Seminar in project management term paper

Factors Affecting the Success of Project Implementation:

The Case of Ethiopian Telecommunication Corporation

By:

Submitted to:

December, 2020

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

I|Page
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................. 1

2. Background of an organization................................................................................................................................ 2

3. Statement of the problem and objective............................................................................................................... 3

4. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................. 4

Project success Factors.................................................................................................................................................... 4

5. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................................................................. 6

The study Design................................................................................................................................................................ 6

Data Source........................................................................................................................................................................... 6

Sampling Design................................................................................................................................................................. 6

Data Analysis methods..................................................................................................................................................... 6

6. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS INTERPRETATION......................................................................................... 7

6.1 Descriptive Statistics for Independent Variables....................................................................................7

6.2 Factors affecting the success of Project Implementation..................................................................11

7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION........................................................................................................... 16

7.1 Conclusion............................................................................................................................................................ 16

7.2 Recommendation.............................................................................................................................................. 17

References............................................................................................................................................................................... 18

II | P a g e
 1. INTRODUCTION
A project is defined as a temporary endeavor undertaken by people who work cooperatively
together to create a unique product or service within an established time frame and within
established budget to produce identifiable deliverables (Cleland and Kerzner 2001).

Project failures in worldwide are still significantly high, although attempts by project
management societies to provide project managers with frame works, standards, techniques and
methodologies to assist them in their activities (Smith,Bruyns, and Evans ,2011).

Marnewick & Labuschagne (2009) suggest that many organizations invest resources in project
management, believing that it can be used to all new initiative successfully. In other sense
Project success has been defined by the criteria of time, budget and deliverables (Flaman and
Gallagher, 2001). According to Antill (1974), a project is only successful if it comes on schedule,
on budget, it achieves the deliverables originally set for it and it is accepted and used by the
clients for whom the project was intended.

Initially, project success was referred to as reaching the objectives and the planned results in
compliance with predetermined conditions of time, cost and performance. As knowledge in
project management field developed, the “golden triangle” was considered not enough to define
project success. Project success was recognized to be a complex, multi-dimensional concept
encompassing many attributes (Mir, Pinnington, 2014). Projects are unique, reason why project
success criteria differ from one project to another (Müller, Turner, 2007). To increase complexity
even more, within the last decades the concept of project success is approached in relationship
with stakeholders’ perception (Davis, 2014), being accepted that success means different things
to different people (Shenhar et al, 2001). What determines project success, referred to as success
factors, is also approached and considered to be of great interest.

Based on the importance of the project for Ethiopian Telecom project success, in this paper was
analyzed as the main aspects related to project success based on a literature review: success
criteria and success factors. Furthermore, the study complement with an empirical research
focused on the main factors of project success.

1|Page
 2. Background of an organization
Telecom industry becomes tremendously changed time to time with vast and rapid scope.
Expectation of customers of this industry also diverges accordingly. Telecommunication sector
has also an opportunity to generate huge amount of revenue. The impact of telecom industry has
significant role on social, cultural and economic sector in addition to the governmental and
private sectors.

Ethio Telecom was established on December 2010 by the decision of the Government of Federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia to transform the previous traditionally operating corporation
(ETC) with a vision to be a world class telecom operator. Ethio Telecom conduct different kinds
of projects all over the country and act as a sole service provider. In order to achieve the
government goal mainly focus on GTP 1 as well as the company strategic plan “being world
class telecom operator” which ultimately repairs, develop and maintain modern information and
communication network infrastructure and develop & maintain better organizational structure,
capabilities and readiness.

New services such as mobile telephony, the Internet, and data transmission services, have been
introduced, but the telecommunications penetration is still low at a rate of less than 0.5% and
even lower than 0.07% in rural areas. The distribution of existing telecommunications systems is
uneven throughout the country, with 60% of automatic switching capacity concentrated in the
Capital and its suburban sphere and deformed network distribution accompanies the low
penetration rate.

Project Management in Ethiopian Telecommunication

(1) Project Execution by Technical Division

Idle facility should be minimized through turn-key projects with switching, transmission, and
OSP in single packages.

Expansion of the subscriber access network shall be implemented by a high priority for the
utilization of the idle capacity of the switching system.

(2) Insufficient Inter-system Coordination for Project Planning

2|Page
Preparation and management of the integrated implementation schedule up to the new

Completion of OSP basic design prior to the determination of switching capacity

(3) Enforcement of Responsibility/Authority for Project Implementation Management

Establishment of an Implementation Body independent from technical divisions for project

administration

Enforcement of supervision and progress management for new subscriber connection target

Stronger authority on project management including the implementation of ad-hoc action plan

Smooth transfer of the facility to O&M division upon construction

3. Statement of the problem and objective

Projects are used in all economic and non-economic fields as mean of organizing the activity,
aiming the achievement of desired objectives. There is a direct relationship between projects,
projects portfolio, programs and the organizational strategy. Projects, as the main way of creating
and dealing with change (Cleland, Gareis, 2006), are used to implement strategies. Meskendahl
(2010) refers to projects as the central building block used in implementing strategies, therefore
business success is determined by the success of the projects. According to PMI (2013), aligning
projects with strategic objectives brings value to an organization.

Implementing successful projects generates positives effects on the organization, influencing not
just short and medium, but also long term development. The topic of business success is related
to aspects of profitability and competitive advantage. Several studies have been made in this
field due to the importance of finding what success is and how it is measured. In this paper we
focus on projects’ success, a topic of great interest in project management literature.

Sumner (1999) studied project failure in the context of cost and attributed it to poor
communication among the client and the project team members, inadequate financial resources,
lack of motivation, tendering methods and poor project definition and project organization,
environmental conditions, quality of project management, lack of proper project definition and
infrastructure. Arrow Smith (1998) in analyzing project failure factors identified as poor

3|Page
communication, little experience of the project manager, late procurement of equipment, lack of
training of project managers and slow project selection methods has being the major causes of
project failure.

Towards this end, a survey was conducted to establish what factors collectively and significantly
contributed to poor project implementation by non- governmental organizations that affect in
success of project implementation in Ethiopian Telecommunication as a guiding objective.

Further the study tries to answer the following questions: - How factors related to project affect
the implementation of projects, to what extent organizational structure factors effective
implementation of projects, project management and team related factors affecting the projects
performance, stakeholder’s level of involvement in project cycle management and success of
project implementation?

4. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Project success Factors

Success factors can be perceived as main variables that contribute to projects’ success (Dvir,
1998), as levers that can be operated by project managers to increase chances of obtaining the
desired outcomes (Westerveld, 2003). A combination of factors determine the success or failure
of a project and influencing these factors at the right time makes success more probable
(Savolainen, 2012).

In earlier project management literature the main focus was on identifying generic factors that
contribute to projects’ success. Within the last years, authors emphasized on the existence of
different success factors depending on project type. The struggle to identify the critical success
factors is an ongoing topic, approached by many researchers especially due to the pressure of
implementing successful projects in a dynamic global market and ever changing business world
(Crisan, Borza, 2014), where continuous innovation is a must in order to achieve competitive
advantage (Salanta, Popa, 2014).

Davis (2014) studies project management success in literature from 1970s to present, classifying
the evolution of success factors into decades. According to this study, approaches of success
factors evolved from focusing on the operation level of a project in 1970s to embracing a
4|Page
stakeholder focused approached after 2000s (Davis, 2014). As a result of the numerous studies
that approached the topic of project success, several lists of success factors exist. Pinto and
Slevin’s paper from 1987 represents a reference point by establishing a list of ten success factors,
recognized by other authors as accurate (Turner, Müller, 2005): project mission, top management
support, schedule and plans, client consultation, personnel, technical tasks, client acceptance,
monitoring and feedback, communication, trouble-shooting (Pinto, Slevin, 1987). Davis (2014)
adopted in her paper a set of nine themes in order to describe success factors of projects:
cooperation and communication, timing, identifying/ agreeing objectives, stakeholder
satisfaction, acceptance and use of final products, cost/ budget aspects, competencies of the
project manager, strategic benefits of the project and top management support. These lists of
factors mentioned above, completed by inputs from practitioners, are the basis of the empirical
research presented in this paper.

Yu et al. (2005) discussed the timing of project evaluations which aim analyzing the success,
concluding that the process is useful at any time between the first milestones until the completion
of the project. The results of these evaluations might indicate inconsistencies that can have
negative influence on the final outcomes.

Whenever these situations occur, project managers should act in order to increase success
chances by influencing the previously identified success factors.

5|Page
 5. METHODOLOGY

The study Design

This study adopted both descriptive and explanatory research design as well as a quantitative and
qualitative research approach. Descriptive study design has been chosen because this study seeks
to establish factors affecting successful implementation of projects in Ethiopian
Telecommunication Corporation.

Data Source
This research used both the primary data which is directly collected from the respondents or
population under study which are the projects at hand and secondary data as a source of some
information required was used to the required standard to make the research more viable.

Sampling Design
Based on the information from the company there are 39 employees positioned in project team at
head office. Because of the small size of the study population, all of them are part of the study.
So, the study adopted a census approach and collected data from 39 implemented and completed
projects.

Data Analysis methods

The collected data were coded into SPSS and were analyzed using regression analyses.
Descriptive statistics such as mean, standard error of the mean, standard deviation, minimum and
maximum were used to describe the data. Explanatory analysis using regression is employed to
analyze the significant level of the relationship between causes of success of project
implementation factors.

6|Page
 6. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS INTERPRETATION

6.1 Descriptive Statistics for Independent Variables

Findings in Table 1 show that mission statements of the projects were sound. All of the
respondents agreed on this with a mean of 4.62 and standard deviation of .47. The goals of the
project were in line with the general goals of the organization. The basic goals of the project
were made clear to the project team. The project goals are developed in a way that contribute to
the missions of the parent organization. The beneficial consequences of the project to the
organization's success are also clear.

Table 1: Descriptive analysis of factors related to mission

Frequency Percent Mean Std. Deviation

Agree 13 33.3 4.62 .47
Strongly agree 26 66.7
Total 39 100.0

Findings on the project schedule/plan in Table 2 shows that majority of the respondents agreed to
a high extent (mean 4.42, std. dev. 44). They reported that they know which activities contain
slack time of slack resources which can be utilized in other area during emergencies. There was
also a detailed plan (including time, schedules, milestones, work force requirements, etc.) for the
completion of the project.

There was a detailed budget for the project and key personnel needs (who, when) were specified
in the project plan. Risks were also sufficiently identified and mitigation strategies included as
part of the project plan. This implies that the projected incorporated in the study were well
planned.

Table 2: Descriptive analysis of factors related to project schedule/plan

Frequency Percent Mean Std. Deviation

Agree 18 46 4.42 .44
Strongly agree 21 54
Total 39 100.0

7|Page
From the findings in Table 3 below, communication related factors of the sampled projects were
agreed as high with a mean of 4.26 and a standard deviation of .56. The results (decisions made,
information received and needed, etc.) of planning meetings were published and distributed to
applicable personnel. Individuals/groups supplying input have received feedback on the
acceptance or rejection of their input. All groups affected by the project know how to make
problems known to the project team. Plans were clearly communicated to the project team
members and to stakeholders. The project adopted a formal communication channel to direct
work orders and to receive feedbacks. This implies that communication activities of the projects
were effective.

Table 3: Descriptive analysis of communication factors

Frequency Percent Mean Std. Deviation
Disagree 1 2.6 4.26 .56
Agree 26 66.6
Strongly agree 12 30.7
Total 39 100.0

Findings in Table 4 show that the management team of the projects was sound. Majority of the
respondents agreed on the management team is good with a mean of 4.04 and standard deviation
of .58.

Table 4: Descriptive of team related factors

Frequency Percent Mean Std. deviation

Disagree 1 2.6
Undecided 4 10.25 4.04 .58
Agree 24 61.5
Strongly agree 10 25.6
Total 39 100.0

Nearly 70% of the respondents agreed that managerial skill of the sample projects were good. In
addition, 30% of them strongly agreed on the managerial skills with mean of 4.41 and standard
deviation of 1.08.

Table 5: Managerial skill and staff related factors

8|Page
 Frequency Percent Mean Std.
Deviation
Agree 27 69.2 4.41 1.08
Managerial skill Strongly agree 12 30.7
Total 39 100.0
Neutral 2 5.12 4.18 1.00
Agree 29 74.3
Staff related
Strongly agree 8 20.5
Total 39 100.0

According to the result shown in table 6, majority of the respondents (66.65%) agreed that there
were socio finance problems while the programs were implemented. While the project was being
implemented inflation occurred, there was a change in economic policy and/or regulation that
affected the project performance, currency devaluation occurred, the opportunity to get access to
capital and technology changed.

Regarding the political and legal situations, only 14% of the respondents reported that there were
political and legal problems during the project implementations. From the questions provided for
them, only 15% agreed as there was political instability while the project was being
implemented, the project is situated in a politically sensitive environment, the project was
implemented in a governance structure which was too inhibiting, there was election while the
project was implemented.

In respect to socio cultural factors, majority (74.5%) reported that there were a problems such as
being projects were implemented in a cultural setting that don't accept new things, there was
hidden obstruction that affected the project implementation, there was adequate access to social
amenities (e.g. medical care) and the literacy level of the local community was enabling the
implementation of the project. This may affect success of the projects.

Table 6: Descriptive analysis of socio finance, politico legal and socio cultural factors

9|Page
 Frequency Percent Mean Std. Deviation
Neutral 13 33.3 3.85
Socio finance Agree 18 46.15 .63
Strongly agree 8 20.5
Disagree 6 15.38 3.43
Neutral 10 25.64
Political and legal .64
Agree 9 2.07
Strongly agree 4 12.25
Disagree 1 2.6 3.74
Neutral 8 20.5
.48
Socio cultural Agree 29 74.3
Strongly agree 1 2.6
Total 39 100.0

The client consultation and acceptance related factors are provided in table 7. The result shows
that majority of the respondents (74.3%) reported that the clients were given the opportunity to
provide input early in the project development stage, were kept informed of the project’s
progress, the value of the project has been discussed with the beneficiaries/clients, the purpose of
the project has been discussed with the clients, the clients were told whether or not their input
was assimilated into the project plan. Regarding the client acceptance of the projects, 61.4%
were agreed on the statements related to client acceptance such as there was adequate
documentation of the project to allow easy use by the clients (instructions, etc.), potential clients
have been contacted about the usefulness of the project, clients knew who to contact when
problems or questions arise, adequate advanced preparation has been done to determine how best
to “sell” the project to clients.

Table 7: Descriptive result of client consultation and client acceptance

10 | P a g e
 Frequency Percent Mean Std. Deviation
Disagree 6 15.3 3.75 .87
Neutral 4 10.25
client consultation
Agree 22 56.4
Strongly agree 7 17.9
Disagree 9 23.07 3.64 1.04
Neutral 6 15.38
client acceptance Agree 12 30.7
Strongly agree 12 30.7
Total 39 100.0

6.2 Factors affecting the success of Project Implementation

In order to identify the effect of each aspects of the implementation on the project success, each
of the independent variables were regressed with each of the aspects of project success
individually.

Factors Affecting Performance of Projects from the Dimension of Schedule Performance

Index

From the correlation results, project management and team related factors had a statistically
significant positive correlation with schedule performance of the projects (r = 0.36, p<0.05).
There was no found other variables statistically significant with schedule performance of
projects.

As shown in the model summary table below, the cumulative effect of the independent variables
on the schedule aspect of the project success were found to be .551 indicated moderate level of
prediction. The R square also found to be .303. That means 30.3% of the variation in the
dependent variable were explained by the independent variables.

Model Summary
b
Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Durbin-Watson
Square Estimate
a
1 .551 .303 .019 .39421 1.838
a. Predictors: (Constant), client acceptance, mission general, communication
11 | P a g e
 total, manager skill, staff total, socio finance, socio cultural, schedule general,
team, client consultation, political legal
b. Dependent Variable: Schedule performance index

As shown in the coefficient table below, only management and team related factors were found
to be the significant factor for schedule aspect of project success (B= .337, p .019). This means
that for each one increase in management and team related factor, there is an increase in .337 unit
increase on schedule performance. Other factors were not found to be significant predictors of
plan project success.

Coefficient table
Model Un-standardize Standardi t Sig Co linearity
d Coefficients zed . Statistics
Coefficie
nts
B Std. Beta Toleranc VIF
Error e
1 (Constant) -.144 1.217 -.119 .906
mission general -.239 .178 -.283 -1.341 .191 .579 1.727
schedule general .353 .179 .389 1.977 .058 .667 1.498
communication total .008 .134 .011 .060 .952 .711 1.406
Team .337 .135 .497 2.494 .019 .650 1.538
manager skill -.035 .071 -.096 -.490 .628 .678 1.476
staff total -.090 .071 -.227 -1.264 .217 .800 1.250
Socio-finance -.102 .134 -.162 -.764 .452 .572 1.749
political legal .161 .166 .260 .969 .341 .358 2.791
Socio-cultural -.016 .173 -.020 -.093 .926 .570 1.755
client consultation .003 .118 .007 .028 .978 .383 2.610
client acceptance -.063 .083 -.165 -.757 .455 .541 1.847

Factors Affecting Project Performance from the Dimension of Efficiency (Cost)

The correlation table below revealed that communication in the project team and among
stakeholders were found to have positive relationship with the cost aspect of project success (r= .
310, p= .027).

12 | P a g e
That means when communication increases, the effectiveness of the projects also increases in
terms of cost management. Other variables did not found to correlate with the cost aspect of
project success.

The overall results illustrate a moderate positive and significant (p<0.05) association between
these variables (r = .542, p<0.05). Results also indicate that 29.3% (R2 = 0.293) of successful
completed projects was attributed to the independent variables.

The result is consistent with the finding of Sumner (1999) studied project failure in the context of
cost and attributed it to poor communication among the client and the project team members.
The finding also support the result of Arrow Smith (1998) in analyzing project failure factors
identified as poor communication.

Model Summary
b

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Durbin-Watson

Square Estimate
a
1 .542 .293 .005 .22875 1.820
a. Predictors: (Constant), client-acceptance, mission-general, communication-total, manager-
skill, staff-total, socio-finance, socio-cultural, schedule-general, team, client-consultation,
political-legal
b. Dependent Variable: Cost performance index

The coefficient table below indicated that, communication found to be the only factor that
significantly affect the cost aspects of project success (B= .180, p<.05). This implies that the one
unit change in communication processes brings a .180 unit change on the success of projects
related to cost performance.

Coefficient
Model Un-standardized Standardized T Sig. Co linearity
Coefficients Coefficients Statistics
B Std. Beta Tolerance VIF
Error
(Constant) 1.772 .706 2.510 .018
Mission-general -.171 .103 -.352 -1.657 .109 .579 1.727

13 | P a g e
 Schedule-general .090 .104 .172 .867 .394 .667 1.498
communication_ .180 .078 .442 2.306 .029 .711 1.406
Team -.073 .079 -.187 -.932 .360 .650 1.538
Manager-skill .022 .041 .102 .521 .607 .678 1.476
Staff-total .029 .041 .125 .693 .495 .800 1.250
1 Socio-finance .020 .078 .054 .254 .801 .572 1.749
Political-legal .098 .096 .275 1.017 .318 .358 2.791
Socio-cultural -.036 .101 -.078 -.362 .720 .570 1.755
Client-consultation .013 .069 .051 .195 .847 .383 2.610
Client-acceptance -.003 .048 -.012 -.056 .956 .541 1.847

Factors that affect Project Performance from the Dimension of Quality

On correlating project factors and project implementation, a Pearson correlation coefficient of

did not show any significant relationship between the independent variables and quality of
project success.

The model summary table below indicated that the cumulative effect of the independent
variables (r=.550). The R square result also found to be .303. This implies that 30.3% of the
variability on the project quality is explained by the independent variables.

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Durbin-Watson

Estimate
1 .550a .303 .019 .12441 1.439
a. Predictors: (Constant), client-acceptance, mission-general, communication-total, manager-
skill, staff-total, socio-finance, socio-cultural, schedule-general, team, client-consultation,
political-legal
b. Dependent Variable: quality

In order to see the individual independent variable effect on project quality, the coefficient table
is presented below. As shown in the table, schedule was found to be the significant factor
(B=.117, p< .05) for the quality aspect of project success. This means a unit change in scheduling
leads to a .117 unit change in the quality of the project.

Coefficient table
Model Un-standardize Standardized t Sig. Co linearity
Coefficients Coefficients Statistics

14 | P a g e
 B Std. Beta Tolerance VIF
Error
(Constant) .738 .384 1.920 .065
Mission-general .096 .056 .362 1.712 .098 .579 1.727
Schedule-general .117 .056 .409 2.081 .047 .667 1.498
Communication- -.005 .042 -.022 -.117 .907 .711 1.406
total
Team -.027 .043 -.128 -.644 .525 .650 1.538
Manager-skill .016 .023 .141 .723 .476 .678 1.476
1 Staff-total -.009 .022 -.072 -.400 .692 .800 1.250
Socio-finance .003 .042 .016 .074 .942 .572 1.749
Political-legal -.017 .052 -.089 -.330 .744 .358 2.791
Socio-cultural .104 .055 .406 1.907 .067 .570 1.755
Client- .025 .037 .173 .666 .511 .383 2.610
consultation
Client-acceptance
-.031 .026 -.255 -1.168 .253 .541 1.847

7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

7.1 Conclusion

It was possible to conclude the following based on the objectives and questions of the study. The
projects were found effective in time management performance and quality of the projects
15 | P a g e
whereas they were weak in cost performance. The study concludes that projects have well
defined procedures of determining the project scope before implementation by staff. In addition
project objectives are discussed before implementation and scope clarity to staff affect project
completion time and quality of projects.

The study also concludes that management and team involvement and cohesion affected project
implementation in respect to its schedule. The study noted that team involvement improved the
accuracy and speed of project implementation as per its intended plan. Their involvement meant
that projects were implemented as planned without delays. The stakeholders were involved in
different ways. The study also established that stakeholders were involved in strategy
implementation. Hence, their involvement was key for the success of project implementation at
the Foundation.

The study also concludes that communication influences effective implementation of project
implementation in respect to cost. This means the low achievement of the projects in terms of its
cost management is may be because of lack of effective communication between staff members
and stakeholders.

The study also concludes that project plan (schedule) is a prominent factor for the quality
implementation of projects. Well organized, more discussed and involved plan (schedule)
facilitates the quality of project implementation.

A study conducted by Pinto & Slevin (1988) concluded that “project success” is something much
more complex than simply meeting cost, schedule, and performance specifications. In fact client
satisfaction with the final result has a great deal to do with the perceived success or failure of
projects. Therefore, it is important to address other dimensions of project success and their
contributing factors.

7.2 Recommendation

Based on the findings come up with, the following recommendations are forwarded:

The study recommends that the project management office or committee should assess the causes
of problems in cost management of the projects. This can eliminate the mismatch of the planned

16 | P a g e
and actual cost expenses. This will be done by collaborating the stakeholders and enhancing their
communication.

The study also recommends that the management and team cohesion and involvement should be
enhanced to improve the plan (schedule) effectiveness of projects.

To improve cost effectiveness of the projects, the study recommends that reviewing the previous
projects, assess the current market, and improve staff members and stakeholder’s
communication.

Planning phase of formulating projects is a basic stage for its success. So, the study recommends
that there should be clear and specific schedule (plan) in order to improve the projects quality
performance.

References
Cleland, D., Gareis, R. (2006). Global Project Management Handbook, 2nd Edition, Mc- Graw-
Hill Print
Crisan C. S., Borza A. (2014). Strategic entrepreneurship, Managerial Challenges of the
Contemporary Society, Ed. Risoprint, 170-174

17 | P a g e
Davis, K. (2014). Diff erent stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success,
International Journal of Project Management 32, 189–201
Dvir D., Lipovetsky S., Shenhar A., Tishler A. (1998). In search of project classifi cation: a non-
universal approach to project success factors, Research Policy 27, 915–935
Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D., Festinger, D. (2005). Essentials of Research Design and
Methodology, Ed. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Meskendahl, S. (2010), The infl uence of business strategy on project portfolio management and
its success — A conceptual framework, International Journal of Project Management 28,
807–817
Mir, F.A., Pinnington, A.H. (2014). Exploring the value of project management: Linking Project
Management Performance and Project Success, International Journal of Project
Management 32, 202–217
Muller, R., Turner, R. (2007). € The infl uence of project managers on project success criteria
and project success by type of project. European Management Journal 25 (4), 298–309
Pinto, J.K., Slevin, D.P., (1987). Critical factors in successful project implementation, IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management 34 (1), 22–28
PMI (2013). Pulse of the Profession In-Depth Report: € e Impact of PMOs on Strategy
Implementation
Salanţă I., Popa, M. (2014). An Empirical Investigation into the Outsourcing Logistics Contract,
Proceedings Of € e 8th International Management Conference “Management Challenges for
Sustainable Development”, Bucharest, Romania, 350-357
Savolainen P., Ahonen, J.J., Richardson, I. (2012). Software development project success and
failure from the supplier’s perspective: A systematic literature review, International
Journal of Project Management 30, 458–469
Shenhar, A. J., Dvir, D., Levy, O., Maltz, A. C. (2001). Project Success: A Multidimensional
Strategic Concept, Long Range Planning 34, 699–725
Turner, J.R., Muller, R. (2005). € e project manager’s leadership style as a success factor on
projects: a review, Project Management Journal 36 (2), 49–61
Westerveld E. (2003). € e Project Excellence Model: linking success criteria and critical success
factors, International Journal of Project Management 21, 411–418

18 | P a g e
Yu, A. G., Flett, P. D., Bowers, J. A. (2005). Developing a value-centred proposal for assessing
project success, International Journal of Project Management 23, 428–436

19 | P a g e