A longitudinal analysis of ICT project success

In developing countries such as South Africa, many companies are reliant on information and communication technology (ICT) to provide accurate, relevant and timely information. ICT systems are constantly implemented, upgraded, modified or replaced to obtain and sustain a competitive advantage. These initiatives are often managed as projects. While financial resources and effort being spent on ICT are increasing, these projects are not always perceived as successful. It is therefore important to understand the factors that influence the outcome of South African ICT projects relative to their original constraints. The goal of this article is to determine the factors that influence South African ICT projects, taking into consideration the fact that most current published research on this topic was done within the context of developed countries such as the USA and Europe. This is done through a longitudinal study that originated in 2003. The outcomes of ICT projects in South Africa as well as the factors that influence them were determined through extensive surveys in 2003, 2008 and 2011. An analysis was done of the factors together with a correlation between the main factors contributing to project outcomes. The purpose was to establish whether a factor's presence or absence influenced the eventual outcome. The factors that contribute to a successful outcome are soft issues such as communication and requirements engineering rather than the more technical aspects associated with the implementation of a project. The benefits of this article are that it firstly provides a South African perspective of current ICT project management practices, and secondly, it highlights factors that influence project outcome over a period of a decade. Companies can use this information to improve their current practices. An important aspect is that the longitudinal analysis indicates the same factors and companies can improve project success if they focus on these factors. The value of the research results presented in this article lies in the realisation that project success is not just determined by adherence to best practices or formal processes, but requires an environment and context conducive to business success.

[1]  Janice Thomas,et al.  Project management maturity models: The silver bullets of competitive advantage. , 2002 .

[2]  Peter Caputi,et al.  Introduction to Quantitative Research Methods: An Investigative Approach , 2001 .

[3]  Joyce Fortune,et al.  The project‐specific Formal System Model , 2009 .

[4]  Paul L. Bannerman,et al.  Defining project success: A multi-level framework , 2008 .

[5]  Carol Dekkers,et al.  Increase ICT Project Success with Concrete Scope Management , 2007, 33rd EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (EUROMICRO 2007).

[6]  Jen-Her Wu,et al.  Measuring ERP success: the ultimate users' view , 2006 .

[7]  Lavagnon A. Ika.  Project Success as a Topic in Project Management Journals , 2009 .

[8]  Dov Dvir,et al.  Projects and Project Managers: The Relationship between Project Managers' Personality, Project Types, and Project Success , 2006 .

[9]  Irja Hyväri,et al.  Success of Projects in Different Organizational Conditions , 2006 .

[10]  Leonardo Solarte-Pazos,et al.  The body of knowledge of the Project Management Institute-PMBOK® Guide, and the specificities of project management: a critical review , 2010 .

[11]  A. Ledwith,et al.  Project management in small to medium‐sized enterprises: A comparison between firms by size and industry , 2009 .

[12]  Christopher J. Hemingway,et al.  The importance of context in programme management: An empirical review of programme practices , 2007 .

[13]  Paul. Olomolaiye,et al.  Critical success criteria for mass house building projects in developing countries , 2008 .

[14]  Dominic M. Thomas,et al.  Limits to Effective Leadership Style and Tactics in Critical Incident Interventions , 2009 .

[15]  M. Feilzer,et al.  Doing Mixed Methods Research Pragmatically: Implications for the Rediscovery of Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm: , 2010 .

[16]  Stephen A. Leybourne.  The Changing Bias of Project Management Research: A Consideration of the Literatures and an Application of Extant Theory , 2007 .

[17]  Robert L. Glass.  IT Failure Rates--70% or 10-15%? , 2005, IEEE Softw..

[18]  Alan D. Smith.  Surveying Practicing Project Managers on Curricular Aspects of Project Management Programs: A Resource-Based Approach , 2003 .

[19]  Chris Verhoef,et al.  The rise and fall of the Chaos report figures , 2010, IEEE Software.

[20]  Walter Fernandez,et al.  Success in IT projects: A matter of definition? , 2008 .

[21]  Sheila Cameron,et al.  Business Research Methods: A Practical Approach , 2009 .

[22]  Tun Lin Moe,et al.  Success Criteria and Factors for International Development Projects: A Life-Cycle-Based Framework , 2008 .

[23]  Eelko K R E Huizingh,et al.  Applied Statistics with SPSS , 2007 .

[24]  Susan Greener,et al.  Business Research Methods , 2008 .

[25]  Terence J. Cooke-Davies,et al.  The maturity of project management in different industries: An investigation into variations between project management models , 2003 .

[26]  Blaize Horner Reich,et al.  Searching for Knowledge in the Pmbok® Guide , 2006 .

[27]  Kevin P. Grant,et al.  Project Management Maturity: An Industry Benchmark , 2003 .

[28]  Norman W. H. Blaikie,et al.  Analyzing Quantitative Data: From Description to Explanation , 2000 .