The Enablers of Project Management Practice in Technological Industry

Supachart Iamratanakul 1,2, Ravi Shankar 1,3, Yuosre Badir 1, Nicholas J. Dimmitt1
1
School of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand
2
Faculty of Business Administration, Kasetsart University, Thailand
3
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India

Abstract--The best practices in project management are II. LITERATURE REVIEW

defined by looking at the enablers that worked well for a
company and most likely continue to work well in many future The best practices in project management for some
projects. However, the enablers for one project from a companies are indicated by the outstanding critical success
particular industry may be differed from another. Present study
focuses on Thailand’s electronics industry to identify its
factors and repetitive activities that continuously add value to
enablers and understand mutual relationship among these the deliverables of the projects [2]. The best practices are
enablers. Few enablers supporting other enablers are “driving defined by looking at the enablers that worked well for a
enablers” and those which are most influenced by others are company and most likely continue to work well in the future
“dependent enablers.” Interpretive structural modeling (ISM) on every project. For example, a company identified two
methodology has been applied to investigate the mutual enablers, quality and customer satisfaction, that are related to
relationship among these enablers. The results show that there each other. When project managers focus their attention on
are an enabler, specifically “Relationship with clients”, being the customer satisfaction, they discover that quality is improved.
most significant enablers, and therefore deserve serious Thus, a company could conclude that focusing on customer
attention from management. The study concludes with a
direction of future research.
satisfaction is a company best practice since it improves
quality of a project. Employee in the company then should be
I. INTRODUCTION instructed to focus heavily on customer satisfaction.
The best practice of technological projects in developing
The best practice in project management usually helps countries, especially Thailand is limited to study in literature.
companies to stay competitive. For some companies, the best Also, most research in the past has shown that three major
practices are indicated by the outstanding success factors, industries (defense, aerospace, and construction industry)
critical activities and management practices. The concepts dominated research in project management [2-8]. New
that look at the enablers as the indication of the best practice perspectives of project management on other industries are
are newly happened in the field of project management. A needed. Technological-based projects are published
company lacking the best practice is losing its competitive infrequently in journals. This research is an opportunity that
advantage and hard to stay in a market. Even if the best can contribute to this publishing gap.
practice is critical for companies, the enablers of the best In addition, the research is considered as the advanced
practice in an industry differ to another industry [1]. This is a study of project management that shed the light into the
clear sign for an opportunity to identify what the enablers of factors helping to translate theory into project management
project management practice are. practice [2, 3, 9, 10]. The following variables are the list of
the enablers that have been identified.

TABLE 1: THE ENABLERS OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE IN ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY

Enablers Enablers
1. On time completion 2. Profitability
3. Desired quality 4. Customer reference
5. Follow-up work 6. Technical superiority
7. Strategic alignment 8. Regulatory agency relationships
9. Proper execution of projects 10. Coordination among different function units of projects
11. Corporate reputation and ethical conduct 12. Employee alignment
13. Scope definition of projects 14. Relationship with clients

In this research, the identification of the contextual III. METHODOLOGY

relationship among the variables is the enablers of
technological project management practice in Thailand. The This study applied Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM)
enablers are identified by reviewing literature in project to investigate relationship among enablers. ISM is a
management and consulting three experts from academic, methodology that is very useful to understand a complex
three consultants from national agency, and three project situation [11]. ISM enables learning through directly and
managers from electronics industry. indirectly related elements in a different set, which are
structured into a comprehensive systematic model.
 The interpretive word in ISM implies that the judgment of 6. Draw a diagraph model: The variables, which are
the group make decision on variables in the model. The removed transitivity links and grouped in different levels
variables are connected to build the structure that illustrates in the fifth step, are utilized to draw a direct graph.
the relationship of the variables. The structure is in a form of 7. Set statements into variable nodes: The variable nodes in
a diagraph model and contains directions of variables in the a diagraph are converted to statements with more
model. ISM is mostly considered as a group learning process, illustrations of the context.
but it can be used individually. The ISM procedure is 8. Review the model: The ISM model developed in the
described briefly as encompassing the following steps. seventh step is checked for conceptual inconsistency.
1. Identify and select the relevant variables: Variables Necessary modification will be implemented when the
affecting the system under consideration are listed, which inconsistency problem is detected.
can be objectives, actions, individuals, strategy, operation,
and performance, etc. Follows the steps mentioned above, ISM starts with
2. Examine the relationship among pairs of the variables: gathering a group of experts to give their opinions based on
The variables identified in the first step constitute a variety management techniques such as brain storming,
contextual relationship with respect to comparison among nominal group technique, Delphi, etc. The group of experts is
pairs of those variables. working together to document all the variables in which the
3. Develop the structural self-interaction matrix: The value contextual relationship among variables is developed. The
of pair-wise comparison among variables of the system enablers are analyzed a contextual relationship by the
under consideration is used to develop a structural self- definition that one variable help to achieve another variable.
interaction matrix (SSIM), The notations for establish the contextual relationship
4. Determine the Reachability matrix: Based on the SSIM, between any two enablers (i and j) are as follows:
a binary (elements of 0 or 1) matrix that reflects the V : enabler i will help to achieve enabler j
relationships between the variables is built. The matrix is A : enabler j will help to achieve enabler i
checked for transitivity assumption. The transitivity is an
X : enabler i and j will help to achieve each other ;
assumption of the contextual relation in ISM. It states that
if a variable A is related to a variable B, and B is related and
to C, then A is necessarily related to C. O : enabler i and j are unrelated .
( If A → B and B → C , then A → C ).
5. Decompose the variables into different levels: The The explanation of the notations and value of pair-wise
Reachability matrix is partitioned into different levels to comparison among elements are applied to develop a
create structural models. This is an algorithm-based structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM) as shown in the
process making a group of variables into different levels following table.
based on their interrelationships.

TABLE 2: STRUCTURAL SELF-INTERACTION MATRIX

Enablers 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
1. On time completion A X A X A A A A A A O X X
2. Profitability A X A X A A A A A O A X
3. Desired quality A X A X A A A A A A A
4. Customer reference X V O V O O O A V A
5. Follow-up work V V O V X X A A O
6. Technical superiority A V A V A A A A
7. Strategic alignment V V V V V V V
8. Regulatory agency relationships V V O V V V
9. Proper execution of projects X V X V X
10. Coordination among projects X V X V
11. Corporate reputation and ethical conduct A X A
12. Employee alignment X V
13. Proper definition of project scope A
14. Relationship with clients

(i) According to opinions of experts, a project that (ii) Enabler 5 (Follow-up work) and enabler 8 (Regulatory
completes on time (element 1) will help to increase agency relationships) are perceived by experts as no
profitability (element 2) in the project. Also, a project that is relationships. Thus, the symbol O is assigned in the cell (5, 8)
profitable is completed on time. Thus, the notation X that at the intersection of element 5 and 8.
shows the relationship between element 1 and element 2 is (iii) Enabler 5 (Follow-up work) helps to achieve enabler
assigned in the cell (1, 2) at intersection of “on time” and 1 (On time), so that the relationship expressed by notation A
“profitability” as shown in table 2. is assigned in the cell (1, 5).
 (iv) Strategic alignment in enabler 7 leads to proper • If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is X, then the (i, j) entry in
execution of a project (enabler 9); hence the notation V is the reachability matrix becomes 1, and the (j, i) entry
assigned in the cell (7, 9) to demonstrate the relationship of becomes 1.
those pairs. • If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is O, then the (i, j) entry in
The SSIM is transformed into a binary matrix, known as the reachability matrix becomes 0, and the (j, i) entry
the reachability matrix by replacing the notation V, A, X, and becomes 0.
O with 0’s and 1’s. The rules for substituted the binary 0’s
and 1’s are as follows: The reachability matrix is determined by the SSIM in
• If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is V, then the (i, j) entry in Table 2 based on the four rules for binary substitution shown
the reachability matrix becomes 1, and the (j, i) entry in Table 3.
becomes 0. The transitivity is incorporated to fill the gap, if any, in
• If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is A, then the (i, j) entry in the structural self instructional matrix (SSIM). The entry that
the reachability matrix becomes 0, and the (j, i) entry is corrected transitivity is denoted as 1*. The final
becomes 1. reachability matrix is presented in Table 4.

TABLE 3: INITIAL REACHABILITY MATRIX

Enablers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
4 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1
5 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
6 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
8 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1
9 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
11 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
12 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
13 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
14 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1

TABLE 4: FINAL REACHABILITY MATRIX

Enablers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
4 1* 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1
5 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
6 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
8 1 1 1 1* 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1
9 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
11 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
12 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
13 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
14 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1

The final reachability matrix is partitioned into levels by own level in the hierarchy. Once the top-level elements are
evaluating the reachability set and antecedent set for each determined, they will be removed from the rest of elements to
variable [11]. The reachability set consists of the element find the next level of elements. Then, the next level of
itself in the horizontal line and the other elements which it elements is found by the same process. The repeated process
may impact, whereas the antecedent set consists of the is continued until the levels of all elements in the ISM
element itself in the vertical line and the other elements hierarchy are determined. The elements in each level will be
which may impact it. Thereafter, the intersection of the sets is used to build the diagraph or directed graph.
performed for all of the elements. From Table 4, the results from iteration I are shown in
When the elements in the reachability set are the same as Table 5 based on the process that the reachability set (Ri) is
the elements in the intersection, the elements become the top obtained from the horizontal line and the antecedent set (Ai)
level (level I) in the ISM hierarchy. The top-level element in is obtained from the vertical line.
the hierarchy would not help any other elements beside their
 TABLE 5: ITERATION I
Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set
Element (enablers) Level
(Ri) (Ai) Ri ∩ Ai
1 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 I
2 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 I
3 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 I
4 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 11, 13, 14 4, 5, 7, 8, 14 4, 14
5 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 5, 7, 8, 10 5, 10
6 1, 2, 3, 6, 11, 13 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 6
7 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 7 7
8 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 7, 8 8
9 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 5, 9, 10, 12, 14
10 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 5, 9, 10, 12, 14
11 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 I
12 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 7, 9, 10, 12, 14 9, 10, 12, 14
13 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 I
14 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 4, 9, 10, 12, 14

In Table 5, the elements 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 are partitioned at Table 5 to perform the repeated process that will provide the
level I, which will be located at the top of hierarchy of the elements in level II. The results of iteration II-VI are
ISM model. The elements 1, 2, 3, 11, 13 are removed from summarized in Table 6.

TABLE 6: ITERATION II-VI

Iteration Enabler Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set Level
II 6 6 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 6 II
III 4 4, 14 4, 5, 7, 14 4, 14 III
III 9 9, 10, 12, 14 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 9, 10, 12, 14 III
III 10 5, 9, 10, 12, 14 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 5, 9, 10, 12, 14 III
III 12 9, 12, 14 7, 9, 10, 12, 14 9, 12, 14 III
III 14 4, 9, 10, 12, 14 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 4, 9, 10, 12, 14 III
IV 5 5 5, 7, 8 5 IV
V 8 7, 8 7, 8 8 V
VI 7 7 7 7 VI

IV. RESULTS
In Table 6, element 6 (technical superiority) is partitioned
to level II. Elements 4, 9, 10, 12, 14 (customer reference, Based on the final reachability matrix (Table 4), the
proper execution of projects, coordination among different structural model is built by connecting nodes with lines of
function units of projects, employee alignment, relationship edges. If there is a relationship between the enablers i and j,
with clients) are located at level III. Element 5 (follow-up the relationship is shown by an arrow pointing from node i to
work) is placed at level IV. Element 8 (regulatory agency node j. The graph of connecting among nodes is called a
relationships) is set at level V. Finally, element 7 (strategic diagraph or a directed graph. After removing transitivity and
alignment) is at level VI. set statements into nodes as described in ISM methodology,
the diagraph is finally converted into ISM model as shown in
Figure 1.
 Performance

Corporate Scope
On time Desired reputation and
Profitabilit definition of
quality ethical conduct projects

Technical
superiority
Operation

Customer Proper execution Coordination among

different function units
Employee Relationship with
reference of projects of projects Alignment clients

Follow-up work

Regulatory agency
relationship

Strategy

Strategic
Alignment

Figure 1: ISM based model for enablers in technological project management practice

V. DISCUSSION The diagram of driver power and dependence power is

shown in Figure 2. The first cluster consists of enablers that
The model shown in Figure 1 is subject to identify which have week driver power and weak dependence power. These
enablers are “driving enablers” or “dependence enablers.” enablers are relatively disconnected from the system, with
MICMAC analysis is used to characterize the driver power which they have only few links, which may be strong. Second
and the dependence power of the enablers [12]. The enablers cluster consists of the dependent enablers that have week
are classified into four clusters based on the driving power as driver power, but strong dependence. Third cluster has the
a vertical axis and the dependence power as a horizontal axis. enablers that have both strong power and dependence. These
Recall that the final reachability matrix in Table 4, the enablers are unstable because any action on these enablers
driving power for each enabler is the total number of enablers will have an effect on others and also feedback on
(including itself) on the horizontal line with the value of “1”. themselves. Fourth cluster includes the independent enablers
The dependence power of each enabler is the total number of that have strong driving power, but weak dependence. It can
enablers (including itself) on the vertical line the value of be notified that a variable having a strong driver is the key
“1”. The driving power and the dependence power are shown variable.
in Table 7.
 TABLE 7: THE DRIVING POWER AND THE DEPENDENCE POWER
Enablers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Driver
1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 5
2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 5
3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 5
4 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 8
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 11
6 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 6
7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 12
9 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
10 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
11 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 5
12 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
13 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 5
14 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
Dependence 14 14 14 5 4 9 1 2 7 7 14 5 14 8

14
13
12 8
11 5 10 14
10 12 9
9
Driving power

8 4

7
6 7 6
1,2,3,
5
11, 13
4
3
2
1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Dependence power

Figure 2: Driver power and dependence power diagram

The results indicate that “Follow up work (no.5)”, “Co- the analysis to identify the variables that need to be managed
ordination (no. 10)”, and “Relationship with client (no. 14)” in their projects. For instance, there is an enabler, “strategic
are the top three enablers in the ISM-based model. These alignment (no. 7)”, which turns out to be an “autonomous
enablers also contain high driving power. The surprising enabler.” Autonomous enablers are located in the bottom-left
result of the model is that “Regulatory agency relationship quadrant in the driver power dependence diagram. The
(no.8)” is the lower rank enabler in the ISM-based model, but autonomous enablers contains weak drivers, weak
it contains the highest driving power. This incident implies dependents, and do not have much influence on the model.
the top management to pay attention when they encounter the Thus, the “strategic alignment” enabler does not have much
enabler that is at the bottom of the model, but having the influence and continuously adds value to deliver projects.
greatest driving power. The enabler in this phenomenon Management should not therefore pay much attention to the
should view as “strategic enabler” for management to autonomous enabler.
investigate its impacts more vigilantly. It can be further observed from the driver power
In practical view, the MICMAC analysis provides dependence diagram that “Relationship with clients (no. 14)”
valuable insights regarding the relative importance and inter- is located at the top-right quadrant in the driver power
dependency of the enablers. The practicing managers can use dependence diagram. The enablers in this quadrant have
strong driving and dependence power, which is known as significant of literature are discussed only in defense,
“linkage enablers.” Linkage enablers can affect on other aerospace and construction projects [2, 4, 6]. One type of
enablers when they have action with each other and also send management for construction projects may not fit all for
a feedback from the effect on themselves. The implication of another type of management for technological projects. New
this effect means that the enablers located within the linkage perspectives of project management on technological
quadrant are the most significant enablers and those located industries are needed. Technological-based projects are
within the autonomous quadrant are the least significant published infrequently in journals. This research is an
enablers. In this study, the “Relationship with clients (no. opportunity that can contribute to this publishing gap.
14)” is the most significant enablers and therefore deserves This work is undoubtedly on-going research. The future
serious attention from the top management. study will be focused more on developing a robust
Finally, it is interesting to note that focusing on implication from the results. The diagraph model representing
“Relationship with clients” is the project management’s best the relationships among enablers will become a conceptual
practice since it is the outstanding enablers and continuously framework for testing further hypotheses in the study. The
adds value to deliver the projects. The relationship with qualitative techniques such as an interview, coding, and
clients also leverages management to work well for current pattern matching will be the tools for elaborating more on
and future on every project. Normally, management may not explanation of each enablers using in the study. The multi-
have enough time to identify the enablers that indicate the variate statistics will also be tested for confirming the
best practice in project management. Interpretive Structural relationships of those enablers.
Modeling (ISM) is a proper tool for this situation. ISM is
usually developed on the basis of input from expert panel. REFERENCES
However, ISM can also develop a model in conjunction with
other managerial techniques such as brainstorming, nominal [1] A. J. Shenhar, "One Size Does Not Fit all Projects: Exploring classical
contingency domains," Management Science, vol. 47, pp. 394-414,
group techniques (NGT), etc. The statistical test can be 2001.
applied to test the validity of such a hypothetical model as [2] H. Kerzner, Advanced Project Management: Best Practices on
well. Implementation: John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
[3] H. Kerzner and F. P. Saladis, Project management: a systems approach
to planning, scheduling, and controlling, 10th ed. New Jersey: John
VI. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH Wiley & Sons, 2009.
[4] R. D. Archibald, Managing High Technology Programs and Projects.
There is a lot to be learned in project management. This Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.
study sheds light on the topic that calls for exploration and [5] D. I. Cleland, Project management casebook. Sylva, N.C. : Project
Management Institute,, 1998.
contributes to the body of knowledge in project management. [6] J. M. Nicholas, Project management for business and engineering, 2nd
The enablers that drive the best practice in project ed. Burlington, MA: Elsevier, 2004.
management are still in question for technological-based [7] S. C. Project Management Institute, A Guide to Project Management
industry. What are the enablers of technological-based project Body of Knowledge, 3 rd ed.: PMI Publishing, 2004.
[8] A. Shtub, et al., Project Management: Processes, methodologies, and
management practice? How those enablers are related? economics. NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005.
Which enablers fit into performance, operations, and strategy [9] H. Kerzner, In search of excellence in project management. NY: Van
in technological-based projects? What are the relationships Nostrand, 1998.
among enablers and the resulting impacts? These questions [10] H. Kerzner, Strategic Planning for Project Management Using a
Project Management Maturity Model, 1st ed.: John Wiley & Sons,
call for answers. 2001.
Form the questions discussed above; this paper rise to [11] J. N. Warfield, "Toward Interpretation of Complex Structural Models,"
what should be considered as “the best practice of Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 4, pp. 405-
technological project management in developing countries,” 417, 1974.
[12] A. Agarwal and R. Shankar, "Analyzing alternatives for improvement
obviously limited to emerge in literature. Also, most research in supply chain performance," Work Study, vol. 51, pp. 32 - 37, 2002.
in the past has paid attention mostly to three major industries
(defense, aerospace, and construction industry), so that the