Using vision as a critical success element in project management
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose The thesis reported upon in this paper addressed the research question “How does the effective development and communication of a ‘project vision’ impact project outcomes?” It outlines the approach, summarizes results and explains the protocols that have been developed from the thesis so that others researching this area may: gain better insights and understanding into how project vision may impact upon project success; and have access to a model and protocols to effectively develop a project vision and effectively communicate it to project stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative research design was selected with multiple case studies. These were conducted within a public service organization using interviews and action learning through testing a developed protocol for team members to develop a coherent and well understood vision for project outcomes. Results were then used to develop a tool for teams to develop a project vision statement in a structured workshop. This approach was then tested through gathering and analyzing participant feedback from the workshop. Subsequent to this initial workshop and the publication of the thesis, the vision development tool has been further validated in both academic class room settings (Masters of Public Administration students) and with senior public servants as part of a project sponsor course offerings. Participants in both groups have commented on the relevance and effectiveness of the tool in creating a value add project artifact: the project vision. Findings First, the study established that a clear, well‐articulated and convincing project outcomes vision that was effectively communicated made a strong and positive impact upon perceived project success. Second, a protocol was developed and thoroughly tested to develop a project vision. This protocol was found to be successful for the projects it was trialed on and reasons for its acknowledged success were explicated. Third, the study highlighted four emergent issues that require further investigation but for the moment may be risks that need to be managed or opportunities to be exploited. These are: the benefits of an incremental or phased approach; the need for sustainment; the necessity of addressing horizontality; and the imperative of vision champions. Practical implications Project practitioners should find the approach outlined by the protocol model as being valuable to replicate and adapt to their own project context. Originality/value While the concept of a clear and well‐communicated project vision is now well‐accepted there are few examples of rigorous thesis that examine how a vision may be best developed and communicated.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,161 | 0,171 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,009 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,044 |
| Communication savante | 0,026 | 0,023 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,020 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».