Project Management Processes that are Common to Technology-Intensive Organizations

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Abstract
Introduction
Project Evaluation
Project Selection
Project Planning Fundamentals
Project Cost Control
The Scheduling of a Project by utilizing the Critical Path Method (CPM)
Conclusion
Reference List

Abstract

Changing the operation environment of organizations such as competition and technological developments compels such organizations to seek new, efficient, and effective ways of maintaining competitive advantage.

In technology-intensive organizations such as IS and IT-based organizations, altering organizational operations to be project-based has made them increase their performance by ensuring that they meet deadlines for execution of various activities under the stipulated time constraints.

This paper discusses some of the management processes that are common to these organizations with respect to project evaluation, project planning, cost control, project selection, and the scheduling of a project by utilizing the Critical Path Method (CPM).

The goal of the general practices adopted by the technology-intensive organizations with respect to these aspects is to ensure that the projects meet the anticipated time and financial constraints.

Introduction

The modern organizational economy that is defined by globalization, the increased outsourcing of organizational functions, competition, and the need to establish information and knowledge-based organizations are some of the critical elements that have compelled organizations to seek cost-saving organizational management models.

Some of the solutions to address these challenges include the development of project-based models for organizational management and investment in technology for organizations to become technology-intensive in their operations (Zekic & Samarzija, 2012, p.101).

In project-based organizations, the organizational culture is developed in a manner that ensures that all resources of an organization are allocated to guarantee cute performance of temporary systems that are aimed at attaining the demands of particular tasks that make the project.

This implies that the organizational culture is aimed at enabling “project-based organizations execute specific tasks” (Turner & Müller, 2005, p.221). Project-based organizations are established to foster innovation.

Projects are temporary endeavors in nature. They are constrained by both time and monetary resources. Any attempt to initiate another endeavor in the future would not follow the same path in relation to the one followed previously.

In technology-based organizations, projects are complex, with others being enormous in size in some situations (Anantatmula, 2008, p.34).

Hence, organizations are forced to deploy technology that is enhanced through information technology (IT) and information systems (IS) to manage their projects effectively.

Anantatmula argues that organizations in global platforms are becoming project-based in the effort to “operationalize their strategic objectives” (2008, p.34) to increase the operational efficiency and effectiveness.

In technology-intensive and project-based organizations, one of the noble tasks is the selection of a project. This process requires intensive project evaluation and planning process (Kostelac, Matrjan & Dobovicek, 2011, p.1120).

This paper discusses project management processes that are common to technology-intensive organizations from the context of the aspects of project-based organizations, in addition, to cost control and scheduling of a project through the application of the CPM.

Project Evaluation

Projects are initiated to fulfill specific goals and objectives through various phases. The evaluation process of any project in technology-intensive organizations involves the attempt to establish whether various objectives and goals of the different phases of project execution processes are realized (Pinheiro, 2010, p.2).

This suggests that the evaluation is not an aspect of project-intensive organizations that stands on its own, but a constituent element of all phases of the project right from the planning and scope definition.

In the project closing phase, evaluation forms the last aspect, which ensures a close examination of the functionality of projects.

In technology-intensive organizations, projects are executed with the aid of information and technology systems. These systems help in decision-making processes.

Evaluation takes the form of algorithmic constructs that are aimed at answering different questions based on projects’ progress in relation to the established scope and anticipated goals (Pinheiro, 2010, p.5).

Through algorithmic decision constructs, project-based technology-intensive organizations collect information defining the planned project execution processes, variation in the process, and why such variations take place together with the mechanisms of improving projects in the context of the desired long-term and short-term outcomes.

Two main types of project evaluation mythologies are deployed in technology-intensive organizations.

Formative evaluation helps in the provision of information necessary for the identification of various aspects that are pivotal to the success of a project together with the possible areas for improvement in the effort to achieve the project’s goals and objectives.

IS projects are characterized by immense complexities akin to their massive needs and isolated project components, which must work in harmony to enhance integration of activities.

In support of this reality of IS projects, Martin, Pearson, and Furumo argue, “studies suggest that a significant percentage of IS projects encounter problems, many requiring additional time, financial, and human resources” (2007, p.52).

Hence, in IS-based organizations, formative evaluations are critical to enhance the success of projects through the provision of early information on areas of constraints. Summative evaluation is yet another important evaluation technique for technology-intensive organizations.

Project Selection

In all project-based organizations, selection of projects that deliver optimal gains to organizations is important. In project management discourses, the selection of project is the first activity.

The selection is conducted such that it keeps “in view the organization’s strategy and business” (Jigeesh, 2012, p.41). Project selection starts with proposal drafting. The proposal defines the problem to be solved by the project within an organization.

It lays down the scope of the project and objectives besides establishing the project risks and a comprehensive description of the manner of execution of the project. Several alternatives can solve one problem.

Upon considering the usual constraints of projects, financial resources, and time, the cost analysis section of different projects’ proposal to solve similar problems helps in the selection of an alternative, which does not open an organization to vulnerabilities of taking unnecessary financial risks.

One of the best practices of project management process in the technology-intensive organization is the involvement of organizational leadership in project selection processes.

Many technology-intensive organizations adopt this practice since they encounter the need for the realization of high demands with small budgets.

This calls them to focus on prioritization of IT projects, which reflect the modern-day best organizational management practices (Jigeesh, 2012, p.42).

Before determination of the best projects and seeking funding, determination of worthiness of projects is important. Organizational leadership plays pivotal roles in this extent.

Identification of good projects requires the adoption of appropriate criteria for evaluation of various alternatives. Common practices in the technology-intensive organization in the selection of projects involve the deployment of financial and non-financial criteria.

In such organizations, Jigeesh (2012) suggests, “ financial criteria are the preferred methods to evaluate projects, and the financial models are appropriate when there is a high level of confidence associated with estimates of future cash flows” (p.43).

However, although financial returns considerations are important in the selection of projects, the criterion does not reflect the strategic significance of a project in all situations.

In some situations, projects are implemented in the effort to restore or gain a desired corporate image and/or enhance the recognition of a particular brand.

In such a scenario, technology-intensive organizations select projects based on non-financial criteria such as the scoring model and checklist replica (Kostelac, Matrjan & Dobovicek, 2011, p.1119).

Irrespective of the criterion deployed in the selection of a project, technology-intensive organizations consider the capacity of the project to fit and meet the organizational strategies for enhancing efficiency and effectiveness as the most important mechanisms of arriving at decisions to plan and implement a particular project.

Besner and Hobbs (2008) support this assertion by further arguing, “a greater number of innovative projects are led by better performing organizations” (p.133).

Increasing organizational performance in an environment characterized by intensive competition forms one of the fundamental operational strategies for technology-intensive organizations.

In a research to identify the various factors that influence project selection in IT-based organizations, in both large and small-sized organizations, Jigeesh (2012) provides evidence that the selection criteria deployed by many technology-intensive organizations are complementary in nature.

They both incorporate perspectives of financial and non-financial considerations.

Jigeesh identified, “demand and value of project, user initiative, organizational initiative, financial prospectus, financial capability, and the estimated cost of project” (2012, p.48) as the main factors, which affect project selection in IT firms.

By considering these factors, it is evident that financial consideration does not act in isolation in terms of determining the appropriate projects in a technology-intensive organization.

Saeed, Anbari, and Money (2008) found factors related with work such as perceptions of the success of a project and performance of software as influencing the acceptance of software application projects in technology-intensive organizations (p.12).

Project Planning Fundamentals

Project planning constitutes one of the most important aspects of project management. A project plan states “how to complete a project within a certain time frame, usually with defined states and with designated resources” (Tolbert, 2008, p.65).

In fact, in all project-based organizations, one of the most crucial elements of the planning phase is a consideration of the available resources.

These resources include time frames and financial resources. Project managers in technology-intensive organizations define a procedure that would be deployed to realize the objectives of the project.

The next step of project planning involves breaking down the project into work structures, which are then allotted to the employees depending on their professional expertise. In the execution process of a project plan, change always takes place (Anantatmula, 2008, p.35).

This calls for the development of a plan management strategy by the project managers before proceeding to the execution phase of the project plan. A common strategy of project planning is dividing the entire process into various tasks.

These tasks include objective selection, identification of various project deliverables, planning schedules, and development of supporting plans. Supporting plans involves aspects such as planning for communication processes, human resources, and more importantly, risk management.

Communication management is central to enhancing the to-and-fro flow of information between agencies that are constantly monitoring the project and interest groups (Anantatmula, 2008, p.38).

The feedback obtained is used in the derivation of strategies to improve and/or identify the necessary areas that need further attention in terms of being communicated to enhance dissemination and disposition of information.

In technology-intensive organizations, implementation of IT and IS projects requires incredible consideration of planning for risk mitigation.

Such projects are prone to a variety of risks, including the failure of the project upon its completion or even later after use in the short term (Anantatmula, 2008). This underlines the significance of risk planning in the project planning phase.

The main focus of planning for risks is to ensure that all efforts of project execution focus on “maximizing the probability and consequences of positive events and minimizing the probability and consequences of adverse events to project objectives” (Tolbert, 2008, p.57).

This task is done in a number of steps including planning of risks, identification of risks, qualitative risk analysis, quantitative analysis of risks, response planning for risks, and risk monitoring and control (Tolbert, 2008, p.61).

The risk of failure of software and hardware applications in technology-intensive organizations presents situations in which the operation of an organization may come to a halt in totality. The operations of such organizations are dependent wholly on computer-based platforms (Anantatmula, 2008).

To help in the reduction of the possibility of occurrence of such risks, planning for software together with computer hardware requires planning from the basis of past cases of success of similar projects.

Project Cost Control

Cost control involves the control of various expenses encountered in the process of planning and execution of all the necessary tasks that are required to facilitate the completion of projects within the set budgetary constraints.

It has four essential elements, namely “resource planning, cost estimation, cost budgeting, and cost control” (Tolbert 2008, p.6).

Resource planning is concerned with the determination of resources: material, people, and even equipment together with the magnitude of the resources that are plausible for completion of the activities of the project within the constraints of a project: time and financial resources.

In technology-intensive organizations, cost control is accomplished in various ways. When contracts are issued out, clear definition of the scope and requirement of the projects must have been defined. Consequently, the cost of the project remains constant.

The cost of the material required to execute the project also remains constant. However, technology-intensive organizations are characterized by changes of scopes (Tolbert, 2008, p.63).

When such changes occur, the cost of projects escalates. In project cost management approaches, technology-intensive organizations determine the costs of human resource requirement to successfully complete a project.

This also includes a definition of the required productivity level, especially in the calculation of the project completion time. Unfortunately, people have possibilities of superseding the requirements for different tasks constituting a project (Tolbert, 2008).

For instance, in the development of a website for a technology-intensive organization, some teams may scrutinize the requirements to prepare a simple website that meets the scope requirements while another team may read the same requirement and create a more complex website requiring twice the amount of time taken by the first work team to be complete.

This increases the cost of human resource. To control these costs, project managers in technology-intensive organizations conduct a review of project requirements with project implementation teams.

The purpose of the review is to discuss the amount of effort required and time allocation for each task.

The Scheduling of a Project by utilizing the Critical Path Method (CPM)

Projects are constrained by time. Definite starting and completion times define them. Consequently, irrespective of the industry in which a project is being implemented, scheduling of various activities such that the completion time of the project is not delayed is incredibly important.

This concern leads to the establishment of CPM (Critical Path Methods) together with PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) in project management to help project managers in the process of risk analysis and the scheduling of various project tasks (Saeed, Anbari & Money, 2008, p.5).

The CPM approach has various algorithmic constructs that have a list of tasks that are necessary to complete given project tasks.

Through computerized CPM software model, in technology-intensive project-oriented organizations, the aspects of CPM discussed above are utilized in the calculation of the earliest and latest completion times of various tasks.

The process is utilized in the derivation of the critical path. Critical path refers to the path that requires the largest amount of time. Delay in the activities constituting the critical paths has a direct implication on the time of completion of the overall project.

When activity in the critical path is delayed for two days, the entire project also delays by two days.

Calculation of the critical paths requires project managers to calculate the time for different paths of the project’s activities. Hence, the identification of the critical path is tedious, especially for a complicated project endeavor such as IS projects.

The above challenge leads to the development and embracement of computer-based CPM analysis software in technology-intensive organizations. However, such software has been criticized by various project management scholars.

For instance, Mark and Sanders (2005) argue that commercial CPM software used in technology-intensive organizations lack transparency in the manner in which calculations are done.

They further argue that the addition of “more features of commercial CPM scheduling packages has made the basic calculations underlying the schedule even more difficult to follow” (Mark & Sanders, 2005, p.2).

This implies that it is necessary for commercial software developers to create a tool for making CPM scheduling for complex projects more transparent.

However, it is important for the user communities within technology-intensive organizations to develop open source applications that can aid in the development of more transparent CPM scheduling software applications.

Conclusion

Projects are critical endeavors that are often constrained by resources and time. One way of looking at a project is from the context of being a composition of many tasks that amount to a whole while brought together.

These specific activities require valid financial resources and time for their completion. They must also be clearly planned to avoid unnecessary delays.

Based on these claims, the paper focused on the discussion of important aspects and practices that are common in technology-intensive project-based organizations such as IS and IT-based organizations.

Project evaluation was identified as an important element of projects in these organizations. It helps in establishing the degree of achievement of the desired goals and objectives.

Planning helps in establishing various resource requirements together with how they are utilized in the project execution process. Cost control helps in ensuring that the project is executed within the financial constraints.

CPM scheduling ensures that projects meet the time constraints through the provision of a mechanism of identification of project execution paths, which may cause delay of the completion times of the entire project.

Reference List

Anantatmula, V. (2008). The Roles of Technology in the Project Manger Performance Model. Project Management Journal, 39(1), 34-48.

Besner, C., & Hobbs, B. (2008). Discriminating Contexts and Project Management Best Practices on Innovation and Non Innovative Projects. Project Management Journal, 39(1), 123-134.

Jigeesh, N. (2012). Selection of Project as Important Beginning for Information Technology Project Management. IUP Journal of Operations Management, 1(1), 41-49.

Kostelac, D., Matrjan, D., & Dobovicek, S. (2011). Relationship between Processes and Project Management. International DAAAM, 22(1), 1119-1120.

Mark, C., & Sanders, P. (2005). Transparent CPM. New York, NY: AACE International Transactions.

Martin, N., Pearson, M., & Furumo, K. (2007). IS Project Management: Size, Practices and Project Management Office. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 3(2), 52-60.

Pinheiro, A. (2010). How Do Managers Control Technology-intensive Work? Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 5(2), 1-12.

Saeed, A., Anbari, F., & Money, W. (2008). Impacts Of Organizational and Project Factors on Acceptance And Usage of Project Management Software And Perceived Project Success. Project Management Journal, 39(2), 5-33.

Tolbert, L. (2008). Nine Knowledge Areas. Journal of Community Academy, 2(2), 56-69.

Turner, J., & Müller, R. (2005). The Project Manager’s Leadership Style as a Success Factor on Projects: A Literature Review’, Project Management Journal, 7(3), 219-234.

Zekic, Z., & Samarzija, L. (2012). Project Management of Dynamic Optimization of Business Performance. International Business Research, 5(12), 99-111.

Click Here To Order Now!