VUCA environment on project success: The effect of project management methods

Moura, Ralf Luis de; Carneiro, Teresa Cristina Janes; Dias, Taciana Lemos

doi:10.15728/bbr.2023.20.3.1.en

Ralf Luis de Moura

conceptualization

investigation

methodology

project administration

supervision

validation

writing – original draft

writing – review & editing

Faculdades Integradas Espirito-Santenses, Vitória, ES, Brazil.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0170-4056

Teresa Cristina Janes Carneiro

conceptualization

investigation

methodology

project administration

supervision

validation

writing – original draft

writing – review & editing

Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo, Vitória, ES, Brazil.

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9987-1460

Taciana Lemos Dias

conceptualization

investigation

methodology

project administration

supervision

validation

writing – original draft

writing – review & editing

Universidade Federal do Espirito Santo, Vitória, ES, Brazil.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7172-1230

ralfmoura@gmail.com

carneiro.teresa@gmail.com

taciana.dias@ufes.br

AUTHOR'S CONTRIBUTION

This paper's authors declare that they worked equally on the stages of conceptualization, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, validation, writing, and editing of this paper.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

All the authors of this paper declare that they have no conflict of interest about the objects addressed.

Variable	Value	%
Gender	Male	73.25
Gender	Female	26.75
Education	High school completed	1.82
Education	Higher education completed	98.18
Professional role	Engineers technicians or IT professionals	41.65
	Project Manager	25.23
	Senior Manager, Director, or CEO	18.54
	Other	14.58
Region	South America	35.75
	Europe	14.85
	Central America	10.61
	North America	20.30
	Asia / Pacific e Africa	18.49
Company size	Less than 1000 employees	53.94
Company size	More than de 1001 employees	46.06
Method	Agile Method	54.10
Method	Non-agile method	45.90
Team size	Less than 50 people	79.06
Team size	More than 51 people	20.94
Project segment	IT Infrastructure	17.33
	Software Development	15.50
	Services	9.73
	Utilities	9.73
	Transports	9.12
	Construction	8.81
	Health	8.21
	Other (Aerospatiale, environmental, agriculture, military, manufacture e industrials)	21.59

		V	U	C	A	S	AVE	Composite Reliability	Cronbach's Alfa
Construct	V	0.769*					0.592	0.810	0.666
	U	0,247	0.789*				0.622	0.869	0.702
	C	0.239	0.012	0.831*			0.690	0.815	0.678
	A	0,154	-0.375	0.397	0.831*		0.691	0.869	0.781
	S	-0.392	-0.279	-0.458	-0.224	0.805*	0.647	0.902	0.728

	V	U	C	A
V
U	0.382
C	0.334	0.096
A	0.178	0.522	0.562
S	0.486	0.349	0.608	0.207

Hypothesis		Original Sample (O)	Sample Mean (M)	Standard Deviation (STDEV)	T Statistics (O/STDEV\|)	P Values
H₃	V(S	-0.198	-0.200	0.053	3.752	0.000*
H₁	U(S	-0.268	-0.275	0.051	5.259	0.000*
H₄	C(S	-0,366	-0.365	0.053	6.950	0.000*
H₂	A(S	-0.103	-0.112	0.051	2.035	0.042*
H₇	M(V	-0.132	-0.131	0.051	2,608	0.009*
H₅	M(U	0.040	0.041	0.054	0.744	0.457
H₄	M(C	0.041	0.039	0.055	0.757	0.449
H₆	M(A	0.043	0.043	0.056	0.778	0.436

Hypotheses		Path coefficient	P-value	R²	R² adjusted
H₃	V(S	-0.198	0.000*
H₁	U(S	-0.268	0.000*	36.7%	35.0%
H₄	C(S	-0.366	0.000*	36.7%	35.0%
H₂	A(S	-0.103	0.050*
H₇	M(V	-0.132	0.009*
H₅	M(U	0.040	0.457
H₄	M(C	0.041	0.449
H₆	M(A	0.043	0.436

Path Coeff.		t-value		Conclusions
H₁	-0.268	0.000	*	Confirmed
H₂	-0.103	0.000	*	Confirmed
H₃	-0.198	0.000	*	Confirmed
H₄	-0,366	0.000	*	Confirmed
H₅		0.457	NS	Not confirmed
H₆		0.436	NS	Not confirmed
H₇		0.009	*	Confirmed
H₈		0.449	NS	Not confirmed

Construct	Variable	Description	Authors
Ambiguity	A_1	In my last completed project, there were incorrect requirements	Wallace et al. (2004Wallace, L., Keil, M., & Rai, A. (2004). How software project risk affects project performance. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 289-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02059.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.... )
	A_2	In my last completed project, there were conflicting requirements
	A_3	In my last completed project, there were difficulties in defining the scope of the project.
Tecnical Complexity	C_1	In my last completed project, there was the use of new technology	Wallace et al. (2004Wallace, L., Keil, M., & Rai, A. (2004). How software project risk affects project performance. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 289-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02059.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.... )
	C_2	In my last completed project, there was use of technology that had never been used before in previous projects.
	C_3	In my last completed project, there was the involvement of different technical specialties.	Baccarini (1996Baccarini, D. (1996). The concept of project complexity: A review. International Journal of Project Management, 14(4), 201-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-7863(95)00093-3 https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-7863(95)000... )
Uncertanty	U_1	In my last completed project, the goals were Ill-defined.	Jun et al. (2011Jun, L., Qiuzhen, W., & Qingguo, M. (2011). The effects of project uncertainty and risk management on IS development project performance: A vendor perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 29(7), 923-933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.11.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.... )
	U_2	In my last completed project, there was a lack of project domain knowledge (knowledge about project theme)	Wallace et al. (2004Wallace, L., Keil, M., & Rai, A. (2004). How software project risk affects project performance. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 289-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02059.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.... )
	U_3	In my last completed project, the client did not know what he wanted.	Jun et al. (2011Jun, L., Qiuzhen, W., & Qingguo, M. (2011). The effects of project uncertainty and risk management on IS development project performance: A vendor perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 29(7), 923-933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.11.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.... )
Volatility	V_1	In my last completed project, requirements changed	Wallace et al. (2004Wallace, L., Keil, M., & Rai, A. (2004). How software project risk affects project performance. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 289-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02059.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.... )
	V_3	In my last completed project, the technology involved changed
	V_3	In my last completed project, the sponsor or members of the project changed	Lee and Xia (2005Lee, G., & Xia, W. (2005). The ability of information systems development project teams to respond to business and technology changes: A study of flexibility measures. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), 75-92. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000523 https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.30... )
Success	S_1	My last completed project met intended requirements (scope).	Wallace et al. (2004Wallace, L., Keil, M., & Rai, A. (2004). How software project risk affects project performance. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 289-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.02059.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.00117315.2004.... )
	S_2	My last completed project was finished within the schedule.
	S_3	My last completed project was finished within the budget.
	S_4	In my last completed project, the overall quality of project deliveries (e.g. products or services) was high.
	S_5	In my last completed project, deliveries met the client's expectations.
Project Management Method	M	Which methodology was applied in your last completed project?	Authors

[1] ralfmoura@gmail.com

Brasil

Brasil

VUCA environment on project success: The effect of project management methods

Abstract