The hot potato game: roles and responsibilities for realizing IT project benefits
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of frameworks have been proposed to help organizations manage their IT projects and get the willing benefits, such as Project Management Book of Knowledge, Managing successful programmes, Program management and Managing Benefits from APMG certificate. Even though most of them are prescriptive, evidence has shown that organizations front strong difficulties to adopt them. Hence, this paper present the benefit realization methodology implemented by a public organization to appropriately manage IT/IS project benefits. Based on two case studies from the same organization, we described how the organization have identified desired benefits, defined project outcomes, planned benefit realization, realized benefits and assessed the benefit accomplishment. We have also described which stakeholders should participate in the benefits realization methodology and described their main responsibilities: portfolio management level, program and project level, project sponsor, lead users and change management officers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it