Al Hawsah, M O (2020) The impact of project sponsors' decisions on the success of projects: An action research study. PhD thesis, University of Liverpool, UK.
Abstract
This action research was conducted to explore the impact of project sponsors' decisions on the success of three projects. My organisation had a problem concerning delays in its projects. The management undertook different approaches to support the projects. One action taken was assigning a project sponsor. It was observed, however, that at times the project sponsor made decisions that contributed to the projects' failure. This study examines how the project sponsors' decisions affected the success of the projects and identifies the causes of the project sponsors' behaviours and decisions. Moreover, it explores the strategies the research participants and I can use to support the sponsor in facilitating project success.I used a qualitative case study methodology and action research approach to explore the decisions of the project sponsor in the context of three megaprojects. The study involved 13 research participants. The data were collected through an interview and observations. The data analysis revealed that, of the 78 identified project issues, 27, or 34%, were caused primarily by the decisions of the project’s sponsor. The research found three significant project sponsor decisions that affected the success of the projects: the decision to request a low budget for Project A, the decision to set an unrealistic project deadline and the project sponsor’s level of support for the project.The research identified three primary causes of the project sponsor’s behaviours and decisions. They include the lack of project management knowledge and experience, the effect of the organisational culture and the desire of the project sponsor to achieve his own personal objectives. The research results revealed many strategies the research participants and I can use to influence the decisions and behaviours of the project sponsor.In three action cycles, the research participants and I were able to implement approaches that influenced some of the project sponsor’s beliefs and assumptions. These actions helped the organisation more effectively manage projects and minimise project delays.The research contributes to actionable knowledge by developing a successful project sponsor framework. The framework guides management, the project sponsor and the project manager in taking relevant actions to develop project sponsors and letting them act in the interest of project success. It additionally guides management in fostering the organisational conditions that promote a successful project sponsorship.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Morales, L; Meizner, A; Sambrook, S; Apergis, N and Rowe, M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | megaproject; project success; project manager; culture; failure; organisational culture; action research; case study; interview |
| Index terms: | project delay, organizational culture, megaproject, methodology, strategy, data analysis, action research, project sponsor, interview, project management, project success, case study, project manager |
| Subjects: | strategic project management, research methods, data collection methods, profession, data analysis and analytics, project management theory and practice, management, project controls, sociology |
| Topics: | Project Management, Time Control, Organizational Design, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here