The Impact of Project Complexity on Project Success in Terms of Cost and Time Over - Thesis Proposal Example

Table of Contents 1.0.Introduction 1 1.1.Background Information 1 1.2.Research Context and Motivation 4 1.3.Research Problem Statement 5 1.4.Research Aims and Objectives 5 1.4.1.Research Aims 6 1.4.2.Research Objectives 6 Primary Objective 6 Secondary Objectives 6 1.5.Benefits of the Research 7 2.0.Literature Review 8 2.1.Introduction 8 2.2.Impacts on Project Success---Cost and Time 9 1.0. Introduction 1.1. Background Information Large literatures that have been provided regarding the connectedness between project complexities on project success remain multifaceted. Recent case studies on projects such as Müller and Jugdev (2012) indicated that there is still lack on consensus among project managers on defining whether the such complexities have implication on projects’ cost and time or it stretches beyond time and cost to other variables such as project quality, overruns and health and safety (Teller et al. 2012). As a result of paucity of information regarding complexity and project success, it remains that there is need for a broad view as well as critical analysis of the underlying implications of projects complexities. From the one hand, studies such as Alzahrani and Emsley (2013) have observed that for proper framework to be drawn that helps researchers to understand the impact of project complexity on project success then there is need to draw a project complexity framework as well as a well-defined approach that will help categorise projects complexities with specific rate of success. Recent developments in project complexity on project success shows that researches need to shift attention from what Alzahrani and Emsley (2013)’s research. From the one hand, an understanding of project complexity is not a one size-fit-all concept; instead, it assesses project initiations, development and completion. As such as, to understand specific impact of such complexity in any of the stages proposed, Caniëls and Bakens (2012) noted that every impact if assessed, should consider resources, targets and environment. From this perspective it is possible to consider the extent to which specific complexity of a project impact on health and safety in the construction industry. For all practical purposes, we recognize that there are a number of studies that have researched on this topic; some have included statistical analysis and survey to quantify the link between the impact and specific success (Mir and Pinnington 2014; Park and Lee 2014). However, their conclusions leaves gap in knowledge that must be addressed. For instance, Park and Lee (2014) concluded that current methods of quantifying specific impact of project complexity on project success needs development of a project management systems that plays an oversight role in mitigating impacts such as cost and time. This approach indeed provides limitation for future researchers on ascertaining specific impacts since they cannot allow the stakes of every dynamic and expanding project complexities. Additionally, lacks and limits are detected in other studies as well as industrial case studies concerning project predictability (Park and Lee 2014). As Caniëls and Bakens (2012) observed, it will not be prudent to research on project complexity and its impacts on different parameters such as time and cost without understand project predictability. Ahern et al. (2014) define project predictability as the ability of project managers to outline projects success and failure. Therefore, we need to deviate from the position taken by previous studies that failed to consider project predictability in assessing complexity and success. While studies continue to design a research model that help in understanding specific impact when they take a given parameter (time or cost) their approaches to their research designs have fallen short of provide a case that will apply to all projects and specific complexity that is inherent in a given project (Caniëls and Bakens 2012). Taking a case study from Too and Weaver (2014), he observed that project complexity affected cost and time project managers would take to complete the project. Taking a case study of The Three Gorges as a project the research took as a case study, the author estimated that the overall cost shot by at least 25 percent of the initial cost due to project complexities that at some point, required project managers to rely on a well-developed project management system that would solve some complexities. However, this study merely based its thesis on the assessment of a resource management system as a tool that helps project management practices to create coherent system, that in turn, affect the functionality towards execution of a project rather than focusing on a specific parameter and link it back with the project complexity so that the parameter can be quantified in terms of specific aspect of complexity within the project. 1.2. Research Context and Motivation The current cases of project complexities entirely depend on the pattern of planned resources that have been put in projects. However, the effectiveness of any project is placed on the platform that has been designed by resource managers to reduce such complexities. Building from Alzahrani and Emsley (2013) research, the idea is to look at across the world and look at what researches have attributed as project complexity then compare then with already laid down parameters such as cost so that we quantify universally accepted project complexity against each parameter. The idea as Alzahrani and Emsley (2013) had it, was not to enumerate these impacts but to come up with a project complexity specific impact that help project managers understand consistencies in projects thus have the platform of reinforcing streamlined and optimized project management processes through automated workflows that detect and report specific complexity. With the growing need to initiate and complete projects within the allocated time, project managers and researchers have shifted attention to look at specific impact their project complexity would have on different parameters of the project. We are therefore concerned about project planning, scheduling and tracking. We seek to understand specific impacts on projects by connecting such impacts to aspects such as cost on scheduling or planning and overruns so that project complexities are defined from specific parameters rather the current case where studies such as Varajão et al. (2014) found the impact of project complexity on project success in terms of structuring project decision systems. 1.3. Research Problem Statement The problem is that as it stands, there is no consensus among studies on what really constitute a project complexity. It will not be possible to collect and analyze data regarding the impact of project complexity on project success and specifically, finding data that quantify parameters such as cost and time, overruns, quality and health and safety without establishing a common standpoint on what is project complexity, regardless of the nature of complexity. Therefore, the statement problem is to first deviate from studies such as Shenhar et al. (2016) so as to establish almost a single concept of complexity that will adequately capture previous studies’ notion of what is ‘complexity’ within the context of different projects. Secondly, construction industry is very specific and as such, projects in this industry may not share the same connotation of ‘complexity’ as other scholars have established. Therefore, providing data specific definition within the context of this industry is essential in outlining how costs and time, overruns, quality and health and safety will be a factor to give consideration as far as such complexities are concerned. Secondly, we are concerned with parameters such as cost and time, overruns, quality and health and safety within the industry (the construction industry) but it would be vague to argue that project complexity is for instance, impacts on cost and time without first understand how such parameter (cost and time) would be that property of a model which would make it difficult formulate the project’s overall behavior. 1.4. Research Aims and Objectives 1.4.1. Research Aims The aim of this research is to put project complexity and success in terms of cost and time, overruns, quality and health and safety I within the context of construction industry. We define these variables so as to understand the specific impact of project complexity on project success. Secondly research aims at quantifying different parameters with specific project complexity. These aims have been chosen since they underlie the broad point regarding what the research hopes to accomplish and the proposed outcome from the process of researching. Since the study considers the impact of project complexity on project success as being a total new areas of study the aims introduce what is missing from the statement problem and literatures review in the next section thus identifying the gap in knowledge. The gaps in knowledge as identified in the statement problem will thus provide the linkage or concordance between the identified aims and parts of research objectives as mentioned in the next section. 1.4.2. Research Objectives The research has identified the following objectives that are in tandem with the research gap and motivation for study: Primary Objective Development of evidence-based research that outlines the impact of project complexity on project success Secondary Objectives A project complexity framework and definition within the construction industry A critical analysis of the underlying concepts regarding project complexities Primary objective challenges assumptions and theories that have been used in understanding the impact of project complexity on project success. On the other hand, the two secondary objectives develops from primary objectives to test the validity and conformity of the assumptions and theoretical models that other studies have adopted in assessing the connection between project complexity and project success. 1.5. Benefits of the Research Every project is unique owing to the fact that there are always some parameters that guide their operations. Rodríguez-Segura et al. (2016) cite these parameters to include cost, time, overruns and quality of the project. It therefore means that an assessment of specific impact will take into consideration parameters that have been drawn by previous studies. We also note that the topic ‘project complexity and project success’ continue to grow. We develop new approach of looking at the project in its totality; ascertaining the composition of the project in terms of cost and time, overruns, quality and health and safety. Working with these parameters (cost and time, overruns, quality and health and safety) we borrow from previous studies such as Domurath et al. (2015) who noted that most scholars have looked at the impact in terms of cost and time or overruns which accordingly, have been insufficient parameters that succinctly describe the complete situation at a given time in project’s lifecycle. As such, one of the benefits of the research is to define and put into context, practical implication of project complexity within specific parameter. The reason for taking this approach is to eliminate confusion when defining a complex project, especially between project team members. Secondly, we move from a theoretical synthesis and policy framework as suggested by Bryde et al. (2013) to original framework and definition of project complexity. As such, the research develops the complexity model that will permit the navigation from any element of the project to any other details that might be required by project managers. But importantly, we ensure new approaches developed to understand specific impact of project complexity on project success work in liaison with traditional project management models and tools proposed to understand project complexities. 2.0. Literature Review 2.1. Introduction If we analyse the Standish Group statistics about the project complexity and its impact on project success for the last 10years we are faced with a contradiction and a need for critical literature review. Currently, the data from the Standish Group statistics show that there is a significant upward trend of failed projects (from 15% in 2000 to 15% in 2014), this follows a rise, to a level worse than the starting one (24% in 2009) (Mir and Pinnington 2014). Again, International Data Linkage Conference in Perth (2012) as cited in Montequín et al. (2016) indicated that project complexities have changed over time and the best approach in detailing the extent to which it impacts project success is to draw on evidence-based case studies through a literature search. The study uses literature search to give future researches an overview of how it is going to build and use project complexity case studies to quantify different impacts. Importantly, the research uses literature search to introduce to its readers existing findings that if adopted will provide another level of understanding on different impacts. The literature review aims at providing the research context. We look at the impact of project complexity on project success from different studies that have been proposed on the topic. This situation needing to understand the research, we use literature review as guidance in defining project complexity. While general understanding is that project complexity is considered as part of that project that makes it difficult for project managers to understand, (Martinsuo 2013) foresee and keep different aspects of the project intact, this section contextualize such proposals by drawing study conclusions and findings that were narrowed within construction industry. Currently, there is general definition of impacts of project complexities on the project success but the gap in knowledge is to provide critical analysis and overview of research findings that look at project size, project interdependence, project variety and project context devoid of previous researches’ position on project as a tool that links success and costs (Alzahrani and Emsley 2013). 2.2. Impacts on Project Success---Cost and Time Once I am done with the literature review I will definitely edit your parts, create subheadings to it and add it here References Ahern, T., Leavy, B. and Byrne, P.J., 2014. Complex project management as complex problem solving: A distributed knowledge management perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 32(8), pp.1371-1381. Alzahrani, J.I. and Emsley, M.W., 2013. The impact of contractors’ attributes on construction project success: A post construction evaluation. International Journal of Project Management, 31(2), pp.313-322. Alzahrani, J.I. and Emsley, M.W., 2013. The impact of contractors’ attributes on construction project success: A post construction evaluation. International Journal of Project Management, 31(2), pp.313-322. Bryde, D., Broquetas, M. and Volm, J.M., 2013. The project benefits of building information modelling (BIM). International journal of project management, 31(7), pp.971-980. Caniëls, M.C. and Bakens, R.J., 2012. The effects of Project Management Information Systems on decision making in a multi project environment. International Journal of Project Management, 30(2), pp.162-175. Domurath, A., Behrens, J. and Patzelt, H., 2015. Scientists' commitment to underperforming research projects: linking past success and the social environment. R&D Management, 45(5), pp.569-588. Martinsuo, M., 2013. Project portfolio management in practice and in context. International Journal of Project Management, 31(6), pp.794-803. Mir, F.A. and Pinnington, A.H., 2014. Exploring the value of project management: linking project management performance and project success. International Journal of Project Management, 32(2), pp.202-217. Mir, F.A. and Pinnington, A.H., 2014. Exploring the value of project management: linking project management performance and project success. International Journal of Project Management, 32(2), pp.202-217. Montequín, V.R., Fernández, S.C., Fernández, F.O. and Balsera, J.V., 2016. Analysis of the Success Factors and Failure Causes in Projects: Comparison of the Spanish Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Sector. In Project Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 1365-1379). IGI Global. Müller, R. and Jugdev, K., 2012. Critical success factors in projects: Pinto, Slevin, and Prescott–the elucidation of project success. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(4), pp.757-775. Park, J.G. and Lee, J., 2014. Knowledge sharing in information systems development projects: Explicating the role of dependence and trust. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), pp.153-165. Rodríguez-Segura, E., Ortiz-Marcos, I., Romero, J.J. and Tafur-Segura, J., 2016. Critical success factors in large projects in the aerospace and defense sectors. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), pp.5419-5425. Shenhar, A.J., Holzmann, V., Melamed, B. and Zhao, Y., 2016. The Challenge of Innovation in Highly Complex Projects: What Can We Learn from Boeing's Dreamliner Experience?. Project Management Journal, 47(2), pp.62-78. Teller, J., Unger, B.N., Kock, A. and Gemünden, H.G., 2012. Formalization of project portfolio management: The moderating role of project portfolio complexity. International Journal of Project Management, 30(5), pp.596-607. Too, E.G. and Weaver, P., 2014. The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management, 32(8), pp.1382-1394. Varajão, J., Dominguez, C., Ribeiro, P. and Paiva, A., 2014. Critical success aspects in project management: similarities and differences between the construction and software industry. Tehnički vjesnik, 21(3), pp.583-589. Read More