Establishing Critical Success Criteria For A Project Management Success

Historically, project success has been directly tied to the Iron Triangle of cost, time, and quality. While most of the articles reviewed for this study refer to these standards for success criteria, the overwhelming majority find that they are not enough to fully define what success is. Atkinson (1999) defined two types of errors in project management and places using the Iron Triangle as success criteria into the category of not doing something as well as it could be done. This comes from an understanding that projects that meet cost, time, and quality requirements can still be considered failures while projects that run over on cost and time can still be considered successes (Belassi & Tukel, 1996; Dvir & Shenhar, 2003). Anton de Wit (1988) found that success is time dependent and that a project may be perceived a success one day and a failure the next.

The success principle states that the measure of the Dixon re-structuring project’s success “must be defined at the beginning of the project as a basis for project management decision” (Wideman, 2000). It is relevant to identify at what accomplishments the project must have for it to be reviewed as

In many studies and reports, project successes tend to be measured against the prescribed schedule, cost and performance. In reality, project success measurement should be against projects constraints and the operational readiness status of the business environment. The combination of the two will assist in efficiently using the product or service as intended.

Milestones are indicators that are inserted into a programme at points of strategic activity. These milestones enable us to track specific events so we can identify certain conditions through the course of a project.

Performance measurements are used to characterize and define performance in a project. They are used to track and manage progress toward achieving specific project goals. Performance measurements help determine how decision-making processes of a project led to its success or failure, understanding these can help organizations make future improvements. It is a project manager's responsibility to measure performance based on the triple constraints of time, budget, and quality of a project. There are many performance measurements a project manager can use based on the type of project at hand, this paper compares and contrasts the following measurements -

Project management provides reasonable scientific solutions in order to overcome difficulties and achieve success. Each project has a variety of objectives have to achieve, these objectives are vary and can be for organization objectives or for social objectives. However, the project objectives could face some obstacles could be lead to limited success. The attempt to discover the factors of project success and project failure was not easy task for both scholars and expertise. These definitions can provide a close understanding and explanation for these terms. Many project management literatures have variety definitions of project success. (Adinyira, 2012) pointed out that Pinto and Slevin (1988) defined the success as delivering projects on proper time, cost and quality. Others like westerveld, elizabith have different ideas regarding the success that are related to the judge of stakeholders and organizational management. However, nowadays success become more complex issue to determine, it is not only meeting the costs and time it is belonging to the typology and sector of the project

Scaling the ongoing attainment of the goals to get the client’s evaluation of the progress made.

The completion of all phases can determine a project success. The success of a project includes the completion being completed within the allocated time period, within the budgeted cost. It must be completed at the proper performance/quality level with acceptance by the consumer. During this phases there should be minimum scope changes and no disturbance to the main work flow.

Project Scope Management follows a five step process that makes the project successful; the five steps that are needed are,

According to Kloppenborg (2015), “Project success is creating deliverables that include all of the agreed-upon features” (p.11). Other measures of success include the customer’s success, the performing organization’s success, the project team’s success, and if the project is completed on time and on budget.

2- Project Scope: "The finite set of correct end products, deliverables, or outputs that the project team undertakes to provide to the client (the owner or sponsor) of the project" (Kerzner & Black

Looking at the issue of success criteria. It important that rather than creating one standardized success criteria for project management, success criteria should be based upon the type of projects and its requirements. Projects are unique and therefore success criteria should be based upon projects and organization. Using one standardized success framework for project management will only create Type II error that Atkinson has describes. The cons of creating new success criteria for every project can lead to disagreements in the team. If there is a standardized model then everyone is likely to follow it but creating new success criteria can also create Type I error.

Budgeting and Timetable Planning Completion: This milestone will be delivered on June 10, 2016. The reason why this milestone is critical to the project is that, it stipulates the amount of money and time required to complete the project.

Measurable success: The success of this project will be defined by three important measurable aspects. All the deadlines and scheduled deliverables must be met. Any length of time spent with the current cost and revenue structures in place mean lack of profitability for that much longer. The project manager will track these deliverables and the associated dates. As part of the project team, all members must be responsible enough to ensure timely delivery

Prior to the onset of modern project management, the success criteria of a project lay solely on the technical success, or scope of the resulting product or service. Today, adherence to budget and schedule form a triangle of success factors alongside scope, with client satisfaction also developing as a key determinant of project success (Kerzner, 2004). However, the delivery of project scope will always take precedence over all other project factors, because if a project fails to deliver on its original intention, need or functionality, the project will always be considered as a failure. This essay will analyse the adequacy of the Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge’s (PMBOK) definition of Project Scope Management in relation