+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

Discussion Week 3
Please answer the following discussion question with 250-300 words and include references, also used
the 2 student discussions below as example to make sure it is done right. Then write a response to each
of the other students (100 words each) be positive, what you agree with or not and what you like about
it.
Discussion question ( min 250 words include references)
After carefully reviewing the lecture materials, assigned
reading(s), and relevant resources, please respond to the
following:
Review the course materials for this week and define the difference
between project and product requirements. Also, use a professional
example to detail five examples of each including how each would be
planned for, managed, and controlled.
Note: Please post your original response by Thursday and
respond to at least 2 peers by Sunday. In addition, follow APA
guidelines and cite at least 1 resource to support your
discussions; be sure to include a reference section at the end of
your post.
Student 1 Doug
Review the course materials for this week and define the difference between project and product
requirements. Also, use a professional example to detail five examples of each including how
each would be planned for, managed, and controlled.
Project requirements are the are the defined elements that a project needs to meet to be successful. A
project can create a good or service. The project requirements do not define the product but, instead,
define the way it is developed, manufactured, and deployed. Let’s use the example of a software
application. The budget should be managed by the business finance process and, like requirements,
require a change management board to evaluate and approve the change. Much the same as a change
to the schedule. An example of some project requirements would be:
1. Project timeline.
2. Project team.
3. Project budget.
4. Project scope.
5. Project constraints.
(Burek, 2008) As with any configured item the requirements for the project, and product, should be
properly managed for change. Any change should look at the impact the change, if any, has to the
schedule, budget, and technical design of the product and how it impacts the project.
In Contrast product requirements would be the defined elements that make a product successfully
completed. It is the definition of the product that must be met. Continuing with the example of a
software application these are some examples of a product requirement:
1. Application uptime. This would be the definition of how much the application needs to be
available to users. It would allow for downtime for maintenance and software code rolls.
2. Data Storage. This would be the amount and types of data the application uses that would need
to be stored and the durations of storage.
3. Backup. This is the schema for how often the application and data needs to be backed up. This
can be used if data or the code becomes corrupted.
4. Disaster recovery. In the event of a man-made or natural disaster how will the application and
its data be restored?
5. Service cost. This is the expected user cost as determined by a ROI analysis or similar.
Product requirements tend to evolve over the course of a project. They begin with high level scope
requirements then gain detail as the analysis, design, and fabrication happens. Learnings take place
throughout the product lifecycle. These need to be managed and controlled or they can run away and
cause a product to fail to meet what it was intended. Typically, a requirements document would be
authored and change managed as the requirements evolve. Any changes would be evaluated for cost,
schedule, and technical impacts which would be rolled into the product definition. The end result would
be a product which would meet the expectations for success (Holmes, 2022)
References
Burek, P. (2008, October 19) “Creating clear project requirements – differentiating “what” from “how”.
Retrieved from: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/clear-project-requirements-jointapplication-design-6928
Holmes, R. (2022, February 24) “Modern ways to create Product Requirements Documents”. Retrieved
from: https://www.departmentofproduct.com/blog/modern-ways-to-create-productrequirements-documents/
less
Student 2 Rachael
A requirement is a “condition or capability that is required to be present in a product,
service, or result to satisfy an agreement or other formally imposed specification” (Project
Management Institute [PMI], 2017, section 5). Project requirements are requirements
regarding project execution whereas product, or solution, requirements are regarding
characteristics of the product in order to meet business and stakeholder needs (PMI,
2015). Product requirements can be categorized as functional or nonfunctional
requirements. It is important to identify requirements as it “provides the basis for defining
the product scope and project scope” (PMI, 2017, section 5.2).
Currently I am working on a project to implement a new software tool. During the RFP
process we identified product requirements and then, after the RFP was over and the vendor
selected, we further defined these requirements. Product requirements included functional
requirements such as integrations with other tools, types of conditional rules in workflows,
and automation of approval routing and nonfunctional requirements such as single sign on
capability, SLAs, and company branding. These were planned for during the discovery phase
when we mapped the new processes and configurations ensuring that all the identified
requirements were accounted for. During this process some limitations of the software
were discovered so that we could not configure it as planned, we had to brainstorm in order
to find other solutions or workarounds. We then did many rounds of testing to ensure the
solution worked properly and met our requirements prior to going live with the
solution. Project requirements included milestones, frequency of status reports from our
third party implementation partner, budget tracking for fees incurred, preferred
communication methods, and identifying the attendees and timing for SteerCo
meetings. Whereas the stakeholders and subject matter experts identified the product
requirements, the project manager was responsible for the project requirements.
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes habil (2018) presented that project success is dependent on both the
success of the product (user/stakeholder satisfaction) and of the project management (triple
constraint). The requirements management plan should be used to manage both project
and product requirements.
References:
Ágnes, C.-K. (2018). The relevance of project success criteria and Requirements in project
Management. Project Management Development – Practice & Perspectives, 51–58.
International Institute of Business Analysis. (2015). A guide to the business analysis body of
knowledge (BABOK Guide) (3rd ed.). International Institute of Business Analysis.
Project Management Institute. (2015). Business analysis for practitioners: A practice guide.
Project Management Institute, Inc.
https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/business-analysisfor/9781628250794/cover.xhtml
Project Management Institute. (2017). A guide to the project management body of
knowledge: PMBOK Guide (6th ed.). Project Management Institute,
Inc. https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/a-guideto/9781628253900/cover.xhtml
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
THE RELEVANCE OF PROJECT SUCCESS CRITERIA AND
REQUIREMENTS IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes habil. Ph.D, Associate Professor, Óbuda University
SUPPORTED THROUGH THE NEW NATIONAL EXCELLENCE PROGRAM OF THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN CAPACITIES
Abstract
Projects have become key players in national economies today. Projects are concrete
manifestations of investments, there are no investments without projects, and without them the economy
can not grow substantially. However, projects are unsuccessful in many cases, because they aren’t
prepared in time, don’t achieve the required performance they expect from them. A common cause of
project failure is a poor planning process, budgetary problems, the missed investment calculations, or the
omission of sustainability, relevance, and feasibility.
These expectations are expressed in every project management course, all of the literature dealing
with the projects, but the project actors don’t give the required relevance to them. The aim of this paper is
to examine the above-mentioned triple success criteria system based on the opinion of Hungarian
companies, in addition to measuring the elements of a classical project triangle.
Key words: Project success, project management, primary research, SME
JEL code: O10, M10
Introduction
Projects are always temporary arrangements that are established for pre-set objectives.
Success for a project means achieving the objectives, but the road to success is paved with
various risks and difficulties. Therefore in many cases the expected success of a project turns
into failure. Several organizations have already tried to estimate the number of unsuccessful
projects. An organization called Wellingtone (n.d., a.) defined the project as such a changeinducing endeavour that has to meet three criteria for the sake of success:
 Alignment to the strategy of the project promoter,
 Must have priority over other initiatives, which are in competition with the project for
scarce resources,
 Must have a positive impact in the future.
Based on some surveys, 70% of the projects fail due to inadequate planning. The most
common mistakes are the underestimation of the budget and the insufficient management of
risks. The failed projects will not be able to contribute to the increase of the investment ratio
and to the promotion of the economic growth. Hence the failed projects will always appear as a
loss or damage, for which the organization wasted the resources in vain. These effects also show
up at the level of the national economy as a loss in the form of lost growth.
The above cited organization also interpreted success in three dimensions:
Successful project management that is capable of delivering the predefined result on
time and within the budget, in which setting up the correct milestones has a huge role,
 Successful project, which reaches the pre-set business goals,
 Successful enterprise, which is able to approach the strategic goals, meeting the
expectations of all actors (owners, managers, employees, other stakeholders).

Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
51
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
The organization provided methodological recommendations as well (n.d., b.) for the sake
of achieving the project’s success. Based on their theory there are six steps leading to the
success of the project: preparation, planning, communication, monitoring, controlling and
review.
The annual project management survey conducted by the organization examines the key
factors along the project characteristics, through which success is measureable and the
tendencies can be determined too. The results are summed up in the diagram below.
31%
always or mostly complete on budget
42%
31%
always or mostly deliver full benefits
2016
35%
2017
32%
always or mostly complete projects on time
37%
0%
5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Source: Wellingtone, 2016, 2017
Figure 1.: The performance of the project success criteria
As the chart shows, there has been a significant improvement in the success features of
projects: while in 2016 only one-third of the projects had been carried out on time and within
the budget under the given performance characteristics, a year later this proportion was notably
above 35%. All this was due to the better project management, the more thorough planning and
the more conscious application of the project management methodologies.
According to Pinto and Slevin (1988) the success of a project also highly depends on how
well it can be implemented into the project promoter organization. This process almost always
hinges on the successful implementation of three factors: the technical and organizational
validity, and the organizational efficiency. Afterwards they defined the criteria of project
success too from the perspective of the project and the client. In order to carry out successful
projects, on the project part there are always three factors that need to be carefully and
accurately determined: time, cost and efficiency, which became known as the classic project
triangle or iron triangle. From the client’s point of view usability, efficiency and satisfaction are
the success factors.
The success of the projects can only be measured by the clear definition of the success
criteria. Görög (2008) defined the success criteria as such benchmarks that give an unequivocal
answer to whether the project was successful or not. The success criteria can also be defined by
certain indexes that are called key performance indicators (KPI) in the literature. This method is
applied in the projects in a way that the indicators and the related minimum acceptable ratings
are established at the planning stage (Toor – Ogunlana, 2010), and the success of the projects is
measured against their fulfilment. The KPI method can be excellently used in projects where the
objectives are quantitative, meaning that they are measurable and analysable. The method is
52
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
hard to use in the case of outputs that are difficult to measure, due to the lack of measurable
performance.
According to De Wit (1988) the success of a project can be measured from two aspects,
the success of the classic project triangle or project management, and the success of the project
itself. The latter can be best defined by the satisfaction of the users. Baccarini (1999) continued
De Wit’s theory and said that the success of a project is basically the success of the product and
the project management together. Baccarini’s theory also referred to the project triangle, and
turned to user satisfaction with regard to the product success. Both recently introduced theories
are described as two-dimensional.
Görög (2007) measured project success in three dimensions. The iron triangle being the
starting point, he considered organized satisfaction to be the criterion of success, in addition to
the satisfaction of the stakeholders.
Bannermann (2008) interpreted project success in several dimensions. The forms of
success can be:
 Success of the project management, which can be measured via the implementation of
the above mentioned project triangle, and it is the most often used criterion. However,
this success factor has many limitations. It is criticized by its opponents mainly for
putting the primary focus on the assets of the project, while disregarding the purpose it
was created for.
 Success of the product, which includes satisfaction with the end product of the project,
usability and quality as well, based on the factors of the iron triangle.
 Business success, which – on top of the success of the project management – also takes
into consideration how the project, carried out on the basis of the triangle, will be able
to be integrated into the organization and what kind of benefits it will bring to the
organization.
 Strategic success, which is integrally linked to the previous criterion and underlines the
long-term utility and developmental role of the project in the long term.
 Success of the process, which is the most neglected criterion and describes the success
of the path towards the objective. For the sake of the full implementation of this
process, the organization needs to make serious efforts so that the project can meet its
target.
Fortune and White (2006) also dealt with the identification of success criteria. As a result
of their extensive researches they found that there are five crucial areas in the projects that are
of particular relevance on the road to success, which are the followings:
 Clear-cut objectives (scope),
 Clear, detailed, up-to-date plans (plan),
 Communication with the stakeholders,
 Support of the management, and
 Involving the client/user from the start.
It can be seen from the above literature that project success can be defined by a lot of
factors. However, we mustn’t forget the basic principles suggested by the classic iron triangle,
namely that a project cannot be successful if it does not meet the characteristics set in the
triangle, nor if it overachieves them. These are only supplemented by the other criteria, so that
the projects could reach their objective for the sake of the organization and the clients.
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
53
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
Research results and discussion
3. Methodological background
The research results introduced in this study are part of a primary questionnaire research
conducted in 2017. The research was carried out in Hungary with the help of a pretested and
standardized questionnaire form. The present research was preceded by a previous survey
among enterprises, which had been preceded by an in-depth interview analysis. The present
questionnaire form was created as a result of these two former rounds, and it was a complex
questionnaire, covering the financing and investment activity of the enterprises. The survey paid
special attention to the enterprises’ project management and project financing practices as well.
During the research we received 521 questionnaires, but only 416 of them were assessable
enough to be included in the sample. The results of the research are presented in this study
based on the employment figures of the responding enterprises. The composition of the sample
is illustrated in the below graph.
As it is shown, the majority of the sample, 85%, comprised of smaller enterprises with
less than 50 employees, which meant 355 enterprises. The proportion of the medium-sized
enterprises was 9% (38 enterprises), while the larger companies had a percentage of 6% (23
enterprises), therefore it can be established that the results presented in this study introduce the
possible ways of the achieving the success criteria mainly from the aspects of the small and
medium-sized enterprises.
4. The results of the research
During the research through 27 statements I was looking for an answer to how the
responding enterprises assess the success criteria of the projects on a four point Likert scale.
Several of the listed statements were related to planning and implementation, but there were
success factors deriving from the micro and macro environments as well. I asked the
respondents to grade the importance of the criteria on a scale of four, where the highest grade
represented the most important criterion. The below table contain the results of the research by
the average ratings, highlighting also the ratings given by the certain segments.
Table 1
Assessment of the project success criteria based on the mean values given to the certain levels
Below Between Above
Criteria
Mean
50
50-250
250
emp.
emp.
emp.
Actual and real cost planning
3,43
3,44
3,26
3,57
Actual and real resource planning
3,42
3,43
3,21
3,48
Actual and real time planning
3,36
3,39
3,11
3,30
Accurate, thorough planning
3,30
3,32
3,42
2,70
Solid financial background of the project
3,28
3,31
3,13
3,13
Continuous communication
3,27
3,31
2,84
3,39
Flexible reaction to changes
3,27
3,28
3,11
3,30
Adequate risk management
3,23
3,23
3,08
3,48
Real and accurate needs assessment
3,23
3,25
3,26
2,78
Well-trained and prepared project team
3,22
3,23
3,21
3,13
54
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
Well-trained and prepared project manager
3,22
3,22
3,16
3,30
User satisfaction
3,17
3,22
2,82
3,04
Adequate risk assessment
3,11
3,14
2,66
3,30
Adequate level of financial reserves
3,09
3,12
2,74
3,26
Adequate level of human resources
3,05
3,08
2,55
3,35
Meeting the user expectations
3,01
3,06
2,68
2,78
Technical compliance of the project result
2,99
3,03
2,82
2,74
Implementation of adequate milestones and control points
2,96
2,92
3,03
3,48
Stable and strong sponsor
2,89
2,88
3,13
2,78
Content definition of the project result
2,86
2,92
2,47
2,61
Integration of the project result into the organization
2,75
2,74
2,61
3,09
Wide acceptance of the project result within the organization
2,70
2,69
2,63
3,00
Predictable macro environment at a domestic level
2,67
2,66
2,95
2,35
Supporting economic policy at a domestic level
2,65
2,66
2,29
3,13
Predictable macro environment at an international level
2,48
2,47
2,68
2,26
Wide acceptance of the project result in a social context
2,44
2,43
2,50
2,57
Supporting economic policy at an international level
2,39
2,35
2,37
3,13
Source: own research, 2017, N = 416
It can be stated on the basis of the results that for the enterprises the most important
success factor with the highest average rating (3.43) was the real cost planning. The enterprises
can perfectly see that without a real budget the projects will fail, so they will not be carried out
to the original plans. The importance of the actual and real resource planning tightly followed
with a rating of 3.42. The actual and real time planning was the third with an average rating of
3.36. The first three success criteria of the sample mean were practically the iron triangle,
except for efficiency. The responding enterprises found the other planning-related factors
significant too, which came in after the third place, and they considered the stakeholders’
involvement in projects to be important as well. Interestingly, the supporting economic policy at
an international level was deemed the least crucial success criterion. Based on the opinion of the
enterprises it can be established that changes in the international environment cannot
substantially influence their projects. Wide acceptance of the project result in a social context
was also deemed less significant. It is peculiar, because the majority of the projects fail due to
the insufficient support from the environment, as the society does not accept them or agree with
them. This statement only received an average rating of 2.44. Finally, the criterion regarding the
macro environment, namely the predictable macro environment at an international level, was
among the last ones too. The economic policy and the domestic macro environment were
considered to be more important than this, since they were not included in the last three factors.
The smallest enterprises – the ones with less than 50 employees – also put the actual and
real cost planning, resource planning and time planning to the first three places. All three
success criteria received higher than average ratings. In their point of view the macro
environment at an international level, the international economic policy and the wide acceptance
of the project result were the least relevant factors. Since mainly the smallest enterprises
constituted the sample, therefore their priority ranking was evidently the same as the assessment
of the enterprises in the whole sample.
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
55
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
The accurate and thorough planning was the most important for the medium-sized
enterprises with employees between 50 and 250. It got a lot higher rating than the sample mean
(this criterion was fourth in respect of the entire sample). In their opinion cost planning and
needs assessment were also essential. They gave an average rating of 3.26 to the actual real cost
planning, the same as to the real and accurate needs assessment. The latter criterion was only
eighth in terms of the whole sample. On this basis it can be established that the medium-sized
enterprises put a lot more emphasis on the planning work preparatory to the projects than their
counterparts from other segments. They also placed the actual and real resource planning to the
fourth place, which further confirmed the former conclusions. From their perspective the
domestic economic policy was the last, slightly preceded by the rating of the international
economic policy. Third from bottom was the content definition of the project result again,
which was even less important than it was for the whole sample.
In the case of the largest enterprises cost planning and resource planning took the first
places. The actual and real cost planning had an average rating of 3.57, and resource planning
followed with an average rating of 3.48. Both figures were substantially higher than the sample
mean. It is interesting that in their case the adequate risk assessment was ranked third with the
same 3.48 average rating. This factor was only tenth among the enterprises of the whole sample.
All this refers to a more conscious project management that takes the risks determining the
project result into account more seriously. The last places were taken by the acceptance of the
project result, along with the predictable macro environment both at a domestic and
international level. Nonetheless, in the eyes of the largest enterprises the domestic and
international economic policy had a more relevant role, which was proved by their ranking as
well.
I classified the above assessed statements into groups with the help of factor analysis.
First, through the KMO value I examined how suitable the data were for factor analysis. The
result was 90.62%, which verified that the data were particularly suited to conducting the
analysis. During the analysis I used the Varimax method, and after performing several trials I
opted for the three factor matrix, since it shows the most optimal grouping of the success criteria
the best.
Table 1
Rotated factor matrix of success components
Actual and real cost planning
Actual and real time planning
Continuous communication
Actual and real resource planning
Well-trained and prepared project team
Content definition of the project result
Well-trained and prepared project manager
Real and accurate needs assessment
Adequate level of financial reserves
Supporting economic policy at a domestic level
User satisfaction
56
Component
Preparation,
Planning construction Supporting
0,791
0,752
0,722
0,651
0,580
0,562
0,546
0,517
0,721
0,656
0,632
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
Adequate risk assessment
Flexible reaction to changes
Adequate level of human resources
Solid financial background of the project
Meeting the user expectations
Adequate risk management
Technical compliance of the project result
Accurate, thorough planning
Predictable macro environment at an international level
Integration of the project result into the organization
Wide acceptance of the project result within the organization
Supporting economic policy at an international level
Wide acceptance of the project result in a social context
Predictable macro environment at a domestic level
Implementation of adequate milestones and control points
Stable and strong sponsor
0,614
0,593
0,589
0,565
0,542
0,516
0,513
0,490
0,743
0,725
0,702
0,680
0,663
0,600
0,431
0,399
Source: own research, 2017, N = 416
On this basis the criteria can be divided into three groups, namely criteria concerning
planning, preparation and implementation, and finally there are support-related success criteria:
 Those criteria belong to planning that significantly affect the planning of cost, time and
resources, which already includes the establishment of the support team (managers,
team members),
 The statements belonging to the preparation and implementation factor are related to
reserves, risk management and the stakeholders, which are able to have a great impact
on the end result of the project during the realization stage,
 Support contains such factors like the aspects of the project result and its acceptance,
but the macro-environmental factors are in this group too – these factors are relevant
and emphasized rather towards the end of the project.

It is apparent which of these criteria are more pronounced, which ones the project
promoter enterprise must pay more attention to. It can be seen through the above analysis that
every enterprise prioritized the first factor, and rather disregarded the other two factors. It
somewhat answers the question why the projects are failing in such great volumes.
Conclusions
Based on the research results it can be asserted that the enterprises deemed planning
crucial from every aspect, regardless of their size. They considered this as the strongest success
criterion, meaning that if a project is well planned then there is a high probability that it will
meet the expectations and achieve the desired result. It can also be acknowledged that the
majority of the enterprises do not specifically deal with the economic policy and the macro
environment in terms of success, they feel them to be distant with regard to their own projects,
although they can largely steer these projects in a completely different direction. This is true
both in a domestic and international context. The results of the research revealed that the
enterprises do not see it as relevant to manage the risks appropriately, and they do not attach
high importance to the project managers and the project team either. This is the case for the
technical questions, the technical compliance, the determination of the milestones and the
content definition of the project result as well.
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
57
Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives
7th International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries
April 19-20, 2018, Riga, University of Latvia
ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263
From the aspect of the success factors it is important to highlight that– apart from
planning – the enterprises of the sample neglect the other two factors. This rather proves the
lexical project management knowledge and not the practical side. From the project
management’s point of view the support mechanisms are truly essential, the underlying factors
that seem to be insignificant, but they are capable of deterring the project from its set path. The
challenge of the future is to emphasize the knowledge on the two neglected factors more in
order to help initiating successful projects in higher percentage than these days.
References
Baccarini, D. (1999): The Logical Framework Method for Defining Project Success, Project
Management Journal, vol. 30., no. 4., 25.-32. pp.
Bannerman, P. L. (2008). Defining project success: a multilevel framework, Paper presented at PMI
Research Conference: Defining the Future of Project Management, Warsaw, Poland. Newtown
Square,
De Wit, A. (1988) Measurement of project success, International Journal of Project Management, vol.
6., no. 3., 164.-170. pp.
Fortune, J. – White, D. (2006): Framing of project critical success factors by a system model,
International Journal of Project Management, vol. 24., no. 1., 53.-65. pp.
Görög, M. (2007): A projektvezetés mestersége, Aula Kiadó, Budapest,
Görög, M. (2008): Projektvezetés, Aula Kiadó, Budapest,
Pinto, J.K. – Slevin, D.P. (1988). Project success: definitions and measurement techniques. Project
Management Journal, vol. 19., no. 1., 67.-72.pp.
Toor, S. – Ogunlana, S. O. (2010): Beyond the ‘iron triangle’: Stakeholder perception of key performance
indicators (KPIs) for large-scale public sector development projects, International Journal of
Project Management, vol. 28., no. 3., 228.-236. pp.
Wellingtone (é.n., a.): What is project success? http://www.wellingtone.co.uk/project-success/
Wellingtone (é.n., b.): 6 spteps to project success, http://www.wellingtone.co.uk/6-steps-project-success/
Wellingtone (2017): The state of project management survey 2017, http://www.wellingtone.co.uk/thestate-project-management-survey-2017/
Wellingtone (2016): The state of project management survey 2016, http://www.wellingtone.co.uk/thestate-project-management-survey-2016/
58
Csiszárik-Kocsir Ágnes
Copyright of Project Management Development – Practice & Perspectives is the property of
University of Latvia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

  
error: Content is protected !!