Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
International Journal of Project Management 22 (2004) 349350 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman
Editorial
(a) There must be high levels of collaboration between the project manager and project owner. The project must be viewed as a partnership by all the project participants. The project is a temporary organization [2] and the people working for that temporary organization must work well together. This is fairly obvious, but unfortunately, so often the project becomes a fearful battle between the project manager and project owner. This is particularly the case between the owner and the contractor under confrontational contracting practices so often adopted. Turner and Mller [3] oer the principal-agency reu lationship between the owner and project manager as an explanation for why the latter happens. (b) The owner should only impose medium levels of structure on the project manager, not too much structure, not too little. Too much structure, and the project manager will not have sucient exibility to deal with risks and uncertainties that arise. Too little and laissez-faire management and anarchy will reign. The owner should agree clear objectives with the project manager (that is part of high collaboration) and then give the manager guidance about how those objectives should be best achieved, but leave the project manager room to manoeuvre to deal with risk and uncertainty. I would say that this means the project manager should be empowered. Empowerment is agreeing objectives, setting a framework, but leaving the manager exibility to make choices within that framework. Unfortunately, the principalagency relationship, and the associated adverse selection and moral hazard problems [3] causes the owner to try to impose very tight and rigid working practices on the manager. (c) The owner should demand regular project performance reports. Mller [1] discovered there was a u mismatch between the project performance reports wanted by project owners and what project managers wanted to supply. Owners had a much greater desire for project performance reports than project managers were willing to give. Where owners demanded the project performance reports, the projects were more likely to be successful, and where they did not the project was unsuccessful. Interestingly, where the owners demanded the project
350
performance reports, their perception of the projects performance was lower than actual, they had a pessimistic view of project performance. Where they did not demand the reports, they had a very rosy picture of project performance, thinking it was better than actual. Mller [1] also noticed that u clients who wanted the performance reports, wanted them quite frequently, once every two weeks. They were just about willing to accept them once a month, but no less frequently. Owners also wanted project managers to make a weekly verbal report in person. Although they liked the formal written reports, they wanted to be able to quiz the project manager and read their body language to tell whether they were telling the truth or not. Thus the four necessary conditions for project success are: 1. The success criteria should be agreed with the stakeholders before the start of the project, and repeatedly at conguration review points throughout the project. 2. A collaborative working relationship should be maintained between the project owner and project manager, with both viewing the project as a partnership. 3. The project manager should be empowered, with the owner giving guidance as to how they think the project should be best achieved, but allowing the project
manager exibility to deal with unforeseen circumstances as they see best. 4. The owner should take an interest in the performance of the project.
References
[1] M ller R. Communication of information technology project u sponsors and sellers in buyerseller relationships, DBA Thesis. UK: Henley Management College, Henley-on-Thames; 2003. [2] Turner JR, Mller R. On the nature of the project as a temporary u organization. Int J Project Manage 2003;21(1). [3] Turner JR, Mller R. Communication and cooperation on projects u between the project owner as principal and the project manager as agent. In: Huemann M, editors. Proceedings of the Research Conference Vienna X, Vienna: Project Management Group, University of Economics and Business Administration; October 2003. [4] Wateridge JF. IT projects: a basis for success. Int J Project Manage 1995;13(3):16972.
J. Rodney Turner Wildwood Manor Close, East Horsley Surrey KT24 6SA, UK Tel.: +44 1483 282344; fax: +44 1483 281 281 E-mail address: ijpm@europrojex.co.uk