The role of structural factors in determining project management success

Might, Robert J.; Fischer, William A.

doi:10.1109/tem.1985.6447584

Cited by 110 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The majority of the projects (80%) in our sample were organized in a matrix structure (either functional, balanced, or project matrix), 15% of the projects were organized as standalone projects, and 5% were directly integrated in the line organizations, which was consistent with what we expected to investigate in project settings. A similar distribution of project management structures is reported in previous work (e.g., Larson & Gobeli 1989, Might & Fischer 1985.…”

Section: Samplesupporting

confidence: 82%

Project spirit: Placing partakers' emotions, attitudes and norms in the context of project vision, artifacts, leader values, contextual performance and success

Aronson

Shenhar

Reilly

2010

The Journal of High Technology Management Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Samplesupporting

confidence: 82%

Project spirit: Placing partakers' emotions, attitudes and norms in the context of project vision, artifacts, leader values, contextual performance and success

Aronson

Shenhar

Reilly

2010

The Journal of High Technology Management Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some proposals aim at measuring success from the level of satisfaction of the stakeholders which take part in the technology transfer process (Wu 1993), while others prefer to do it through the evaluation of the adequacy of the technology result to the transferee' needs or taking into account the compliance of costs and deadlines (Might and Fischer 1985). Spann, Adams and Souder (1995) make a detailed proposal of parameters to measure technology transfer effectiveness, which considers short term factors (such as number of licenses, requests for help, transfer budgets, etc. )…”

Section: Effectiveness Criteria and Measures Of Success For Technologmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical factors for success in university–industry research projects

Barbolla

Corredera

2009

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides insight into the reality of university-industry technology transfer through the assessment of some of the most influential factors for success or failure in research contracts. This widespread mechanism of technology transfer is examined in the light of exhaustive information and experience gathered from thirty interviews with qualified university researchers. The interviewees, who have been directly involved in collaborative projects with industry partners, have deeply described both sound and unsatisfactory cooperation cases, in order to explore which relevant circumstances have led to success or failure. The analysis drives to conclude that there are some features (beyond technological ones) related to the corporate partner's strategic and functional characteristics, which come to be decisive for success. For example, company's real interest and involvement during the technology transfer process, its capacity to assimilate new knowledge and a confident attitude towards the university research group are identified to be key elements for attaining an effective technology transfer. In this contribution, the importance of these aspects is contextualized and summarized in a model for successful technology transfer.

show abstract

“…The survey questionnaire consisted of 67 potential factors ( (2000), Macomber (1989), and Might and Fisher (1985).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical Success Factors for Different Organizations in Construction Projects

Inayat¹

2012

Icsdec 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers have been compiling lists of key factors the presence or absence of which have determined the success or failure of projects. Early researches of critical success factors were largely theory based; subsequent researches employed the use of statistics and continuously refined methods like neural network and the analytical hierarchy process. Over the passage of time, the focus has narrowed down from broad generalization of 'projects' to 'project classes'.The thesis can be broadly divided into three components. First Component:The first component (Chapter 1, 2, and 3) leads an insight into the basic concept of success factor studies, and the empirical frameworks adopted for identification of critical success factors. The second and the third component, comprises literature review and original research, respectively. These components pertain to success factor studies of construction projects, and are introduced as below. Second Component:The second component (Chapter 4: Review Component) sets out to choose from among a treasure of resources on construction projects, three such state of the art works that can best explain the progress in search of success factors over a period of the foregoing 25 years. After discussing each work in detail, the reader's attention is drawn to a collective discussion, and summary towards the end of the Review Component. The review includes the following works:(1) Pinto and Covin, 1989, (2) Ashley et al., 1987, and (3) Loh, 2011. Pinto andCovin (1989) endeavored to set aside the convenient research trend of treating all project types (Manufacturing, R&D, Construction etc.) as similar. It was felt that management practitioners considered the generalized project management prescriptions offered by researchers as mostly inapplicable to the unique situations posed by their respective classes of projects.Stepwise regression analysis was employed to seek separate sets of CSFs for construction and R&D projects. The choice of these two project types was made as they apparently lied on opposite ends of the spectrum of characteristics. The phases of project lifecycle considered for determining CSFs were conceptualization, planning, execution, and termination. It was concluded that though identification of a set of general critical success factors has some benefits for both academics and practitioners, strict adherence to them would not necessarily ensure project success. It was proved that every project type offers its own set of problems, and that these vary over a project's lifecycle.The review briefly touches upon the work of Ashley et al. (1987) so as to lead an insight into yet another methodology adopted by CSF researchers. This study views project success from the project managers' perspective for the owner and contractor organizations they works for, and does not take into consideration the view point of other professionals working for owner, contractor and consultant organizations. Hypothesis testing was employed to find those factors that exhibited strong stat...

show abstract

The role of structural factors in determining project management success

Cited by 110 publications

References 4 publications

Project spirit: Placing partakers' emotions, attitudes and norms in the context of project vision, artifacts, leader values, contextual performance and success

Project spirit: Placing partakers' emotions, attitudes and norms in the context of project vision, artifacts, leader values, contextual performance and success

Critical factors for success in university–industry research projects

Critical Success Factors for Different Organizations in Construction Projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About