To improve the chances that projects will be successful, organizations often choose senior executives with an interest in the outcome to act as the project sponsors. Executive sponsors are responsible for lining up the necessary resources at the beginning, managing certain activities while the project is under way, and ultimately delivering results. Since sponsors rarely have enough time to manage projects personally, they must rely heavily on project managers. So which activities and behaviors can busy sponsors perform in the course of a project to increase the chances of project success? In researching what makes for successful project sponsorship, the authors used a project life cycle model with four stages: (1) initiating from the preliminary idea through approved charter; (2) planning from approved charter through approved project plan; (3) executing from approved project plan through acceptance of major deliverables; and (4) closing from acceptance of major deliverables through final completion. Project success historically has been defined by the "iron triangle" of cost, schedule and performance. The authors use a broader definition based on three success factors. The first success factor involves impact on the project's customers, which is almost always the most important success measure. The second success factor involves meeting agreements: Was the project completed on time, on budget and to specifications? The third success factor is tied to the future benefits to the company, be they new technology, new products, new markets and/or commercial success. The authors conducted separate studies of each project life-cycle stage, using literature reviews, focus groups, surveys and factor analysis in order to examine sponsor behavior and project success factors. For each stage, they found that two or three behaviors had a significant impact on the project success factors. In the initiating stage, the important behaviors for executive sponsors involve setting performance goals for the project, selecting and mentoring the project manager and establishing priorities. In the project's planning stage, the key sponsor behaviors are ensuring planning and developing relationships with stakeholders. While the project is being executed, important roles for executive sponsors involve ensuring adequate and effective communication, maintaining relationships with stakeholders and ensuring quality. In the project's closing stage, identifying and capturing lessons learned and ensuring that capabilities and benefits are realized are critical sponsor activities. Reprint 56307. For ordering information, see page 6.

The role of the executive sponsor in achieving project success is important, yet rarely addressed. Recent research identifies behaviors that constitute the role of the executive project sponsor and evaluates how such behavior affects project success during different project stages. This study answers two research questions: (1) Does the relative importance of executive sponsor behavior vary significantly at different project stages? And (2) Does the relative importance of project success dimensions vary significantly within and across the different stages of completion? Results provide knowledge that will help executive sponsors decide how to invest their limited time and resources.

Undergraduate research programs are commonplace at many universities. However, little research has been conducted to evaluate their ongoing and long-term effectiveness from the standpoint of the undergraduate student researcher. In an effort to gain perspective from the student researcher, including their thoughts on such a program, a survey was conducted of past participants of a business school research program which brings together three stakeholders in the research process: a faculty member, a business executive mentor, and the undergraduate student researcher. The results presented highlight the major benefits and deficiencies of the existing program from the student’s perspective and provide an evaluation of the program’s overall effectiveness. In addition, our findings are compared to the results of a similar survey, performed fifteen years earlier, of the same undergraduate research program. The comparison reveals a maturation of a program which has evolved to better support the financial needs and time demands of today’s students.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to identify and validate executive sponsor behaviors necessary for successful project implementation during project planning.Design/methodology/approachA survey of 145 executives and managers interested in project management was conducted. Data were analyzed using principal components analyses with varimax rotation for both behavioral‐ and outcome‐based items. Relationships between variables were analyzed via path analysis.FindingsIn total, five sponsor behavior factors were identified including: ensure planning, clarify outputs, stakeholder relationships, support project, and appoint project manager. Additionally, three outcome factors were found: firm's future, meeting agreements (e.g. budgets, scheduling expectations), and customer success. An estimated path model testing the effects of sponsor behaviors on project outcomes indicated six significant paths.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper empirically identifies behaviors sponsors may use during project planning and the impact such behaviors have on project success measures. The exploratory nature of this study suggests further research to confirm findings.Practical implicationsThis paper provides executive sponsors with a focus during the planning stage when various stakeholders are determining many project details.Originality/valueThe paper adds to the limited body of research on the role of project sponsors. The investigation indicates that as sponsors spend more time performing the three behaviors of ensuring planning, managing stakeholder relations, and appointing the project manager; project success increases as measured by outcome factors.

In two leading management bodies of knowledge, A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK[R] Guide) and Syllabus for APMP Examination, executive sponsor has long been recognized as critical to success. Yet research to substantiate this role is limited. The term sponsor, by definition, suggests a financial responsibility. In fact, most recent publication of A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge describes sponsor as the person or group that provides financial resources, in cash or in kind, for project (Project Management Institute, 2004: 376). In Syllabus for APMP Examination (Association for Project Management, 2000), a publication of Association for Project Management (APM), sponsor is considered to be, in addition to provider of finds, individual or group for whom is undertaken, primary risk-taker, and person(s) to whom manager reports (APM). This senior executive or executive sponsor is thought to own and is considered responsible for ensuring its success. He/she is also typically one who proposes in first place, whose business unit reaps its benefits, and whose effectiveness is used to predict success. Involved and committed executive sponsors must have enough clout to dictate appropriate processes and/or make organizational changes necessary to bring about success (Perkins, 2005). Englund and Bucero (2006) recognize sponsorship as a commitment by management to define, defend, and support major activities from start to finish. As a link between manager and senior manager, sponsors' roles vary during life cycle to include: seller, coach, mentor, filter, business judge, motivator, negotiator, and protector. For purposes of this research, we define sponsor as normally a senior executive who has an interest in results of a project. This executive may also have monetary control over project. Often executive has organizational clout, but does not often have significant time to personally manage project (Kloppenborg, 2009: 60-61). Interestingly, very little research exists specifying exactly what tasks or behaviors constitute role of executive sponsor and how these behaviors contribute to success. Furthermore, little research has tested intuitively appealing notion that sponsor behavior during initiation (from first idea concerning to a signed charter or other form of commitment) contributes to success. The purpose of current research is to identify and empirically validate sponsor behavior during initiating stage of a project. After describing mechanisms employed to identify specific sponsor behaviors, we then discuss how these behaviors are validated and extent to which they affect outcomes. BACKGROUND AND STUDY OBJECTIVES While most management bodies of knowledge recognize sponsor as a key stakeholder on every project, very little research has examined empirically role and behavior of executive sponsor in achieving success. Highlighting need for such research, recent studies have stressed role of sponsor with respect to success, often quoting advice from senior managers on how to deal with inadequate sponsors (Englund and Bucero, 2006; Kloppenborg et al., 2006; Melymuka, 2004; Perkins, 2005). Although there is a dearth of empirical research from which to base current study, two studies standout out as particularly relevant. First, Helm and Remington (2005) undertook a combined analysis of, one, roles and responsibilities of sponsor in relation to organizational structure and, two, behavior and practices of key identified agents. Couched in Grounded Theory, methodology in this research involved gathering of data (prior to interviews) via assisted self-analysis. …

Since Information Systems Development (ISD) project success is difficult to achieve and the literature has shown the relationship between IS developer skills and system success is mixed, this paper isolates and studies the knowledge shared by users and developers and its interaction with group solving practices that may lead to ISD project success. We evaluate developer’s knowledge of application domains and user knowledge of IS development along with the level of group problem solving among users and developers as related to the ultimate success of the project. A survey of 168 ISD professionals indicates that a combination of both user knowledge of IS development and IS developer knowledge of application domains had significant impact on successful project outcomes. The magnitude of this success is moderated by the level of group problem solving activities held by the project implementation teams. Up to a certain point, the more group problem solving interaction the more successful the project outcome. However, if knowledge redundancy is very high then exchange of knowledge is not so essential.

This paper considers the mediating effects of user participation activities that interact with crucial skills to explain the varying degrees of software success. Questionnaires were mailed to randomly selected Information System Special Interest Group (ISSIG) members of the Project Management Institute (PMI) in the USA. A total of 171 questionnaires were returned. The overall results of the analysis show that user hands-on activities lower the risks of certain skill deficiencies during the duration of the project to improve the successful implementation of software projects, while user partnering serves as a mediator between application expertise, general expertise, and software success.

A major challenge in Information Systems and Information Technology is to improve the ability to conceptualize, design, develop and deliver information systems that meet customer requirements. Project management is often adopted to create solutions that work and meet customer needs. The principles of project management as defined by the Project Management Institute, can improve project success rates. Researchers in the project management need to help practitioners understanding the impact of different principles on the success of IS development. This study undertakes a survey of project management experts on the state of practice and research to examine the need for improving project management, and suggest areas that can be improved. Research may be the most effective means of defining opportunities for enhancing project success rates by tapping the wealth of literature and complementing it with the expertise of project management practitioners.

PurposeTo identify differences in perceptions between executive sponsors (ESs) and project managers (PM) regarding sponsor involvement on projects, for the purposes of contributing to project management practice and encouraging further sponsor‐related research.Design/methodology/approachA survey of 365 executives and managers interested in project management investigated differences between ESs and PMs in perceived importance on eight dimensions of ES behavior and three dimensions of project success during the initiation stage of a project. This study followed a previous exploratory analysis study that identified sponsor behaviors. Factor analysis and t‐tests were used to develop variables and test for differences, respectively.FindingsResults indicated significant differences between ESs and PMs on the perceived importance of ES involvement on the critical dimension of mentoring and assisting PMs with executives indicating higher importance.Research limitations/implicationsThree specific suggestions are made which are directed toward improving project management practice. Further, additional research is encouraged on the role and influence of the ES in the initiating stage of the project management process.Originality valueThe value of this research is two‐fold. One, the investigation identified a critical project management dimension on which sponsors and PMs differ, which may account for disruptive conflict during a project. Two, the present study adds to the limited body of research on the role of project sponsors.

The failure of systems development projects has plagued the IT industry for years. In fact, the 2004 Standish group report indicates that only 28 percent of software development projects are successful, down from previous estimates of 34%. This paper identifies IT project risk factors that pose threats to successful project implementation and describes project management professionals (PMPs) assessment of these risk factors. It concludes with suggested strategies for avoiding and/or mitigating these risks and associated implications.

Organizational learning is influenced by many traits. Among these, certain environmental and managerial traits within the organization have been shown to support a learning organization. This organizational learning is crucial in information system development so that future projects may gain from the knowledge generated from past projects and during current projects. Organizational technology learning is the term we give to the organizational learning that occurs in information system development. A survey of project managers and participants in system projects tested whether certain common traits tend to be active promoters of learning in the project team setting as well as at the organizational level. Of those traits tested, clear mission and objectives, knowledge transfer mechanisms, and experimentation all proved to be significant environmental factors for learning in project teams.

User participation is an accepted practice for reducing risks during system development. Little is known with regard to which specific risks are mitigated and which user activities are most important. This report describes preliminary results that divide risks into technical expertise and more general process expertise to determine if early partnering or ongoing activities moderate risk more fully.

Employers hiring entry-level information systems personnel have expectations about the entry-level expertise in a number of skill/knowledge areas including interpersonal and management, technical, and general business specialties, in addition to established organizational hiring guidelines. Furthermore, based on recent experience, these same employers have perceptions of the delivery of this requisite skill base. In an effort to increase (or improve) stakeholder relationships between IS hiring organizations and 4-year liberal arts institutions, we introduce a framework for examining skill requirements from the employer’s perspective. Derived from discrepancy theory, the framework concedes that employers hold a variable set of expectations for entry-level IS skills as well as a perception of skills of recently hired entrylevel personnel. This paper examines differences in expectation and performance and describes the impact of this discrepancy on the IS entry-level hiring process and the incorporation of this information into curricula at schools of higher education.

Past research indicates that expectations play a crucial role in the final satisfaction of users of information systems (IS). This includes expectations regarding the skill levels exhibited by the providers of the IS services and products. Typically, the expectations are examined as gaps from perceived performance or as gaps from realistic expectations. The interaction of these gaps has not been thoroughly explored in past research, although recent theories anticipate both gaps are crucial in meeting the desires of the users. A matched pair sample of IS users and IS providers is used to collect data on expected skill levels and perceived delivery of the skills demanded. Gaps, both between these two stakeholder groups regarding expectations and within the user group regarding perceived delivery, are found to impact user satisfaction in a two-way analysis. The results indicate that expectations should be managed to higher levels and commonly understood across the user and provider groups.

A method for measuring service quality that includes both the user and IS service provider perspectives.

System development efforts depend to a large degree upon how well information systems (IS) managers, IS specialists, and IS users work together in a project team structure. Yet, these individuals frequently work under different perceptions about matters of importance to development, management, and success. This paper introduces a framework for examining IS specialists' skill requirements from a multiple-stakeholder perspective. Derived from discrepancy theory, the framework concedes that different stakeholders hold a variable set of expectations for IS personnel skill levels as well as a perception of skills held by IS personnel. We examine differences in expectation and performance expressed by each group and describe the impact of the discrepancy on user satisfaction, career satisfaction of IS specialists, and on job performance evaluations by IS managers. Results confirm that a discrepancy between an IS specialist's expectations of skill and their perceived skill self-proficiency impacts career satisfaction. Similar relations hold for IS managers and users. Since different stakeholders may hold different perceptions, satisfaction of all parties becomes problematic unless a common frame of reference can be determined.

This paper describes the methodology and results of research designed to extract useful professional project management information from recent research literature in the information systems and information technology (IS/IT) fields. The resulting database of 784 journal, thesis, and conference proceedings abstracts represents research from 1999 through 2001 in the IS/IT field related to project management. A lessons learned executive seminar was conducted to allow experienced, active project managers to examine selected findings for lessons learned and research opportunities that might benefit project managers.

Desired qualities include a strong technical orientation, end-user empathy, and organizational awareness.