Pan-Pacific Conference XXXIV. Designing New Business Models in Developing Economies

Another concerning fact is that IT projects cost
exceeded 189% their initial cost estimate.
Further studies indicate that more complex projects
present an even higher risk of failure (Joseph,
2014). Factors such as the number of stakeholders
involved the size of the project and number of
deliverables increases the complexity of a project.
This brings forth a need for the effective
management of projects, which means managing all
risk.
Another perspective that is emerging is the concept
on focusing on the value or benefits derived from a
project, regardless of the manner in which it was
completed (Bierwolf, 2016). This would entail that
even if a project does not deliver the desired
outcome in a timely, cost-efficient or complete
manner, it can still be considered a success should
the customer derive the intended benefit from a
viable deliverable (Marnewick & Labuschagne,
2011).
Possible contributing factors to IT project failure
Research regarding IT projects has focused mainly
on the major factors and influences of IT project
success. This research has been translated in various
guides and standards. Yet exceedingly high level of
project failure remain the reality. Just as sources of
project success exist, so do sources of failure. Nawi
et al. (2011) proposes six sources of failure as risks
to be mitigated:
FIGURE 2: Sources of project failure
Project
management
factors
Top management
factors
Technology factors
Organisational
factors
Complexity and
size factors
Process factors
• Lack of user involvment
• Unclear scope and
objectives
• Lack of champion
• Lack of comitment
• Lack of development
expertise
• Lack of comitment
• Culture
• Conflicting interests
• Large, multifaceted
project
• Many deliverables
• No formally stated
methodology
• Conflicting interests
• Unsuitable methodology
These sources are internal and external to the
project. The project manager relies on the formally
adopted methodologies, culture and management
factors to be in place prior to any project being
initiated. However, the project itself may be
complex in nature and risk of failure may be
exacerbated by poor project management practices
itself.
DATA GATHERING AND RESULTS
INTERPRETATION
Research design
The research is performed form a qualitative
paradigm. Interviews were conducted with project
managers and other project workers in a specific
South African SOE. The data was collected by way
of transcripts and analysed with the aid of software.
The context of failed projects
In order to determine an explanatory context for the
data to follow, the interviewees were requested to
divulge their experience levels. The responses
varied from 18 months to 20 years working in
project management.
The largest group of project and program managers
have more than ten years’ experience and cannot be
classed as junior project practitioners anymore.
There is however a slight majority of project and
program managers who have less than ten years’
experience. Therefore, the results and discussion to
follow should be seen in the context of project
practitioners who have intermediate levels of
experience.
The projects undertaken were mostly IT
infrastructure and software development projects.
Some of the interviewees indicate that they have not
experienced a failed project yet where as one
individual had as many as ten failed projects.
Defining the failed project
All the interviewees were unanimous in declaring
that a failed project does not meet the triple
constraint or delivers benefits as states in the
business case. Clearly, the individuals in this
organisation are acutely aware of the fact that their
performance on projects are measured in technical
success criteria. This is the area where project
managers have direct control and responsibility to
achieve.
According to the interviewees, they cannot be held
accountable for delivering a project that does not
provide the benefits as envisaged if all technical
requirements are met. A failure in this instance
would lie with customers, program managers or
higher levels of management for selecting the
incorrect product or solution to be implemented. A
network view in ATLAS.ti yields characteristics of
failed projects and can be divided into technical
project success and product failure:
i) Technical project failure
a. Does not meet customer
requirement
b. Project not completed in time,
scope and budget (Triple
constraint)
c. Project does not meet quality
ii) Product failure:
a. Fluid requirements
b. Does not meet functional
requirements
c. Project does not realize benefits.
The implication is clear that in this case, project
management success is dependent on both technical
and product success of the project.
146