What (specifically) differentiates the successful and unsuccessful systems delivery projects (SDPs)

Abstract

Purpose

Against the backdrop of management, planning, temporary organizations, Shannon–Weaver theory of communication and evaluation theories, the purpose of this research paper is to examine the relative importance of specific project management tasks in the various phases of system delivery projects in distinguishing successful and unsuccessful projects.

Design/methodology/approach

A survey method was used (N = 3,129) to collect data from the customers of a major systems delivery project management company operating in the facilities management industry. Logistic regression was used to analyze the capability and relative importance of the tasks in discriminating successful and unsuccessful projects.

Findings

The results of the paper indicate that three out four installation tasks were among the top three in their ability to differentiate the successful and unsuccessful systems delivery project. Especially critical tasks were “Meeting milestones” and “Allocation of appropriate resources” so that the project could be completed on-time. Relatively less important tasks were “Advice and suggestions regarding the development of specifications for the project” and “Proposal to meet the intent of the company’s specifications” in the proposal phase of the project, and “Resolving warranty issues as defined by the warranty process” in the commissioning phase.

Originality/value

Previous research has assessed the importance of the various project management phases. This research examines the capability of the more minutiae tasks to distinguish the successful and unsuccessful projects in the various phases of systems delivery projects, i.e. proposal, installation and commissioning.

Citation

Haverila, M. and Twyford, J.C. (2024), "What (specifically) differentiates the successful and unsuccessful systems delivery projects (SDPs)", Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 588-608. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-03-2022-0029