:i Detailed and precise ^::J

I\) tion, setting the CD

s General guidelines definition of goals, ba- ^CD

� goals, defin- insignificant General definition of ^o..

c ^{c1 1 .4% c2} for project param- 16.1 % c3 30.4% c4 sis and requirements 52.1% ^Cf)

-:::;:

ing lirnits and re- /not present the project parameters g_

-"'

eters related to project real-

,r;E quirements of 3

ization ^(])

the project _o s:

High degree of suscep- o ^o..

Project environ- Low degree of sus- Moderate degree of tibility to project envi- ^o

insignificant ^<D

D ment and con- d1 3.2% d2 ceptibility to project 22.2% d3 susceptibility to proj- 45.2% d4 ronment, taking into ac- 29.4% 0·

/not present ^m

!ext environment ect environment count correlations and ^Cf) c

mutual dependence _-o ^-o

o

Defining the gen- Detailed and precise de- ^{� ...}

Giving structure Complete identifi- s

to the project insignificant eral scope and lim-

cation of the project scription of the compo- -o

�

E e1 2.2% e2 its of a project and 29.0% e3 54.5% e4 nents of project scope 14.3% ..Q.

and scope man- /not present scope and setting the ^CD

setting general con- and accurate proce- ^o

agement rules of its verification ^...

troi rules dures of its control 3

m ::J

Framework proj- ^m

Project process plan- Detailed and exhaus- ^<D

Project time insignificant ect process plan- ^CD

F f1 0.7% f2 1 7.5% f3 ning with a moderate 53.2% f4 tive project time man- 28.6% 3

management /not p1·esent ning, on a ver; gen- ^CD

N> attention to detail agement �

o eral level

(..:>

.....^...

I\) Problem areas I vari- Profile of the needs for the methodological support

o .i::- ables _{1 2 3 4} ^{u DJ}

::§'.

General advice con- �

Organizing and

insignificant cerning creating General rules of creat- Accurate responsibility :2:

G leading a pmject g1 6.8% g2 23.7% g3 ing and leading a proj- 43.7% g4 rules and procedures of 25.8% ^{'< -.}

/not present and leading a proj- ^o

team ect team creating a project team ^N

ect team ^{CD IT}

(/)

Exhaustive and detailed ^�

General control over Current monitoring

procedures of monitor- H Monitoring and

h1 insignificant

1.8% h2 project implementa- 16.0% h3 and control of proj-

67.0% h4 ing and control of proj- 15.2%

control of project /not present

lion process ect implementation

ect implementation pro- process

cess

Closeout and Overall hints con- General rules and Complex and precise

project evalu- i1 insignificant

7.1% i2 cerning closure and 25.6% i3 guidelines of closing 34.5% i4 procedures of closing

32.7%

ation /not present review of the project out the project out and reviewing the

project o JJ

C; )> General rules sensi- Fmmework proce-

z Risk manage- insignificant Detailed processes of

N J ^{j1 11.3% j2} tizing to the risk as- 37.9% ^j3 dures of risk identifica- 35.5% j4 15.2%

� ment /not present risk management

o pect in the project tion and prevention

z )> Framework proce-

z o General rules sensi- dures of requirements Detailed processes of

$;'. Quality manage- insignificant

)> K k1 8.2% k2 tizing to the quality 32.3% k3 identification and en- 40.5% k4 quality management in 19.0%

z ment /not present

)> aspect in the project suring quality in the the project

Q m project

$;'.

m z General rules sen- Framework proce- Detailed processes of

-I

z L Communication

11 insignificant

6.0% 12 sitizing to the com-

31.9% ¹³ dures of communica-

41.1% 14 communication and in-

20.9%

o management /not present munication aspect in tion and information formation flow in the

i\:; 01 the project flow in the project project

s �

'.:}

.!"'

§

o Profile of the needs for the methodological support

Jl Problem areas I van-

Q )> ab I es _{1 2 3 4}

z N

� Very general rules

o Framework proce-

z Project cost insignificant of finances planning Detailed pmcesses of

)> M management m1

/not present ^5.7% m2

and control in the ^20.9% m3 dures of financial 38.3% m4

financial management ^{35. 1 %}

z management

o project

;;o;:

)> :D

z General 1·u1es sen- Framework proce- ^CD

)> (f)

G) sitizing to the as- dures of planning and Detailed processes of ^CD

m Project resource insignificant ^PJ

;;o;:

N

^{n1 4.6% n2} pect of resource 34.2% n3 monitoring the use of 41 .6% n4 resource management 1 9.6% o ^-.

m /not present ^:::r

z management

-I management in the the resources in the in the project ^o _::J

z project project ^... :::r

o CD

Q1 _I\) General rules sen- ^::J

Fmmework proce- ^CD

o Project procure- sitizing to the as- Detailed processes of ^CD

� o..

� insignificant dures of procurement (f)

-:::;: ^-1' o ment manage- o1 /not present 9.9% o2 pect of procurement 24. 1 % o3 management in the 39.7% 04 procurement manage- 26.2% s.

SE ment management in the meni in the p^roject 3

project project _CD

--+ :::r

Change man- General rules of im- o ^o.. _o

agement (atti- plementation and Framework proce- Detailed procedures ^o

insignificant ^co

p tucie towards p1 6.8% p2 ways of reacting 31 .3% p3 dures of change man- 40.2% p4 and processes of 21 .7% o·

/not present ^PJ

changes, flexi- to changes in the agement change management ^(f)

c

bility) project ^u _u

High level of documen- ^o

Medium level of docu- ;::::::_

Low level of doc-

mentation of the proj- talion of the project (full ⁵

Project docu- insignificant umentation of the ^u

R r1 1 .4% r2 1 5.2% r3 ect (general project 45.4% 1'4 and complex documen- 37.9% ^-.

mentation /not present project (basie proj- ^.Q.

documentation, basie talion of the project im- ^CD

ect documentation) Q_

reports) plementation process) 3

PJ

insignificant ^::J

IT support for the Fundamental IT sup- significant, consider- full and complex IT sup- ^PJ

s methodology ^s1 I lack of IT ^{8.2% s2 40.9% s3} able IT support ^{32.4% s4} po1t ^{1 8.5% co CD}

support port 3

CD

!\.) ;:;;.

o 01

Pawet Wyrozebski

. . . ..

Exhibit 9. Matrix of a variable correlation in a model of project management methodological needs

Variable Size of organi-

zation A. Stages and Life

0.162 Cycle of the project

B. Project lnitiation 0.198 C. Project clefinion 0 .0 1 5 D. Project Environment

0.160 and context

E. Giving structure

to the project and 0.145 scope management

F. Project time man- 0 . 1 1 4 agement

G. Oi-ganizing and

leading a project 0.179 team

H. Monitoring and con-

0 .065 troi of project

I. Closeout and project 0.051 evaluation

J. Risk management 0.097 K. Quality manage-

0 .070 ment

L. Communication

0.064 management

M. Project cost man-

0 . 0 8 1 agement

N. Project resource 0.066 management

O. Project procurement 0.042 rnanagement

P. Change manage- 0.092 ment

R. Project documen- 0 . 054 tation

S. IT support for the 0 . 1 1 2 methodology

Source: own study.

206

Rank Correlation Coefficient of Spearman

Determined Correlation Coefficients are significant at p <0,05 Foreign

capital share

0 . 1 00

-0.01 3 -0 .0 1 8 -0.069

0 .076

0.098

0 . 084

0.082

0 . 0 1 0

0 .075

0.097

-0.001

0 . 062

0 .081

0.0 1 3

0 .043

-0.0 1 8

-0.050

External lnvestment Project

Project project Complexity lnnovation intensity

share share level level 0.262 ^{0.098 0.003} 0.270 0.249

0.125 ^{-0.034 -0.045} 0.196 0.122 0. 095 0.055 0 .066 0 . 1 1 2 0.118 0 . 0 1 7 -0.133 ^{-0. 1 05} 0.203 0.157

0.097 -0.039 0 .004 0 . 1 0 1 0 . 1 00

0 . 041 0 .044 -0.01 2 0.148 ^{0 .035}

0.041 -0.080 -0.093 0.145 ^{0 .079}

0.057 0.066 -0.031 0.177 0.126

-0 . 0 1 4 -0 .001 0.003 0.149 ^{0 . 1 02}

0.002 --0.145 ^-0.021 0.239 0.155

0.072 -0.003 -0.020 0.193 ^{0 .098}

0.034 0.039 -0. 1 09 0.145 ^{0 . 1 08}

0 . 035 -0.008 -0.004 0.222 ^{0 .070}

0.090 0.068 -0.0 1 7 0.184 0.197

0.130 ^{0.025 0 .085} 0.241 0.176

0.078 -0.034 -0.048 0.240 0.137

0 . 086 0 .09 1 0 .078 0.305 ^{0 .088}

0.161 ^{-0.050 -0.082} 0.209 0.235

ORG.A.NIZ.ATION A N D MANAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (148)

Research on the needs of methodological support in project management

D omains that, according to the respondents, do not require much regulation or support (first column) are: Risk management

( 11 %

₎, procurement management

(10%),

Quality management and IT support for the methodology

(8%

_{cach ) .}

A concentration analysis (dispersion analysis) o f the given answers helped to identify the fields on which there was a general agreement among the respondents concerning the expected range of methodological support. In order to measure the level of concentration, a standard deviation analysis of an indication frequency for each given variable was applied.

The highest level of concentration that was measured on the basis of the highest value of a standard deviation was observed in:

� Monitoring and control of project

( 67%

of respondents indicated current moni­

toring and control of the project implementation I>rocess),

m Stages and Life Cycle of the proj ect

(59%

of respondents indicated determining different project stages and a description of the main milestones),

!Il! Giving structure to the project and scope management

(54%

of respondents in­

dicated complete identification of the project scope and setting the rules of its verification),

m Project time management

(53%

of respondents indicated planning of the proj­

ect process with a moderate attention to detail), and

� P roject definition

(52%

of respondents indicated a detailed and precise identifi­

cation of goals, basis and requirements related to project realization) .

The lowest level of concentration of the answers, measured by the lowest value of a standard deviation was observed in: proj ect procurement management, Closeout and project evaluation and Risk management.

I n conformity with the applied research model, an attempt to analyze the factors that influence the needs of methodological support in project management in the studied organizations has been made. For this purpose, tools of statistical analysis were used, including the Rank Correlation Coefficient of Spearman, which presents covariance of an analyzed pai r of variables (exhibit

9).

6. Analysis and research findings

Application of the model of assessment and selection of methodological support tools for project management permitted the identification and analysis of the orga­

nizations' needs for methodological support. Both generał profile (of all studied or­

ganizations) and cross-sectional profiles (according to the scheme of organizations' characteristics and projects) were analyzed.

Most of the studied organizations expected the proj ect management support to be moderately detailed and based on the use of generał management procedures. Tt

ORGA N IZATION A ND MANAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (1 48) 207

Paweł Wyrozebski

is possible to draw a conclusion that, in the field of project management, there ex­

ist two contrary forces that influence the finał form of methodological support. On one hand we havc the need for detailcd solutions and significant support because of the complexity of the projects. On the other hand, there is a reluctance of project staff towards exccssive work formalization and overly-rigid action models. There is also the need to leave a certain freedom of choice for the decision-makers concern­

i ng the project implementation methods because of the uniqueness and risk of re­

alized ventures.

In the studied organizations, regardless of the specification of a project or or­

ganization, from all the fields of project management, Project Definition proved to be the domain that requires particular and exhaustive support. In a significant number of analyzed profiles this domain was considered to be an area that requires a detailed and precise definition of goals, basis and requirements related to project realization. We can interpret this conclusion as a realization of one of the main proj­

ect management principles, that is, goal-orientated management. Project definition is a key element of a project. On its basis, other strategies, plans and conceptions are elaborated. Goals described and clefined at this stage arc then being achieved during the project implementation and verified after the project closure. From the project managers' and organizations' point of view, project definition is an area that requires special methodological support. In depth analysis of that question is an object of de­

t ailed scientific research, including those conducted by organizations that co-ordi­

nate European projects

[3], [4]

Another observation is that, regardless of the specification of a project or or­

ganization, tliree domains: Risk management, Quality management and Procure­

ment management, were indicated by the studied organizations as ones that re­

quire little methodological support in project management. This conclusion was totally unexpected as the importance of these three domains for the project success is often emphasized. Moreover, they are objects of separate standards of risk man­

agement and quality management in projects.

'"D1is observation corresponds with the analysis of the project maturity of an or­

ganization concerning the above mentioned areas of knowledge. Both international and Polish research show that risk management is an area in which the irnplemented methods are of a very low maturity level

[ 15], [5] .

An explanation of the obtained findings can be the fact that solutions from these domains are still relatively new and not known in Polish organizations as a result of their insufficient popularization . The findings demonstrate a poor level of awareness of Polish project managers concerning the role of risk and quality management in p rojects, relatively poor lrnowledge of different methods, and, consequently, show a great need of making a bigger effort in order to sensitize project managers to these questions and provide tools adapted to the current proj ect maturity level.

208 ORGANIZATIO N A ND MA NAGEMENT No. 5 /201 1 (148)

Research on the needs of methodological support in project management

Another explanation of such an assessment can be connected with the more and m ore frequent processes of transfer of competences in the area of risk management.

'The transfer takes place from projects to program management structurcs and proj­

ect p ortfolio management e.g. centralized services of Project Management Offices and p rograms. TI1is is the reason why risk management can be identified with more risk assessment required in order to approve or not approve the possible implemen­

tation of a project (portfolio risk level) . TI1is attitude leaves the current risk manage­

ment to project managers who rely mainly on their intuition.

As far as project procurement management is concerned the low level of needs can be caused by considering these areas as supporting, carried out by an organiza­

tion's functional units. TI1at is the reason why project managers tend to perceive them as less important and peripheral issues that lay beyond basie project tasks. The next interpretation could be the character of implernented projects, in which the relation­

ship with external partners is not essential, thus a significant and cornplex method­

ological supp ort is not necessary. These observations and its interpretations should be a starting point for further, more detailed and in-depth research.

The strongest relationship between variables was shown between the com­

plexity level of implemented projects and project documentation requirements.

In second place, there was the accuracy of the description of stages and project life cyde that increased as the project complexity level, project intensity level and project innovation level rose. There was also a strong connection between the complexity level and project procurement management, change management and risk management.

Together with the growth of organizations have an increased need of method­

ological support for Project D efinition, Organizing and leading a proj ect team, De­

scription of the stages and life cycle of the project, Proj ect Environment and context, and Giving structure to the project and scope management.

TI1e rise in the intensity of project activily in the organizations was accompanied with an increase in the needs of methodological support for Stages and life cycle of the project, Proj ect procurement management and Project initiation.

Alongside the relative increase in the number of realized projects for external use compared to the in-house proj ects, a decreasing need for methodological sup­

p ort in Risk management and Project environment and context has been observed.

The complexity level of implemented projects was an aspect that influenced ex­

tensively and to a great degree on the support needs in the studied organizations.

A rise in the complexity level of the projects was accompanied by a growing need of attention to detail in methodological requirements concerning:

li1I P roject documentation

™ D escription of stages and the life cycle of the project

ta P roject Procurement management

ORGANIZATION AND IVIANAGEMENT No. 5/201 1 ( 1 48)

209

•

Paweł Wyrozebski

· · · ··

r1ł Change management

m» Risk management

im Project cost management

!i.ll IT support for the methodology

� Project environment and context

� Project definition

r� Q uality management

f\! Project resource management

Mil Monitoring and control of project

fl1! Closeout and project evaluation

1m Project time management

� Communication management

l!; Organizing and leading a proj ect team

'Ibe innovation level has also influenced, to a large extent, the process of generat­

ing the methodological needs. Its rise was accompanied by a growing need of atten­

tion to detail in the methodological requirements in the following areas:

� Stages and life cycle of the p roject

)M IT support for the methodology

!'iii Project resource management

� Project Procurement management

l'1 Project environment and context

fil Risk management

!!::� Change management

� Monitoring and control of proj ect

� Project initiation

l1ll Proj ect definition

As far as the organization's and implemented projects' characteristics are con­

cerned, there were no signs of a relationship between the needs for methodologi­

cal support and foreign capital share in the equity capital of the studied organi­

zations. Although one could presume, on the basis of the observed project maturity and development of project management in Poland that such relationship exists (be­

ing a result of transfer of knowledge ), it was not confirmed by the research.

The relationship behveen soft projects, investment projects, and methodologi­

cal support needs was also not revealed in any of the studied project management problem areas. It can mean that, from the point of view of methodological efliciency, the above mentioned project categories have similar characteristics.

210 ORGANIZATION A ND MA NAGEMENT No. 5/2011 (148)

Research on the needs of methodological support in project management

Conclusion

TI1e project management methodologi es have become a key element of the envi ­ ronment of project management. TI1ey are a source of knowledge, a ro ad map and a si gn-post for the project managers. They are also a set of methods for solvi ng prob­

lems duri ng project reali zati on. An i mplementati on of project management standards i s, i n i tself, a complex and uni que venture that has a powerful i nfluence on the orga­

ni zation's way of operati ng. TI1 e ri chness of exi sti ng standards means that maki ng the ri ght choi ce and then adapting the methodologi cal support soluti ons consti tute a great challenge.

A research tool whi ch was presented i n the arti cle, a morphologi cal matri x of methodologi cal support for project management, makes possible not only conduct­

i ng the syntheti c populati on assessment (as i t was presented above), but also an i ndi ­ vi dual assessment - an analysis of the needs of a given enterpri se or organi zati on i n terms of real ex pectati ons towards project management methods and tools. Compar­

i ng the needs profi le wi th the profiles of support provi ded by exi sting project manage­

ment methodologi es provi des the basi s of the assessment process and the selecti on of methodologi cal s upport tools on sci enti fi c, rati onal p remi ses, and to use methods and tools that help to mai ntai n i mparti ality characteri sti c of empi ri cal sci ence. That atti tude guarantees that the implemented methodology corresponds i n the hi ghest degree wi th the needs of an organi zati on.

Bibliography

[ l ] European Commission, Project Cycle Management Guidelines, 2004.

[2] Goff S.A., What is a PM 1\!fethodology?, www.maxwidernan.com, [ l 9.08.2008] .

[ 3 ] Grucza B., Problems with European p roject ident{fication, based on an exarnple ofEQ UAL Comm unity lnitiative, PhD thesis, Warsaw 2008.

[4,] Grucza B., Problemy defi niowania projektó w europejskich na przykładzie Inicjatywy Wspólnotowej EQUAL [Problems with European project identification, based on an ex­

ample of EQUAL Community Initiative}, PhD thesis, Warsaw School of Economics,

·warszawa 2008.

[ 5 ] Juchniewicz M., Dojrzałość projektowa organizacji [Project management maturity of or­

gallizations}, Bizarre, Warszawa 2009.

[ 6] Lent B., Zarzqdzanie procesami prowadzenia projektów. Informatyka i telekomunikacja {!VIanagement of processes in project realizr1tion, IT and Telecommunications], Difin,

\Narszawa 2005.

ORGA NIZATIO /\J A ND MA NAGEMENT No. 5/201 1 (1 48)

211