IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i14p11236-d1197348.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differences between Public-Sector and Private-Sector Project Management Practices in Hungary from a Competency Point of View

Author

Listed:
  • Bálint Blaskovics

    (Department of Project Management, Institute of Strategy and Management, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8, H-1093 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Zalán Márk Maró

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Institute of Sustainable Development, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8, H-1093 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Gábor Klimkó

    (Department of Information Systems, Institute of Data Analytics and Information Systems, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 13-15, H-1093 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Viktória Papp-Horváth

    (Department of Project Management, Institute of Strategy and Management, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8, H-1093 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Ágnes Csiszárik-Kocsir

    (Department of Economics and Finance, Keleti Károly Faculty of Business and Management, Óbuda University, Tavaszmező utca 15-17, H-1084 Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

Both sustainability and strategic goals are realized in the course of implementing projects and in this way, projects are crucial for companies. Despite the growing importance of projects and the vast resources allocated to them, the success rates achieved by these projects are still considered low. Numerous reasons have been identified in the literature for why a project might succeed or fail, and it has also been revealed that a competent project manager is a key factor in this process. However, papers have mainly focused on analyzing the required competencies in general, while the sector involved is rarely considered. Thus, this paper investigates, within an exploratory framework, the success and failure rates of projects and project management competencies in Hungarian public- and private-sector organizations by using the Mann–Whitney test. Based on the results, the authors reject the idea that public-sector organizations perform better than those in the private sector, but the analysis of the data also revealed that there were differences in the perceived importance of skills in the two sectors. Customer orientation and business acumen were considered significantly more important in the private sector than in the public sector, based on the sample available. This study also revealed possible correlations among the knowledge areas and skills required. In addition to contributions to the understanding of project success, this paper can also help to improve the project management frameworks applied in public and private companies. Furthermore, the findings can be adapted for projects that require a special attribute, such as sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Bálint Blaskovics & Zalán Márk Maró & Gábor Klimkó & Viktória Papp-Horváth & Ágnes Csiszárik-Kocsir, 2023. "Differences between Public-Sector and Private-Sector Project Management Practices in Hungary from a Competency Point of View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11236-:d:1197348
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11236/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11236/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qing Chai & Huimin Li & Wei Tian & Yang Zhang, 2022. "Critical Success Factors for Safety Program Implementation of Regeneration of Abandoned Industrial Building Projects in China: A Fuzzy DEMATEL Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, January.
    2. Mónika Garai-Fodor & Tibor Pál Szemere & Ágnes Csiszárik-Kocsir, 2022. "Investor Segments by Perceived Project Risk and Their Characteristics Based on Primary Research Results," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul W., 2002. "Non-parametric tests of returns to scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 115-132, May.
    4. Danijela Toljaga-Nikolić & Marija Todorović & Marina Dobrota & Tijana Obradović & Vladimir Obradović, 2020. "Project Management and Sustainability: Playing Trick or Treat with the Planet," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-20, October.
    5. Chris Tofallis, 2013. "An automatic-democratic approach to weight setting for the new human development index," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 1325-1345, October.
    6. Fahime Lotfian Delouyi & Seyed Hassan Ghodsypour & Maryam Ashrafi, 2021. "Dynamic Portfolio Selection in Gas Transmission Projects Considering Sustainable Strategic Alignment and Project Interdependencies through Value Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-25, May.
    7. Mohammad Bilal Shaukat & Khawaja Fawad Latif & Aymen Sajjad & Gabriel Eweje, 2022. "Revisiting the relationship between sustainable project management and project success: The moderating role of stakeholder engagement and team building," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 58-75, February.
    8. Jaroslav Vrchota & Petr Řehoř & Monika Maříková & Martin Pech, 2020. "Critical Success Factors of the Project Management in Relation to Industry 4.0 for Sustainability of Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.
    9. María Pilar de la Cruz López & Juan José Cartelle Barros & Alfredo del Caño Gochi & Manuel Lara Coira, 2021. "New Approach for Managing Sustainability in Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, June.
    10. Tariq Al Amri & Katalin Puskas Khetani & Manuel Marey-Perez, 2021. "Towards Sustainable I4.0: Key Skill Areas for Project Managers in GCC Construction Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-17, July.
    11. Zaman, Shah & Wang, Zilong & Rasool, Samma Faiz & Zaman, Qamar uz & Raza, Hamid, 2022. "Impact of critical success factors and supportive leadership on sustainable success of renewable energy projects: Empirical evidence from Pakistan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shabir Hussain Malik & Weizhong Fu & Samma Faiz Rasool & Gowhar Ahmad Wani & Shah Zaman & Najaf Ali Wani, 2023. "Investigating the Impact of Communication Factors and Stakeholders Engagement on Renewable Energy Projects in Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-14, July.
    2. Gisele Blak Bernat & Eduardo Linhares Qualharini & Marcela Souto Castro, 2023. "Enhancing Sustainability in Project Management: The Role of Stakeholder Engagement and Knowledge Management in Virtual Team Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-26, March.
    3. Uz Zaman, Qamar & Zhao, Yuhuan & Zaman, Shah & Batool, Kiran & Nasir, Rabiya, 2024. "Reviewing energy efficiency and environmental consciousness in the minerals industry Amidst digital transition: A comprehensive review," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Zanella, Andreia & Camanho, Ana S. & Dias, Teresa G., 2015. "Undesirable outputs and weighting schemes in composite indicators based on data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 517-530.
    5. Kerstens, Kristiaan & Van de Woestyne, Ignace, 2014. "Comparing Malmquist and Hicks–Moorsteen productivity indices: Exploring the impact of unbalanced vs. balanced panel data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(3), pages 749-758.
    6. Tofallis, Chris, 2020. "Which formula for national happiness?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    7. Gumber, Anurag & Zana, Riccardo & Steffen, Bjarne, 2024. "A global analysis of renewable energy project commissioning timelines," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 358(C).
    8. H Fukuyama & W L Weber, 2009. "Estimating indirect allocative inefficiency and productivity change," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(11), pages 1594-1608, November.
    9. Daraio, Cinzia & Simar, Leopold, 2006. "A robust nonparametric approach to evaluate and explain the performance of mutual funds," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 516-542, November.
    10. Gómez-Calvet, Roberto & Conesa, David & Gómez-Calvet, Ana Rosa & Tortosa-Ausina, Emili, 2014. "Energy efficiency in the European Union: What can be learned from the joint application of directional distance functions and slacks-based measures?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 137-154.
    11. Lucía Muñoz-Pascual & Carla Curado & Jesús Galende, 2021. "Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis on the Adoption of Environmental Practices: Exploring Technological- and Human-Resource-Based Contributions," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(13), pages 1-21, July.
    12. María Pilar de la Cruz López & Juan José Cartelle Barros & Alfredo del Caño Gochi & Manuel Lara Coira, 2021. "New Approach for Managing Sustainability in Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-27, June.
    13. Zhichao Wang & Bao Hoang Nguyen & Valentin Zelenyuk, 2024. "Performance analysis of hospitals in Australia and its peers: a systematic and critical review," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 139-173, October.
    14. Halkos, George & Tzeremes, Nickolaos, 2008. "Measuring regional public health provision," MPRA Paper 23762, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Federica Rossi, 2014. "The efficiency of universities’ knowledge transfer activities: A multi-output approach beyond patenting and licensing," Working Papers 16, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2014.
    16. Gilbert, R. Alton & Wheelock, David C. & Wilson, Paul W., 2004. "New evidence on the Fed's productivity in providing payments services," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(9), pages 2175-2190, September.
    17. Hua Song & Yudong Yang & Zheng Tao, 2020. "How different types of financial service providers support small- and medium- enterprises under the impact of COVID-19 pandemic: from the perspective of expectancy theory," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-27, December.
    18. Wijesiri, Mahinda & Yaron, Jacob & Meoli, Michele, 2017. "Assessing the financial and outreach efficiency of microfinance institutions: Do age and size matter?," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 63-76.
    19. Benito, Bernardino & Guillamón, María-Dolores & Martínez-Córdoba, Pedro-José, 2020. "Determinants of efficiency improvement in the Spanish public lighting sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    20. Haidong Guo & Xingshan Gao & Qiangqiang Lin & Baosheng Gao, 2023. "Assessing the Degradation of Safety Management Performance in Large Construction Projects: An Investigation and Decision Model Based on Complex Network Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-26, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11236-:d:1197348. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.