With this paper, I am going to discuss Terry Cooke-Davies article on The real success factors on assignments'(Cooke-Davies, 2002). In his article, Cooke-Davies recognizes 12 factors critical in making sure the successful projects. Cooke-Davies starts by differentiating between successful projects, successful task management, and regularly successful projects. In addition, he argued on the lifetime of a marriage between job management and functions management and then suggested how successful tasks aligns with commercial success. Furthermore, he concludes by asserting the role folks have to try out in successfully providing assignments. After summarizing Cooke-Davies article, I'll agree with the results of his research in discovering the 12 factors critical for task success and on the linkage between job management and businesses management; but I will disagree with the research methodology especially with respect to the small sample size, and the extrapolation of the data to apply to worldwide projects. I'll also claim that the copy writer did not expatiate on the critical role people in delivering projects. I'll conclude by reappraising the role of this article in bridging our current distance in knowledge on factors relevant for task success.
MAIN REVIEW
Matching to Terry Cooke-Davies in Parts 1 and 2 of this article, the reason why for project inability can be adduced to be the limited knowledge on the critical factors that lead to successful tasks. Cooke-Davies argument is the fact that prior to the research, the information available on the factors that lead to project success responded one question only which is what factors determine an effective task?. He asserted that in order to manage projects successfully, we need to answer three questions i. e. what factors are critical to job management success?, what factors are critical to specific job success?, what factors lead to constantly successful assignments?. I will argue an identical view compared to that of Terry-Cooke here. It's been acknowledged that for assignments to achieve success, certain specific critical factors must be achieved. Researchers have acknowledged the critical role of specific factors to a jobs success or failure and they also proposed that the reasons projects are unsuccessful is consequently of an lack of ability to carefully identify those specific factors critical to job success. The question then is Exactly what is a successful project?, What factors define an effective project?; I would suggest that the definition of a successful project will change because of the fact that the different project stakeholders have specific interpretations of why is project success. Such as Cooke-Davies, I am arguing for a organized approach to discovering factors relevant to task success by grouping this factors into categories based on those critical for job management success, specific successful jobs and consistently successful assignments.
Section 3 targets the factors critical for job management success and the study methodology used in deriving the discovered factors. Cooke-Davies begins by analyzing the cost and agenda performance data of 136 tasks executed in Europe in the middle to later 1990's by 23 companies. From Cooke-Davies perspective, there's a correlation between your tasks that where not completed on timetable and their budget overrun. The upshot of Cooke-Davies argument is that we now have eight specific factors that donate to the capacity/ inability of an project to meet program and budget focuses on. He suggested that of the eight factors, six factors pertain specifically to improvement in timetable performance while two factors pertain specifically to improvement in budget performance. Cooke-Davies data leads him to the conclusion in this section that the overall strength of implementation of these recognized eight factors on the project contributes to an overall improvement in the cost and schedule basics of the job. I trust Cooke-Davies in so far as the data examination and email address details are concerned. The expert use of statistical tools e. g. Self confidence Period(CI), and a P value of 0. 0005 really helps to highlight the frustrating statistical value between budget and schedule fundamentals. The top and valid point Cooke-Davies implies in this section is the relationship between budget overrun and plan wait for a task. My disagreement with Cooke-Davies pertains to the extrapolation of the data to jobs worldwide. Cooke-Davies will depend on the assumption that the data derived from the test size of 136 tasks executed mainly in European countries can be long to apply to projects worldwide. He does not acknowledge the main element role environmental factors in certain regions of the globe e. g. Africa play in identifying job management success. I also wish to focus on the non-inclusion of any projects been supervised in Africa as a part of the resource pool of this research. This essential omission increases a essential question which is; Can we really extrapolate the findings of this research to use worldwide whenever we have ignored data from a one continent?; the argument I am proposing because of this section is that data only concerns projects been supervised in the regions of the world where in fact the data comes from and cannot be extended to add those regions that aren't a part of the learning resource pool.
Cooke-Davies starts section 4 by asserting the life of a space between the traditional goals of task success(cost, quality, time) and the non-traditional goals like the relevance of the job deliverable to the stakeholders. In a very bet to bridge this discovered gap, he argues for the use of a method such as benefits management to help the stakeholders derive the entire value from the job deliverable. Furthermore, he clarifies the variation between your role of the project management team in delivering the task deliverable and the role of the efficient management team in using the project deliverable to bring the stakeholder anticipations to reality; he then proposes that the latter step is much more difficult than the previous. He concludes this section by arguing a good working marriage between the job management team and the functional management team is a crucial factor in making sure project success. The discussion I wish to put forward here is completely in arrangement with Cooke-Davies on the main element concept of benefits delivery. Before, project managers have focussed exclusively on delivering projects promptly, budget, and at the right quality lacking any equal emphasis on how the project deliverable will meet the targets of the stakeholders. In this particular light, I share the view of Cooke-Davies which is that a project cannot be successful unless the objectives of the stakeholders are found. Hence it is essential for the benefits management methodology to be utilized in translating the job deliverables to stakeholder simple fact.
In section 5, Cooke-Davies proposes how to achieve consistently successful assignments. He argues about how consistently successful tasks aligns with commercial success and he proposes three factors that are critical in guaranteeing consistently successful projects in an organization. Cooke-Davies's main debate in this section is the presence of a viscous routine between jobs that are constantly successful and improved commercial performance; his final result seems to be that organizations that deploy project management procedures as part of their commercial culture generally have a much more improved corporate performance. Such as Cooke-Davies, I am arguing that the utilization of management techniques such as management by projects(MBP) in which all organizational goals are defined as projects greatly assists with ensuring regularly successful projects, in case these assignments are supervised in a coordinated way in line with organizational goals, it'll invariably lead to increased organizational performance. My viewpoint would be that the inculcation of an projectized organizational composition assists with the achievement of constantly successful projects. The corporate strategy of your projectized organizational composition is a focus towards making certain all organizational goals are managed like tasks.
In section six, Cooke-Davies uses different task industries to dispute on the lifetime of a marriage between successful tasks and commercial success. He argues on how a successful/unsuccessful task can impact immediately or indirectly on a corporate bottom-line. He concludes by proposing that the sustainability of the corporate organization is based largely on its bottom-line. Following from Cooke-Davies valid point, I am proposing a synergy between task management and value management to be able to ensure long-term commercial success. This view has long been corroborated by research workers on the translation of task success to commercial success. The bottom-line is the fact that effectively defining the actual contribution of a project is to an organization is crucial in the translation of the job deliverable to organizational benefits. This entire cycle of task and value management is iterative throughout the lifecycle of the task.
Section 7 of Cooke-Davies's work focuses on the people facet of project management. He acknowledges the role people have to experience in job success, and then he argues that the individual factors of project management can't be singled out as an individual factor of its own but is embedded in each of the recognized twelve success factors. Furthermore, he concludes that the goals of the study is how project groups achieve results rather than on what motivates the task team to attain results. Inasmuch when i agree with Cooke-Davies valid point on the critical role of the individuals in successful jobs, it is indeed a strange omission that he overlooked the human aspects of projects till the finish of his article. I would like to espouse the fact that in order to achieve project success, specific human resources strategies have to be in place. Cooke-Davies view is dependant on the assumption that people are somehow integrated into the procedure of attaining job success; but he didn't explicitly determine the critical role people play in attainment of task success. As opposed to Cooke-Davies view, I wish to propose that the human element in project success is so important it must be designated as an independent factor of its own. I dispute that it can't be embedded in to the twelve recognized success factors due to a tendency for it to be overlooked by an independent reviewer. The relegation of the real human aspects of projects to the previous section of this content seems to reveal a bias of the writer for the process aspects of project success with little emphasis on the critical role of men and women in ensuring the success of the process.
CONCLUSION
Cooke-Davies article helps greatly in shedding more light on the factors relevant for job success by highlighting three perspectives of what makes a successful job. He recognized eight factors relevant for task management success, one factor relevant for task success, and three factors highly relevant to achieving regularly successful projects. Furthermore, he argued on the relationship between project success and commercial success; and then he shows how successful assignments immediately or indirectly impact on different project establishments. He then concluded by proposing that the role people play in assignments is embedded into each one of the recognized twelve factors. Inasmuch as I share Cooke-Davies take on the factors highly relevant to job success as well as the partnership between jobs and commercial bottom-line; I would like to change on the extrapolation of this research conclusions to parts of the world that aren't represented in the study pool of data. I wish to also highlight the actual fact that even when seen from the point of view of the parts where the research samples where produced from, the test size is so small for this to be totally indicative of the factors that may affect project success in those parts. I'd also prefer to argue that people are so critical in projects that the human being factor of project success should appear as an independent factor. Inasmuch as the article represents a fantastic work by Cooke-Davies to fill up possible gaps inside our understanding of what makes a successful job; more work still needs to be done using a larger sample size which should be considered a true representative of all the regions of the entire world.
ASSIGNMENT APPENDIX
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS FOR PROJECTS
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHIES
Cooke-Davies, T(2002) The real success factors on projects'. International journal of project management, Vol. 20, pp. 185-190.
In this information, the author pulling thoroughly from his PhD dissertation and statistical data extracted from a survey of 136 Western projects argued that we now have 12 factors needed for project success. The writer starts by asserting that the reason why this factors never have been properly determined before now is as a result of inability to effectively define what task success means; furthermore, the author suggested a three pronged description of project success. In subsequent sections, the writer highlights the specific factors accountable for the success of every of the three different perspectives of project success. The author concludes by acknowledging albeit belatedly' that individuals aspects of project success is embedded within each one of the aforementioned factors. This work is a commendable try to compartmentalize the factors accountable for job success into three different perspectives. My point of difference from this work is within terms of the small sample from which the authors' data comes from. Furthermore, I argue that leaving individuals aspects of task success to the last section may appear to show you a bias by the writer for process-focused job management somewhat than people-focused task management.
Dvir, D. Lipovetsky, S. Shenhar, A. Tishler, A. (1998) In search of job classification: a non-universal method of project success factors'. Research insurance plan, Vol. 27, pp. 915-935.
In this information, the authors get their data from Israeli defence projects completed in the 1980's to propose a target classification of project types and also the specific factors that may influence the success of assignments. The authors proposed the use of the multivariate analytical technique to compare the impact of specific variables derived from a specific data set on other variables in other to reach at the possible effects of discovered potential factors on the success of tasks. The authors discussion is that the utilization of the multivariate approach produced results that shows how an array of factors affect task success. Furthermore, the authors argued that there surely is no universality in the factors that have an impact on job success hence project managers must establish the factors that relate to their particular jobs. The authors assert in their realization that the utilization of the multivariate analytical strategy allows for the results of the research to be extrapolated to other assignments. My argument is usually that the authors in their bottom line appear to contradict themselves because they primarily argued that success factors are project specific but conclude by proposing the effectiveness of their help all projects. Inasmuch when i buy into the objectiveness of the multivariate approach used here, I wish to disagree with the assumption of the authors in extrapolating their studies to other tasks.
Soja, P(2006) Success factors in ERP systems implementations: Lessons from practise'. Journal of Venture information management, Vol. 19, Nos. 4, pp. 418-433
In this content, the author drawing thoroughly from data produced from respondents involved in ERP systems and his own experience available world argues that there are certain factors that determine the success of ERP systems. The authors' technique involved the initial recognition of potential factors which could affect the outcome of ERP projects. Furthermore, the aforementioned factors where then subjected to a study among experts of ERP systems to look for the relative need for each factor and the role of each factor in deciding project final result. The results was then statistically analyzed to determine the most important factors that could determine the success of ERP jobs. The authors' realization appears to be that the value of the recognized success factors fluctuate depending on the type of task and its duration. Soja's discussion has merit and the conclusion sheds more light on the foggy' section of the factors that could lead to successful project benefits. My discussion against Soja has been admiration to the subjective approach deployed to recognize the initial potential factors. I propose that a more objective potential factors can be arrived at from a study of the respondents themselves rather than relying strictly on the books review. Furthermore, predicated on the small sample size used for this research, it'll be hasty for us to extrapolate the conclusion arrived at to all ERP jobs.
Segalla, M(1998) Factors for the success or inability of international teams: The special case of international research projects'. Journal of Managerial mindset, Vol. 13, Nos. 3/4, pp. 133-136.
The writer of this content proposes that lack of ability to recognize specific project requirements establishes the success or failing of international research projects. In addition, the writer argues that the occurrence or absence of certain success factors play a role in determining how successful a global research study will be. The writer recognizes three requirements and four factors that require to be satisfied before an international research study can be deemed to be successful. In his summary, the author asserts the vital role clubs play in achieving job success with an focus on international studies and recommends that the success important thing for research workers is to Go find a team. Such as Segalla, I am also suggesting that exactly like any other task, certain factors have to be in location to ensure the success of international research projects. Furthermore, identification and description of the requirements of a job plays an integral role in job success. I also buy into the author's assertion on the vital role groups play in reaching international research study success as compared to specific work by analysts.
Trent, J. R(2003) Planning to work with work clubs effectively'. Team performance management: A global journal. Vol. 9, Nos. 3/4, pp. 50-58.
In this information, the author, an associate professor of management, evaluates data produced from literature review, sensible evidence derived from sampling, and his own private experience, to claim that one factors are essential for ensuring the success of teams. The writer compartmentalizes the different stages of the team planning process and identifies various factors that are essential for the success of each stage. In his summary, the author seems to acknowledge that there is no factor that may be said to promise the success of your team; he proposes that the existence of these recognized factors will only assist in promoting the ability of the team to have success. This article displays another attempt by an academics to recognize the factors that could lead to successful groups and invariably successful jobs. The quest for these success factors has been likened to that of the Holy Grail', and this work represents an addition to the plethora of research done on what makes job teams work?'. My main point of disagreement with this work rests on the final outcome of the author where he appears to contradict himself by acknowledging these factors do not guarantee successful clubs. The question then is, what is the relevance of this work if its request does not assure successful clubs? That response to that question is in the end kept for the visitors to decide.
