|
Home Our Company Public Workshop Schedule In-house Delivery and Consulting Workshop Descriptions Site Map Articles |
Track 2000
Defining project success - case by case
As discussed by Thomsett [1995.1] Most definitions of project success focus on the traditional concerns of:
meeting requirements [process, capability, data and function];
keeping within budget [people and capital]; and
delivering within estimated deadlines.
As a result, the tracking mechanisms focus on these factors.
The contemporary definition of success developed by our group reflects the difference between an internal or software factory view of success such as the one above and an external or added value chain or service view of success. The fact that a project has met the requirements [objectives], budget and deadlines is simply a measure of the internal development process effectiveness and is not a measure of the product or added value effectiveness.
In other words, for a project to be successful, it must meet all the following criteria :
meets quality expectations/requirements;
meets functional requirements;
within cost [paid, unpaid and business expert costs];
within deadline ; and
delivers sustained and actual benefits [added value].
More importantly, it is our experience that different projects will require a different combination of the above success factors to be considered successful by the business groups.
For example, in a project where the need to develop a new product quickly for a competitive market from the perspective of the business experts funding the project, added value, deadline and minimal functionality may be the key success factors. As a result, the business group makes a pragmatic decision to "trade-off" these factors against more functionality, higher quality and lower costs.
In another project, the quality and functionality may be paramount. As a result, the deadline and costs may be less important to the business client.