IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/now/fntisy/2900000022.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

IT Project Management: Lessons Learned from Project Retrospectives 1999–2020

Author

Listed:
  • Nelson, R. Ryan

Abstract

Companies realize they cannot stay in business if they cannot manage their projects effectively. Yet, most organizations still are either unable or unwilling to perform the one basic activity critical to project management and continuous improvement: learning from mistakes and successes. This monograph provides a framework for conducting retrospectives—a process of “looking back†—to glean lessons for ongoing and future project success. This systematic approach has evolved through the analysis of hundreds of information technology (IT) projects over the past 20 years. Compiling the findings of this extensive research, the monograph offers a guide for how to leverage best practices to avoid classic mistakes with the end goal of improving the chances of project success. To this end, the monograph begins with a discussion on project retrospectives, including what they are, why they are important, and why they aren’t done, followed by a description of the action research (i.e., meta-retrospective) on which the remainder of the monograph is based. The focus of Section 2 is on 10 of the most infamous IT project failures (each with reported losses of over $100 million), a ranked list of classic mistakes that most often contribute to project failure (categorized by people, process, product, and technology), and a discussion of one method (root cause analysis) and five best practices designed to prevent classic mistakes from occurring in the first place. Section 3 presents a robust framework for evaluating project success based three process-related criteria (schedule, cost, and product) and three outcome criteria (use, value, and learning). Section 4 defines momentum as it relates specifically to IT projects and discusses how managers can equip themselves with mapping and analysis tools to control the momentum of a project for best results. The focus of Section 5 is on the most cited reason for IT project failure—poor estimation. Using the findings from two research studies, the section provides recommendations to help project managers improve project estimation. In sum, this monograph plots a pathway to success for IT project managers by applying the voluminous findings from analysis of retrospectives done for 264 IT projects from 1999 to 2020. The result is a comprehensive guide that project managers may use to gauge progress at points throughout a project’s life, map momentum, apply best practices to spot and prevent classic mistakes, conduct root-cause analysis, and devise actionable recommendations that will help their organization achieve project success.

Suggested Citation

  • Nelson, R. Ryan, 2021. "IT Project Management: Lessons Learned from Project Retrospectives 1999–2020," Foundations and Trends(R) in Information Systems, now publishers, vol. 4(4), pages 275-381, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:now:fntisy:2900000022
    DOI: 10.1561/2900000022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/2900000022
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1561/2900000022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rajiv Sabherwal & Rudy Hirschheim & Tim Goles, 2001. "The Dynamics of Alignment: Insights from a Punctuated Equilibrium Model," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 179-197, April.
    2. Marcie J. Tyre & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1994. "Windows of Opportunity: Temporal Patterns of Technological Adaptation in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 98-118, February.
    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. M. N. Ravishankar & Shan L. Pan & Dorothy E. Leidner, 2011. "Examining the Strategic Alignment and Implementation Success of a KMS: A Subculture-Based Multilevel Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 39-59, March.
    2. Henri Barki & Alain Pinsonneault, 2005. "A Model of Organizational Integration, Implementation Effort, and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 165-179, April.
    3. Ricardo A. Santa & Alejandro Acosta & Silvio Borrero & Annibal Scavarda, 2020. "Corporate, operational, and information systems strategies: Alignment and firm performance," Estudios Gerenciales, Universidad Icesi, vol. 36(157), pages 454-464, December.
    4. Da Mota de Pina E Cunha, A.M., 1998. "Determinants of Product Innovation in Organizations : Practices and Performance in the Portugese Financial Sector," Other publications TiSEM e6e4e56e-b72a-4392-8d79-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Daniel Geiger & Jochen Koch, 2008. "Von der individuellen Routine zur organisationalen Praktik — Ein neues Paradigma für die Organisationsforschung?," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 60(7), pages 693-712, November.
    6. Silva, Leiser & Hsu, Carol & Backhouse, James & McDonnell, Aidan, 2016. "Resistance and power in a security certification scheme: the case of c:cure," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68348, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Andrew Hargadon & Angelo Fanelli, 2002. "Action and Possibility: Reconciling Dual Perspectives of Knowledge in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 290-302, June.
    8. Tatiana Manolova & Linda Edelman & Candida Brush & Beate Rotefoss, 2012. "Properties of emerging organizations: empirical evidence from Norway," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 763-781, October.
    9. Heather A. Haveman & Michael V. Russo & Alan D. Meyer, 2001. "Organizational Environments in Flux: The Impact of Regulatory Punctuations on Organizational Domains, CEO Succession, and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 253-273, June.
    10. Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Khan, Zaheer & Wood, Geoffrey, 2021. "COVID-19 and business failures: The paradoxes of experience, scale, and scope for theory and practice," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 179-184.
    11. Luis Perez-Batres & Jonathan Doh & Van Miller & Michael Pisani, 2012. "Stakeholder Pressures as Determinants of CSR Strategic Choice: Why do Firms Choose Symbolic Versus Substantive Self-Regulatory Codes of Conduct?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 110(2), pages 157-172, October.
    12. Nicholas Berente & Kalle Lyytinen & Youngjin Yoo & John Leslie King, 2016. "Routines as Shock Absorbers During Organizational Transformation: Integration, Control, and NASA’s Enterprise Information System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 551-572, June.
    13. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2020. "Why distance matters: The relatedness between technology development and its appropriation in smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Lüchau, Elle Christine & Atherton, Helen & Olesen, Finn & Søndergaard, Jens & Assing Hvidt, Elisabeth, 2023. "Interpreting technology: Use and non-use of doctor-patient video consultations in Danish general practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 334(C).
    15. Beth A. Bechky, 2003. "Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 312-330, June.
    16. Sébastien Rocher, 2007. "De l'implantation à l'appropriation d'une innovation comptable dans le secteur public local : une approche interactionniste," Post-Print halshs-00544942, HAL.
    17. Daniel Z. Levin, 2000. "Organizational Learning and the Transfer of Knowledge: An Investigation of Quality Improvement," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(6), pages 630-647, December.
    18. Rajiv D. Banker & Joy M. Field & Kingshuk K. Sinha, 2001. "Work-Team Implementation and Trajectories of Manufacturing Quality: A Longitudinal Field Study," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 25-42, November.
    19. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    20. Rogier van de Wetering & Tom Hendrickx & Sjaak Brinkkemper & Sherah Kurnia, 2021. "The Impact of EA-Driven Dynamic Capabilities, Innovativeness, and Structure on Organizational Benefits: A Variance and fsQCA Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.

    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:now:fntisy:2900000022. 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: Lucy Wiseman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nowpublishers.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.