Search results

The purpose of this paper is to propose to redefine the concept of project lead time (PLT) to encompass the time between the project initial idea and the moment in which success is being assessed, which can be beyond the project close-out, using whatever criteria is appropriate for the stakeholder at that moment in time. The conventional project life cycle does not count for the long-term effects of the megaproject, which can have a significant impact on its perception of success. Thus the megaproject life cycle should include a significant part of the operational life cycle of the end product or result, and the criteria of success should include the long-term benefits of the project (measured along various years after the delivery of the end product or result).

The paper uses three illustrative cases of megaprojects: Airbus A380, London Heathrow Terminal 5 and London Olympic Games 2012. These megaprojects, despite their problems in achieving objectives of time, cost and quality (the triple constraint), can be viewed as success or failure depending on the performance and benefits of the resulting product/infrastructure analysed over a long period of time after its delivery.

In order to reconcile the usual distinction between project and product life cycle, and the various definitions of success in different moments of the project/product life cycle, the authors propose to redefine the concept of PLT to encompass the time between the project initial idea and the moment in which success is being assessed, beyond the project close-out, using any criteria which is appropriate for the stakeholder at that moment in time.

When assessing the success of the megaproject it is important to define the PLT under which success is being assessed. As pointed out earlier, in findings, the authors propose to redefine the concept of PLT to encompass the time between the project initial idea and the moment in which success is being assessed, beyond the project close-out, using any criteria which is appropriate for the stakeholder at that moment in time.

This paper studies how the concepts of efficiency, effectiveness and efficacy are used in project management literature. The concepts relate to the degree of success or failure of projects and the degree to which the results are achieved. The purpose of this paper is to review the use of the concepts of efficiency, efficacy and effectiveness in project management literature and among practitioners.

The study is based on an extensive literature review, initially from the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. The first phase involved searching the words “efficiency”, “effectiveness” and “efficacy” in all articles of the journal, and then quantifying the results. This was followed by a qualitative search of the same articles with the aim of understanding how the terms “project efficiency”, “project efficacy” and “project effectiveness” are used. A further intensive literature review was then conducted in other literatures in the field of project management, including, but not limited to, International Journal of Project Management and Project Management Journal. Finally, the authors complemented the review by including theories from deep searches of Google Scholar and Google Books using the parameters “project efficiency”, “project effectiveness” and “project efficacy” and checked how the three concepts are used in other fields.

This research reveals there is wide diversity in interpretations of the three concepts among research scholars and practitioners, which makes it challenging to apply these three concepts appropriately and clearly. As a consequence, the authors propose a model for describing these concepts.

This research is based on an academic and non-academic literature review. It identifies a number of inconsistencies in existing literature regarding the three concepts.

This review enriches understanding of project management. Clarifying the understanding of project efficiency, project effectiveness and project efficacy will help and support organisational improvement. A clear and aligned view of these concepts can also be a basis for measurements based on possible developed indicators.

This paper highlights the gap in the literature concerning the practical use and interpretation of the concepts “project efficiency”, “project effectiveness” and “project efficacy”.