Proyectos Exitosos
Páginas: 20 (4784 palabras)
Publicado: 7 de noviembre de 2012
International Journal of Project Management Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 337±342, 1999 # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 0263-7863/99 $20.00 + 0.00
PII: S0263-7863(98)00069-6
Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria
Roger Atkinson
Department of Information Systems, TheBusiness School, Bournemouth University, Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow, Poole, Dorset BH12 5BB, UK
This paper provides some thoughts about success criteria for IS±IT project management. Cost, time and quality (The Iron Triangle), over the last 50 years have become inextricably linked with measuring the success of project management. This is perhaps not surprising, since over the same period thosecriteria are usually included in the description of project management. Time and costs are at best, only guesses, calculated at a time when least is known about the project. Quality is a phenomenon, it is an emergent property of peoples dierent attitudes and beliefs, which often change over the development life-cycle of a project. Why has project management been so reluctant to adopt othercriteria in addition to the Iron Triangle, such as stakeholder bene®ts against which projects can be assessed? This paper proposes a new framework to consider success criteria, The Square Route. # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved
Keywords: Project management, success criteria
Research studies investigating the reasons why projects fail, for example Morris and Hough1 andGallagher,2 provide lists of factors believed to contribute to the project management success or failure. At the same time some criteria against which projects can be measured are available, for example cost, time and quality often referred to as The Iron Triangle, Figure 1. Projects however continue to be described as failing, despite the management. Why should this be if both the factors and thecriteria for success are believed to be known? One argument could be that project management seems keen to adopt new factors to achieve success, such as methodologies, tools, knowledge and skills, but continues to measure or judge project management using tried and failed criteria. If the criteria were the cause of reported failure, continuing to use those same criteria will simply repeat the failuresof the past. Could it be the reason some project management is labelled as having failed results from the criteria used as a measure of success? The questions then become: what criteria are used and what other criteria could be used to measure success? This paper takes a look at existing criteria against which project management is measured and proposes a new way to consider success criteria,called the Square Route. The paper has four sections. First, existing de®nitions of project management are reviewed, indicating
The Iron Triangle success criteria to be almost inextricably linked with those de®nitions. Next, an argument for considering other success criteria is put forward, separating these into some things which are done wrong and other things which have been missed or not done aswell as they could have done. In the third section, other success criteria, proposed in the literature is reviewed. Finally The Iron Triangle and other success criteria are placed into one of four major categories, this is represented as The Square Route. First a reminder about how project management is de®ned, the thing we are trying to measure.
What is project management?
Many have attemptedto de®ne project management. One example, Oisen,3 referencing views from the 1950's, may have been one of the early attempts.
Project Management is the application of a collection of tools and techniques (such as the CPM and matrix organisation) to direct the use of diverse resources toward the accomplishment of a unique, complex, one-time task within time, cost and quality constraints. Each...
PII: S0263-7863(98)00069-6
Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria
Roger Atkinson
Department of Information Systems, TheBusiness School, Bournemouth University, Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow, Poole, Dorset BH12 5BB, UK
This paper provides some thoughts about success criteria for IS±IT project management. Cost, time and quality (The Iron Triangle), over the last 50 years have become inextricably linked with measuring the success of project management. This is perhaps not surprising, since over the same period thosecriteria are usually included in the description of project management. Time and costs are at best, only guesses, calculated at a time when least is known about the project. Quality is a phenomenon, it is an emergent property of peoples dierent attitudes and beliefs, which often change over the development life-cycle of a project. Why has project management been so reluctant to adopt othercriteria in addition to the Iron Triangle, such as stakeholder bene®ts against which projects can be assessed? This paper proposes a new framework to consider success criteria, The Square Route. # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved
Keywords: Project management, success criteria
Research studies investigating the reasons why projects fail, for example Morris and Hough1 andGallagher,2 provide lists of factors believed to contribute to the project management success or failure. At the same time some criteria against which projects can be measured are available, for example cost, time and quality often referred to as The Iron Triangle, Figure 1. Projects however continue to be described as failing, despite the management. Why should this be if both the factors and thecriteria for success are believed to be known? One argument could be that project management seems keen to adopt new factors to achieve success, such as methodologies, tools, knowledge and skills, but continues to measure or judge project management using tried and failed criteria. If the criteria were the cause of reported failure, continuing to use those same criteria will simply repeat the failuresof the past. Could it be the reason some project management is labelled as having failed results from the criteria used as a measure of success? The questions then become: what criteria are used and what other criteria could be used to measure success? This paper takes a look at existing criteria against which project management is measured and proposes a new way to consider success criteria,called the Square Route. The paper has four sections. First, existing de®nitions of project management are reviewed, indicating
The Iron Triangle success criteria to be almost inextricably linked with those de®nitions. Next, an argument for considering other success criteria is put forward, separating these into some things which are done wrong and other things which have been missed or not done aswell as they could have done. In the third section, other success criteria, proposed in the literature is reviewed. Finally The Iron Triangle and other success criteria are placed into one of four major categories, this is represented as The Square Route. First a reminder about how project management is de®ned, the thing we are trying to measure.
What is project management?
Many have attemptedto de®ne project management. One example, Oisen,3 referencing views from the 1950's, may have been one of the early attempts.
Project Management is the application of a collection of tools and techniques (such as the CPM and matrix organisation) to direct the use of diverse resources toward the accomplishment of a unique, complex, one-time task within time, cost and quality constraints. Each...
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.