Analysis of Current Practice in Project Managementan Empirical Study by Diana White - Research Paper Example

? Critical Analysis of Research Paper (Current Practice in Project Management—an Empirical Study by Diana White & Joyce Fortune) Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Thesis Statement 3 Article’s Summary 4 Critical Analysis of the Article 5 1- Introduction 5 2- Theory 5 3- Research Methodology 6 4- Presentation of the Findings 7 5- Critical Discussion on Findings 8 6- Conclusion Drawn 10 7- Paper’s Contribution Level 11 Conclusion 11 References 13 Introduction According to James P. Lewis(2004), Project Management is “…the planning, scheduling and controlling the scarce resources to achieve desired results…[which] are defined in terms of four factors, called Cost, Schedule, Performance, and Scope”.This not onlydefines the capabilities of a person, especially the exclusive managerial qualities such as risk taking and leadership that need to be used in achieving a goal, but also encourages and guides the ambitious people in how to move ahead in the right direction.Therefore, project management has become the most widely practiced and experimented field of today. The research paper that I am going to analyse offers an experiential and pragmatic study in the contemporary practices in project management. The title of the paper is ‘Current Practice in Project Management—an Empirical Study’, and it was presented by Diana White who works in the Open University’s Centre for Complexity and Change. The corresponding author is Joyce Fortune. This paper was published in the year 2002 in the International Journal of Project Management: PERGAMON. The paper seemed to be a comprehensive and critical presentation at first glance. Thesis Statement The paper was aimed to throw comprehensive light on the causes for disparity between the objectives defined by the managerial techniques and the results obtained. For this purpose, the writer focussed this paper on the data and results of a contemporary survey which was planned“to capture the `real world' experiences of project managers” aiming at finding out the level“to which those involved in the management of projects actually make use of the methods and techniques that are available and how effective the methods and techniques used are felt to be” (White & Fortune, 2004). Article’s Summary The paper aimed at explaining the disparity between the objectives and conclusions reported in the contemporary survey planned to observe the real-life active participation of project managers. The survey was conducted with the help of questionnaires which were referred to 995 Project Managers. However, the response rate was mere 23.7%.The chief activity in the questionnaire was the description of a recent project and the factors influential on its conclusive outcomes. The emphasis was laid on the extent to which these influential factors modify the project outcomes and the researcher has directed the respondents to relate them with the available tools and techniques used in the methodology for a specific project management. The researcher had also asked for the respondents’ own critical evaluation of the tools and techniques that they had used so far and to relate any limitation that they have to face or any drawback that they noticed for using them. The results of this survey revealed the narrow range of tools and techniques which are frequently and commonly used in the project management including the project management software and Gantt charts. Nearly 50% of the participants testified against these tools and techniques. The results also revealed that the most implied criteria to judge the project success include three widely used factors: time, budget, specifications. Moreover, the suitability between the project and the organization as well as the success of the business also proved to be the determining factors of the project success. Critical Analysis of the Article The overall presentation of the paper is quite impressive as it appears to be quite a critically comprehensive analysis of the survey that was conducted contemporarily to note the real-world issues in project management. However, on close observation, certain lacking was found. The critical analysis of various parts of the paper is as follows: 1- Introduction According to Carol Ellison (2010), a good introduction should possess a background of the researched topic as well as some previous researches along with clear thesis statement and hypothesis. As far as the introduction of this research paper is concerned, it is quite small and to the point. However, it does not provide any background details of the project. The researchers have directly stated their aims and determined what they were going to do. Therefore, their thesis statement was quite explicit and clear. But the hypothesis made was indirect and unclear, and needed to be comprehended vigilantly. Moreover, the introduction also lacked the references to previous researches and the researcher seemed to appear uninterested in whatever had happened before. 2- Theory Other than the introduction, the strength of a research paper is determined by the quality and clarity of the theory suggested and presented in it (Lester, 2005) The hypothesis indirectly offered in the research paper is the presence of disparity between the used tools and techniques in the project management and the obtained results. Though the theory has not been offered in this paper in a comprehensive manner, yet the indirect presence of this hypothesis was enough to gain and hold the attention of the readers. However, any comparison and relevance offered to contemporary theories could have added to the overall effect and strength of the paper that would have added solidity to the benefit of the researchers. 3- Research Methodology Research methodology is basically the planned outline of the research endeavour that is offered to help the readers understand the technical and practical aspects of the particular study (Goddard, 2004). Lester (2009) suggests that clear and lucid research methodology should be added to every research paper so that the readers of that study can have a grip to the practical ideology of that endeavour, and be able to appreciate the effort more. Diana White and Joyce Fortune have also explained the entire research methodology that they have implied in getting data for their survey. The researchers have described and explained whatever methodology they had used. They had not shied away at revealing the slight failure of their pilot questionnaire and had stated the use of revised survey openly. This sort of behaviour gains the confidence of the readers and makes them appreciate the effort of the researchers honestly (Melville, 2004). The researchers have explained that they have aimed at six areas in that survey. These included the variety of the projects that the respondents have done, various criteria that they6 have used to judge the success of these projects and their outcomes, the unexpected (desirable or undesirable) side-effects that they had to face during these projects, various factors that proved to be important in determining the outcomes of the projects, various methods, tools and techniques that people use for managing projects as well as the limitations and drawbacks that they have to face in doing so. Other than the research methodology, the researchers have also offered some details of the respondents to their questionnaires as well as the type of their project and its cost. All this information can add to the strength to the paper as well as increase its complexity as it is aid that too much information can sometimes make the readers confuse (Lester, 2009). 4- Presentation of the Findings Presentation of the findings is of great importance in the overall research paper because it offers empirical facts and data to the readers that they themselves can asses and analyse (Lester, 2005). As far as the presentation of the findings of the entire research endeavour is concerned, the researchers have made appreciable use of bar graphs, pie-charts and tables. The researchers have managed to offer percentages of the results to the readers so that they can easily and comprehensively understand the figures and facts themselves. They have offered almost everything to the readers in their research paper that they could get hold on in their survey. This has not only offered the readers a wider exposure to the data, but has also added complexity to the overall understanding. Now the readers can distract also because of the provision of too much information at the spot (Markman, Markman and Waddell, 2001). 5- Critical Discussion on Findings The critical evaluation of the findings is perhaps the most important part of the research paper because it suggests the intellectual level as well as logical working of a researcher’s mind and approach (Morrell, 2004). It does not usually make a large part in a dissertation, but in a research paper, critical analysis is the main part of the outline. Diana White and Joyce Fortune have probably devoted 70% space of their paper to the presentation and analysis of the findings: the analysis covering almost 60% of the entire paper. As far as the quality and strength of this analysis is concerned, the researchers have done a great job. They have used quite an objective language: I could not find subjectivity in it at all. The facts are drawn rationally and impartially. The researchers have evaluated them in accordance to their own research thesis and have concluded their hypothesis: disparity between the objectives and results of contemporary practices in project management. The researchers have divided the whole analysis in parts according to the questions and objective perused in the survey questionnaire. Thus, the findings as well as their analysis appeared divided into the following headings: 1. The respondents and their projects: the researchers have analysed the data gathered and have explained the findings in terms of the projects types, industry sectors, number of employees, number involved and role of respondents, duration as well as completion of the projects. To help the readers with visual aids, they have made explicit use of bar graphs that have presented the categorized project types and industries lucidly. 2. Criteria used for judging project outcome: The researchers have analysed the projects involved and the findings gathered in accordance with their successful completion as well as the criteria used for determining that success. They have made explicit use of the pie-charts and tables to explain the various criteria that the respondents have used to determine whether their projects were successful or not. These include the fulfilment of the client’s expectation, the in-time completion and delivery, whether they have met the organizational objectives or not, the benefits that the overall business have got from it, etc. 3. Unexpected side-effects: the third aspect that the researchers have analysed is that of the unexpected side-effects that the respondents have reported while using certain project management tools and techniques. According to this analysis, these side-effects (both desirable and undesirable) have affected the overall business, and in doing so have laid greater emphasis on the appropriate selection of the right and suitable methodology. The desirable effects in clued the expansion of the business and the opportunities; whereas the undesirable effects include the losses due to gap between client and the supplier as well as the underestimation of the cost, etc. 4. Factors’ critical to the projects’ outcome: one of the activities in the revised questionnaire was regarding the factors which the respondents consider important for the greater outcome. Clear goals, realistic schedule and the support from the senior management are top three factors that the respondents have reported to be the most influential in determining the success of a project management technique. 5. Methods, methodologies, tools and techniques: the next section has analysed the methods and the tools that are the most used in the project management. According to the reported findings, project management software is the most frequently used tool that the people have been using at that time. Some others include Gantt bar charts and in house project management methods. 6. Limitations and drawbacks of the methods, methodologies tools and techniques used: the last activity was the description of drawbacks and limitations that the respondents have had faced in the usage of various project management tools and methods. The researchers have reported that the most drawbacks reported were that of project management software. This offers a real conflicting fact that the most widely used tools offers the largest number of limitations and drawbacks. The researchers have not simply offered these details to the readers, they have analysed each and everything with the help of percentages and frequency counts. 6- Conclusion Drawn In the conclusive section of the paper, the researchers have offered again a very brief overview of the paper and have drawn the results in the simplest way. However, even this very brief conclusion contains all that must be a part of a good conclusion. The thesis statement have been related again and again here and the results are once again related to them s that to offer evidences to the hypothesis. However, the conclusion that Diana White and Joyce Fortune have drawn appears to be a mere presentation of the results and the findings. They have not drawn any sort of theory from it and have left it as it is. 7- Paper’s Contribution Level The basic purpose of every research endeavour is to contribute to the existing information and to open newer doors to more and more knowledge (Neuman, 2007). As far as the contribution level of this paper is concerned, it has certainly added some valuable information to the contemporary knowledge of the project management tools and methods. It has made the readers aware of the futility of certain tools and methods which bring only loss and confusion to the business and the employees (Cleland, 2006; Bolles, 2002; Cooke, 2005; Lewis, 2004). The paper has thrown light on the disparity between the objectives and the outcomes in using various project management tools and techniques. The findings as well as the critical analysis have proved this hypothesis and has opened a new way to the finding and inventing of newer tools for successful management of projects (Korgaonker. 2011; Pinto, 2007). In this way, the researchers have contributed to the overall welfare of the business community (Galarreta, 2007). Conclusion To sum up the critique, it has been noted that the research paper under consideration was a well-planned report based on the facts and figures obtained via a survey conducted to find out the real world practices of tools. The thesis statement is quite relevant to the topic of the paper in en extended manner, that is, the topic refers to the practices whereas the thesis statement hints at the disparity between their objectives and results. Methods and other technical issues in the project management as well as the various factors involved which determine the success or failure of a particular project.The researchers have also explained the effectiveness of the selected tools. The entire paper appeared to be an organized research endeavour that has made an explicit use of visual objects such as tables, graphs and charts to offer a quite comprehensive and easy to understand facts and data to the readers.The language used was straight forward and comprehendible, and it has left nothing to the readers to contemplate. However, the only aspect in which the paper has been appeared to be lacking is that of references of previous studies and researches on the topic in the introduction. However, the researchers have filled this space in the discussion section where they have referred quite randomly to various studies. Above all, the researchers have related everything to their thesis statement and have mould everything to prove it, even though sometimes they managed merely in adding irrelevant information and making unnecessary comparisons. References Carol Ellison, 2010. McGraw-Hill's Concise Guide to Writing Research Papers (Perfect Phrases Series). 1 Edition. McGraw-Hill. David Cleland, 2006. Project Management: Strategic Design and Implementation. 5thEdition.McGraw-Hill Professional. Dennis Bolles, 2002. Building Project-Management Centers of Excellence.1stEdition.AMACOM. Helen Cooke, 2005. The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Project Management Course (McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Courses). 1 Edition.McGraw-Hill. James D. Lester, 2009. Writing Research Papers (Spiral) (13th Edition). 13 Edition. Longman. James P Lewis, 2004. Team-Based Project Management. 1stEdition. Beard Books. Lester Jr., 2005. Research Paper Handbook: 3d Edition: Ages 11-18+: Teacher Resource: Parent Resource. 3 Edition. Good Year Books. M. G. Korgaonker. 2011. Project Management: A Survey of Current Practices and Implications. Powered by Google Docs. [ONLINE] Available at: http://docs.google.com/ . [Accessed 13 July 2011]. Neuman. 2007. Social Research Methods, 6/E. Pearson Education India. OGC - Office of Government Commerce, 2007. For successful project management: think PRINCE2: Think PRINCE2 (Managing Successful Projects). Edition.TSO (The Stationery Office). Peter Morris and Jeffrey K. Pinto, 2007. The Wiley Guide to Project Organization and Project Management Competencies (The Wiley Guides to the Management of Projects).1stEdition.Wiley. Pierre-Jean Charrel and Daniel Galarreta, 2007. Project Management and Risk Management in Complex Projects: Studies in Organizational Semiotics. 1stEdition.Springer. Roberta Markham, 2001. 10 Steps in Writing the Research Paper (Barron's 10 Steps in Writing the Research Paper). 6 Edition. Barron's Educational Series. Wayne Goddard and Stuart Melville, 2004. Research Methodology: An Introduction (Social Research Statistics). 2nd Edition. Juta Academic. Read More