Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 25 (2011) 338 344

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

1877-0428 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Asia Pacic Business Innovation and Technology
Management Society
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.552
International Conference on Asia Pacific Business Innovation & Technology
Management
An Ethical approach towards sustainable project Success
Piyush Mishra,

G.S. Dangayach, M.L. Mittal
Department of Management Studies
Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur, India

Abstract
For any country the project management has been a vital part for its development. The highly
competitive business world has created tremendous pressure on the project managers to achieve success.
The pressure is derived from survival and profit building in business organizations which compels the
project managers to pursue unethical practices. As a result unethical activities in business projects can be
found easily where situations or issues arise due to dubious business practice, high corruption, or absolute
violation of the law. The recent spur on Commonwealth games to be organized in New Delhi indicates
towards the same. It has been seen that the project managers mainly focus on cost, time, and quality rather
than social impact and long term effects of the project. Surprisingly the literature as well as the
practitioners perspective also does not identify the role of ethics in project success. This paper identifies
ethics as the fourth most important dimension in the project based organizations. The paper predicts that
the approach of considering ethics will result in sustainability of the project. It will increase satisfaction
and loyalty of the customers as well as create harmony, trust, brotherhood, values and morality among the
team members. This paper is conceptual in nature as inadequate literature exists linking the project
success with an ethical approach.
2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Asia Pacific
Business Innovation and Technology Management Society (APBITM).

Keywords: Project Success, Customer Satisfaction, Ethics, Loyalty, Values, Morality
1. Project Management
Project Management (PM) is concerned with the organization of available resources whether of
manpower, plant, machinery, technology, material, finance or other to undertake and complete a defined
project on time, within budget, and of the required quality. It identifies the tasks to be accomplished,
develops a plan to achieve these tasks, and constantly monitors progress and quality according to that plan,
or, when there is deviation from the plan, triggers corrective action (APM 2000). Morris' (2000) traced the
origin of PM as an identifiable management discipline to the aerospace and defense industries, when it
was devised during the 1930s by the United States Air Corporation's project coordination engineering
department. However, it was not until the 1950s that its application spread, first, between 1953 and 1954,
to the US Air Force Joint Project Office and Weapons System Project Office, then in 1955 to the US
2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Asia
Pacifc Business Innovation and Technology Management Society
339 Piyush Mishra et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 25 (2011) 338 344
Navy's Special Projects Office. Later it was also used in the Polaris missile programme. During the 1960s
PM began to migrate from aerospace and defense to other industries, most notably to construction, where
private-sector companies in the USA began to use PM to monitor and control specialized industrial,
commercial and institutional construction projects (Kartam, Al-Daihani & Bahar 1999). In the process
further tools were devised, most notably Work (Tseng, 2009).
Breakdown Structures Earned Value Analysis, Resource Allocation Structures, Value Analysis and
Integrated Logistics Support. New theories and tools emerged during the 1980s with a view to achieving
greater integration and owner-level focus in construction projects. In addition, the concepts of Lean
Production, Total Quality Management (TQM), Partnering and Teamwork were developed. Risk
Management became a distinct PM discipline; and the so-called Fourth Generation Computing enabled
cost schedule planning and other computer-based techniques to become increasingly effective for PM.
Industrialism acquired legitimacy from the way products were made accessible to the common, man:
low prices from economies of scale from the standardization of products. Frederick,W. Taylor and others
added the need of regulating the work and specializing the employees, to fit the industrialist agenda: if
machines are more resourceful than persons, then persons should, work like machines. Although this
thinking came to pervade society as a whole, projects were, still important as unique and creative work
environments on two counts: (1) investments providing ,the basis for mass production (such as railways,
factories, steel mills, etc.) required project management skills for their implementation; and (2) the life-
cycles of products, organizational structures and technologies all became shorter and shorter, thus
highlighting the need for projects as instruments for achieving continuous improvement and innovation
(Kanter, 1983; Kreiner,,1992). The efficiency of mass production is dependent upon isolation from the
environment and protection against heretical ideas from within; disturbances and freethinking are referred
to temporary work settings for further exploration (Tseng, 2011). Thus, if industrialism in the guise of
mass production can be said to require stability and inertia in production systems, project management can
be seen as a way of evoking change and renewal in these systems (Kreiner, 1992).
2. Project Success
Currently, the concept of success in projects is being widely discussed in management literature and
has been central to the literature of PM (Diallo & Thuillier 2003). Cooke-Davies (2001) explains that
project success is measured against the overall objectives of the project and the standards by which the
success or failure of a project will be judged could be called success criteria. Lim and Zain Mohamed
(1999) suggest that the criteria for assessing project success consist of a set of principles or standards by
which project success is or can be judged. Chan and Tam (2001) conducted a quantitative study on
construction projects in Hong Kong which identified three dominant criteria affecting project success and
client satisfaction, namely, effective time, cost and quality management. The time budget -quality triangle
is the most commonly cited criteria for success (Westerveld 2002). A study carried out in the
telecommunications, IT and construction industries in Norway and China also suggested the time - cost -
quality triangle as the main success criteria (Andersen, Dyrhang & Jessen 2002). Wateridge (1998)
conducted a study of successful and failed projects and concluded that the following were the major
criteria for measuring the success or failure of projects, namely, whether the project:
1) Meets user requirements
2) Is completed on time
3) Is carried out within budget
4) Meets the quality requirements
According to PMI (2000) and APM (2000), time, cost and quality management are
Considered to be three most important among many important PM activities or component processes
those contribute to PM knowledge and practice. Atkinson (1999) opined that, over the last 50 years, cost,
time and quality (The Iron Triangle) have become inextricably linked with measuring the success of
340 Piyush Mishra et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 25 (2011) 338 344
project management. This is perhaps not surprising since, over the same period, those criteria have usually
been included in the description of project management. However, the time and cost elements are at best,
only guesses, since they are calculated at a time when the least is known about the project. Quality is a
different phenomenon, since it is a property which emerges from peoples' different attitudes and beliefs,
which often evolve over the development life-cycle of a project. Liu & Walker (1998) and Westerveld
(2002) propose as alternatives: - satisfaction of claimants and satisfaction of stakeholders as project goals.
Another by Chinyio, Olomolaiye and Corbett (1998) in the United Kingdom indicates that clients desire
more than just the triangle, also wanting functionally efficient and durable projects. Svetlana (1997)
proposes a more ethereal view: that project success be measured in terms of the client's appreciation of the
transition from concept to creation.
3. Factors Affecting Project Success
Cleland and King (1983) came out with a list of 13 factors affecting project success. Among well-
known drivers, like planning and scheduling, this study points other important levers which might be
grouped basing on their relation to project area (project summary and project review), human area (client
characteristics, training of executives, and manpower capabilities), and general management area (top
management support, financial support, logistics requirements, and acquisitions). Locke (1984) also
indicates a necessity to clarify communication channels and procedures stating that it will also have an
impact on progress control efficiency. Morris and Hough (1987) after examination of eight complex
projects which had a great economic influence and at the same time failed came with a conclusion that the
reasons of failure related to a poor project management in general. Belassi and Tukel (1996) come out
with four main areas of critical success factors related to: project, project manager and a team,
organization, and external environment. Apparently, project related factors refer to project size and project
life cycle, when project team addresses competences and skills of project key players; organization group
combines top management support and organizational structure while environmental cluster involves
political, economic, social and technological issues. Project management aspect according to Chan et al.
(2004) combines planning and control, organizational structure, overall managerial actions,
implementation of effective quality assurance and safety programs. Chan and Kumaraswamy (2002) also
categorize similar factors in one group accentuating communication and human resources management.
Yu et al. (2006) add under the similar category control of processes naming this group as process-related
factors. Also as managerial factors they mention decision-making abilities and communication. Project
manager as a one of key force affecting project performance is also analysed from the success factor point
of view. Particularly project managers experience, commitment, competence and authority were
discussed as factors influencing project success by Chua et al. (1999). However, project management
tools and mechanisms attract more attention of researchers rather than personal features of project
manager. Among critical project management tools Belout (1998), Walker and Vines (2000) specify
communication, feedback capabilities, and decision making effectiveness. Furthermore, Jaselkis and
Ashley (1991), Belassi and Tukel (1996) also recur to planning, monitoring and control mechanisms
which seem to be classical factors since the 60-s when they were initially declared. Although, majority of
factors related to project management refers to specific techniques or abilities some author indicate
organization structure and safety and quality assurance program as success factors connected to project
management within the enterprise (Walker and Vines, 2000).
4. Business Ethics
Business ethics commonly involve work related ethical dilemmas and work related ethical judgments
(Guy, 1990). Business ethics is commonly divided into two areas consisting of normative and descriptive
ethics (OFallon and Butterfield, 2005). The former resides largely in the realm of moral philosophy and
341 Piyush Mishra et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 25 (2011) 338 344
theology and serves to guide individuals as to how they should behave. The latter, descriptive (or
empirical) ethics resides primarily in the sphere of management and business decision-making and is
concerned with explaining and predicting individuals actual ethical behavior. Ethical decisions in the
business arena are important because they can have significant implications for business as well as society.
Ethical decision-making has been a topic of philosophical thought since the dawn of recorded history;
certainly the classical Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle remain influential in this
area of study even today as our society continues to grapple with the same elemental philosophical
questions regarding morality and ethics (e.g. Hartman, 2008). Making decisions has always been one of
the most crucial activities of human beings; ethical decisions are among the most intricate and vexing and
historically have involved both philosophy and research in their study (Brans, 2000). Moral or ethical
decisions are distinct from other kinds of decisions because they stem from a specific type of dilemma in
which the decision-makers options lead to material and psychological consequences to others, and the
violation of rights and conflicts between opposing claims (Garcia and Ostrosky-Solis, 2006). Rest (1986)
offers that an ethical decision is a considered opinion of what should be done when confronted with an
ethical dilemma. Guy (1990) proposes that ethical decisions involve a moral dilemma that touches on two
or more personal core values and involves uncertainty and possibly unknown consequences. Trevino and
Youngblood (1990) advise that ethical decisions have a normative-affective component, and that
individuals often struggle with their feelings as to whether they are making a good decision. Jones (1991)
suggests that an ethical decision is one that is acceptable both legally and morally to the larger community.
Jones (1991) made significant theoretical contributions in the area of ethical decision-making by
organizing a number of disparate theoretical perspectives and recasting them within Rests (1986) four-
step ethical decision-making framework. Moral intensity is a multi-dimensional construct that contains a
number of facets. These include the magnitude of consequences of an immoral act (the sum of the harm or
benefit to victims or beneficiaries in a moral act), social consensus (the degree of social acceptance that a
given act is good or evil), probability of effect (the probability that a given act might actually take place
and the probability of its potential for harm or good), temporal immediacy (the length of time between the
present and the onset of consequences of the moral act in question, proximity (feeling of nearness that the
moral agent has for victims) and concentration of effect (an inverse function of the number of people
affected by an act of given magnitude).

EARLIER NOW
Cost Schedule
Time
Cost
Schedule
Time
ETHICS
342 Piyush Mishra et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 25 (2011) 338 344
5. Ethical Approach towards Sustainability
The approach to changing the current scenario through influencing power relations is to raise consumer
awareness and apply consumer pressure in order to make moral considerations logically relevant to the
organizational decision making. Thus making good ethics is good business a viable business strategy.
There is evidence that consumers are becoming increasing concerned about social issues, and the impact
of corporations on people and the environment, and that these concerns are manifesting themselves in
buying and investment decisions, thus directly influencing a corporations bottom line. From the moral
perspective, is that ethical conduct is not legitimately being encouraged, but becomes a marketing or
public relations strategy. The project manager should make sure that he is completing the project while
keeping the ethical standards and social impact in mind. The results obtained on keeping an ethical code
of conduct give millions time better results compared to those which are non-ethical. The business
managers have to make sure that they do it on time, under budget, and within scope, all the while
maintaining their professional integrity in a frequently evolving international business environment. The
project manager is the first who confirms everything gets done as per planning. The project managers
cannot dissociate from the project and expect that the end result is positive. He is responsible in ensuring
subordinates and others behave ethically. Whether dealing with personal work ethics or broader ethical
considerations, a project manager must eventually step up to take responsibility. Ethics should be the
foundation of for projects or any other kind of business. It forms the basis of trust that will fascinate and
hold top talent, customers and suppliers. Identifying ethics as the most important criteria will result in
sustainability of the project as it will have a better social impact.
6. Conclusion
Project management is about getting things done on time and within budget while meeting or
exceeding stakeholder expectations. Yet project management practitioners must not only carry out their
projects efficiently, but also with a high level of moral character in an increasingly global environment.
Ethics in project management is critical in keeping the flow of relationship within the management
integrated. Ethics is very important in gaining the support of project team which is paramount in
achieving the success of specified project. The fourth quadrant of ethics being the most important
dimension will result in sustainability towards the end result of the project. The project managers should
practice fairness, honesty and integrity which are the root behind every successful project or business.
Reference
[1] Agarwal, N & Rathod, U 2006, 'Defining "Success" for Software Projects: An Exploratory Revelation',
International Journal of Project Management, vol. 24, pp.358-70.
[2] Ahituv, N, Zviran, M & Glezer, C 1999, 'Top management toolbox for managing corporate IT',
Communications of the ACM, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 93-103.
[3] Alkaabi, A 1999, 'The development of management information system performance assessment
model', Doctor of Science thesis, George Washington University.
[4] Ammeter, A & Dukerich, J 2001, 'Assessing the impact of leadership, team building, and team
member characteristics in creating high performance project teams', paper presented to Proceedings from
the 2001 ASEM National Conference, USA
[5] Berrell, M & Smith, R 1996, 'Choosing Between Alternative Organisational Structures A Case Study
of Continuing Education', Higher Education Management, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 111-23.
[6] Caldwell, D & Posner, BZ 1998, 'Project Leadership', in JK Pinto (ed.), The Project Management
Institute - Project Management Handbook, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, pp. 300-11.
343 Piyush Mishra et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 25 (2011) 338 344
[7] Caliskan, N 2006, 'A decision support approach for the evaluation of transport investment alternatives',
European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 175, no. 3, pp. 1696-704.
[8] Cohen, S & Bailey, D 1997, 'What makes team work: Group effectiveness research from the shop
floor to the executive suite', Journal of Management, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 239-90.
[9] Crock, M 1993, 'Determining Success: An exploration of the Critical Success Criteria for the Design,
Production and Implementation of Computer Based Education and Training', Doctor of Philosophy thesis,
Griffith University
[10] Harvard Business Essentials (2004). Managing Projects Large and Small: The Fundamental Skills
for Delivering on Budget and on Time.
[11] Guy, M.E. 1990. Ethical decision making in everyday work situations. Westport, CT:Greenwood
Press.
[12] Jones, T.M. 1991. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue contingent
model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2): 368-395.
[13] Jones, T. M., & Gautschi, F.H. III. 1988. Will the ethics of business change? A survey of future
executives. Journal of Business Ethics, 7: 231-248.
[14] Verma, V. K. (1997). Managing the project team. Project Management Institute. Newtown Square,
PA. pp. 72.
[15] Verma, V. K. (1996). Human resource skills for the project manager. Project Management Institute.
Newtown Square,
[16] PA.Verma, V.K. (1995). Organizing projects for success. Project Management Institute. Newtown
Square, PA.
[17] OFallon, M.J. & Butterfield, K.D. 2005. A review of the empirical ethical decision making
literature: 1996-2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59: 375-413.
[18] OReilly, C.A., & Chatman, J. 1996. Culture and social control: Corporations, cults and commitment.
In L.L. Cummings & B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 18: 157-200.
Greenwhich, CT: JAI Press.
[19] Forsberg, K, Mooz, H & Cotterman, H 2005, Visualizing Project Management Models and
Frameworks for Mastering Complex Systems, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken,New Jersey.
[20] Fortune, J & White, D 2006, 'Framing of project critical success factors by a systems model',
International Journal of Project Management, vol. 24, pp. 53-6 .
[21] Thamhain, H.J. (1988). Team Building in Project Management, Project Management Handbook,
Second Edition, Eds..
[22] Cleland D.I and King, W.I., New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, pp.8-15.
[23] Pinto, JK 1998, The Project Management Institute : project management handbook, 1st edn, Jossey-
Bass business and management series, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
[24] Pinto, JK & Pinto, M 1991, 'Determinants of Cross-Functional Cooperation in the project
implementation process', Project Management Journal, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 13-20.
[25] Pinto, JK & Kharbanda, O 1995, Successful Project Managers - Leading Your Team to Success, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
[26] Pinto, JK & Slevin, D 1998, 'Critical Success Factors', in JK Pinto (ed.), The Project Management
Institute - Project Management Handbook, Jossey-Bass Publishers, SanFrancisco, pp. 379-95.
[27] Rotter,J.B.(1971), Generalized expectancies from interpersonal trust American Psychologist,26,
443-452.
[28] Thamhain, HJ & Wilemon, D 1975, 'Conflict Management in Project Life Cycles', Sloan
Management Review, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 31-51
[29] Thomsett, R 1989, Third Wave Project Management: A handbook for managing the complex
information systems for the 1990s, Prentice-Hall, Inc, New Jersey, USA.
344 Piyush Mishra et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 25 (2011) 338 344
[30] Tseng, M.L. (September, 2009). Application of ANP and DEMATEL to evaluate the decision-
making of municipal solid waste management in Metro Manila. Environmental monitoring and
assessment 156(1-4), 181-197
[31] Tseng M.L. (Jan. 2011) Using a hybrid MCDM model to evaluate firm environmental knowledge
management in uncertainty. Applied Soft Computing 11(1), 1340~1352
[32] Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. American Psychological Association,
Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), pp. 384399.
[33] Thorn, J & Dixon, C 2006, 'Choosing Just the Right Level of Project Management for Small Projects',
Levels of PM, p. 22
[34] Whittaker, B 1999, 'What went wrong? Unsuccessful information technology projects', Information
Management & Computer Security, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 23-34.
[35] Wilemon, D 1998, 'Cross-Functional Cooperation', in JK Pinto (ed.), The Project Management
Institute: Project Management Handbook, Jossey-Bass Publishers, SanFrancisco, pp. 279-99.
[36] Wysocki, R 2002, Building Effective Project Teams, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, NewYork.
[37] Yin, R 2003, Case Study Research Design and Methods, 3 edn, vol. 5, Sage Publications, Newbury
Park, CA.
[38] Yukl, G 2006, Leadership in Organizations, Pearson Education, New Jersy.
[39] Zhao, L 2002, 'The integration of Geographical information systems and multicriteria decision
making models for the analysis of branch bank closures', Doctor of Philosophy thesis, University of New
South Wales