IT projects remain beset by leadership problems

26 Feb 2009

Comments: 2

A Computing logo
Dr John McManus
Dr John McManus, senior research fellow, University of Lincoln

According to research I conducted last year with a colleague, the annual cost of IT project failure across the European Union is a breathtaking €142bn (£125bn).

To put that figure in context, we defined project failure as any project not meeting any or all of the following success criteria: cost, time, quality and original requirements.

Further reading

The study looked at 214 projects between 1998 and 2005. Of those we examined, seven out of eight projects were classified as failures. Amid the current economic turmoil, such levels of project failure are cause for alarm.

There was little comfort we could draw from the research. The firms we studied had adopted sophisticated project management techniques to steer and keep projects on track. Yet many still failed.

Strong executive leadership and project management skills are lacking in many firms. Indeed, the major causes of project failure relate to inadequate leadership and pre-project due diligence.

Evidence suggests that the culture within many companies is often such that leadership, stakeholder and risk management issues are not factored into projects early on and in many instances cannot formally be written down for political reasons and are rarely discussed openly at project board or steering group meetings, although they may be discussed at length behind closed doors.

Despite attempts to make software development and project delivery more rigorous, a considerable proportion of effort results in systems that do not meet user expectations and are cancelled. In our view, this is attributed to the fact that very few businesses have the infrastructure, education, training, or management discipline to bring projects to successful completion.

While our understanding of the importance of project failure has increased, the underlying reasons still remain an issue and a point of contention for practitioners and academics. There is still a lot to learn from studying project failure.

Reader comments

Honesty might be the best Policy

Project failure is almost always due to behavioural issues in my experience. Overconfidence bias, information availability bias and several other well documented biases kill most projects before they even get off the ground. Addressing these issues requires a level of objectivity that is often missing in an IT project. Sooner of later we'll realise that it is people that are important in IT, not the technology, project management methods, or even ´strong leadership' - whatever that might be.

Posted by: Martin Butler  27 Feb 2009

Corporate Profiling for pre-implementation due diligence

Hi Dr McManus
Having read your article today, I was pleased to hear that someone else has also realized that IT project failures are due to leadership and business issues not being addressed before the project got underway. Having studied this subject extensively myself, I have a book about to be published which highlights key initiatives and decisions that business leaders and executives need to undertake pre-investment and pre-implementation. Ultimately, without these you can employ the best project managers and vendor but they can only work with they have been given and initiatives will only be undertaken if decided by leaders and supported by the organization. The Corporate Profiling methodology I propose , highlights where leaders and executives need to be involved in the pre-implementation planning process if the project is going to have any chance of success.
Kind regards
Sarah Runge

Posted by: Sarah Runge  26 Feb 2009

Have your say on this article

All fields required. Your email address will not be displayed on the site.

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms & Conditions

  • Digg
  • Tweet

Newsletters

Sign up for our FREE newsletters

Technology Patent Wars

Large companies such as Microsoft, Facebook and Google have been hoovering up technology patents recently. Is this stifling innovation?

87 %

5 %

8 %