Linking leadership to project success

Universidade do Minho Escola de Engenharia Lina Alshelh Linking Leadership to Project Success September 2019 Universidade do Minho Escola de Engenharia Lina Alshelh Linking Leadership to Project Success PhD Thesis Doctoral Program in Industrial and Systems Engineering Work done under the guidance of Professor Anabela Tereso September 2019 ii DIREITOS DE AUTOR E CONDIÇÕES DE UTILIZAÇÃO DO TRABALHO POR TERCEIROS Este é um trabalho académico que pode ser utilizado por terceiros desde que respeitadas as regras e boas práticas internacionalmente aceites, no que concerne aos direitos de autor e direitos conexos. Assim, o presente trabalho pode ser utilizado nos termos previstos na licença abaixo indicada. Caso o utilizador necessite de permissão para poder fazer um uso do trabalho em condições não previstas no licenciamento indicado, deverá contactar o autor, através do RepositóriUM da Universidade do Minho. Licença concedida aos utilizadores deste trabalho Atribuição CC BY https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis marks another big milestone in my life and a goal which I have always looked forward to achieve. I never expected to have during this incredible experience so many changes in my life. I was single working in the oil industry in the very north west of Canada, got married to whom I am passionately in love with and moved with him to Portugal, became a mother to two beautiful cupcakes and moved back to Canada. At this moment of accomplishment, I feel greatly appreciative and tremendously thankful to my father Hisham and my mother Shaza for being great supporters for me since the first day of my life and especially throughout my PhD journey. Mom and dad, I know that this lifetime milestone that I am achieving right now will make you proud and happy, yet I will make every effort to keep the smile on your face by achieving more and more in the upcoming years. Also, I would like to thank my three amazing brothers Firas, Saher, and Karam who have been for me a protective shield that helps me overcome all challenges and face every obstacle in my way. To all of you I would say, we will continue to be a great team as we have always been in the past. From the bottom of my heat, I thank a very special person, my husband, Mohamad Ali, for his continued and unconditional love, support, and understanding during my pursuit of this PhD degree. I appreciate having two bundles of love jumping around me and encouraging me in every way, my son Mohamad Samir and my daughter Mirvat. A special “thank you” to my thesis supervisor Professor Anabela Tereso, who accepted me as a PhD student and offered me her mentorship. Her doors were never closed to me, I have always found her by my side and ready for guiding me throughout any challenge. I cannot forget her valuable advices, constructive feedback, supportive directions, and close followups even on weekends and holidays. Finally, I thank those who prayed for me, my uncles, my aunts, my father-in-law, my motherin-law, and my friends. Without their motivational words and encouragements, this milestone might not have been successfully achieved. iv STATEMENT OF INTEGRITY I hereby declare having conducted this academic work with integrity. I confirm that I have not used plagiarism or any form of undue use of information or falsification of results along the process leading to its elaboration. I further declare that I have fully acknowledged the Code of Ethical Conduct of the University of Minho. v ABSTRACT It is crucial for firms to stay competitive in today’s globalized and knowledge-driven society, and this can come in a variety of different forms. Knowledge and human based resources are one such route, in particular, the employment of leadership as a way to achieve success within any given market. With regards to the manufacturing industry which is increasingly dealing with Information Technology projects, that tend to have high rates of failure, leadership plays an equally important role and should not be overlooked as a useful tool. Thus, there is a need for understanding the integral role that leadership plays in projects and how it can be used to improve the chances of project success. Sadly, research is lacking in a number of areas of interest with regards to the impact and importance of leadership within firms. Specifically, there is a lack of research on the role of leadership in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, as well as a lack of research identifying specific factors that lead to good leadership and the impact that those factors have on project and on specific project phases. Most of the research performed to date speaks of leadership in a much broader sense. The current research work delves into this knowledge gap, by identifying leadership factors and performing primary research on the impact that these leadership factors have on project success and, more precisely, on project phases. The main objective of the study was to identify the key leadership factors that have the largest and most direct impact on project success for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in the manufacturing industry. Many relevant areas of interest were analyzed throughout the research and three milestones were reached to achieve the overall objective mentioned above. These three milestones were to identify the top ten leadership factors for a project manager with the direct and indirect interconnections between them, link the leadership factors to project phases by determining which factors are most important to each phase, and present the impact leadership factors have on project success, specifically understanding the culture of various project phases, and having an indication of when, during the project lifecycle, the leadership factors that are most impactful and most beneficial to be implemented to improve the success rate of projects. KEYWORDS: Leadership, Project Management, Project Success vi RESUMO É crucial que as empresas permaneçam competitivas na sociedade globalizada e orientada pelo conhecimento de hoje, e isso pode ser alcançado de diferentes formas. Conhecimento e recursos humanos são uma dessas vias, em particular, o emprego da liderança como forma de alcançar o sucesso dentro de qualquer mercado. Com relação à indústria da manufatura, que está a lidar cada vez mais com projetos de Tecnologia da Informação, que tendem a apresentar altas taxas de fracasso, a liderança desempenha um papel igualmente importante e não deve ser negligenciada como uma ferramenta útil. Assim, há necessidade de entender o papel integral que a liderança desempenha nos projetos e como ela pode ser usada para melhorar as chances de sucesso do projeto. Infelizmente, faltam pesquisas em várias áreas de interesse com relação ao impacto e à importância da liderança dentro das empresas. Especificamente, há uma falta de pesquisa sobre o papel da liderança em Pequenas e Médias Empresas, bem como a falta de pesquisa identificando fatores específicos que levam a uma boa liderança e o impacto que esses fatores têm no projeto e em fases específicas do projeto. A maioria da investigação realizada até à data aborda a liderança num sentido muito mais amplo. O atual trabalho de investigação aprofunda essa lacuna de conhecimento, identificando fatores de liderança e realizando pesquisas primárias sobre o impacto que esses fatores de liderança têm no sucesso do projeto e, mais precisamente, nas fases do projeto. O principal objetivo do estudo foi identificar os principais fatores de liderança que têm o maior e mais direto impacto no sucesso dos projetos para Pequenas e Médias Empresas na indústria de manufatura. Muitas áreas relevantes de interesse foram analisadas ao longo da pesquisa e três marcos foram alcançados para atingir o objetivo geral mencionado acima. Esses três marcos foram identificar os dez principais fatores de liderança de um gestor de projeto com as interconexões diretas e indiretas entre eles, ligar os fatores de liderança às fases do projeto determinando que fatores são mais importantes para cada fase, e apresentar o impacto dos fatores de liderança no sucesso do projeto, compreendendo especificamente a cultura de várias fases do projeto, e tendo uma indicação de quando, durante o ciclo de vida do projeto, os fatores de liderança que são mais impactantes e com mais benefícios na implementação para melhorar a taxa de sucesso dos projetos. PALAVRAS CHAVE: Liderança, Gestão de Projetos, Sucesso do Projeto vii INDEX Figure index ........................................................................................................................... xi Table index .......................................................................................................................... xiii Symbols and Acronyms ......................................................................................................... xv 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 The Problem ............................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Purpose and Objectives ........................................................................................... 3 1.4 Motivation and Research Question.......................................................................... 4 1.5 Thesis Structure ....................................................................................................... 4 2. Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Small and Medium-sized Enterprises ....................................................................... 7 2.2 Project Management ............................................................................................. 10 2.3 Project Success ...................................................................................................... 15 2.4 Leadership ............................................................................................................. 33 2.4.1 Definition ....................................................................................................... 33 2.4.2 Importance..................................................................................................... 35 2.4.3 IPMA Views .................................................................................................... 40 2.4.4 PMI Views ...................................................................................................... 43 2.5 Relationship between Leadership and Project Management in SMEs .................... 44 2.6 Impact of Leadership on Project Success ............................................................... 48 2.7 Manufacturing Industry ......................................................................................... 50 2.8 Summary ............................................................................................................... 54 3. Related Work ............................................................................................................... 57 3.1 Similarities ............................................................................................................. 57 3.2 Limitation and Gaps............................................................................................... 60 3.3 Methodologies for Data Gathering ........................................................................ 63 3.4 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................... 67 3.5 Conclusions and Comparison ................................................................................. 70 4. Methodology ................................................................................................................ 77 4.1 Research Methodology and Design ....................................................................... 77 viii 4.1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 77 4.1.2 Chosen Methodologies ................................................................................... 78 4.1.3 The Research Onion ....................................................................................... 82 4.1.4 Application of the ‘Research Onion’ ............................................................... 84 4.2 Sample Selection ................................................................................................... 86 4.2.1 Considerations ............................................................................................... 86 4.2.2 Importance for Research ................................................................................ 87 4.2.3 Selection Criteria ............................................................................................ 88 4.2.4 Selection Process ............................................................................................ 89 4.2.5 Selected Samples ........................................................................................... 92 4.3 Surveys, Interviews, and Business Case Studies ..................................................... 94 4.3.1 Surveys ........................................................................................................... 95 4.3.2 Interviews ...................................................................................................... 97 4.3.3 Business Case Studies ..................................................................................... 98 5. Leadership Factors ..................................................................................................... 101 5.1 Selection of Leadership Factors ........................................................................... 101 5.2 The Leadership Factors ........................................................................................ 102 5.2.1 Integration (Ideas and Teams) ...................................................................... 104 5.2.2 Balancing Objectives .................................................................................... 105 5.2.3 Systematic Information Capturing ................................................................ 107 5.2.4 Commitment to the Project .......................................................................... 108 5.2.5 Motivational ................................................................................................. 109 5.2.6 Innovative .................................................................................................... 111 5.2.7 Idealized Influence ....................................................................................... 112 5.2.8 Fast-action Decision Making ......................................................................... 113 5.2.9 Intellectually Stimulating Team .................................................................... 114 5.2.10 Individualized Consideration ........................................................................ 115 5.3 Leadership Factors Interconnection..................................................................... 116 5.4 Other Leadership Factors .................................................................................... 122 6. Timing of Leadership Factors in Projects ..................................................................... 129 6.1 Project Cycle ........................................................................................................ 129 6.1.1 Phases of Project Cycle ................................................................................. 129 xv SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS Symbol Description APM Association of Project Management B2B Business to Business BM Benefits Management CIT Communications Information Technology CMM Capability Maturity Model DPISE Doctoral Program in Industrial and Systems Engineering EQ Emotional Quotient EU European Union GDP Gross Domestic Product ICOPEV International Conference on Production Economics and Project Evaluation IPMA International Project Management Association PMI Project Management Institute PMCD Project Management Competency Development IQ Intelligence Quotient IS Information System IT Information Technology KPI Key Performance Indicator MNE Multi National Enterprise MQ Managerial Quotient NAICS North American Industry Classification System PMBOK Project Management Body of Knowledge PMM Project Management Methodology R&D Research and Development SEI Software Engineering Institute SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprise UK United Kingdom xvi US United States CEs Competency Elements ICB Individual Competence Baseline 1 1. INTRODUCTION The following chapter presents some background information on the research project performed. To start, some general information about the manufacturing industry has been discussed, so that an understanding of the field in which the project takes place can be developed. An introduction to the project is then undertaken, discussing the issue which has presented itself in the literature. From this issue, the purpose and objectives of the study were decided upon and discussed. This is then delved into further and discussions relating to the motivation behind initiating the research, as well as the development of the research question. Finally, information pertaining to the research design and the methodologies utilised as well as the limitations presented throughout the study are discussed. 1.1 Background In virtually every field in today’s globalized society it is crucial for firms to stay competitive in the market. For many, this can mean tapping into social technologies (Kingsley et al., 2011), streamlining processes, and acquiring the most educated and talented minds for their firm. A subtler and often undervalued way to achieve success within a market is utilizing the soft-skill of leadership to organize and direct individuals within an organization to work effectively and efficiently towards an end goal (Maladzhi, Yan, & Makinde, 2012). Leadership plays a critical role in every aspect of the organization from the day-to-day businesses activities, to the variety of shortand long-term projects undertaken to improve processes and implement new and functional systems. The challenge of constantly staying competitive in an ever-changing and increasingly globalized market is no different for the manufacturing sector. The first industrial revolution, which occurred from the mid-18th century to the mid-19th century (Spear, 2016) allowed for a boom of jobs, especially in the manufacturing sector, where an increased interconnectedness with the scientific community allowed for new inventions (Ó Gráda, 2016). Of course, an agglomeration of factors is to be held responsible for the industrial revolution, including advances in human capital, but the science-based knowledge, acquired by entrepreneurs throughout this time, was a key contributing factor (Ó Gráda, 2016). Before 2 this wide-scale shift, manufacturing relied heavily on manpower, but over time human workers became increasingly aided by machines (Spear, 2016). Eventually machines became more advanced, able to function more independently, with humans playing much smaller roles in the manufacturing processes. Innovations throughout the manufacturing industry, as well as the invention of computers and the internet, has led to the highly efficient robots that dominate much of the manufacturing sector today (Lamb, 2010). These robots are aided by computer programs (Lamb, 2010), rather than physical labour. The first modern industrial robots appeared in 1961 and were essentially automatons, programmed to repeat tasks that were dangerous or cumbersome to humans (Lamb, 2010). Since the advent of computerized technology, the manufacturing industry has benefitted immensely, with companies constantly working to increase outputs and streamline processes, using the ever-improving computerized technology being developed. On top of computerized technologies, the internet has changed the way businesses are conducted, allowing companies to harness social technologies the internet provides to innovate, expand their market base, and outperform their competitors (Kingsley et al., 2011). Businesses across the board have been impacted by the changes that computers and the internet have brought, with the manufacturing industry at the forefront of many of these changes. 1.2 The Problem The majority of the research previously performed, with regards to project management and leadership, focuses on the importance of leadership in a much broader sense. No literature was uncovered that delved into identifying specific leadership factors and the impact that those leadership factors have on various phases of a project. The current research project is the first to utilise the relevant literature on leadership factors to identify those leadership factors which will be the most impactful on the success of projects. It then goes a step further by relating each of the leadership factors to the project phases in the project’s lifecycle to ensure a higher rate of project success. The lack of research into this particular area is unfortunate, given that it is possible, for leadership factors used incorrectly or at an inopportune time, to lead to project failure. This trend is something that was noticed throughout the empirical studies performed. The current research aims to rectify 3 this research gap by breaking down the relevant research, and from that compiling the top ten leadership factors to then prove the relations between the factors and the project phases. 1.3 Purpose and Objectives This research falls under one primary objective that consists of several secondary or ‘subobjectives’. Throughout the body of work, these objectives will be analyzed, with primary research performed in an attempt to fill any research gaps. The main objective of this study is to identify the key leadership factors that have the greatest and the most direct impact on project success, in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The study will review relevant existing literature, employing both quantitative and qualitative data, to develop a set of specific leadership factors. These leadership factors being those that, based on the relevant literature, aid in the successful completion of projects performed within SMEs. In addition, the research will study several areas that will serve as major milestones on the way towards achieving the primary objective. This includes identifying the leadership factors, and then linking them to project management in SMEs through conducting surveys, interviews and other data collection forms. These milestones have been divided into three distinct secondary objectives as follows: 1. Breaking down leadership into factors to identify the indispensable factors for project success; 2. Linking leadership factors to project phases by determining which factors are most important to each phase; 3. Presenting how the impact of leadership factors can drive project success. Moreover, relevant areas of interest shall be reviewed and analyzed throughout the research phases, including, but not limited to SMEs, Leadership, Project Management, and Success. It is apparent that this research will bring to light the correlations between the various areas of interest and the objectives. It is the intention that this research will lead to useful results for the academic world, business world, and numerous industries. Specifically, it is the intention that the information gathered throughout the research project provide benefits to projects performed by SMEs in the manufacturing industry. The essential purpose of this research then is to provide valuable insight into the leadership of projects so that project 4 managers may use this information to increase the number of successful projects that they undertake. During the research work, some findings were presented in International Conference on Production Economics and Project Evaluation (ICOPEV) and the Doctoral Program in Industrial and Systems Engineering (DPISE) conference. The focus of the papers and presentation was around the 10 leadership factors found during the research work. The future plan is to publish some papers related to other research objectives and findings in conferences and scientific journals such as Leadership Quarterly, International Journal of Project Management and Academy of Management Journal. 1.4 Motivation and Research Question The need for Information Technology (IT) and Communications Information Technology (CIT) innovations and upgrades is a constant in the manufacturing sector, with projects ranging from organizational restructuring of computer systems to automating processes that were historically performed by people. These projects play a crucial role in ensuring that companies stay competitive, so it is important that these projects run smoothly and are successfully completed. Much of that onus is placed on project managers and their ability to effectively lead groups of individuals to successfully complete shared end goals. Although any leadership style has beneficial aspects that contribute to the success of a project, the company culture, project type, and project team members will impact the way that a project is led. Projects in the manufacturing industry are no different. While it is recognised that every project is different and should be treated as such, it is also believed that through the proper implementation of leadership factors, both through how and when they are implemented throughout a project, the chance of that project succeeding is increased significantly. Therefore, the following research aims to answer the question: Which leadership factors will be most beneficial to the success of IT projects in the manufacturing industry and when throughout the project lifecycle will each factor have the most impact on project success? 1.5 Thesis Structure This research document contains eight main chapters. The first chapter gives an introduction of the research work, including its background, the problem, purpose and objectives, and then 5 discusses the motivations and research question. The second chapter encompasses what the literature says about SMEs, project management, project success, leadership, relationship between leadership and project management in SMEs, impact of leadership on project success, and the manufacturing industry. The third chapter sheds the light on some related work that supports the research topic in question by looking at the similarities, limitations and gaps, methodologies for data gathering, data analysis, and conclusions and comparisons. The fourth chapter addresses the methodology used in this research in terms of what is the chosen methodology, on what sample was it applied, and how the analysis tools were used to support the methodology in place. The fifth chapter discusses the leadership factors in detail, along with their interconnections. The sixth chapter explains the timing of leadership factors in projects considering the phases of project cycle and the culture of each phase. The seventh chapter presents the results of each tool that was used in this research work and how the results were divided into different themes to answer the objectives of this research work. The eighth chapter comprises of an executive summary, research usage and benefits, limitations of the research, and ends with research opportunities. 6 7 2. LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter will state some information found in the literature review in regards to SMEs, project management, project success and leadership. For the leadership topic, the definition, the importance, and the International Project Management Association (IPMA) views will be presented. In addition, this chapter will shed the light on the relationship between leadership and project management in SMEs, as well as the impact of leadership on project success. Finally, information on the manufacturing industry relating to all of the previous topics discussed will be presented. At the end of the chapter, there will be a summary of all what was discussed. 2.1 Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Small and Medium-sized Enterprises contain two different groups of enterprises; small-sized firms and medium-sized firms which, depending on where you are, will be defined slightly differently. In the European Union (EU) an Enterprise is “considered to be any entity engaged in an economic activity, irrespective of its legal form. This includes, in particular, self-employed persons and family businesses engaged in craft or other activities, and partnerships or associations regularly engaged in an economic activity” (European Commission, 2003, p. 39). In the EU, as shown in Table 1, two factors determine an organization’s eligibility to be listed as an SME – the staff headcount and the choice of either company turnover or balance sheet totals. Medium-sized firms in the EU will have less than 250 people, whereas small-sized firms will have less than 50. They also include a further group of Micro-sized businesses which contain less than 10 individuals. Table 1: European SME Eligibility (European Commission, 2017) Company category Staff headcount Turnover or Balance sheet total Medium-sized < 250 ≤ € 50 m ≤ € 43 m Small < 50 ≤ € 10 m ≤ € 10 m Micro < 10 ≤ € 2 m ≤ € 2 m 8 The United States (US) International Trade Commission also uses a headcount to define SMEs, specifying these enterprises as those with less than 500 staff members (Hammer et al., 2010). In the US, SMEs also account for the majority of firms and approximately half of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) that is generated by the non-agricultural industry sectors (Hammer et al., 2010). An American organization by the name of The Standish Group (1995) also gives a segmentation of companies, this time based on annual revenue, with large companies being those with revenue exceeding 500 million dollars per year, medium companies having revenue of 200 to 500 million dollars per year and small companies having revenue from 100 million to 200 million dollars per year. SMEs play a large role in countries’ economic development and are increasingly being tied to the internationalization trend across the world (Semrau et al., 2016). They are generally more prone to being entrepreneurially savvy than larger organizations. This entrepreneurial orientation has been shown to positively affect their performance, which may account, at least in part, for their increasing role on the international stage (Semrau et al., 2016). They play a large role, not only in the Western world, but also in developing countries where many family businesses and small-scale operations are crucial to keeping communities functioning and healthy (Miladi, 2014). These smaller organizations are more difficult to assess because unlike larger corporations, they cannot easily be boiled down to a simple model (Adapa & Rindfleish, 2013). SMEs tend to be much more heterogeneous in their organizational structures and their overall cultures than the larger enterprises, i.e. SMEs are much more simple and flexible (Adapa & Rindfleish, 2013) which is part of the reason it is so difficult for experts to follow a straight forward formula that will work every time (Miladi, 2014). This is mainly because their smaller size fosters an environment where individuality and collaboration are key and there is ample room for businesses to grow and develop (Teruel, 2010). They also tend to have more organic cultures, and an easier ability to change the organizational culture, due to the fact that SMEs generally consist of a small group of people who have similar beliefs and values (Tidor et al., 2012). This being said, it is still often the owner of the organization who has the most power to sway views and change the organization’s culture and structure (Tidor et al., 2012). Looking at a specific segment, such as SMEs in the manufacturing sector, is one way of narrowing the field 15 have been known to fail completely while another roughly 50 percent of projects that are started will be challenged (The Standish Group, 2009). This is a huge number of projects which don’t meet the customer’s needs and waste the organizations time, money, and resources. It is clearly an issue that needs to be further addressed. 2.3 Project Success As was noted previously, a large portion of projects that are started either fail completely or are challenged. A challenged project is one which is received by the client either late, overbudget, and/or did not meet all of the requirements that it was expected to deliver (The Standish Group, 2009). Figure 2 shows, from the year 2000 to the year 2008, the percentage of projects which were successful, challenged or failed. It demonstrates how few projects in total actually did what they were supposed to do throughout these eight years and how the percentage of projects in each category shifted from year to year. Success generally means accomplishing a set goal, however success can also be measured on various different criteria where one part of something may have been a success but by another standard it was a failure. The vagueness in describing success as a general concept makes it equally difficult to determine what success is with regards to projects. Defining project success is a difficult task since projects vary significantly and different individuals and institutions will consider a variety of different attributes when judging whether or not projects have been successful. As was noted by Mir and Pinnington (2014, p. 203), “Some [studies] conceptualise it as a uni-dimensional construct concerned with meeting budget, time and quality whereas others consider project success a complex, multidimensional concept encompassing many more attributes”. Put simply, every organization does it differently and project success in not something that has been standardized yet, which makes it a difficult measure to assess. 16 Figure 2: 2000 to 2008 Project Resolution (The Standish Group, 2009) One of the issues with trying to define project success is that success is not easily quantifiable and therefore is based much more heavily on the perceptions of stakeholders (Davis, 2017). Stakeholders include groups such as executives and owners of the organization, clients and users of the project’s outcome, and employees – specifically those working on the project. The difficulty with determining success comes from the fact that stakeholders will often interpret project success in different ways (Mir & Pinnington, 2014). In a study done to examine multiple stakeholders’ perceptions of project success in order to determine the reason behind the high failure rates of projects, it was found that the most common and overlapping dimensions used to ensure a successful project were communication, setting and meeting a schedule, identifying and meeting objectives, stakeholder satisfaction, making use of and acceptance of the finished product, as well as relevant cost and budgeting parameters (Davis, 2017). In this study, although, many stakeholder groups had some overlap with regards to the dimensions they considered crucial to the success of a project. There were also many stakeholder groups between which no overlap in criteria existed (Davis, 2017). For example, the client and the executive groups, the user and the executive groups, and the sponsor and the project team were three instances in which the groups identified had no commonalities with regards to project success dimensions (Davis, 2017). This highlights the issue with pinning down an exact definition of project success and furthermore illustrates the need for more 17 research into what it actually means for a project to be successful so that avoiding failure is more straightforward. One of the most commonly used methods to determine a project’s success is by going with what the client deems to be successful. Discussing early on in the project’s lifecycle what the successful project would look like, and what criteria need to be met for this to occur is a common and useful way to define the success of a project as well as to ensure the achievement of that success (Authenticity Consulting, 2006). Based on the client’s determinants, the success of a project will often mean achieving the outcomes and results that were listed in the project agreement, solving the client’s problem, finishing on time and on budget, and maintaining a high-quality relationship with the client throughout the process (Authenticity Consulting, 2006). Although staying on budget is a huge indicator of whether or not a project was successful, it is certainly not the only indicator and is sometimes not the most important. Many projects are completed and deemed to be successful despite being finished over-budget for projects where the main goal is to save the firm’s money in the future, this presents an interesting conundrum which is mirrored with many other criteria used for determining whether a project was a success. When presented with these kinds of situations it is clear how difficult it is to quantify the success of a project. Success is a grey area which can be loosely defined but not easily given a specific list of determinants which will lead to success in every situation. It does not help that projects differ in size, complexity and uniqueness or that viewpoints about performance will vary across industries (Mir & Pinnington, 2014). In terms of Project success, the vagueness of ‘success’ can translate to 3 broad categories of measure in which all of the specific criteria can fit underneath. Going back to the idea of the Iron triangle, cost, time and quality are three broad categories which most of the aforementioned determinants of success can fit into. Think of the Iron Triangle as three category titles within which many different criteria can be picked to find the best combination of requirements to success for that specific project. As is apparent in Table 2, most of the criteria that had been identified previously, as well as a few not formerly mentioned, fit under the ‘Quality’ category of the Iron Triangle. Most individuals will agree that, for a project to be successful, the ‘Time’ and ‘Cost’ categories should be met and the differences in what criteria should be met varies very little. The 18 ‘Quality’ category on the other hand encompasses the majority of criteria that may be used to determine success and these measures are the portion of success that differ greatly from project to project. Table 2: The Iron Triangle as Umbrella Categories (Hajiagha et al., 2014) Cost Time Quality ▪ Staying on budget ▪ For project overall ▪ For products used ▪ For salaries ▪ Human resources pulled from other areas of the business ▪ Completion of project ontime ▪ Setting and meeting a schedule ▪ Quality of end product ▪ Achieving outcomes/results listed in the project agreement ▪ Solving the client’s problem ▪ Maintaining high-quality relationship throughout the process ▪ Communication ▪ Identifying and meeting objectives ▪ Stakeholder satisfaction ▪ Making use of final product/acceptance of project To an organization called The Standish Group, a successful project must meet all three of their defined metrics – the project must be on time, on budget, and contain all the required features and functions. If the project does not meet some of these, for example it was delivered late, went way over budget, and/or did not have all of the required functions and features, the project is not considered failed but ‘challenged’. A project becomes a failure if it was either cancelled prior to completion or was delivered but was never actually used (The Standish Group, 2009). The Standish Group (2013) refers another way of achieving project success with a modified version of success factors to look specifically at the success of small projects with a focus on IT projects within different sectors of the economy. They define a small project as one that has a total labour cost of less than $1 million, not including equipment or software used. The Standish Group (2013) compiled a list of 10 factors, each with a number attached to them, indicating their relative impact on the success of a project (see Table 3). 19 The most important factor is executive sponsorship, or executive management support. Executive sponsorship as well as the rest of the factors are laid out in order of most to least importance in Table 3. Each factor has been awarded a number of points out of 100, based on how much impact they have on the success of a project. The higher the points awarded, the more impact that particular factor has on the project success. The success factors given by The Standish Group (2013) for small projects are useful guidelines for project managers to pinpoint which aspects of a project should be focused on to achieve success. Table 3: Factors of Success for Small Projects (The Standish Group, 2013) Factors of Success Points (100) Executive management support 20 User involvement 15 Optimization 15 Skilled resources 13 Project management expertise 12 Agile process 10 Clear business objectives 6 Emotional maturity 5 Execution 3 Tools and infrastructure 1 The first factor of success is Executive Management Support, which means that the success of a project is extremely dependent on having a committed executive sponsor/owner who will take responsibility for the project’s outcome and support the project throughout its lifecycle (The Standish Group, 2013). This is deemed a crucial factor by The Standish Group (2013) who state that this individual will ultimately decide whether the project succeeds or fails, especially with regards to small projects where they have a lot more power to make decisions with less delegation involved. The second most important success factor is User Involvement. Projects are developed as products and solutions for people (referred to as users) to use. Their input and participation are highly valued and crucial to the success of a project. It is important for cooperation and 20 collaboration to occur between the project team and the users throughout the project process so that, once the project is finished, the resulting solution is actually useful for the users (The Standish Group, 2013). The third most important success factor is Optimization which refers to the scope of the project. Smaller projects have higher success rates and so breaking large projects down into smaller projects as well as focusing more on starting out with smaller projects in the first place will increase the number of successful projects that the organization undertakes. Many organizations with successful projects used the so-called Agile Process to manage their projects. Agile is all about paring down the scope of the project and ensuring that the processes are as lean as possible (The Standish Group, 2013). The Standish Group (2013) found that about 20 percent of the total features and functions provide around 80 percent of the value in a project, which is even more a reason to optimize projects by paring down their size and breaking large projects into smaller ones. It is known that sub-projects are much easier to manage, and this ensures the success of the big project that is divided into sub-projects. These first three factors provide 50 percent of the total points towards the success of a project and are focused much more on the execution of small project skills, along with success factors four and five, which do not pertain to leadership. The fourth success factor is Skilled Resources, and this has to do with the people working on the project. The people who make up the project team and any other individuals they may consult with for expertise throughout the project are important components to ensuring a successful project. Skilled resources therefore can be thought of as “having the right people doing the right things at the right time” (The Standish Group, 2013, p. 17). Successful projects require skilled teams who are not only competent but able to deploy those skills during the project. The fifth success factor is Project Management Expertise, also referred to as process management expertise. Project management expertise means having competent project managers or process masters – (PMs) for short – who will administer the natural progression of projects to a successful conclusion. PMs need to have good judgement and strong decisionmaking skills as well as the ability to simplify the complex processes that sometimes occur in projects. These top five success factors combined account for 75 percent of the total points awarded to all of the success factors. As such they account for a large majority of the success 21 or failure that a project may result in. As such, they should be focused on much more than the remaining five success factors. The final five success factor are: using an Agile Process; having Clear Business Objectives; having Emotional Maturity; correct Execution of the project; and utilizing the appropriate Tools and Infrastructure. The Agile Process is all about embodying the small project philosophy and incorporates all of the first five success factors into its methodology. However, it is still a process guide which, while extremely helpful, is a tool that utilizes success factors rather than being a specific factor. Having a Clear Business Objective is less important for small projects which is why this falls so far down the list. As mentioned previously, SMEs tend to engage in smaller projects due to their resource and money constraints. While a business strategy should still exist and align with the organization’s goal and strategy, it does not need to be particularly clear when working on small projects and therefore is much less applicable to the vast majority of projects undertaken by SMEs. Emotional Maturity is the eighth success factor down the list and it refers to the emotional state of the project environment. In other words, “having the skills to be self-aware, socially aware, self-managed, and to manage relationships … all important skills for a small project team and their stakeholders” (The Standish Group, 2013, p. 33). Since projects get resolved within the ecosystem, a healthy environment full of emotionally mature individuals will lead to more successful projects. Emotional maturity is an especially important skill for the project manager to have, as they are ultimately responsible for resolving issues that may arise between project team members. Second last in importance for the success factors outlined by The Standish Group (2013) is Execution. Execution being the process that governs and controls the project, taking it through to its completion using a plan. Smaller projects are generally easier to execute than larger ones given that they require less time and money and are often much less complicated. Even though projects are easier to execute when they are smaller, they still do need to be taken to completion to be considered successes. As such it is important to put some time and energy focused on this particular factor. 22 Lastly, Tools and Infrastructures make up the least important of the ten success factors when it comes to small projects. Tools and infrastructure can be very useful aids for projects. This being said, often they are over used and relied upon too heavily which results in a lack of use of judgement and experiences from team members. This can ultimately hinder a project rather than help it achieve success and so with small projects, less is more, when it comes to tools and infrastructure. As has been noted through the variety of different measures used to determine the success of a project as well as to achieve that perceived success, there truly is no one-size-fits-all method to approaching project success. It will be useful for those involved with projects to take into account what has worked for similar projects, as well as follow some of the more general guidelines to achieving a successful project. This is especially important for project managers who have the responsibility of ensuring that the project turns out to be successful. This being said, a pattern emerges, and many similar pieces are repeated throughout the different studies and researches conducted by various groups. Much of this goes back to that idea of the Iron Triangle and ensuring that the cost, time and quality of the project are being accounted for. The Standish Group (2013) offers one set of guidelines which may aid in achieving a successful project, which emerges through being delivered useful functions on time, on budget and with quality. Many will note a theme developing through these project success factors; the important role that leadership plays directly or indirectly in many of the metrics that The Standish Group provides for small projects. Project success is known to be an important component to not only the success of businesses but also to the success and steady running of the global economy (Serra & Kunc, 2015). As has been mentioned previously, to achieve this success, it is crucial that the project management team defines, in no uncertain terms, how they will be evaluating whether each project completed is a ‘success’ (Serra & Kunc, 2015). Throughout most of the history of project success, research and projects have been focused on the ‘golden’ idea of the Iron-triangle. More recently however, researchers and groups, such as the Standish Group, have switched the focus to a more inclusive view of project success. The Standish Group are not the only ones who believe that the original Iron Triangle is an outdated model for project success. Often, project managers who focus solely on achieving these ‘output’ goals end up completing projects where the customers or the sponsors are left 23 unsatisfied with the results (Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). A project manager’s goal is to quite literally change things (Tayntor, 2010), and this change to organizations, whether it be structurally or with the implementation of a new technology, cannot be done well if the project manager only has the goal of finishing the project in mind. Since the 1980’s when the output-focused Iron Triangle was the norm, research on project success has shifted to a more customeroriented approach (Badewi, 2016). This has brought to light new ways of leading a project to a successful conclusion – and how to determine that this success has been achieved. While in the past, the short-term efficiency of a project was often highly valued - sometimes at the expense of the project’s long-term goals, both for the organization and for their intended customer - this is increasingly no longer the case. This being said, the adoption of a more inclusive approach to project success evaluation in organizations has been slow, with many organizations clinging to the idea of evaluating solely the efficiency of projects (Serra & Kunc, 2015). One reason behind this may be because of how difficult project benefits are to measure (Serra & Kunc, 2015). This is particularly the case with regards to the benefits that occur long after the project has been finished, for example benefits incurred during the product operation stage (Serra & Kunc, 2015). A visual representation of the various levels of benefits throughout a project’s lifecycle and after its completion can be seen below in Figure 3. The simple definition of a benefit, set out by Ward and Daniel in 2006, as “an advantage on behalf of a particular stakeholder or stakeholder group”, does not take into account all of the various considerations (Badewi, 2016, p. 763). An extended version of this definition is mentioned by Badewi (2016), which does bear in mind the multiple considerations of varying projects and their stakeholders, can be divided into three parts: 1) Benefits cannot be realized without a current change of state; 2) For each aspect of project success, those being the management and the investment, measures should be defined to assess each of the success criteria; 3) Benefits should be assigned to a particular person or department whose responsibility is to ensure the benefit is realized. The more comprehensive definition then, combining all of the aforementioned pieces of a benefit, is set out by Badewi (2016, p. 763) as “a measurable advantage owned by a group of stakeholders incurred by changing the current state through project management 24 mechanisms”. These benefits can be measured using Key Performance Indicators (KPI) which are a combination of both financial and non-financial indicators (Badewi, 2016). Figure 3: Chain of Benefits (Serra & Kunc, 2015) As can be seen above in Figure 3, benefits come into play throughout the project lifespan and can have a spin-off chain of benefits – and potentially consequences. It represents a conceptual interpretation of benefits realisation management, and the many levels of benefits which can be achieved, from the project outputs to the achievement of business objectives (Serra & Kunc, 2015). This intricate chain of benefits resulting from project outputs – many indirectly – is partly why it is so difficult to quantify the amount of benefit that any given project will result in. Now that project success has an increasingly overall-business strategyand customer-oriented meaning within many organizations, it is crucial that project managers do not achieve the setout objectives of a project only to have their endeavour fall into the 40 percent of projects 31 models designed to implement a systematic project method, are one way to tangibly incorporate the idea of project management maturity into the achievement of project results and success (Carvalho et al., 2015). Given, however, that there is a serious gap in the literature with regards to the relationship between project management and project success, it is possible that the inconclusive evidence is occurring simply because not enough research into the topic has been performed to date (Carvalho et al., 2015). This may be the beacon of hope that researchers and organizations who believe in project management have been using, and why they continue to work to perform research on the topic. A study conducted by Carvalho, Patah, and Bido (2015) aimed to fill this gap through research conducted on the relationship between two different aspects of project management and the results of projects. The first aspect of project management, whose relationship to project results was being assessed, was project management training efforts, while the second aspect was the project management context (Carvalho et al., 2015). Project management context essentially refers to developing and using Project Management Methodology (PMM), and providing both organizational and administrative support (Carvalho et al., 2015). From the literature review conducted in this study, two slightly differing collections of five success criteria were identified. In the first account, the five key success factors were given by Carvalho et al. (2015) are as follows: 1) Efficiency; 2) Effectiveness; 3) Impact of the project on society; 4) Relevance to the real needs and priorities in society; 5) Sustainability. The second set of discussed success factor criteria were similar but with some slight differences. The second set of criteria given by Carvalho et al. (2015) are as follows: 1) Efficiency; 2) Impact on the customer; 3) Impact on the team; 32 4) Business and direct success; 5) Preparation for the future. As can be seen by comparing the two criteria lists, the measure of efficiency was identical in both measures, and the impacts on society as a whole were incorporated into the criteria in both lists, albeit in different ways. As well, the ‘sustainability’ criterion in the former list may be compared in various ways to the ‘preparation for the future’ criterion in the latter list, since the whole idea behind sustainability is the ability to maintain something into the future. Where the lists diverge the most would be between the inclusion of an ‘effectiveness’ criterion in the former criteria list and the inclusion of a ‘business and direct success’ in the latter criteria list. However, even these two points have some overlapping meaning, for example, the ‘effectiveness’ and ‘business success’ can be referring to the effectiveness of a project to achieve direct success in the business. The literature review also reveals that benefits do come from a systematic project management approach, because, if done using a good framework and implemented properly, project management capabilities can be stored for future use both across time and locations (Carvalho et al., 2015). As well, project management done right ensures that information and knowledge is stored and can be easily recollected, making the organization less vulnerable than if that information and knowledge was only being captured in the minds of particular individuals working for the organization (Carvalho et al., 2015). This is due to the fact that human brains have a tendency to mix up information or forget things when recalling information, something that is not an issue when information is immediately documented. In terms of the study that Carvalho, Patah, and Bido (2015) conducted themselves to fill the literature gap, they used a field study of a multinational organization across three of its locations in South America over a three-year time frame. Various business departments were analyzed and a variety of sources were drawn from to use as evidence (Carvalho et al., 2015). As well, a number of projects were chosen to evaluate in each business unit, so that a valid sample could be compiled, and a number of control variables were established in an attempt to eliminate as many external possible connections as possible (Carvalho et al., 2015). The results from the study show above all that more research needs to be conducted to gather a more complete picture, since there exist intricacies that are difficult to extract from one 33 another to determine what impacts are causing which outcomes. From what was gathered, the study showed that both project management training efforts and project management enablers – which relates to maturity – have a significant positive effect on the schedule performance of a project, but fail to show significant positive relationship on the project performance measures (Carvalho et al., 2015). They note that more research should be conducted and more energy devoted to project management, especially with regards to the soft side of project management, to which the above measures are more related (Carvalho et al., 2015). The soft side of project management refers more so to the management of stakeholder’s roles, individual capabilities and skills as well as the idea of project ecology (Carvalho et al., 2015). 2.4 Leadership What is mentioned in the literature about the definition and the importance of leadership will be outlined in this section. Then, it was important to highlight what the IPMA said on leadership. 2.4.1 Definition It is difficult to define the term ‘leadership’ without using the root word ‘lead’. To find a perfect way to encompass all that leadership means is not easy. Simplifying, leadership is understood as the act of guiding or directing a group of individuals. However, this definition is not an exact match, as it does not fully explain what leadership is. A more comprehensive definition of leadership is as follows: “Leadership is a process of social influence, which maximizes the efforts of others, towards the achievement of a goal” (Kruse, 2013, p. 1). Along these same lines, the University of Sherbrooke (2016, p. 1) defines leadership as “the ability of an individual to [direct] or lead other individuals or organizations in order to achieve certain goals. It will then be said that a leader is someone who is able to guide, influence and inspire”. Leadership is so much more than simply managing or even influencing people. It is a combination of many different aspects and attributes including influencing others, organizing both individuals and plans, taking initiative, and engaging and inspiring groups of people towards achieving common goals. Often it gets confused with managing or coaching but these are examples of roles where leadership may be employed. This being said, leadership is not 34 the only important aspect needed to be a manager or a coach nor is it strictly necessary to perform either of these jobs. Another way to look at leadership is to understand change management. Change management is a type of leadership that often involves discussions about what is and is not working, as well as where improvements can be made (MRH, 2014). These discussions tend to be lengthy and highly emotional (MRH, 2014). Change leadership is crucial because industries and situations are constantly in flux, and not everyone handles changing work environments the same way (Perrin, 2012). In times of change, it is starting to be recognized that a softer approach is necessary to lead a team, rather than the structured and unyielding leadership style that was often thought of a necessary to show strength (Perrin, 2012). Remember that change is difficult for people because it means giving up the comfort and predictability of the status quo, instead allowing for the uncertainty and anxiety that often comes with change (Issah, 2018). Due to the difficulty people have dealing with change, and the emotional stress it can often have on individuals, change leaders need to be able to understand and harness the power of emotional intelligence (Issah, 2018). Emotional intelligence being the “set of emotional and social skills that influence the way we perceive and express ourselves, develop and maintain social relationships, cope with challenges, and use emotional information in an effective and meaningful way” (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2004, p. 197). Change leaders need to possess the five associated components to emotional intelligence in order to be more successful at moving people through times of change, those being: self-awareness, self-regulation, self-motivation, empathy, and social skill (Issah, 2018). Emotional intelligence is crucial for helping individuals and teams through change process, something that is inherent in the nature of projects. Thus, change management requires an emotional maturity and intelligence to help project teams move organisations through times of change. When approaching leadership as a more guiding role, leaders are helping team members to make their own decisions and find solutions rather than deciding how the project will be executed themselves. Taking a guiding role in leadership is about being able to guide and influence the cognitive behaviours of people, ideally to the benefit of the project and organisation as a whole (Gallagher, Mazur, & Ashkanasy, 2015). This can be an incredibly 35 useful skill in projects because of all the change that is occurring within the projects which makes necessary for people to be on board and have critical thinking skills (Issah, 2018). Different people will require different approaches and different guidance methods throughout the process, and so a leader that can alter their strategies of guidance is beneficial (Perrin, 2012). On the other hand, approaching leadership from a more directive standpoint is a more harsh and strict option. Directive leadership has an association with authoritarian leadership style, the style associated with a hierarchal organisational structure where one individual makes decisions and gives clear directions and rules to others (Li, Liu, & Luo, 2018). While it does have positive aspects, research has found that groups under directive leadership are more dependant on the leader, and it can dampen creativity and initiative in problem solving scenarios (Li et al., 2018). Overall, directive leadership has not been shown to be helpful in group settings, especially where group decision-making is involved, such as project and portfolio environments. 2.4.2 Importance Leadership is an important aspect of any business. In SMEs leadership is especially important to keep companies afloat when competing against multinational corporations and larger firms. As is the case with many research topics pertaining to businesses, leadership and its effects have been much more thoroughly studied with regards to large organizations than with SMEs (Szczepańska-Woszczyna & Kurowska-Pysz, 2016). It is well known that SMEs function differently in many respects than large corporations and therefore it is seen as a necessity to study the effects of leadership on SMEs as well (Hillary, 2000). As research directed towards SMEs is much sparser it is important to draw from the small amount of research available to enact change in the sector as well as to encourage further research to be performed (Hillary, 2000). Rather than simply using research that only accurately reflects the situations of large organizations, research on leadership in SMEs will allow for a more accurate and relevant picture to be formed. In one study done on leadership in SMEs, research on its importance was conducted as well as the aspects which enabled sustainable business practices. One of the key findings was that the effective implementation of actions for sustainable development was dependent on how 36 convinced the owner or managers were of these activities (Szczepańska-Woszczyna & Kurowska-Pysz, 2016). This applies to more than just sustainable business practices. Moving anything forward in SMEs requires owners, managers and executives to be fully committed to the goal of showing employees that they are devoted to the cause as well as act as role models for the rest of the employees. This is in line with the Standish Group’s successful projects’ criteria with the most important factor to project success being executive management support and the firth most important factor being project management expertise, both of which require participation, support and leadership from management and upper management roles in the company. Although these pertain specifically to projects, they can also be applied to leadership in general for companies. Basing leadership on the comprehensive definition provided in a Forbes magazine article, a leader is someone who influences change, and transforms individuals and followers’ performance (Kruse, 2013). From this definition the idea of transformational leadership, which was developed by Bass in 1985, is a logical step. A study done by Wang et al. (2011) examined the four behavioral characteristics that transformational leaders exhibit. The first behavior of transformational leadership is Inspirational Motivation through which they develop and articulate a shared vision and high expectations that are motivating, inspiring, and challenging (Wang et al., 2011). The second behavior is Idealized Influence, which is serving as a role model by acting in ways that are consistent with the vision. The third behavior is to Intellectually Stimulate Individuals to challenge assumptions and the fourth behavior is Individualized Consideration which is essentially attending to the needs of individuals and treating every person as unique so as to foster trust. These four leadership criteria act as a baseline and have been shown to improve performance in various areas, including at the team-level, as well as at the individual level with regards to contextual performance – or voluntarily motivated work behaviors (Wang et al., 2011). Another set of criteria is given by Maladzhi, Yan, and Makinde (2012) in their paper looking at the connection between leadership and innovation. The criteria they have come up with are as follows: ability to ascertain external factors, fast action orientated, high gain risk taker, immersed in progressive change, inspirational and motivation, charismatic, passionate, and visionary leaders. As innovation is often a key component and driving influence on the 37 formation and execution of projects, the outlined criteria are useful in the context of both projects and leadership as well as their interconnected nature. For the large Canadian Corporation, Sears, a further set of 12 criteria have been developed which they use for their hiring processes at individual locations. These criteria, modelled in Figure 4, give another perspective on what characteristics make a good leader. Although these criteria were developed for a larger corporation and not an SME, they still contain merit given that large corporations need strong leadership at many different levels to function properly. As well, much of the same skillset will be required for a good leader at an SME as would be required to be a leader for a larger corporation such as Sears. They group these twelve criteria in relation to what they call the ‘three P’s’, namely Passion for the customer, People adding value, and Performance leadership (Rucci et al., 1998). Each of these three P’s is the point of a triangle connecting them all to show their relationship as a function of leadership. Each of the criteria fits somewhere along the spectrum either in one group of the ‘three P’s’, between two groups, or in the middle where all three of the groups are relevant. Figure 4: Leadership Skills (Rucci et al., 1998) 38 The leaders of SMEs often beat the odds and rise up in economies alongside the large corporations with deep pockets and are sometimes even able to succeed where their larger counterparts have failed. This is frequently due to their ability to lead in unconventional ways and their creative strategies in absence of seemingly endless resources (Chanyatipsakul & Wongsurawat, 2013). In a study done of entrepreneurial SMEs around Bangkok, Thailand, a number of strengths emerged with regards to the leadership strategies and habits of SMEs. One of the main strategies used by these SME leaders was to experiment to discover what worked and what did not. This was a strategy also employed by the Chinese government, essentially ‘feeling one’s way forward’, which led to the remarkable growth and modernisation of the Chinese economy (Chanyatipsakul & Wongsurawat, 2013). This strategy does present many difficulties for SMEs, mainly because it means constantly changing direction with the threat that something might not work, hurting revenue and funds. Another strength that SME leaders had was the ability to make do with limited resources, something that larger firms often do not have to deal with making them more vulnerable to reliance on resources rather than ingenuity. For these SME leaders this entailed focusing on their strengths rather than their weaknesses and working with the resources they had available (Chanyatipsakul & Wongsurawat, 2013). A third theme that was noted with most of the SME leaders in the study was an extreme sense of optimism when it came to challenges. Their ability to look at a challenge and find solutions allowed them to continually press forward and re-evaluate when something was not working. Finally, the study found that most of the individuals they interviewed were well aware that their business was at high risk of failure and so they always budgeted for failure. This led to SMEs being generally more resilient in light of the many failures that they can and will face throughout their business endeavours and especially during the early stages, when their business is still growing and developing (Chanyatipsakul & Wongsurawat, 2013). With all of the strengths that leaders in SMEs have, they also face many obstacles - some of which have previously been touched upon. One of the biggest obstacles that managers and owners in SMEs face is the constant threat of losing employees to larger companies. Big corporations can offer higher pay and more reliable job security which draws talented individuals away from the smaller organizations that do not have the funds to offer 39 competitive pay (Chanyatipsakul & Wongsurawat, 2013). To overcome this, the individuals running the organization need to be able to inspire their workers and ensure that they are passionate about what the organization is doing. Much of this ability to inspire and motivate employees goes back to being a good leader. One of the other major obstacles that leaders of SMEs face is the difficulty that hard times hitting entire markets or economies has on these smaller companies. When industry or economy wide difficulties emerge, SMEs have fewer resources and fewer safety nets to keep them from going under. This means their leaders need to be even more resilient and better at motivating and empowering employees as well as using creative problem-solving methods to keep the organization up and running (Cooper, 2010). Many businesses, especially in the SME sector, are constantly forced to embrace change. This is particularly true when cuts in both the private and public sector start occurring, forcing stresses such as job insecurity, restructuring, reorganization and downsizing (Cooper, 2010). Many SMEs rely on public or private funding and so they are often more affected by these events than the larger organizations with access to a greater amount of their own funds (Cooper, 2010). Finally, although, as mentioned above, many SME leaders are able to compete in marketplaces due to their ability to innovate and inspire employees, innovation is often still something that some SME leaders need to improve upon (Maladzhi et al., 2012). Innovation and leadership are positively correlated and when leaders have a strong ability to influence innovative processes in the business, they are much more competent leaders (Maladzhi et al., 2012). Leadership is an important aspect to any business and this importance should not be downplayed, especially when it comes to its relationship with management and executive roles within an organization. It is intricately tied to the idea of management, where it plays an important role in keeping teams, organizational divisions, and specific projects on track for what they are supposed to accomplish. Leaders of SMEs are of particular interest due to their wide spread reach, with SMEs accounting for a large portion of the organizations and employment across most sectors. Although SME leaders have many strengths both due to and in reaction to the smaller nature of their organizations, these same factors also lead to many of the obstacles that SME leaders face on a daily basis. 40 2.4.3 IPMA Views The International Project Management Association sets out a global standard for the competences that individuals should have to work within project, portfolio, and program management (IPMA, 2015). This standard is accurately termed the Individual Competence Baseline (ICB). There have been numerous versions of the IPMA ICB with the most recent version (version 4.0) having come into effect in 2015 after three years of development (IPMA, 2015). Development of the standard occurred with the contributions from and consensus between 60 national member associations (Vukomanović, Young, & Huynink, 2016). It is known that project management is a crucial aspect of project success, particularly for larger and more complex projects where having competent project managers and project management structures is essential for projects to succeed due to the complexity involved (Varajão & Cruz-Cunha, 2013). Project managers therefore need to have the competencies to navigate these intertwined factors in order to successfully manage the projects, portfolios, and programs that their organisation undertakes (IPMA, 2015). It is important to note that this focus on competencies is fairly rare in the world of standards, where much of the focus is on processes and procedures (Vukomanović et al., 2016). The focus that the IPMA ICB has on individual competence development, as well as the standard’s specification of competencies needed for good performance in project management sets it apart from many of the other project management based standards that have been developed (Vukomanović et al., 2016). The goal of the ICB standards the IPMA developed was simply to enrich and improve the competence of individuals within the fields of project, portfolio, and program management, through the development of an inventory of competencies that if used completely would result in the mastery of management in the domains of project, portfolio and program management (IPMA, 2015). As a competence-based standard, the IPMA ICB outlines a wide range of knowledge, skills, and abilities that are necessary for high-level performance (Vukomanović et al., 2016). The document outlines six different groupings of audiences that the standard targets, with a list of potential uses associated with each of the varied audience members (IPMA, 2015). As Varajão & Cruz-Cunha (2013) note, one such use for the IPMA IBC is for the hiring of project managers. As the standard describes competencies that will be beneficial for the various project-oriented environments, hiring committees can use this information for screening 47 come together. For many SME project managers these external communities of practice will offer them the most peer group interaction. This is because project managers from many organizations will be just as isolated as they are, seeking for individuals in similar situations to learn from and innovate with (Lee et al., 2015). As innovation is an integral part of leadership, these communities of practice are a useful tool to ensure that project managers are developing their leadership skills. In a study done on knowledge sharing between project teams, the role of leadership within these teams was examined. It was found in most of the companies in the study that the responsibility for leadership was actually shared between top management, project team managers and the project team members. This means that although the management positions had a role in leadership, that role was also shared throughout the company hierarchy (Mueller, 2015). For some companies of course, the knowledge sharing stayed within the rigid confines of a typical business hierarchy, meaning that project leaders mainly shared insights with other project leaders, and team members shared mainly with team members. In this more rigid structure, leadership in the lower levels of the hierarchy was not frequently possible which allows for an increased leadership role from top-management overall and project leaders with respect to their specific projects. In the vast majority of organizations interviewed however, the knowledge sharing was a lot more fluid allowing for team members to take part in the leadership of different aspects of the project. In these organizations, leadership, while still important for the upper management and project leaders, is less dependent on that typical hierarchal business structure. Since the leadership role is shared more openly, it is slightly less important as a portion of project management than it would be in a business which conforms to the traditional hierarchal structure. Leadership and management have always been thought of as fairly synonymous and although they are two separate things, they do overlap quite a bit. Leadership qualities are sought after when it comes to being in any management position, but particularly for project management where there is such a high chance of projects failing or being challenged. In SMEs, projects are generally smaller and there are often more of them due to the more innovative nature of SMEs in general. This means that the performance metrics of SMEs, with regards to project 48 management, should be seriously considered and researched for individual organizations as well as trends across the sector as a whole. How big of a role leadership will play in project management, as well as what style and approach of leadership should be employed, will differ from organization to organization and from project to project. As such, it is important for organizations to do their research on leadership and observe what works best for their organization so that their project management techniques are as effective as possible. 2.6 Impact of Leadership on Project Success In a paper written on project leadership in the IT sector, it was noted that many of the studies done on this topic were in fact focused on the roles and behaviors of the project managers. It was found that in the case of successful projects, the managers were able to adopt leadership profiles that adapted to the specific project they were working on (Roy et al., 2010). The ability for project managers to be leaders as well as perform other management duties is crucial to the success of projects. They need to be able to read a situation and decide what style of management and what type of leadership role will work best to motivate and inspire staff to get the project done on time, on budget and with high quality results. Leaders should be able to give credit where it is due, nurture the creativity of the staff members involved in the project, as well as support them in taking calculated risks (Chittoor, 2012). Doing so, not only makes a good leader, but also turns out projects that succeed. Projects generally change and adapt over time as the vision and the deliverable result merge. This requires leaders who are also able to adapt, both in their leading style and in their approach to the changing project (Chittoor, 2012). Leaders who are not able to adapt and grow with the project will ultimately develop projects which have failed on one or more of the measures previously discussed. Furthermore, project managers should be able to use their own ability to anticipate and adapt to change in a project, to aid their team members in coping with changing projects (Chittoor, 2012). As has been mentioned previously by the Standish Group’s research and metrics, leadership in multiple forms plays a large role in the success or failure of a project. They deem the foremost important metric of a project to be the executive management support, going as far 49 as to say that the “executive sponsor is ultimately responsible for the success and failure of the project” (The Standish Group, 2013, p. 3). The executive sponsor is expected to have many of the qualities and skills that are required of a leader as well. These include the ability to motivate employees, commitment to the project and to the team members, ability to communicate the goal and/or vision of the project, ability to develop and execute a plan, and the skills to negotiate between team members, external stakeholders, and executive sponsors on all matters of the project. Furthermore, the Standish Group’s fifth criteria for successful projects is also a leadership driven metric, this time focusing on the project manager expertise. When discussing the role of project managers, it is quite literally in their job description to take the natural progression of a project to its successful resolution. The project managers are expected to be leaders and to exhibit skills common to both successful leaders and managers. These skills include, but are not limited to: planning and executing the plan, showing proficiency in good judgement and diplomacy, recognizing the potential and strengths of team members and motivating them, as well as adapting to constant change through communication with stakeholders (The Standish Group, 2013). As such, this metric is another example of the impact leadership has on project success. The sixth criteria laid out by The Standish Group (2013) for successful projects is the application of the Agile Process. The Agile Process is a conceptual framework for undertaking projects, particularly projects in the IT sector. It directly addresses the first five criteria laid out by The Standish Group, including the two aforementioned ones which focus on leadership and management. This is another criterion which reinforces the importance of leadership when it comes to project success. Finally, the eighth criterion that The Standish Group discusses for the success of smaller projects is emotional maturity. Emotional maturity being an ability to perceive, assess, manage, and direct the emotions and actions of the individuals involved in the project (The Standish Group, 2013). This is the same as emotional intelligence which is defined as “[the] ability to perceive, to assimilate, to understand, and to manage emotions” (Gallagher et al., 2015, p. 15). In research done on leadership, emotional intelligence - or emotional maturity - has been found to be positively correlated with the emergence of leadership qualities and the effectiveness of leadership (Gallagher et al., 2015). Emotionally intelligent leaders are able to 50 improve trust and cooperation between project team members (Gallagher et al., 2015) which is an extremely important part of being a good leader. Emotional maturity is therefore yet another criterion expressed by The Standish Group (2013) in their success factors for projects which ties leadership into project success. In total, these four criteria account for 47 percent of the total points that were awarded to the ten criteria that The Standish Group (2013) outlined as the most important factors for achieving successful projects. That is nearly half of a project’s outcome relying directly or indirectly on leadership as a factor according to the Standish Group’s metrics (The Standish Group, 2013). Of that 47 percent, 32 percent can be accounted for by the first and fifth factors, both of which focus more directly on the leadership aspect rather than indirectly focusing on leadership through its integration into the success metrics. Regardless, The Standish Group’s list of success criteria and the breakdown of points awarded to each section show the merit of having meaningful and functional leadership when it comes to the project environment. The role leadership plays is therefore quite significant, with the Standish Group metrics leading one to think that without it, projects have nearly fifty percent less of a chance at being completed successfully. As has been shown by multiple studies and papers, leadership is a key factor with regards to the successful execution of projects. Without leadership, projects would not have nearly as much structure or direction and would often get abandoned halfway through or would not deliver the necessary metrics. Projects would end up reaching their conclusion without ever having a focus much more often, leading to a decrease in overall project success. This is a reality for projects across all industries and throughout all departments in companies. Regardless of what the project is supposed to accomplish it is important for it to have a strong leadership force keeping the team on task and motivated to achieve a successful end result. The manufacturing industry is no different, requiring leadership for its varied projects just as much as any other industry. 2.7 Manufacturing Industry The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) explains in detail what comprises the manufacturing sector. On Statistic Canada’s webpage devoted to NAICS, the manufacturing sector is described as “[comprising of] establishments primarily engaged in the 51 chemical, mechanical or physical transformation of materials or substances into new products. These products may be finished, in the sense that they are ready to be used or consumed, or semi-finished, in the sense of becoming a raw material for an establishment to use in further manufacturing” (Statistics Canada, 2016). Put more simply, the manufacturing industry is an industry involved in creating new products through a variety of means and at varied stages of being a finished product. The manufacturing industry has long played an important role in Canada and around the world, accounting for a variety of factories producing innumerable different goods and employing a large portion of the population. As labour has become cheaper overseas, due in part to the decrease in transportation costs, many manufacturing firms have moved out of western countries. This being said, many factories and firms do still reside in western countries such as Canada, still playing a role in their economies. Some provinces have developed long-term work-force strategies to ensure that the manufacturing that is still occurring continues to supply jobs and money to the province (Government of Alberta - Ministry of Labour, 2007). In Albert alone, manufacturing is the 4th largest industry in terms of GDP and the fifth largest industry in terms of employment (Government of Alberta - Ministry of Labour, 2007). This however, is not the case for many provinces across the country. In Ontario, manufacturing accounted for about 12 percent of the Province’s GDP in 2013, with only health and education, and real estate being more influential to the economy. This means it does also have a fairly large impact on the economy in Ontario, similar to the situation in Alberta and with many of the same obstacles that face Alberta’s variety of manufacturing firms (Davis, 2017). Figure 6, Statistics Canada data, shows the breakdown of all of the Ontario Industries based on their nominal GDP so a more complete image can be formed. 52 Figure 6: Structure of the Ontario Economy (Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2017) Since the manufacturing industry is so broad, it encompasses a number of subsectors which are considered both a part of the manufacturing industry as well as industries unto themselves. Some of these subsectors include the chemicals and petrochemicals industry, the industrial machinery and equipment industry, and the food and beverage manufacturing industry, just to name a few (Government of Alberta - Ministry of Labour, 2007). These subsectors face many different issues, from disease in crops and animals, to depletion of natural mineral reserves. Different issues will affect each sub sector and alter their prominence in a province or country in terms of a supply for work and money. These subindustry specific issues are not the only issues that face the manufacturing industry. Most subsectors are faced with issues that include the attraction of skilled workers, maintaining productivity levels, recruiting and retaining production workers, and the health and safety risks that many jobs in the manufacturing sector pose (Government of Alberta - Ministry of Labour, 2007). On top of these issues, much of the manufacturing occurring in Alberta, as well as elsewhere across Canada, is faced with the problems that present themselves to SMEs. This is due to the fact that the vast majority of the manufacturing 53 industry is composed of firms with less than 500 employees, effectively making them a mixture of small and medium sized companies (Government of Alberta - Ministry of Labour, 2007). The ‘Natural Resources Canada’ website provides one breakdown of the different subsectors of the manufacturing industry to show the percentage of energy use in each sector across Canada as a whole. Although values will be skewed significantly by the amount of energy used for processes specific to each sector, it does provide some pertinent information about the impact of each sub-industry and to some extent their size as well (Giroux, 2008). Figure 7 provides a visual breakdown of this energy use. Not all subsectors are fully represented as many had too small of an impact to place into the pie chart. This is also what has occurred for Figure 6 for the sectors of the economy which had too small an impact to be accounted for. These smaller sectors and subsectors are accounted for under the ‘Other’ category present in both figures. Figure 7: Share of Energy Use in the Manufacturing Industry (2005) (Giroux, 2008) In 2001, 15.21 percent of total salaried employment in Canada was in the manufacturing industry (Behrens and Bougna, 2015). By 2005 employment in manufacturing had gone down to 13.19 percent and by 2009 that number had dropped still to 10.11 percent (Behrens and Bougna, 2015). This downwards trend in manufacturing, or ‘de-industrialisation’, is a common trend across most developed countries. It is not limited to just jobs either, it is also affecting the number of plants, which has decreased significantly in the same time frame (Behrens and 54 Bougna, 2015). This trend of de-industrialisation in Canada is mostly due to the globalisation trend sweeping the world which has caused outsourcing of labour, especially in the manufacturing sector, to increase productivity (Chongvilaivan & Hur, 2011). Interestingly enough, one view as to why such a surge in outsourcing has occurred accounts much of the trend to decline in transaction costs that has been caused by the intensified use of IT (Chongvilaivan & Hur, 2011). The very services and technological leaps that have helped the manufacturing industry so profusely seem to also be part of the reason that local manufacturing companies, operating out of western countries such as Canada, are losing so much business to outsourcing. This downward trend in the manufacturing industry makes it even more important for Canadian manufacturers to innovate new technologies and ways to stay competitive in the marketplace. As projects play a key role in the innovation, design, and implementation processes of new technologies, they will become increasingly important for the manufacturing industry in the coming years. Projects in manufacturing should reflect this, and the ability of their project managers to lead effectively and efficiently will be crucial in determining not only whether individual projects succeed, but often whether the company will be able to stay competitive enough to survive in the ever-changing globalised market of manufacturing. If companies are unable to run successful projects with leaders who are inspiring and motivating forces for their employees, the chances of those companies staying alive is greatly diminished. Thus, the link between project management and leadership to project success in the manufacturing industry is an important subject for proposed projects. This is especially true for projects in the IT sector, as the IT department has become a crucial department for manufacturing companies with regards to innovation, improving processes, and decreasing costs. 2.8 Summary IT projects in the manufacturing sector require different tactics in terms of project management and leadership than one might be required to use in other types of projects. There are a multitude of leadership techniques that may be employed in different scenarios and it is up to the project manager to decide which techniques will work best with the specific project, with the project team members, and the organization’s overall dynamic. As project 55 success is the ultimate goal, it is crucial for project managers and project teams to work together along with all of the applicable stakeholders to determine which criteria are necessary for the project to succeed. In the manufacturing sector, especially in Western countries such as Canada, it is crucial for project managers to lead their team so as to accomplish the set goal. By ensuring that they have a goal, a process, and a leader who is willing to work with team members to develop and amend their goal as needed, manufacturing companies are at a good starting point for projects. Doing so will assure that they can continue to work in their industry while maintaining the competitive edge necessary for keeping their company alive in the 21st century’s globalised and highly competitive world. This is even more important for manufacturing companies classified as SMEs where any edge they can get will help them immensely against larger Canadian competitors and overseas competitors. In the Canadian manufacturing industry, the vast majority of firms are considered SMEs and many of their projects focus on IT developments. The Standish Group focuses a lot of their research on IT and software development as well as developing that list of criteria specifically for smaller companies whose needs differ from the large mega-corporations that most research is conducted for (The Standish Group, 2013). As such, The Standish Group (2013) factors of success revamped for small companies will be an incredibly useful tool to improve project processes and success rates. One key way that project leaders and firms can ensure a continuous improvement upon project processes and delivery is to keep records of past projects. Leadership methods, the roles of each of the team members, plans drawn up, any changes that occurred throughout the project, and an array of other factors should be recorded for future reference. By taking this step, firms are preparing themselves to learn from past mistakes and improve processes. This will give them an increased chance for their future projects to succeed. Many of these criteria focus on the role of leadership towards project success and it will be important for project leaders to figure out which leadership methods and qualities will be most useful for their team and their work environment. In smaller organizations, it is often more effective to take a more inclusive and coordinator-like approach to leadership rather than an authoritarian approach. However, this may not be the best solution for every project. It will ultimately fall upon the shoulders of the leaders in the organization and the leaders of 56 the project in question to take any information they have from past projects executed by the firm, as well as from similar projects executed by other firms. Research done pertaining to projects in the manufacturing industry, with regards to SMEs, as well as IT projects – such as the reports written by The Standish Group – will serve as further support for structuring leadership in projects. By doing so, they can ensure that every project they undertake has the highest chance possible of succeeding. 63 should be focused on to gain a more in-depth understanding as well as data to back up (or prove wrong) the beliefs and claims of project managers and those within the project management industry. As will be evidenced through Müller’s work, he has done a good job of filling these gaps using empirical data and primary research studies to draw new pools of data on which to work. 3.3 Methodologies for Data Gathering Throughout Müller’s research works, he has employed a variety of methodologies through which to gather both primary and secondary data. These methodologies, found within numerous research papers written both unaided, with collaborators, and on behalf of organizations, will be discussed within this section. Starting broadly, Müller tends to utilize studies of groups of individuals in order to gain primary data from which to draw conclusions on his work (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller, 2003; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a, 2007b, 2010; Tabassi et al., 2016; Turner & Müller, 2006; Yang et al., 2011). This was done in order to gain information first-hand from people who were directly being impacted by the concepts being studied. In doing so, some of the knowledge gaps described in the section above could be addressed. He also employed literature reviews and document analysis throughout his work in order to gain background knowledge on previously performed research as well as build a case for the need for his current research (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller, 2003; Müller & Turner, 2005, 2007b, 2010; Turner & Müller, 2006; Yang et al., 2011). In terms of gathering primary data, there were a couple of techniques Müller employed to perform these studies. The first, which was present in the vast majority of the assessed studies, was some form of survey (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller, 2003; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a, 2007b, 2010; Tabassi et al., 2016; Turner & Müller, 2006; Yang et al., 2011). The second was the use of interviews, which, while also used in a number of his studies, were not quite as wide-spread (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a; Turner & Müller, 2006; Yang et al., 2011). On the other hand, secondary data was gathered primarily through document analysis and literature reviews, meaning literature on the topics of interest written prior to his intended study were reviewed, key ideas combined, and research and knowledge gaps identified. 64 Referring back to the development and use of primary data, the surveys - or questionnaires - varied depending on what was being studied and the intent of the study. Going off of what was most frequently utilized, Müller’s primary mode of delivering surveys was through email, where an introduction to the purpose of the survey as well as a link to the survey was emailed to professionals of the intended survey audience. There was only one case where the surveys were not web-based, and these were instead hand-delivered to study participants and collected afterwards by research officers (Tabassi et al., 2016). This method was more labour intensive, and the study surveyed a lesser number of individuals that the majority of his webbased surveys. The introductory emails were often distributed through a combination of project management networks such as the PMI, to Masters students at various Universities, and through the researchers’ (including Müller’s) personal networks (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller, 2003; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a, 2007b, 2010; Turner & Müller, 2006; Yang et al., 2011). Participants were also often asked to forward the email to other professionals in order to expand the response pool (Turner & Müller, 2006). This, referred to as a snowball approach to sampling, is a form of convenience sampling often utilized when large numbers of a desired population need to be reached (Müller, 2003; Müller & Turner, 2007b; Turner & Müller, 2006). While this was the case with many of the surveys, some with more specific desires for a representative sample of an industry chose to more carefully select participants so there was geographic and sub-sector diversity with little to no overlap of an industry (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Tabassi et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2011). These questionnaires were often piloted, in other words a pre-test questionnaire was distributed to a small group of individuals (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller, 2003; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007b; Turner & Müller, 2006). This pre-test of questions was performed so that any issues, either with the wording of questions, the clarity of questions, or missing information could be identified and the questions adjusted so that those issues would not occur during the study itself (Müller, 2003). Testing the questionnaire was not the only technique Müller and his colleagues used to ensure that the study would not run into any issues with the questionnaires. In the four studies which employed the use of interviews, they were used as implements to not only gain more qualitative in-depth information, but also as a pre-curser towards 65 formulating appropriate and pointed questions within the questionnaire (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a). In Biedenbach and Müller research paper (2012), the approach was to perform the interviews first (three rounds, with 18 interviews all lasting between 45 and 90 minutes) so that an exploratory case study could be conducted. While this mixed method approach to the research study was more labour-intensive than simply handing out a pre-designed survey to a group of professionals and asking for their feedback, it did allow for a more informative approach to developing the survey questions. In doing so, they would be able to avoid asking questions with little relevance, or missing questions that would have given them key information. Interviews performed were semi-structured (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a; Turner & Müller, 2006), meaning that questions were open-ended ones that were pulled from an interview guide with other questions added for context, deeper understanding, and clarity (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012). A variation on this was the use of focus-groups of individuals reviewing the questions and providing feedback in order to gain a similar result (Müller, 2003). The other strategy they used, to ensure that the questions they were asking would be useful and clear, was to take questions from previous studies done on similar topics (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Müller & Turner, 2010). A variation on this was also performed, by re-using variables from previous studies and adding them into the questionnaires they were developing (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Yang et al., 2011). Both of these strategies are useful techniques as they can review previous studies, identify what steps they took to ensure that their questions were properly developed and tested, and they have the results from those studies as well as any information the researchers identified in hind-sight about issues that the questions ran into. In this sense, it is as if they have performed a pilot test with the questions without having to go through the process of developing and testing the questions themselves. The surveys were generally a combination of various questions, often with multiple sections addressing the topics of interest from a variety of perspectives. Demographic information was also a portion in each of the questionnaires so that background information about the participants could be gathered (Turner & Müller, 2006). For example, in one study, demographic information revealed that the majority of the respondents were males from North America, working in the private sector, who were certified project managers (Müller et 66 al., 2012). Demographic information was also used to weed out any participants that did not fit the demographic of individuals Müller and his colleagues were looking to study with their research. In some studies, a pointed question, either in the initial email or in the survey itself, was intended as a flag to identify those participants whose questionnaires would be useable and those whose would not be useable (Joslin & Müller, 2015). As well, in some studies, particular respondent questionnaires were omitted from analysis due to a lack of information, with some questions or entire sections of questions having not been answered before the surveys were sent back (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012). Bias was also an important factor that Müller addressed in his research. As bias can taint the data in a study and null the results, or at least make them less relevant, it is important for researchers to keep biases in mind and actively minimise their presence. One way in which Müller and his colleagues did this was through the use of recommendations of Podsakoff and Organ (1986) to minimise methods bias, for example through confirming anonymity of participants, using a variety of layouts and scales, and randomising the questions (Joslin & Müller, 2015). They made sure that the sample size was large enough to be representative of the target population as well, to reduce bias (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012). Finally, they used statistical methodologies post-survey completion to test whether there were differences between those groups who responded earlier or later (often before or after a reminder email) (Müller et al., 2012; Turner & Müller, 2006). If a difference in population had been found, this may have indicated that there was also a statistically significant difference between those who responded and those who did not respond, which would mean that there was a non-response bias in their data. No such difference was discovered (Müller et al., 2012). A final way in which bias was reduced was through the dissemination of surveys on a worldwide basis (Müller & Turner, 2010; Turner & Müller, 2006). While this was not the case for all of the surveys conducted, as some were specifically looking at one country or region (Tabassi et al., 2016), the spread of respondents was generally across multiple continents and countries, simply due to the dissemination method of the surveys (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller, 2003; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007b, 2010; Yang et al., 2011). While this may have acted to minimise any bias that might have occurred from a questionnaire that only surveyed respondents from one cultural lens, it also served another purpose. Due to the demographic questions asked during surveys, the researchers were also able to gauge the 67 percentage of participants who came from different geographic areas. In this way, if a large portion of respondents did happen to come from one particular country, then this potential bias could be noted in the study. The final component of many of these studies was a literature review. As mentioned previously, one of the studies performed by Müller was solely a literature review, meaning there was no primary data gathered or analyzed for the research (Müller & Turner, 2005). Literature reviews were also used in many of his other studies as well, mainly as a way to ensure that a research gap was in fact present in the current literature (Müller & Turner, 2007b; Turner & Müller, 2006). This is important because without performing an in-depth literature review, a prior study addressing the exact research assumed to be a gap may be missed and the funds, as well as the researchers’ time, might have been wasted on a subject that has already been addressed. Often these literature reviews were also used to develop the hypotheses of the studies being performed (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller, 2003; Müller & Turner, 2007b, 2010; Turner & Müller, 2006; Yang et al., 2011). In performing a literature review, Müller was able to build off of the information currently available on the topics he was researching to make educated hypotheses for his studies. Using a mix of both primary and secondary data and the methodologies that go along with these is important for a study if its intent is to add on relevant and useful information to the existing bank of knowledge on a topic. While nearly all of the studies performed by Müller (excluding Müller and Turner (2005)) had the intent of addressing knowledge gaps through gathering new information, it was important that Müller first reviewed the relevant literature to ensure that the gap he was attempting to address was in fact a gap. By performing interviews, surveys, and questionnaires, as well as manipulating the raw data to gain useful insights from that primary data, he was contributing to the existing literature and starting to fill some of the knowledge and research gaps. 3.4 Data Analysis The primary data collected throughout the studies Müller and his colleagues performed was analyzed using a variety of statistical methodologies and tools. The tools employed differed depending on the type of information needed, the questions asked, and the data obtained from them, as well as the type of primary data gathering method that was used. 68 Starting with the interviews, the data gathered was primarily qualitative, as the open-ended questions did not generally have numbers attached to them that could be easily manipulated using statistics to gather insights (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Turner & Müller, 2006). Instead, the answers were recorded (with prior permission), transcribed, and in some cases, notes were taken during the interviews. All of this raw data was coded so that the information could be analyzed in conjunction with the information from the secondary data gleaned from literature reviews (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012). The secondary data and the data from interviews was analyzed using template analysis, and elements that emerged were then coded (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012). In terms of the questionnaire information, this was more often quantitative information or qualitative information that could easily be converted into number values so that it could be used in statistical analyzes (Turner & Müller, 2006). Quite often the studies used a combination of question layouts depending on the types of questions being asked. The most common question layout was that of a Likert-scale which was used in nearly every one of the studies Müller performed (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Müller, 2003; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a, 2007b, 2010; Tabassi et al., 2016; Turner & Müller, 2006). Other question layouts used were multiple choice (single response or multiple responses), 6-point scales and close-ended categorisation questions (Müller & Turner, 2007a, 2010; Yang et al., 2011). The questionnaire data were analyzed using a wide range of statistical techniques. One common tool used was factor analysis. Regression analysis was also a common tool utilized for analysis of data, including Multivariate and Multiple Regression analysis techniques. A snapshot of the variety of statistical tools used throughout Müller’s bank of research have been combined into a table for a better understanding of the spread and overlap of tools used. This can be seen in Table 8. Table 8: Statistical Techniques Applied in Müller’s Research Technique Name Research paper(s) in which it can be found Regression Analysis (Standard, Multiple, and Multivariate) (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012; Müller & Turner, 2007a, 2007b; Turner & Müller, 2006) 69 Technique Name Research paper(s) in which it can be found Canonical Correlation Evaluation (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012) Smart Partial Least Squares (PLS) Path Modelling (Tabassi et al., 2016) Factor Analysis (including Exploratory, Unrotated, and Confirmatory) (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2010; Tabassi et al., 2016) ANOVA Analysis (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Müller et al., 2012; Müller & Turner, 2010; Turner & Müller, 2006) Normalization of Sample Data (Müller, 2003; Müller & Turner, 2010) Mann-Whitney Tests (Müller et al., 2012) Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation (Joslin & Müller, 2015; Yang et al., 2011) Haman Test (Joslin & Müller, 2015) Principle Component Analysis with Varimax Rotation (Müller, 2003) Goodness-of-fit (GOF) (Tabassi et al., 2016) Cronbach Coefficient (Yang et al., 2011) While there is a lot of variation in the methodologies used throughout Müller’s work, it is apparent that there are some common themes. To start, his work relies heavily on both secondary and primary data sources to ensure a balanced approach to the research being compiled and analyzed. As well, throughout all of the studies in which he utilizes primary data sources, he has ensured that measures have been put in place to decrease the amount of bias in his studies. The reliance on other bodies of knowledge for guidance when developing questions, in order to both avoid biases and develop relevant and clear questions is another intersection between his bodies of work. Finally, while he uses a variety of statistical tools to 70 analyze his research, he has done so in a thorough manner and there are a number of statistical tools that have appeared in multiple research papers. 3.5 Conclusions and Comparison As Müller’s body of work expanded on the relevant literature surrounding project management through the use of primary data collection and analysis, he was able to develop conclusions to the hypotheses he had established. These hypotheses were generally based off of knowledge gaps apparent in the existing literature and used a comprehensive literature review to develop them. While all of the conclusions drawn from some research papers and Müller’s book comprising the work of Müller’s that was reviewed will be discussed more holistically, the individual conclusions for each paper can be viewed in Table 9 for a more specific and pointed description of the individual studies. As mentioned previously, much of Müller’s work covered aspects of leadership, with respect to various other portions of project management. One thing that he noted consistently was the lack of research on how leadership impacted project management or the role it played. This was most likely due primarily to the outlook of the project management field on leadership as a non-important factor to the success of projects. This has led to a major research and knowledge gap that Müller has aimed to fill through a variety of perspectives. Table 9 presents a more specific breakdown that includes the most important conclusions from each of the studies reviewed in which the author was Müller or some other researchers who wrote about Müller’s work. Table 9: Müller’s Research Conclusions Publication Name and Citation Description of Research Topic Conclusion Absorptive, Innovative and Adaptive Capabilities and Their Impact on Project and Project Portfolio Performance (Biedenbach & Müller, 2012) Of the three capabilities assessed, the absorptive and adaptive capabilities are the primary contributors to the performance outcome of projects, whereas innovative capabilities only made minor contributions. This supports the existing literature (based on firm performance) but expands it to include the project management context. It also shows that managing these three capabilities should accompany the management of early project phases. 71 Publication Name and Citation Description of Research Topic Conclusion Finally, findings show that the fields of project management and strategic management are complementary. Matching the Project Manager’s Leadership Style to Project Type (Müller & Turner, 2007a) Conclusions drawn from the study indicate that a project manager’s leadership style does influence project success, and that different leadership styles are appropriate for different types of projects. Furthermore, project managers will more often be chosen based on their leadership style fitting the project when the project is more complex. Finally, emotional competence is a significant contributor to project success regardless of the complexity of the project, while managerial competence is sometimes significant and intellectual competence is sometimes negatively correlated. Leadership Competency Profiles of Successful Project Managers (Müller & Turner, 2010) Implications from the study include the need for practitioners to be trained in the soft-skill factors of leadership, and that this will be particular depending on their project. In a more theoretical sense, the research implied that there is a need for more transactional leadership styles in simpler projects, compared to a need for more transformational leadership styles in more complex projects. Relationships between Leadership and Success in Different Types of Project Complexities (Müller et al., 2012, p. 78-81) The research showed that Emotional Quotient (EQ) and Managerial Quotient (MQ) leadership competencies are correlated with project success, however, they are moderated by different complexities. EQ is moderated by a complexity of faith while MQ is moderated by both faith and fact complexities. While the complexity of interaction has a direct effect on project success. The three intelligences that Müller describes are EQ, Intelligence Quotient (IQ), and MQ. EQ represents the emotional dimensions, those being: Self-awareness, Emotional Resilience, Intuitiveness, Interpersonal Sensitivity, Influence, Motivation, and Conscientiousness. IQ represents a mixture of three intellectual dimensions, those being: Critical Analysis and Judgement, Vision and Imagination, and Strategic Perspective. MQ represents the managerial dimensions, those being: Resource Management, Engaging Communication, Empowering, Developing, and Achieving. The research also indicates that there is not much variation across project types between EQ, IQ, MQ, complexity of faith, fact, and interaction suggesting they may be used as a 72 Publication Name and Citation Description of Research Topic Conclusion common language for researching and learning across project types. Complexity of Faith, as stated by Müller is “similar to uncertainty, as it is present when creating something unique, solving new problems or dealing with high uncertainty. In such situations, one does not know that the project outcome will work, but has, or at least pretends to have, faith in it”. Complexity of Fact on the other hand is described by Müller as “similar to structural complexity, this requires dealing with a huge amount of interdependent information. Here the challenge is to keep a holistic view of the problem and not to get lost in quantities of factual details. The construction of a refinery is a project dominated by such complexity, there are many constraints to consider, and many people involved, but these are not uncertain, they are facts”. Relationships between a PMM and Project Success in Different Project Governance Contexts (Joslin & Müller, 2015) Three independent factors - completeness, supplementation, and application of the elements of a PMM - are significantly correlated to project success (22.3% of the variation in project success can be explained by applying the relevant PMM elements to a project throughout its lifecycle). Results of the study also show that the experience of using a PMM and the correct choice of tools, techniques, and processes are both relevant success factors for projects. In terms of the research questions, they can now be answered: There is a positive relationship between PMM and project success, and that only one of the moderating factors of governance acted as a quasi-moderator between PMM and success, with the other’s role being indeterminable. The Influence of Project Managers on Project Success Criteria and Project Success by Type of Project (Müller & Turner, 2007b) The results suggest numerous implications for sponsors of projects: ▪ For managing the importance of project success factors: Project managers (PMs) seek challenging projects and therefore PMs should not be assigned to projects below their management capabilities, as well as, the fact that team satisfaction should be taken into account when assigning PMs to business-critical projects. ▪ For managing projects towards successful outcomes: Project managers assigned to the wider project lifecycle tend to be more successful, therefore, project managers should be assigned at the earliest stages and lead the project right to the end; fixed-priced projects are managed more successfully than their re-measurement counterparts; project managers working in their own 79 individuals who are working directly with the project teams and oversee all aspects of the project process. Having a viewpoint from others would be beneficial but it might not have provided a picture as complete as with project managers as they have oversight and a general understanding of the project throughout its lifecycle. Given the amount of time required to conduct interviews and therefore the limited number of interviews able to be conducted, contacting project managers and not other stakeholders made the most sense. Once the project managers were confirmed, information about them and the company they worked for was collected. This was done to ensure that they fit with the target population the research was directed at. Company information was collected primarily from the organization’s website, news articles and reviews of the company. Information collected on the project managers was found principally from their resumes and LinkedIn profiles. Once all of this background information had been collected, a multiple-choice survey was sent to each participating project manager. The multiple-choice survey included twenty leadership factors that the literature has showed positive effect on project success. Throughout the deep literature review that has been conducted in the beginning of this research, big number of important leadership factors that has relation to the success of projects have been found. Yet, a narrow down process was found essential to be conducted on the factors so that “overchoice” is avoided. “Overchoice” or “choice overload” which occurs usually when many similar options are available. “Overchoice” let a decision becomes overwhelming due to the many potential outcomes and risks that may result from making a choice. Therefore, out of so many leadership factors, only 20 were chosen to be presented to the project managers in a survey format. These 20 leadership factors were the ones that were repeated in multiple resources, whether it is a journal paper or a book. The project manager is asked to choose answers based on experience that express the level of agreement. The survey could take five minutes or less to be answered in full. The top ten leadership factors selected among all project managers are presented during the in-person interviews for discussions. The participants were given a limited number of factors to help focus their answers and direct it into a narrowed path. This narrowing will create a kind of nitpick list that enables the research to move swiftly towards clear direction. As mentioned previously, it was important to avoid the “overchoice” for the survey, it was even more important to avoid it for the interview. Especially, the project managers had a limited time to 80 meet because of their loaded schedule. Thus, only the top 10 leadership factors were taken from the survey to the interview for a detailed discussion. In-person interviews, each lasting between 45 minutes to an hour, were favourable because they allowed the researcher to ask open answer questions, ask for prompts if the desired information was not quite being given, and direct the topics as necessary (Bryman, 2015). By doing interviews, more information was gained on the topic of interest and there was no need to wait for respondents to give back forms, as all of the necessary information was discussed during the interview time slot. In-person interviews were planned for this particular research, however, given that the sample interviewed were busy project managers at SMEs, some individuals were not able to take the time out of their busy schedules for an interview. For the ones still interested in participating, there were two other available options for performing interviews, in case the managers needed to be away from the local office during the scheduled interview dates. They were over the phone, and over a video calling service such as Skype. Both of these options allowed the interview time to be more flexible so that both the researcher and the project manager have enough time set aside to get through all of the interview questions. These methods were considered favourable to simply sending another email with questions, since it avoided the possibility of managers reading all of the proposed questions before answering, which could cause bias (Bryman, 2015). Although the hope was that all of the interviews would be performed in a standardized fashion to avoid biases, it was understandable that this was not entirely possible. Regardless of the chosen communication method, used in conducting the interview for each of the sample organizations, the same base interview layout, or question set, was used. The interview layout comprised a variety of different styles of questions, which covered a number of topics of interest. The first style of interview questions were open-ended questions, where the interviewee was free to answer the questions as they saw fit. A majority of questions of this style were used throughout the interview. If the information the researcher was trying to get at was not answered, prompt questions were employed in an attempt to uncover the desired information. Due to these open-ended questions, interviews differed slightly from each other. 81 The second style of interview questions aimed to derive a Business Case Study out of the project manager experience, to highlight how Leadership effects project success and to shed the light on the importance of timing, when using these leadership factors. The business case study illustrates a real-life experience from a previous project they had worked on. This portion of the interview was not a necessity and was offered as an option, if the project manager in question was interested and willing to provide an anecdote. If they were not, then the project manager will speak in general about the effect of leadership factors on project success. Finally, the last style of interview questions that were asked were a multiple-choice survey. The project manager is handed a hard-copy of the survey. The goal is to reveal the importance level of using each of the ten leadership factors in each of the project phases. The survey could take ten minutes or less to be answered in full. During the interviews, the discussions were recorded so they could be analyzed later on. Using a recording device guarantees that all of the information is captured. Therefore, this method was considered the ideal way to keep track of the interviews. Of course, the issue of ethics must be considered. Some individuals do not feel comfortable being recorded while they are being interviewed and as such this method may not consistently be used for the interviews performed. Recording was used for those interviews where the project manager had given consent. In addition, written notes were taken by the interviewer. This method was used for every interview, including those which had been recorded. Then the auditory record information was transcribed, and the written notes expanded upon. After the interviews had been completed and the data had been transcribed, the data needed to be coded. Most of the information gathered was a combination of close-ended questions (quantitative, i.e. surveys) and open-ended questions (qualitative). To code this, an intensive process was used where answers were analyzed and divided into groups, based off the responses given and the ideas that each response presented. Sometimes more than one idea was presented, which added another layer to the coding process. The process for coding the closed ended questions was a little less intensive, given that information could easily be divided. The coded data was then analyzed as a whole to determine any themes present across the various organizations. This data was put through a regression analysis to further 82 understand the data, as well as to allow an interesting way to present the findings to interested parties in the field. Figure 8 outlines the steps that needed to be taken and where they fit in the larger picture of the research project. Steps in light brown represent the methodologies discussed, while steps in grey represent the background information, and steps in yellow represent the final product step. Figure 8: Research Processes 4.1.3 The Research Onion The research onion was an idea originally created by Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009) to describe the stages that a researcher must go through when formulating a methodology for their research. The steps of the onion start from the outside layer and progress to the centre – the analogy being to peel away the layers of an onion. As can be seen in Figure 9, which is a diagram of the research onion, the first step to be implemented when formulating a methodology is identifying a Philosophy. Six layers in total make up the research onion, with the inner most layer being the most specific step: that of deciding upon techniques and procedures. 83 Figure 9: The Research Onion (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009) Starting with the outer-most layer, a general philosophy should be developed. Choosing how to approach the research is an important step as it essentially refers to how the project team is going to approach knowledge development (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). This includes the nature of the knowledge being developed (Saunders et al., 2009). The research philosophy adopted reflects important assumptions about how an organization or project team views the world (Saunders et al., 2009) and therefore presents a starting point for how the rest of the project methodology should be approached. Moving inward through the layers, the second-most outer layer discusses the approach that will be taken when developing theories. The research approaches will often follow from the philosophy that the organization has for the project, for example if a positivism philosophy is being employed, a more deductive approach to the research would be a more natural step than taking an inductive approach (Saunders et al., 2009). Once the philosophy and research approach have been developed, the next few layers to be discussed deal with the design and purpose of the research study. Deciding upon a methodological approach to the research, and then the more specific tactics that will be used to implement the study should be decided upon. This is where the decision on the use of 84 quantitative or qualitative data comes into play (Saunders et al., 2009). As well, a decision will be made on how many different strategies will be used to collect data and more specifically what these strategies will be (Saunders et al., 2009). The final decision to be made, with regards to these middle layers of the ‘onion’, is the time horizon that will be implemented. This refers to whether the study will be a cross-section of a moment in time across a large group of individuals or whether it will be longitudinal and focus on a smaller group of people for an extended period of time (Saunders et al., 2009). Finally, the decision on the specific techniques and procedures to be employed should be made. This is represented by the inner-most layer of the onion and embodies the final stage of methodological development for a research project as described by Saunders, Lewis, and Thornhill in their text. This stage discusses all of the finer details and, as such, it is important to have established the broader approaches for data collection and techniques discussed in the outer layers before commencing to implement these tactics. 4.1.4 Application of the ‘Research Onion’ The current research project being discussed has followed many of these steps to ensure that the methodological practices make sense with one another and with the organization’s viewpoints. As a starting point, the philosophy and the general theoretical approach to the research had to be decided upon. For this research, a deductive approach was taken, and therefore a theory was developed prior to the collection of data (Saunders et al., 2009). This research used a mix approach of theory testing and theory building as there was preliminary research to find out 20 leadership factors that has an effect on project success, then the surveys and interviews narrowed down the leadership factors to 10 factors with some experience-related descriptions around them, after that there was a secondary, more detailed, research on the specific 10 leadership factors. Therefore, this research uses a deductive approach in which the first step in the work was to develop the theory and then to test it via surveys, interviews, and business cases. This approach was a natural decision given that the philosophical outlook on research development was that of a more constructivistinterpretivism perspective. What this implies is that a much more scientific approach to research development was taken. The observable facts and available information were used to develop a testable research structure. This being said, it has been noted that it is difficult to solely assume the position of one philosophical approach as these theoretical models do 85 not capture the intricacies and complexities present in the real-world. This makes the decision on choosing which philosophical viewpoint to follow more about having an understanding of which viewpoints enjoy the most impact on the project as well as how personal philosophical viewpoints will sway the project’s direction. In terms of the middle layers of the ‘onion’, this is where the methodological structure gets a bit more specific. For the research project in question there are a number of different pieces that can be discussed. To start, the methodological choice can be discussed. For the present project, the methodological choice selected was a multiple methods approach. This use of numerous collection techniques and analysis procedures creating a more complete picture of the problem being discussed. It also allowed for the creation of a plan of attack for solving it that took a multiple angled approach. For the next layer inwards, that discussing the strategies employed, there were a number of different ways in which the research aimed to achieve answers. The study was primarily an exploratory study, emphasising a literature review and including interviews with experts. Further specific strategies employed included a survey as well as multiple case studies. Finally, the study took a cross-sectional approach in terms of the timeframe employed. The project managers interviewed were contacted for a single interview where they gave information about their projects and their organization as it stood at the time when the interviews occurred. They were not contacted a second time a number of years later so that a comparison could be made as that was not particularly relevant to the research aim. If they had been contacted multiple times, then the study would have been considered a longitudinal study instead. Finally, the inner most layer of the onion depicting the specific techniques and procedures should be discussed with regards to the project in question. Data was collected using forms of recording during the aforementioned strategies. Data was then analyzed using coding and regression analysis so that the data could be compiled and easily presented. It was possible for all of these methods to be employed properly, with questions formulated with intent, because the broader picture was first discussed. Utilising a methodological approach akin to the research onion, thereby starting with the more general ideas for creating a methodology and then working down to the specifics allowed for a methodology to be planned and executed that followed a cohesive and consistent flow. 86 4.2 Sample Selection In this section, five main topics will be addressed. First of all, the considerations that should be taken into account when selecting a sample. Then, the importance of carefully selecting a sample to this research. After that, the selection criteria and process that was used for this research. Finally, the sample that was selected. 4.2.1 Considerations The first thing to understand when selecting a sample for research is what a sample is, where it is being selected from and why. Sampling refers to the selection of a sub-set of a population for research (Bryman, 2015). A sample is therefore this final selection, which is pulled from the sampling frame, or the subset, of that larger population. The aim of the research will determine who within the population should be targeted, and the sampling frame will take shape from that, while including considerations on the limitations of the researcher and the time frame. When identifying criteria to select samples, there are some overarching rules that should be adhered to so that the samples accurately represent the population the research is targeted at. If samples are not selected appropriately, biases may skew the data collected, rendering the research unusable or inaccurate (Veaux, Velleman, & Bock, 2014). Throughout all stages of a research project, biases will be an issue. It is important to be familiar with all of the possible biases that may affect research, with particular attention to those which are most applicable. A number of potential biases to be aware of have been listed below, which have all been mentioned by Alan Bryman (2015) as well as Richard De Veaux et al. (2014). 1. Non-response/participation bias; 2. Response bias; 3. Coverage/under coverage bias; 4. Culture bias; 5. Confirmation bias; 6. Non-participation bias. 87 In terms of choosing samples, the most important ones to be aware of are the coverage/under coverage bias and the non-response/participation bias. It is important to select a sampling frame that is representative of the overall population. When selecting a sampling frame, the larger target group of people and all of the smaller segments of that population should be considered. The research question should also be considered. This way, when a sampling frame is selected, all known biases have been taken into account so that the final sample can be as representative as possible. It is also important to consider the issue of nonresponse/participation bias. It is almost always the case that some individuals selected will chose not to participate. To ensure that the research has the required number of responses, or that it is as robust as possible, the sampling frame should be widened and/or the number of samples should be increased to account for this bias. Of course, it is often the case that some biases cannot be avoided, especially when working with limited possible samples or access to the population. As such, it is important to acknowledge the shortcomings that may affect your research due to the existence of these biases. For example, a culture bias will nearly always be present, especially with research done solely by researchers hailing from one location or upbringing. This is not necessarily a bad thing; however, it is often a good idea to state in the research the cultural biases that a researcher has so that anyone deciding to read the research has that knowledge and an understanding of why things were done a certain way and why certain conclusions were drawn. In cases where there is a lack of access to the desired field, the main bias that will show up due to the circumstance is a non-response/participation bias, as targeted individuals will be mistrusting of the researcher or simply will chose not to give them their time since they feel it is not important. To avoid these, some steps should be taken. The first step is one that is often difficult to achieve when gathering data in many situations. This is the criteria that the samples be selected randomly. In the research performed sampling method called simple random sampling was the option considered. 4.2.2 Importance for Research Selecting an appropriate and representative sample is incredibly important to ensure that the outcomes are relevant, that they make sense, and that the final data can be manipulated so 88 that conclusions can be drawn from all the raw data (Bryman, 2015). If the samples are not selected appropriately, they may not be relevant to the research question, which means that all of the research conducted was useless for the aim of the researcher. Samples that are selected which are not representative of the population will contain biases which will affect the entirety of the research. If certain sections of the population are under-represented, or missed entirely, the information that they may have offered to the study will be missed as well, skewing the final data and portraying the overall population in a way that may not be accurate. 4.2.3 Selection Criteria In the research pertaining to this study, the portion of the population that is being targeted is SMEs in the manufacturing industry, with a particular interest in those which have 7 to 12 projects dealing with the IT. For this research, it is important to select organizations within the manufacturing sector who have the desired number of IT projects. If the selection of SMEs was just at random from all possible SMEs, and samples were selected from organizations that had nothing to do with either sector, the conclusions drawn from the research may not be true for the manufacturing sector. Crucial information pertaining to this sector would be missed, meaning any improvements or frameworks applied from the research will not be an appropriate fit. Within the sample frame of SMEs in the manufacturing industry with many IT projects, a variety of different types of organizations should be sampled to ensure that no portion of this sampling frame is missed. Since contacting and surveying individuals within this sector will require consent from members and a willingness to participate, random sampling was the best option to consider. Thus, it will be crucial for all of the potential biases to be considered and avoided as much as possible. For those biases which it may be difficult to avoid entirely, a statement should be made. There will be further criteria for the selection of appropriate companies through the projects. As established, the SME must have a particular number of projects within the IT (7 - 12). As well as the number, these projects should also have progressed over a certain length of time. The selected timeframe is quite broad, including all those projects which have taken place between 3 weeks and 6 months. In addition, projects should have been worked on by teams 95 provide the interviewees with a written document explaining each of the leadership factors definitions in detail and other major terms. In this way, if the project managers were unsure about the meaning of a factor, it was easy to refer to the document rather than rely on memory. The second measure taken was to conduct a call with each interviewee prior to having them fill the first survey. This allowed the interviewees to clear up any confusion they may have had and ask any questions directly to the researcher. The third and final measure taken was to provide the interviewee with a high-level short definition of major terms and of each of the 10 leadership factors during the interview. This is to help them quickly read while answering any of the questions during the interview in case they have forgotten the meaning of one of the leadership factors. The intent here was to make it easy on the interviewee to read a short definition during the interview rather than refer to the detailed document that contains long description of each leadership factor. 4.3.1 Surveys Two surveys were given to project managers to fill out (see Appendix I – 1st Survey (Before the Interview) and Appendix II – Interview Transcripts). The target audience for the survey is a very busy subset of individuals who have a lot of competing demands on their time, therefore the surveys are both short and easy to fill out to ensure participation. The surveys used a Likert-scale (1-4). A Likert scale is a close-ended, forced-choice scale that gives the participant several choices to choose from ranging from one extreme to another. It comes in different forms, the most used form is the one with five choices starting at one end with "strongly agree" and ending at the other end with "strongly disagree," with less extreme choices in the middle. Another form is having four choices instead of five which is the one that has been chosen to be used in this research. The four-points Likert scale is also called a forced Likert scale since the user is forced to form an opinion from a list of less choices. And it has been used in this research to get specific responses from all the participants. The nature of this research requires clear answers in order to form up a clear result according to the participant’s answers which they are required to give based on their practical experiences in their companies. The values of the Likert scale that were used in this research are “Strongly Agree”, “Agree”, “Neutral”, and “Disagree” in the 1st survey, and “Very Important”, “Important”, “Neutral”, and “Not Important”. It was made clear to the project managers that 96 choosing “Neutral” would mean that the answer is yes but it depends on the specific situation, circumstances, and some internal or external factors. The first survey was given out before the interview and comprised of a single question (see Appendix I – 1st Survey (Before the Interview)). Project managers were given a list of 20 leadership factors that, according to the literature, had a positive impact on projects and project success. They were asked to give each leadership factor a rating in a Likert-scale fashion based on whether they agreed with each identified factor having an impact on project success. The total amounts for each of the leadership factors were added up from each of the project managers and those with the top ten highest scores were identified. The goal for this survey was to identify that the top ten leadership factors from the literature review were in fact the most impactful according to project managers actively participating in the field. The second set of survey questions was asked during the interviews (see Appendix III – 2nd Survey (During the Interview)). These once again consisted of Likert-scale type rating systems, this time for the importance that each leadership factor played within each project phase. The rating system was once again quantified as 1-4, this time with the numbers corresponding to not important – very important. As the second survey was performed during the face to face interviews with the project managers, the interviewer was able to ensure that project managers understood the questions being asked. The goal of this survey was to identify the differences in employment of leadership factors between the project phases, again based on real-world experience from project managers. Both surveys were structured simply, with boxes next to each leadership factor, for room to indicate the qualitative closed-ended answer they identified for each leadership factor. Once every project manager had filled out the survey or performed the interview, in the case of the second survey, the data was compiled together in two tables for each set of answers (see Appendix I – 1st Survey (Before the Interview) and Appendix III – 2nd Survey (During the Interview)). The first table style (Table 21, Table 23, Table 25, Table 27, Table 29, Table 31) included the qualitative closed-ended responses for each project manager. The second table style (Table 22, Table 24, Table 26, Table 28, Table 30, Table 32) was laid out identically, except instead of the qualitative answer, the corresponding number value was indicated in each box as well as the totals for the leadership factors across project manager answers. 97 4.3.2 Interviews One of the research methods that was used to serve the aim of this research was interviews. Within the interviews, as mentioned above, there was a survey question. The other interview questions are all open-ended questioned, each with a rough amount of time allotted (see Appendix II – Interview Transcripts). Each, of the 7 total questions (including the survey question section), had the purpose of analysing a different one of the themes identified for the research. At the end of each interview, the interviewee was welcomed to shed the light on any other leadership factors that was not among the 10 discussed ones. In total, interviews are to last between 45 minutes to an hour long, per project manager. Moreover, the interviews and the surveys layout and content were pre-tested by having individuals with research experience as well as project management experience to review its details and suggest changes. There was also a possibility of changing the interview layout and content after each conducted interview, but there was no need for the change. This was conceived from the satisfaction of the interviewed project manager and the fact that the results of each interview were supporting the research work already. The first three questions were about defining different terms and were aimed at addressing the three different subsections of the first research theme which was to gain an understanding about project success, project management, and leadership in a project management context. The fourth question is where project managers were asked to talk about the interconnections between the ten leadership factors and how these interconnections might be beneficial to a project. This addressed the third identified theme to the research which was about understanding the interconnections between leadership factors and their impact on project success. The fifth question asked the project managers to discuss the impact that employment of leadership factors has on project success. As an option, this question could be expanded to include the description of a business case relating to how certain leadership factors were beneficial in the case. Three project managers opted to describe a business case. This question also connected to a theme, this time regarding the fourth theme which related to the importance of leadership factors on project success. Finally, for the sixth question, the project managers were asked to describe the culture present in each of the five identified project phases. This question aimed to shed light on the fifth theme for the research which was about how the culture of a project phase would impact the leadership factors most beneficial to 98 employ. The seventh question was to fill out the second survey (see Appendix III – 2nd Survey (During the Interview)). The interview ended by welcoming the project manager to speak about any other leadership factors that was not mentioned or was missing. 4.3.3 Business Case Studies For this research study, it was decided that business cases should be involved as a way to ensure that there was a ‘real-world’ situation to draw information from. Project managers were able to voluntarily expand question five in the interview to fit this, by giving an overview of a business case study that pertained to a problem that occurred in a project that was solved through the employment of leadership factors to the benefit of the project’s success. Three of the project managers opted to do this and so a business case was identified for the Planning Phase, the Execution Phase, and the Monitoring and Controlling Phase. The entire idea behind developing a study to focus on primary data collection was to close knowledge gaps and identify that the literature was in fact on the right track with regards to the importance of leadership and leadership factors in project management. By including business case studies, practical scenarios were able to be analyzed, along with the information gained from the other interview questions. Developing and studying business cases is an additional step in the research project but should not be underestimated. Business cases provide many added benefits to the research process that otherwise would not be realised. Business case analysis allows the project manager and project team to determine if, when, and why, a particular performance-based approach should be implemented (Randall, Brady, & Nowicki, 2016). Because of this, business cases should be developed and analysed prior to the approach of interest being employed in a project. The Business cases should essentially be used as decision support tools (Randall et al., 2016). The Business case should outline benefits and consequences associated with each business decision in question (Schmidt, 2004). While it is most often used as a business decision support tool for projects, it does serve other purposes as well (Schmidt, 2004). For starters, the business case acts as a practical guidance for managing projects as well as other business lifecycle decisions (Schmidt, 2004). As a guidance tool, analysing business cases helps to reveal key success factors that may come into play during a project, as well as contingencies that 99 need to be monitored to keep targets on track (Schmidt, 2004). Guidance from the business cases can be provided for a wide variety of topics and areas, including cost factors, risk elements, and options for solving problems (Randall et al., 2016). The difficulty being that business cases do not always follow a completely standardised formula (Randall et al., 2016). Another benefit provided by business cases is that they can act as early warning systems for various issues in a project (Schmidt, 2004). Rather than waiting until the project commences to discover risks or complications and figuring a way to solve them at that point in time, developing business cases for potential problems in advance can serve as a preparation for when the issue appears. Of course, with this benefit, it is necessary for prior experience be utilised to ensure that the business case problems being developed are relevant and have a real chance of occurring. Without this background knowledge, the benefit of the business case is significantly lowered. Developing business cases also provides a sense of accountability to a project (Schmidt, 2004). If a superior is looking at the decisions made for a project, and the project manager first developed and analysed business cases to provide proof for their actions and decisions, the project manager is regarded with a higher level of responsibility (Schmidt, 2004). This being said, it is important to keep in mind that the scenarios depicted in business cases prior to their implementation are not being developed solely with the tangible budget, business plans or reports (Schmidt, 2004). Business plans also require the project manager to make assumptions, judgements, and create plausible scenarios, without having first witnessed them occur (Schmidt, 2004). It is crucial then, that the project manager be operating with background knowledge and experience that will lend itself to making well-informed estimates and assumptions about a scenario that may impact the project. Another benefit of developing and analysing business cases is that they are useful for depicting issues throughout the project lifecycle (Schmidt, 2004). They can be used to aid project managers in the planning phase just as easily and successfully as they can be used for the monitoring and controlling phase. This is due to the flexibility of business cases and therefore their ability to be subtly changed as needed, to better fit a different purpose and project lifecycle point. Even during the implementation phase, developing a business case can be critical. During this phase, the purpose of developing a business case is to get the go-ahead from superiors for an 100 idea or project. The benefit of implementing a business case during this phase has never been more apparent than in the famous us for corporate social responsibility. Business cases for social responsibility have been developed across industries in order to promote environmental and social responsibility within organizations (Panwar, Nybakk, Hansen, & Pinkse, 2017). Businesses are driven by monetary benefits and without a business case, the monetary and company specific benefits of social and environmental welfare would never see the day in many companies (Panwar et al., 2017). Instead, the development of a ‘business case for social responsibility’ has an entire field of research devoted to identifying the benefits of implementing a variety of different social and environmental practices and policies within organizations. Clearly, the benefits of utilising business cases can be seen when one looks to an example of a business case that has had such an over-arching impact on the corporate and industrial climate. 101 5. LEADERSHIP FACTORS In this chapter, the leadership factor selection process will be discussed in depth. A literature review was previously performed, and now this information has been compiled to develop a guide for the most important leadership factors for project managers to employ throughout a project’s lifecycle in order to bring the project to a successful completion. Each of the ten leadership factors will be identified and a short description provided. A more in-depth description and discussion on each leadership factor will follow. Finally, the interconnectedness of the leadership factors will be deliberated. 5.1 Selection of Leadership Factors Through a comprehensive literature review, a number of leadership factors were identified as key components to project management and project success for SMEs. The literature review explored a wide range of research studies, news articles, and business experts’ surveys to uncover which leadership factors were the most effective in SMEs. Information available on leadership, projects and project success, as well as effective management styles, was often directed towards large enterprises. This made searching for information that pertained specifically to SMEs problematic. Some key reports, such as The Standish Group’s report, were helpful in directing searches and granted a starting point for external searches and key words to seek out in databases. Some reports that pertained to larger organizations were also included as supplemental information since similarities between SMEs and large enterprises do exist. Based on the information gathered on larger enterprises, in combination with the available information on SMEs exclusively, a thorough literature review was performed, and a number of leadership factors were found to have more prevalence. These factors were chosen based on the sources where they came from, the prevalence of the factor in the reviewed literature, and personal experience with leadership. Some sources outlined what they thought were the most important leadership factors and these were described in the literature review in descriptive lists. Other sources, however, focused on project management and the factors listed were therefore indirectly linked to leadership through the lead role that project managers are presumed to take. Both factors geared 102 towards leadership and towards project management were incorporated into the Key Leadership Factors that will be used in this research to study the sample. In Table 13, the selected factors have been outlined with short descriptions to expand on what is entailed for each. In the descriptions, sources have been cited, with some factors came from multiple sources. For those that only have one source cited, it was a comprehensive source and/or personal experience may have played a deciding role in its importance. Altogether, ten leadership factors were settled on to work with when interviewing sample companies. The ten leadership factors selected cover a variety of values and responsibilities deemed appropriate for someone in a leadership role. This includes values such as teamwork, work ethic, motivation, and recording details to name a few. Although some of the factors overlap slightly in terms of which portion of leadership they impact. This overlap is negligible when one considers the importance, they each add to the merit of a leader. 5.2 The Leadership Factors As mentioned in section 5.1, the leadership factors that were chosen have been laid out in Table 13. One column contains the name that this leadership factor was given, and the corresponding box in the second column contains a short description of the factor. More indepth descriptions for each factor will be mentioned below the table in subsections. Table 13: Leadership Factors Leadership Factor Short Description Integration (Ideas and Team) The ability to take into account the ideas and perspectives of the team members at all levels of the system throughout the project’s life and into the development of the final solution (PMI, 2017d). Integration also includes the integration of the team in terms of bringing together individuals who come from a variety of different backgrounds and stances into a cohesive group. Balancing Objectives The ability to find a balance to the project’s varying objectives. This can include finishing the project on time and on budget, finding a useful solution, ensuring all stakeholders are satisfied, and providing high quality work. Projects and Teams may also have multiple goals in terms of the project itself, which is another layer to balance (Hajiagha et al., 2014). 103 Leadership Factor Short Description Systematic Information Capturing The ability to catalogue the project – what worked, what did not work, what steps were taken throughout the project, the process that was employed, which projects ultimately failed and how. This skill also includes follow-through engagement with all of this catalogued data when new projects are started (The Standish Group, 2013). Often the actual information capturing is something leaders will delegate, however, the intention and the active review for future projects is key. In our current era, full of changing consumer preference, constant competition, and technological advances, knowledge management is key for companies (Nowacki & Bachnik, 2016). Creating a system of capturing relevant information throughout project lifecycles is a crucial knowledge management tool. In addition, projects often fail to generate effective and complete ‘lessons learned’ post-mortem reports on projects (Pan, Pan, & Newman, 2007). Without this, ineffective practices will be carried forward in future projects undertaken by the organization (Pan et al., 2007). The first step to avoiding this issue is through capturing accurate information throughout the project lifecycle, so that it can be used to write up a useful report. Commitment to the Project Good leaders should not only be committed to the project, but they should believe in the project’s success. If they are not fully behind the project, the team may pick up on this and lose interest or belief in the project as well (Szczepańska-Woszczyna & Kurowska-Pysz, 2016). Motivational This is the idea of inspirational motivation where leaders are able to develop and articulate a vision and express it in a way as to motivate the team to provide their highest quality of work (Wang et al., 2011). Innovative Innovation encompasses a variety of actions, thought processes, and qualities which together move forward and add value to projects when employed properly (Maladzhi et al., 2012). Idealized Influence This is essentially acting as positive role models who act in ways that conform with the ideals of the project and its goals and perceived values (Wang et al., 2011). Fast-action Decision Making Leaders should be strong decision makers, who have good judgement so that decisions are well thought out (The Standish Group, 2013). In addition to strong decision-making skills, they should also be able to make decisions quickly when it is required and think on their feet (Maladzhi et al., 2012). Intellectually Stimulating Team The ability to stimulate the team thought processes and ideas so that they are able to challenge assumptions (Wang et al., 2011). In another words, the idea of having a positive and an effective atmosphere of thoughts between team members. 104 Leadership Factor Short Description Individualized Consideration This is the ability to recognize each team member as the unique individual they are, and to use these individualities to the advantage of the project. Utilizing their strengths and weaknesses, treating them as individuals, and involving them in the project in different ways so that they feel pertinent to the success of the project (Wang et al., 2011). 5.2.1 Integration (Ideas and Teams) At a very basic level, Integration is about being able to incorporate various features together. For a project, this means a variety of different things, namely ideas and perspectives of team members, as well as team members themselves. Projects are very much team based, and so the individuals involved play key roles in the execution and success of a project. It is the responsibility of the project manager, who acts as the leader of the project, to ensure that integration of team members and their ideas is done effectively to ensure that the project runs smoothly. Incorporation of ideas and perspectives of project members is the first way that project managers should focus on Integration. This should be done at all levels of the process through to the final result of the project (PMI, 2017d). In this way, project managers can ensure that their team members feel appreciated and are necessary to the process. By doing so it also benefits the project since many good ideas that the project lead has not thought of will come from their subordinates. Incorporation of the team is also a critical responsibility of the project lead. Team work is never easy, especially when it is a group of individuals from a variety of different backgrounds, both in expertise and life. Due to the collaborative nature of projects, it is often the case that individuals from different sectors of a business will be brought together to solve problems. While all of these different perspectives on an issue are incredibly useful, it is sometimes problematic to get these individuals to work together cohesively. Therefore, the project manager must find ways to bring the team members together so that the project can function properly and run smoothly. Integration ties in to some of the other identified leadership factors as well. The most obvious way that integration is connected to the other leadership factors is through incorporation of other’s ideas. This will be expanded on in the sections outlining the factors of motivation, 111 This motivation is also said to raise levels of happy emotions in the followers of a transformational leader (Wang et al., 2011). This ties back into showing higher performance levels by individuals who are being led with this inspirational motivation and transformational leadership style (Wang et al., 2011). At a team-based level, the motivation aspect of transformational leadership occurs through this aforementioned communication of a vision, and motivating team members to pursue the collective goal set out in this vision (Wang et al., 2011). 5.2.6 Innovative Innovation is about coming up with new and original ideas, and then pushing these ideas to become meaningful results. This means that innovation itself can take a number of forms, which is why it is often used in such a vague sense. To be innovative means that a leader is constantly working towards creating new solutions to problems. Projects are designed to solve problems, whether it be for the company performing it or for a client, which is what makes innovation for project leaders so crucial. It has been found that there is a positive relationship between leadership and innovation (Rosing, Frese, and Bausch, 2011). Leaders who employ innovative thinking and who therefore influence the innovative processes happening in the businesses are seen to have increased competence as leaders (Maladzhi et al., 2012). Some of the criteria that Maladzhi et al. (2012) came up with in their research to identify innovation are: ability to ascertain external factors; fast action orientated; high gain risk taker; immersed in progressive change; inspirational and motivation; charismatic; passionate; and visionary leaders. Some of the points in the above list of criteria overlap with the leadership qualities that have been chosen for this research, which points to the interconnected nature of all of the key factors. SMEs need innovation so that they are able to stay competitive and continue to develop (Maladzhi et al., 2012). As they do not have the same resources or reach as multinational corporations, anything they can do to get ahead is critical. Innovative leadership gets people excited, motivates them to be committed, and helps them to see the project to its end rather than giving up halfway through (Sloane, 2006). This is an incredibly useful skill for project management since it can be difficult to keep people engaged and focused on one big task, and one end goal for prolonged periods of time, such as is seen when working on projects. 112 It was found that innovative leaders, not only help their company by coming up with original new solutions, but they also foster innovation in their subordinates, thereby creating an innovative culture in the business (Maladzhi et al., 2012). When leaders show innovation and motivate team members to think in unique ways as well, they create an environment that is conducive to this type of out-of-the-box thinking. Then, team members feel more comfortable in their work environment and more comfortable with sharing the original solutions they have come up with (Maladzhi et al., 2012). Innovative cultures help to keep companies sustainable through the formation of valuable ideas that help the business to grow, and adapt to the everchanging business world (Maladzhi et al., 2012). To prove once again that all of the chosen factors work together to form great leaders, it is not enough for a leader to simply be innovative. As mentioned before, they need to motivate team members to do the same and they need to ensure that the environment they are making for their staff is one that is a comfortable and non-judgemental space for ideas. Furthermore, they need to be committed and passionate about what they are doing (Maladzhi et al., 2012). This positive attitude towards the work being done shows, and subordinates will pick up on this and mirror that energy. 5.2.7 Idealized Influence Idealized Influence is about being a good role-model for the team members. By acting as you wish for them to act, you are setting the standard for each team member to strive for. This is key because often subordinates will do as is shown to them, not pushing any harder than the person in charge. By acting in ways that conform to the ideals of the project, team leaders have a better chance at ensuring that the people working on the project with them do the same. Idealized Influence works most strongly at the team level according to Wang et al. (2011). This is because leaders serve as role models who their followers wish to emulate and this instils increased cooperation, team commitment and performance levels from the team. By displaying the desired behaviors and being supportive of team members who follow suit, leaders reinforce their Commitment to the Project and to the common goals of the project. Idealized Influence does not work solely at the team level, however, it works at an individual level by inspiring team members to be harder workers and to sacrifice their own self-interest 113 for the interest of the project (Wang et al., 2011). By improving both the individual Commitment to the Project and the commitment of the team towards supporting each other and working together towards a common goal, leaders are able to move well-made projects forward more quickly and complete them with more cohesion. Idealized Influence is the second of four pillars set out by Bass (1985) as a key leadership factor to creating the idea of a ‘transformational leader’. Wang et al. (2011) go into detail about this idea of transformational leadership and how it positively impacts both leadership and organization performance in many different ways and on many different scales. This includes the project level scale, where teams are generally much smaller but the work that needs to be completely is constrained by time, money, resources, and is generally not a simple or straightforward task. It could be argued that projects are in fact more in need of strong leadership than many other aspects of businesses, since they are so high stakes. 5.2.8 Fast-action Decision Making Decision making is a big part of being a leader, and plays a particularly large role with project leaders, who are constantly faced with decisions that need to be taken to achieve the best possible result for the project. Leaders who are adept at analyzing situations and reacting quickly are well suited for the fast-paced environment that is often found in projects and within SMEs. Without this ability, projects can end up taking longer than the budgeted time frame, costing the company precious time, money, and resources. Project managers are constantly bombarded with issues that need to be solved, as well as decisions that need to be made (Walumbwa, Maidique, & Atamanik, 2014). Often, it is required that these decisions be made before any further steps can be taken. As such, projects may be partially or wholly halted until the manager has given the team a directive. It makes it even more difficult for managers to handle these decisions in today’s world, because of the incredible amount of information available. This may sound counter-intuitive but the repercussions are two-fold: first, there is too much information, so much that no one would be able to sift through it all to find only that which is relevant in a reasonable amount of time. The other reason is because it is so easier for people to access information and to access it much more quickly. Should an inappropriate decision be made, the company could 114 suffer more than in the past, because the public can get a hold of the issue with increased ease (Walumbwa et al., 2014). Sometimes fast decision making can cause the ‘wrong’ decision to be made. This however, is arguably better than missing opportunities due to indecision holding up processes (Maladzhi et al., 2012). SMEs, due to their smaller size and generally the smaller amount of available resources, need to be able to seize every opportunity they get. Therefore, having a project lead who is too careful about decisions can actually do the company – and any prospective projects they engage in – more harm than good. Leader’s need to be brave enough to take a leap of confidence and trust their own judgement (Maladzhi et al., 2012), even if they do not have all of the necessary information. In this way, leaders need to be incredibly self-aware, if they are to be adept at making these fast-action decisions (Walumbwa et al., 2014). A good leader understands that each decision made will impact a wide range of individuals, either negatively, positively, or both. This awareness extends as well into comprehending how they themselves make decisions, what their motivations are, and their behaviors, and then using this knowledge to improve their ability to lead and make solid decisions (Walumbwa et al., 2014). Once a manager is able to understand themselves, as well as, who they will be affecting and how, future decisions will be made more quickly, when under pressure, because they already have this background information in their mind. It is also key to note how interconnected fast-action thinking is with some of the other chosen leadership factors including innovation. Fast-action Decision Making is often a big part of innovative thinking. Decisions need to be made quickly in innovative environments, partially to take opportunities when they arise, and partially because the innate nature of innovative environments is fairly fast-paced. Moreover, this leadership factor works hand-in-hand with Balancing Objectives. A leader must relate his decision making to the objectives presented in the project, keeping in mind their prioritization and balance. 5.2.9 Intellectually Stimulating Team This is a factor that plays into involving team members in the thought process of project execution. However, unlike some of the other factors which deal with team member involvement, this factor has more to do with pushing and encouraging team members so that 115 they are able to challenge assumptions and norms on their own. In SMEs, it is important to think outside the box. Having a whole team of people who are able to do this, rather than merely relying on the team lead to make decisions, means that more good ideas will emerge and be brought to the idea board when solving project problems. This factor is another one that is discussed by Bass (1985) and is the third of the four pillars of transformational leadership. It is about empowering followers to take their own initiative and think for themselves. It is about challenging what is thought as normal, taking risks and problem solving (Wang et al., 2011). Empowering project team members to challenge assumptions and engage in out-of-the-box thinking (Wang et al., 2011) will benefit projects through the integration of a variety of different opinions and contexts, so that ideas will fuse together to generate innovative solutions. This ability to stimulate the thought-processes of team members will ensure engagement in all aspects of the project, allowing for a more comprehensive solution at the end. It also allows for the project to be more of a conversation, rather than a set of tasks that must be followed whether they seem appropriate for the solution or not. By Intellectually Stimulating Team members, however, the leader must be prepared to also take the ideas that come out of it into consideration. Again, the interconnectedness of some of these key factors is evident. By intellectually stimulating their team members, the manager must be ready to consider their individualities and take into account the ideas that result. It also ties into being a positive role model, in the sense that the team lead has to be intellectually stimulating himself as well. If leaders are not taking into account these extra pieces and incorporating the interconnected factors into their plan of action, they will be unable to fully harness the power of their team members, thereby decreasing the usefulness of the project. 5.2.10 Individualized Consideration As per Table 13, Individualized Consideration deals with treating workers as unique humans with their own strengths to add to projects. Each member of the team will have different ideas to bring to the project. By considering each person as unique and ensuring that they are treated as individuals throughout the project, leaders have a better chance at fulfilling the project goals. 116 This is because Individualized Consideration is about more than just recognizing that they are individuals. Leaders who truly harness this factor to its full potential are able to use it to the advantage of the project. By identifying each team members’ strengths and weaknesses, the leader must then use that information when delegating tasks so that each role is given to the person who will do the best job. In this way, projects will end up being done with the highest possible quality work and the quickest possible time. The other key idea with Individualized Consideration is to make each member feel useful. By treating each team member as an individual, leaders are able to attend to the needs of their team members. By doing so, team members foster feelings of trust and satisfaction with their leader (Wang et al., 2011). It is key to have the trust of your team members when working on a project. They need to believe not just in what they are doing, or in the project itself, but also in what their team lead is doing. Team members need to trust the judgement of the leader because ultimately, the leader is the one who will be making all of the final decisions on the project. Without this trust, and without satisfaction of the way the leader is handling everything, team members will start to put less efforts in the project, since they do not believe that the decisions being made will lead to a successful outcome. Individualized Consideration is another of the four pillars that Bass (1985), laid out as key factors in creating strong and effective leadership. This idea of the four factors making up transformational leadership means that they are intrinsically linked. Treating each team member as an individual and considering their strengths, ideas, and needs, when working on projects, ties in to the motivation that these individuals will have throughout the different phases of their work. 5.3 Leadership Factors Interconnection As mentioned previously, the 10 leadership factors identified in this research have some connections to each other, both directly and indirectly. While each of the identified factors are important in their own right, they often benefit each other and the project when used in conjunction with each other. Figure 11 is a visual representation of the interconnections between the 10 leadership factors. When viewed as a whole, the collective power that these leadership factors form in a project leader is evident. 117 Figure 11: Interconnection between leadership factors The following section will aim to provide context and proof for the direct and indirect connections visualised in Figure 12. While many of the interconnections have been outlined in prior literature, some of the connections were identified from first hand experiences and business cases. As has been noted numerous times throughout this research project, there are many gaps in the literature which has made it difficult to provide literary proof. As such, instances where connections were identified from first hand experiences and knowledge will be clearly stated. Figure 12: Direct and Indirect Interconnection between Leadership Factors 118 Starting with the Integration, of both ideas and the team, this leadership factor has many connections to other identified leadership factors. The strongest connections noted were with the leadership factors for motivation, Balancing Objectives, Individualized Consideration, and Intellectually Stimulating Team. More indirect connections were noted with Systematic Information Capturing, innovation, and Commitment to the Project. Integration is itself a balancing act, requiring compromises and coordination to be made (Brentani & Kleinschmidt, 2015). In this sense, balancing of objectives becomes an incredibly useful leadership factor to employ in conjunction with Integration. In the same sense, Integration will go much more smoothly if each team member is considered individually, their strengths and weaknesses used to the advantage of the team as a whole. By recognising that each team member is a unique individual, the project manager can use this leadership factor to shape how teams will be integrated and who will take what roles. Finally, motivation plays a large part in integrating teams. Working in groups is almost always a difficult task, where disagreements or having to work with a problematic person can easily discourage teams or individuals from continuing to integrate their ideas and skillsets. This is a well-known fact and has been experienced firsthand by numerous people involved in this research project. To prevent discouragement, project managers should make use of the Motivational leadership factor to motivate employees to work together, solve problems, and integrate themselves and their ideas. Intellectually Stimulating Team is also important with regards to Integration. It is crucial to recognise the differences team members possess so that those differences can be capitalised on when the team is being integrated, their knowledge banks used, and their ideas combined. More indirectly, Systematic Information Capturing relates to Integration as it is necessary to have captured the required information in order for there to be anything to compile and integrate. This is common sense – if you have no data you cannot compile data. Further than this though, it is useful to have a system to capture this information so that it is clearly laid out and organized for when it needs to be integrated. Innovation may be required for coming up with ideas as to how to integrate teams and information, especially if there are circumstances that make it particularly difficult, such as conflicting ideals among team members. As is important with every other leadership factor, and as will be discussed further later on, if a project manager is not committed to the project, many of these leadership factors 119 will go unused as they require a greater effort and an attachment to the project’s successful outcome than the project manager is able to supply. Moving on to Balancing Objectives, interconnections not previously noted were with Fastaction Decision Making and Commitment to the Project. The connection between Fast-action Decision Making and Balancing Objectives has a direct connection while the connection Balancing Objectives has with Commitment to the Project is more indirect. During the execution phase, when Balancing Objectives comes into the spotlight in terms of importance, there are a lot of conflicting objectives and tasks that need to be done within a set time frame (Hajiagha et al., 2014). While the numerous tasks requiring attention from the project manager point to a need for the Balancing Objectives leadership factor, the timeframe intertwines the need for Fast-action Decision Making skills from the project manager as well. Once again, Commitment to the Project has an indirect connection to this leadership factor as it is a supporting factor that helps to motivate the project manager to put the extra time and energy into developing and using these leadership factors. Next is Systematic Information Capturing which, in addition to Integration, has indirect connections to Fast-action Decision Making and Idealized Influence as well as direct connections to Commitment to the Project and innovation. To start with the direct connections, a company’s innovative capacity is highly linked to the knowledge that the company has accumulated over the years (Nowacki & Bachnik, 2016). Systematic Information Capturing is one of the key ways in which companies can gather and share information which is translated into a knowledge base that can be drawn from when innovating. In terms of Commitment to the Project, it has been mentioned previously that Systematic Information Capturing is a tedious step in the monitoring and controlling phase, part of what contributes to this phase performed incompletely or neglected all together. This was noted in one of the business cases discussed earlier. Because of this, Commitment to the Project is of incredibly high importance, as without it, Systematic Information Capturing is not a priority and therefore will not be done well or at all. With regards to the indirect connections, information should be captured throughout the project’s lifecycle, and Fast-action Decision Making may come into play when recording information becomes an added demand on time. This was something occasionally experienced during projects once the monitoring and controlling tasks became necessary. 120 Decisions about what to record, how much to record, and when to record it in relation to other key activities will all require some degree of Fast-action Decision Making. In terms of an indirect connection to Idealized Influence, the premise is simple: as a project manager, showing the team what is expected of them by leading by example (Wang et al., 2011). Recording information is important but having a role model to follow will add an extra layer of accountability to that importance. In terms of the connections with regards to the leadership factor of ‘Commitment to the Project’, this leadership factor is seen to be linked to each of the other nine leadership factors. Some with a more direct link: Systematic Information Capturing, Intellectually Stimulating Team, Idealized Influence, Individualized Consideration, innovation, and Motivational; while others have a more indirect link: Balancing Objectives, Integration, Fast-action Decision Making. Simply put, the project manager needs to be committed to the project. Without this underlying commitment, the project manager has no driving force to utilise any leadership factors to improve the chances of success of the project. Without a sense of Commitment to the Project, the project manager might as well not be a part of the project at all, as this lack of enthusiasm for the project may in fact hinder its success because the lack of enthusiasm or drive will spread to the rest of the project team members as well, dooming the project (Szczepańska-Woszczyna & Kurowska-Pysz, 2016). For the Motivational leadership factor, those interconnections not yet mentioned include direct links to innovation, fast-action oriented, and Individualized Consideration, and an indirect link to Intellectually Stimulating Team. In terms of the direct links, it was pointed out earlier that contextual-based tasks are more impacted by motivational factors than are taskbased factors (Wang et al., 2011). This is why innovation has such a key link to motivation, because innovation is a very contextual factor that is needed in many situations throughout a project lifecycle where team members are required to think up solutions. Motivating the team members by helping them to see the bigger picture, and how they can impact the outcome of the project and therefore impact the company, is an immensely useful driver for fuelling ideas. This was reiterated by Maladzhi et al. (2012) as motivational behavior that was one of the criteria they discussed as key to identifying an innovative leader. In terms of the fast-action oriented leadership factor, another one of the criteria Maladzhi et al. (2012) put out as qualities that make an innovative leader was the ability to make fast action decisions. As for 127 projects at once. Problem solving is another competency that is important for the project manager to have, but is also important for the project manager to encourage and foster in their project team members (Cavaleri, Firestone, & Reed, 2012). Problem solving should, furthermore, be seen as an act of continuous engagement rather than a reactive step to be taken (Cavaleri et al., 2012). In treating problem solving this way, project managers can help to gain strategic advantage for the organization. The seventh additional leadership factor is customer service orientation. Once again, this is a factor mentioned in Sears’s criteria triangle with regards to leadership factors that they look for in their management (Rucci et al., 1998). The premise behind this leadership factor is simple. Think about who the process or product created by the project is intended to benefit. Who the end user of this outcome will be? Whether it is a stakeholder from outside the organization such as a client or customer who will be purchasing the improved version of a product, or if it is the employees in the IT division who will benefit from the process change, it is the end user or ‘client’ that should be kept in mind while leading a project. The eighth additional leadership factor is flexibility and adaptability. It has been noted throughout the relevant and recent literature, and has been mentioned previously in this research project, that transformational leadership is beneficial to project management. The ability for project managers to be flexible and adaptable in their approaches and their style of leadership has also previously been noted. Flexibility is a key factor in transformational leadership and should not be overlooked as something that can influence project success (Roy et al., 2010). Flexibility is particularly relevant when outside stakeholders are involved with the project, as there will be an increased amount of conflicting approaches and different viewpoints that must be considered throughout the project lifecycle (Roy et al., 2010). In addition, Adaptability is important for project managers as projects will change and grow throughout their lifecycle, and project managers need to be able to adapt their strategies and approaches in step with the changing project (Chittoor, 2012). The ninth additional leadership factor is communication and interpersonal skills. This may seem an obvious factor, but nonetheless it is important. One of the biggest weaknesses that a project can face, according to The Standish Group (2013), is the lack of a team’s ability to create and maintain a platform for clear communications. Communication for the project manager is crucial as it goes beyond communication with the team members and facilitating 128 clear communication between the team members, but also includes communication with any external stakeholders involved in the project (The Standish Group, 2013). Communication is important throughout every phase of the project’s lifecycle, and is important for ensuring that any changes that occur throughout the project run smoothly (The Standish Group, 2013). Communication, and a general grasp of interpersonal skills, is also mentioned by Rucci et al. (1998) when discussing the leadership factors important to Sears. A project manager would quickly fail if unable to interact with others in a professional manner, so it is understandable that interpersonal skills would be a bare-minimum requirement for someone in a leadership position. The tenth, and final, additional leadership factor to discuss is the ability for a project manager to be a visionary leader. Essentially, this means that the project manager should have a grasp on the organizational vision and ensure that they are on the same page as employees throughout the entire project process (Maladzhi et al., 2012). Therefore, leaders have to be able to communicate this vision to team members in ways that appeal to their shared values (Maladzhi et al., 2012). This can be done through inspirational speeches, written messages, or any other means that has an element of inspiration that the team members can latch onto (Maladzhi et al., 2012). This can have a positive effect on the team members as it helps them to become motivated to achieve the vision as they will find meaning in it too. 129 6. TIMING OF LEADERSHIP FACTORS IN PROJECTS The goal of this chapter is to discuss the timing of the ten leadership factors mentioned in section 5.2, specifically to shed the light on each project phase and what factors are best to be used in the said phase. As a starting point, the project cycle will be defined along with its phases and the culture of these phases, then the importance of selecting the best timing when using the 10 leadership factors. At the end, how to select leadership factors. 6.1 Project Cycle As has been previously discussed, culture is an important consideration when it comes to projects and businesses more generally. Depending on the project itself, as well as the company within which the project is being performed, there will be different cultures leading to different leadership styles and co-worker interactions, as well as differences in how projects will be undertaken. In this section, the project cycle will be explored along with a high level description of each project phase. Then, the culture of each project phase will be highlighted. 6.1.1 Phases of Project Cycle Projects have been one of the main focuses of this research. While many aspects of projects have been explored in-depth, the phases that a project may be divided into have not yet been identified or their relevance and importance discussed. A project, as defined by PMI is “a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result” (PMI, 2017b, p. 8). Projects are generally discussed in terms of having a project lifecycle, meaning that they go through a series of stages which include a discernable beginning and end. The PMI also provides a clear definition for project lifecycle which can be used as a starting point to build upon. The definition by the PMI (2017b, p. 8) is as follows: “[Project lifecycle is] the series of phases that a project passes through from its start to its completion”. The phases of the project lifecycle are: starting the project, organizing and preparing, carrying out the work, and ending the project, whereas the process groups are: initiating, planning, executing, monitoring and controlling, and closing. The benefits of using a lifecycle model when undertaking a project are numerous. Lifecycle models tend to bring consistency into an organization’s projects. They provide a channel of communication, as well as facilitate pre-project initiatives and quality assurance 130 (Kloppenborg, Tesch, & Manolis, 2014). Projects are frequently divided into smaller steps or phases, which are used to differentiate the various initiatives that must occur for the project to be completed. These phases can be broken down even more into sub-phases to further structure the plans for the project (Bonnal, Gourc, & Lacoste, 2002). According to the PMI (2017b), a project phase encompasses a collection of highly related activities occurring during the project that culminate in one or multiple deliverables being completed. The idea behind employing a lifecycle model for a project is that all of the inter-related activities of one phase must be completed before the project can move forward to the next phase (Kloppenborg et al., 2014). It is important to note that different types of projects will be structured differently and therefore require different phases. For example, a small project may have fewer or different steps from those present in a large-scale project (Bonnal et al., 2002). Irrespective of the differences that projects in separate fields may have, many companies choose to operate their projects with a simple and generic set of phases (Kloppenborg et al., 2014). Many others will choose to employ phases more tailored to their specific industry or their project scale needs. While some of the project phases may differ depending on the type of project, it’s aim, and the field within which it is operating, most technical projects will require two broad phases; the pre-project phase, and the project phase (Bonnal et al., 2002). The pre-project phase is important because it is where potential projects are identified, researched, and the benefits to the business discovered (Bonnal et al., 2002). Once this phase is complete, the decision-makers within the organization will choose which of the identified potential projects will get to move forward, allocating monetary, human, and other resources towards completing the projects (Bonnal et al., 2002). Once resources have been allocated to a specific project, it then moves into the second broad phase: the project phase. While this simple two-way division of a project is useful as a theoretical concept, it is often more complex in real-world practices (Bonnal et al., 2002). As such, projects are often divided into more practical stages that can be implemented with greater ease into a tangible project setting. There are a variety of ways a project may be divided, and many options have been provided and deliberated throughout the relevant literature. The generic stages, touched upon above, that tend to be used as the simplest framework, are the initiation phase, the planning phase, the execution phase and the closing phase (Kloppenborg et al., 2014). The 131 phases, however, that will be used and discussed in this document, will be the process groups outlined in the PMBOK guide (PMI, 2017a): 1. Initiation; 2. Planning; 3. Executing; 4. Monitoring and Controlling; 5. Closing. The only real difference is the addition of the Monitoring and Controlling phase, an important, yet often overlooked piece to project management and project success. It is totally understood that the above are process groups and are not phases based on PMI PMBOK 6th edition, however, some other researchers call them as phases, excluding or including the monitoring and controlling element. Thus, in this research work, and to avoid any confusions when conducting interviews, the decision was to use the word ‘phase’ instead of ‘process group’. Another way to look at this would be if this research work used explicitly the PMI phases, then there is a chance that the focus on the monitoring and controlling process group will be missed. Thus, the ideal approach in this situation is to use the term ‘phase’ when speaking about process groups. ▪ The Initiation Phase The initiation phase occurs primarily after the pre-project broad phase. Once information has been compiled on things such as economic trends, client communications, technological advances, concerns from distributors and partners, and the competition, the information is sorted to identify concepts for possible projects in the pre-project phase (Bonnal et al., 2002). After that, the initiation phase can commence with the projects that are aligned with the organization’s strategic objectives (PMI, 2017a). As defined by the PMBOK guide, the group of processes in the initiation phase are those that are performed in order to identify either a new project or an extension to an existing project so that authorization to commence the project/extension can be obtained (PMI, 2017a). This is often considered one of the most crucial phases with regards to project success because choosing a project based on incomplete information can lead to money, time, and resources being spent on a project that was doomed from its inception. Often, IS and IT organizations that are dealing directly in selling products 132 based on innovation have great need for engineering capabilities and thus have high fixed costs. These high fixed costs mean that they have even more at stake for every project undertaken. Therefore, dependable individuals with wide ranging knowledge bases are required to ensure that the projects undertaken are as efficient, cost-effective, and valuable as possible to the organization (Fulford, 2013). ▪ The Planning Phase The next phase occurring in a project cycle is the planning phase. One piece that must be taken into account is the capabilities of the company (Bonnal et al., 2002). This refers to the knowhow of the workforce involved, as well as the resources available to the company, both monetary and other (Bonnal et al., 2002). When discussing technical projects, it is also important to discuss the technical know-how, or capabilities of the company (Bonnal et al., 2002). Aside from understanding the capabilities of the company, it is also in this phase where a risk management assessment is performed to identify the threats and opportunities that a project presents (Bonnal et al., 2002). As well, within the planning phase, there should be a breakdown schedule and an overall project plan (Thomas, Jacques, Adams, & KihnemanWooten, 2008). The planning phase is one that is present, no matter what lifecycle model is chosen (PMI | AgileAlliance, 2017). The difference between models lies not in whether planning is present but rather how much planning occurs as well as the timing of planning (PMI | AgileAlliance, 2017). Some models will plan as much as possible upfront, while other models may employ some form of continuous planning and implement a re-planning cycle to ensure that plans are updated with any new, relevant information obtained throughout the project’s life (PMI | AgileAlliance, 2017). Essentially, this phase refers to any processes that are “required to establish the scope of the project, refine the objectives, and define the course of action required to attain the objectives that the project was undertaken to achieve” (PMI, 2017a, p. 23). ▪ The Execution Phase After the planning phase, the execution phase of a project commences. Once the project has been fully defined in the planning phase, the execution phase will begin. It is in this phase that all of the activities culminating in the final deliverable will be undertaken (Bonnal et al., 2002). 133 During the execution phase, it is the duty of those involved to take the compiled information of the risks involved in the project and use it to guide the project implementation (Bonnal et al., 2002). This will hopefully ensure that opportunities are taken advantage of, and threats are minimized or avoided all together. It is this phase that many individuals picture when they think about projects and project completion simply because this is when the tangible deliverables and requirements for projects are executed (PMI, 2017a). It is important to note here that while many projects will be sequential in nature, including when they work on and conclude their deliverables, this is not always the case (Bower & Walker, 2007). In more complex circumstances, where projects do not follow a simple and sequential flow, the execution phase may in fact be embedded in a number of areas throughout the project lifecycle. ▪ The Monitoring and Controlling Phase The next phase that will be discussed is the Monitoring and Controlling phase. This is the phase mentioned previously that has been added from the generic model that many organizations choose to use. While often under-appreciated, monitoring and controlling is a key piece of the project-completion puzzle and has great value to organization’s project success (University of New Hampshire, 2018). Depending on who you ask, monitoring and controlling will occur in two different ways. For the purpose of having a thorough understanding of this phase, both will be discussed. The first way that monitoring and controlling can be employed is as a way to keep the project running on time, on budget, and within scope throughout the lifecycle of the project – particularly during the execution phase (Rozenes, Vitner, & Spraggett, 2006). The second way this phase can be used is after the project output has been completed and has started to be put to use (PMI, 2017a). PMI (2017a, p. 23) also considers this phase during the execution of the project, mainly “to track, review, and regulate the progress and performance of the project; identify any areas in which changes to the plan are required; and initiate the corresponding changes”. Essentially, its role here is to ensure that any bumps have been worked through and that the output works effectively as well as adds value to the company or client (PMI, 2017a). It is in this phase that areas are identified where a change to the initial plan may be required, and in which these changes are instigated (PMI, 2017a). If the project has diverged significantly from the project plan and is causing issues, then remediation activities can be 134 performed to get the project back on track (University of New Hampshire, 2018). Keeping in mind that many of the activities designated for this phase are occurring throughout the project, changes may be instigated during other phases, such as the execution phase. Phase specific activities may include quality control, tracking risk management activities, and providing status reports (University of New Hampshire, 2018). Without this phase, the project may be closed too soon or have included unnecessary steps, leading to sunk costs, time, and resources, with the potential for the project ultimately failing in its intended goal. ▪ The Closing Phase Finally, a project will conclude with the Closing phase. In the closing phase of a project, everything learned from the project, the experiences and knowledge acquired, as well as the pitfalls faced throughout the project will be recorded (Bonnal et al., 2002). In this phase, the final deliverables of a project are accepted and any final loose ends are tied together (Kloppenborg et al., 2014). The deliverables are handed over to the company or client to be put fully into use. The closing phase is, put simply, a formal ending to the project whether successful or not (PMI, 2017a), so that new projects can start, the deliverables can be put into use, and lessons can be learned to improve future projects. Unfortunately, this is another phase which is often under-appreciated by project managers (Aziz, 2015). This is because many project managers consider a successful project based on having completed solely the deliverables of time and cost (Aziz, 2015). The closing phase is often seen as a bureaucratic phase that provides little significance to the actual project (Aziz, 2015). This is often not the case and in fact neglecting this phase can put the organization at significant risk, damage the credibility of the project team and manager, result in substantial losses, and prevent the organization from realizing added benefits from the project (Aziz, 2015). 6.1.2 Culture of Project Phases Given the distinctive differences between the phases of a project there is no reason to believe that culture will not also play a role in project phases or that the culture between each phase will be identical, irrespective of the company culture. One issue that has presented itself throughout the literature is a lack of in depth research performed on the culture of organizations as a whole, the culture of the project, and most pertinently the culture of 135 various project phases (Henrie & Sousa-Poza, 2005). Organizational culture has received more attention in recent literature but the research still remains sparse with regards to the more specific cultures seen in projects and the phases within projects (Best, Smit, & Faber, 2013). As such, information was extracted both directly as well as through inferencing from those sources that were available, with literature reviewed expanding into grey literature as well. An article written by Henrie and Sousa-Poza (2005) outlined a couple reasons for this lack of cultural research, namely: an absence of research on leadership in multinational teams, and an insufficient understanding of what ‘culture’ actually is within the context of an organization and organizational structures. To determine the potential cultural differences between the various phases, it is important to first identify differences between various aspects of each phase that may allow for cultural distinctions. One stark difference noted between earlier project phases and the later ones is that often there are fewer people involved in the initiation and planning phases of a project, compared to the later phases, specifically the execution phase, where an innumerable quantity of individuals may be directly or indirectly involved in the activities that lead to the creation of final deliverables and the maintenance of those deliverables (Bonnal et al., 2002). Most of the differences that can be seen in the culture of each project phase stem from the varied activities that are occurring within each phase. The activities resulting in a general culture for each phase, as well as a brief overview of the most compatible related leadership styles, will be described in the following paragraphs, while an in-depth description of the appropriate leadership factors for each phase can be found in section 6.3 and a condensed version of the cultural points and appropriate leadership factors in Table 15. ▪ Initiation Phase Culture Starting with the first phase, the initiation phase, a distinctive culture emerges. In this phase, very few individuals are generally required to participate (Bonnal et al., 2002). This phase is simply about identifying stakeholders and developing the project charter (PMI, 2017a). There will exist in this phase a short-term relationship between the project manager and the other key stakeholders, such as a representative of the organization for which the project is being performed, often where the client will be involved in the decision for who will be involved in the planning phase and the project execution (Thomas et al., 2008). Because of the nature of this phase - both that it is about gathering facts and brainstorming project ideas - a smaller 136 number of individuals makes more sense than involving a multitude of people. This may bog down the process, stretching it out far too long to be useful. Due to having a small number of individuals involved in this phase, the leadership style employed by the project manager may tend more towards a collaborative inclusion of those few people involved. Since it will be important for ideas to flow and develop, a more democratic and inclusive environment makes the most sense, meaning that the project manager will take a guiding role, giving their professional insight rather than taking a directive role. The guiding role and the directive role are explained in section 2.4.1 in relation to leadership. ▪ Planning Phase Culture Moving on to the planning phase, we see a slightly different culture from that in the initiation phase. In this phase, there are also a relatively small number of people involved in order to keep the project moving smoothly without overwhelming it with too many people’s ideas for how the project should be directed and laid out (Bonnal et al., 2002). Of course, it is beneficial to have some of the project team, the client, or individuals from key departments involved in the project. This ensures that communication between parties is better, and inevitably makes the project run more smoothly (Ballou, Belardo, & Pazer, 2010). While client often establishes completely separate teams for the planning and actual implementation team, there is evidence that suggests that these two teams should be much more integrated to ensure a better understanding of the project and an overall more positive impact on project success (Thomas et al., 2008). In this phase, all of the necessary metrics and information regarding various factors of the project will have been sought out and the project itself will have been approved (Bonnal et al., 2002). It is now that these metrics will be put to use by the project manager with few other individuals to assemble a plan of action for the project, including creating a project schedule, defining the deliverables and requirements, deciding on staff and how to guide them through the project, as well as developing methods for how to interact with team members and external stakeholders to ensure that the project meets its cost, and timeframe requirements (Barron & Barron, 2013). Similar to the initiation phase, the culture will be more collaborative given the smaller number of people involved. In this phase however, even fewer people may be involved due to the fact that it is a stage devoted to decision making. The project manager will undoubtedly have 239 Some external team members started to operate under a false sense of understanding after asking one or two questions, filling in any gaps with the knowledge they had of their own field of study, and moving forward without double checking with the subject matter expert. Once the project manager started to notice this, another leadership factor was employed. The leadership factor employed by the project manager at this point was Individualized Consideration. This required the project manager to take a more hands on approach and work with each external team member to discover what their distinct strengths and weaknesses were. The same thing was done with the internal team so that a full understanding of the project team’s skills could be achieved. This was done on an individual level as well as on a team level. Discussions were had about what skills the team felt confident in, and where people felt they had less knowledge. The idea being that by discussing where people felt most confident, tasks could be formally allotted to those that were best equipped to handle them. Using a discussion and helping to guide people to focus on their strengths, the project manager achieved this without having to use the more abrasive method of ordering people around or telling them how they were currently operating was wrong. To ensure that everything continued to stay on track now that the project was running smoothly, the project manager employed the third leadership factor which was the ability to balance objectives. Because the project was working with an outside vendor, there was an added stakeholder involved and a more complicated set of objectives throughout the project’s execution phase. This made it even more crucial for the project to reach all of the set objectives on time. Through the use of this leadership factor, the project manager was able to ensure that every team member stayed on track, their skillsets used to the highest capacity, and that the project finished each objective within the set scope. 1.4. Benefits and Value Using each of the aforementioned leadership factors, the project manager was able to keep the project running on track and within the designated scope. To start, knowing how to integrate groups of people with different values, approaches, knowledge-bases, and viewpoints, is a valuable skill that served to redirect the project. Even more importantly, the use of this leadership factor provided added benefits that the project manager had not considered. By integrating the teams, the external vendor gained beneficial insight into the manufacturing industry that they otherwise never would have received. Having this insight made it easier for the external vendor to market their services to other companies in the manufacturing industry. More than this though, it provided the benefit of an ally for the company should they require marketing services from the external vendor again. The company themselves also gained valuable knowledge from the integration, with certain team members having a greater understanding of the marketing field. This meant that smaller questions or issues that might present themselves in the future would not need an outside vendor, thus saving the company money and time in the long-run. The employment of the leadership factor of Individualized Consideration also benefitted the project immensely. By helping each team member to find their strengths and guiding them towards the notion of doing those tasks in which their strengths lay, the project manager directed the project to be completed more efficiently with fewer incidents where mistakes needed to be rectified. It also served to empower team members by focusing on their strengths rather than simply telling them what they had to do and instructing them to not do 240 anything other than what they had been told. This increased team morale and led to innovative solutions that otherwise might not have been discovered. Finally, the ability to balance all of the competing objectives presented further benefits for the project. Of course, it served the purpose of getting all of the objectives finished on time and on budget, which was important. More than this though, it presented a good image of the company to the external stakeholders, specifically the external vendor who now saw the company as having an excellent reputation for finishing projects with quality results both on time, on budget, and with keeping all of the key parties’ competing interests in mind. Overall, the use of leadership factors had numerous benefits to the project. From the intended benefits of completing the project, to the added benefits of developing team members and relationships with other companies. It is apparent that the leadership factors chosen to solve the issues presented were valuable assets and aided the project manager in solving issues and keeping the project on track. 2. Company C 2.1. Executive Summary During the planning phase, stakeholders from the various key business departments were involved in developing the scope of the project. This included a representative from the departments of Finance, Human Resources, R&D, and Purchasing. While this was still fewer people involved than would be employed during the subsequent phases, each individual represented a different viewpoint on the organization. These key stakeholders and their unique viewpoints would benefit the project in the long run, ensuring no information was overlooked. While it was important to have the various opinions involved, it made the planning difficult because of the sometimes-conflicting ideals, requirements, and expectations for the project. As discussions for project scope and key objectives ensued, it became apparent that there were some points of contention between the stakeholders. To rectify this, the project manager opted to employ some leadership factors in order to smooth out the process. The first leadership factor put to use was that of Integration of ideas to ensure that each department got what they needed, and the scope was boiled down to the essentials. They also implemented the use of Innovation to find ways to balance all of the competing objectives that the department heads wanted to include for the project. This was done through a series of constructive meetings and project ‘wish lists’ written up by each department stakeholder. By getting each individual to solidify their ideas in written form, they were able to have a constructive discussion about which items were pertinent to the success of the project and which were merely added benefits should they occur. 2.2. Business Problem Planning a project means taking into account considerations from every department in the business. While a project manager may be able to conceptualize some of the issues that are important, they will not have the in-depth knowledge that individuals who work in each department will possess. To ensure that valuable insight and information about a business does not get missed, during the planning phase it is wise for a project manager to work with, or at least consult, individuals from each department. 241 During the project in question, department heads from the Human Resources, R&D, Finance, and Purchasing were brought on to aid the project manager in the planning process. Specifically, they were there to identify any potential issues that might arise, and aid the project manager in deciding what metrics were necessary to include in the scope of the project. This was necessary given that the project manager did not have much knowledge in Finance or Purchasing, and limited insights into the other two departments of interest. Despite the benefits of bringing together the department heads to help conceptualize the project, the differences in interests and viewpoints on the organization started to present some issues. Each department head had their own ideas about what should be included in the project scope and, with so many items to include, the project manager knew that the budget and time requirements would be unattainable. Furthermore, some of the department heads’ ideals were conflicting with each-other, making it impossible to include every departments’ requests even if they had the resources. Key metrics and objectives for the project were also discussed with much the same results – too many ideas – and too many conflicting ideas. These conflicting opinions were also starting to cause tension between the key stakeholders, making discussions more difficult as tensions and negative emotions started to rise. 2.3. Solution The project manager, recognising that the project planning was stalling with all of the conflicting ideas, decided that something needed to change. It did not appear that the department heads were doing anything to make compromises, and it was starting to get to the point where it was unclear if they were truly thinking critically about what would be best for the project. Instead of continuing to let the department heads attempt to sort through their requirements themselves, the project manager decided to step into a slightly more autocratic leadership role. A number of leadership factors were employed as well, so that the project manager could get the project back on track. 2.3.1. Leadership Factor Effect First, the project manager decided to employ the use of Integration of ideas. It was very apparent that the department heads were having a difficult time integrating all of the ideas and educated opinions that they were bringing to help make sure the project ended up successful. To resolve this, the project manager devised a way to reframe the situation and guide each department head through the process. The project manager was aware that many of the ideas and concerns being brought forth by the department heads were not key, but instead extras that would be welcomed should it be possible to include them. It was important for everyone involved to understand the importance of boiling down the metrics and scope so that only the truly necessary and beneficial things were included. The discussions were temporarily halted, and the project manager took a chance to review the project again with the stakeholders. The objective of the project was reiterated with an added explanation about how important it was for everyone involved to provide critical input, so the project had a higher chance of success. With a renewed frame of mind, the project manager hoped that the department heads would get a chance to revisit what they were aiming for and think critically about what was necessary and what was not. This was only the first step however. Once the project manager had gotten everyone to step back for a moment, he decided to employ yet another leadership factor in tandem with the Integration of ideas. 242 The project manager was not entirely convinced that simply getting everyone to take a moment to think would be enough to get all of the departments to start integrating their ideas. Instead, it was taken a step further and a new leadership factor employed. Innovation was utilized by the project manager in order to find a unique way of fixing the squabbles between the department heads. While one option would have been to simply make the judgement calls and taken charge, the project manager did not feel comfortable making those decisions. This was namely because there were some departments that the project manager truly did not know enough about. If this route were taken, key metrics would be missed, while other non-essential ones included, bogging the project down. Instead, the project manager opted to use a thought experiment of sorts to engage the department heads and force them to think critically and make the judgement calls on the issues where they had the most knowledge. Each department head was asked to write up a ‘wish list’ containing all of the items they thought important or relevant to the success of the project. On their wish list, they were required to identify which of the items were crucial to project success and which were merely added benefits. Afterwards, constructive meetings were held individually by the project manager with each department head so that they could discuss one-on-one the various metrics and requirements for the project. For each point deemed a necessity by the department heads, they were required to back it up to prove its importance. Once each department head had completed their meeting and boiled down their list to the key features, the team of department heads was brought back together. Discussions commenced moving with more ease now that there were fewer items being discussed. The project manager was able to benefit from the input of the department heads without feeling bogged down by excess information and requirements for the project. The scope and key metrics were solidified, and the project was able to move forward to the next stage. 2.4. Benefits and Value Employing these leadership factors was incredibly helpful to the project’s eventual success. The project manager was aware how important it was to involve all of the departments in deciding the scope of the project and identifying the various metrics. Their input was valuable to make certain that the project scope did not leave out any considerations that would alter the project, potentially leading to its failure. While crucial, it was not an easy process, and the project manager’s use of relevant leadership factors allowed for the facilitation of discussions and helped to keep the project planning stage on track. Aside from the apparent benefit of keeping the project on track and ensuring that the scope was appropriate for the project, the employment of these two particular leadership factors also had some hidden, secondary benefits to the organization. The department heads benefited a great deal from the experience. They gained valuable skills about project work and requirements and were also given an opportunity to learn how that setting requires a more engaged type of teamwork. The benefit to the project manager, and any other project managers that undertake projects in the organization, was that they now had department heads they could rely on for pertinent information, but also to work together and form a cohesive plan that covered all of the business bases – without as much supervision from the selected project manager. Undertaking knowledge transfers, and teaching key stakeholders what is required to put a project together was a good way to benefit future projects and add value to the company. 243 3. Company E 3.1. Executive Summary Throughout the entire project, but specifically during the monitoring and controlling phase, collection of data is central to project success. This was known by the project manager. Therefore, early on in the project life-cycle, the project manager had made it known to team members that it was part of their requirement to record information on key project metrics. Some team members were doing a good job of ensuring that pertinent data was recorded. Other members were not doing their part, thus key information was being missed and forgotten. The project manager knew that this was going to present serious issues later on and may impact the deliverables of the project if issues were not caught early on. To remedy the problem, the project manager decided to use a few key leadership factors. First, they decided to utilize Systematic Information Capturing. To do so, they developed a system and step by step document that could be easily followed. Thus, they ensured that the information collected by each team member was systematic and followed a formula to capture any required information. They also employed the use of motivational tactics as a supportive factor to get employees who were not as engaged to follow through with the remainder of the project duties. This was done mainly through incentives, rewarding those employees who did what they were supposed to recognising those who went above and beyond expectations. 3.2. Business Problem Collection of data is an important step during the project lifecycle. It ensures a record is kept so that issues can be tracked back to their root cause, it helps people to write up accurate reports post-project, and it is a useful way to compare steps and results to future projects, so that pitfalls can be avoided. Data collection is something that is often done throughout the lifecycle of the project but comes into particular importance during the monitoring and controlling phase when everything is being double checked, tracked, and enhanced. During the project in question, it had been requested that data be gathered throughout the execution phase and into the monitoring and controlling phase. The project manager started to notice however, that not everyone was doing the same quality of data collection. Some people were recording too much information and others were barely recording anything at all. This was an issue, because it meant that pieces of information and key perspectives would be missing while other perspectives would be so bogged down with irrelevant details that time and resources would be wasted trying to find the key points. The project manager was aware that both ends of the spectrum, but particularly having sections of completely missing information, would be incredibly detrimental to the project. The missing information could end up being something pertinent to the success of the project, perhaps indicating an issue that was not overtly apparent but would cause the project to break down if not addressed. Because of this, the project manager decided that something needed to be done and devised a solution to the issue. 3.3. Solution Ensuring that all of the project team members were participating in data collection meant that the project manager had to devise a plan to keep every member responsible for their own 244 sections of the project. While one option would have been to enact severe consequences for those who did not follow through with keeping records throughout the project lifecycle, the project manager wanted to use a softer approach that was structured but also motivated team members to take action of their own accord, rather than forcing it upon them. Therefore, the project manager decided to employ a couple of leadership factors to help facilitate this process. 3.3.1. Leadership Factor Effect The first leadership factor that the project manager chose to employ was Systematic Information Capturing. The project manager realised that one of the reasons there was such a spread in the quantity and quality of the information being recorded by the team members was because none of them were completely sure what they were expected to be recording. This caused some people to record much more than was necessary, capturing a ton of extraneous information along the way, while simultaneously gave other individuals an easy excuse to record next to nothing while they completed their project duties. To resolve this problem, the project manager developed a guide that outlined what information they were needing to capture, why they needed to capture it, as well as providing a step by step document that could be easily filled out. The team was also briefed on the new document so that everyone was aware that this was a requirement of the project added alongside their regular duties. No more and no less was needed to be recorded throughout the project. In structuring a document, the project manager found a way to standardise the data recording process. This made it much simpler and straightforward for all of the team members. The project manager also realised that it was important to not simply direct team members on the project. It was apparent that some of the team members were not happy with the standardisation and were subsequently doing a less than satisfactory job on the input sheets. Some of the team members appeared to become less engaged in the project in general now that they had extra work to do for each step in the process. The project manager wanted the data recording step to feel like less of a burden and so another leadership factor was employed to increase the morale of the team. The leadership factor the project manager chose to employ was motivation. Motivational tactics were employed to boost morale and induce an increase in the efficiency and quality of work being performed by the team members. This was mainly done through the use of incentives. The project manager provided incentives for team members to do the added work they had been given, making it almost into a competition of who was able to collect the most key points. The incentives were small, and often food related, but they served the purpose of re-invigorating the team and their determination to bring the project to a successful completion. For those employees that went above and beyond, the project manager also went above and beyond by formally recognising the accomplishments of those team members. This helped to boost the confidence of team members which in turn made them work harder and stay more focused. 3.4. Benefits and Value The data collection process can be long and a tedious extra step. While it is not the most enjoyable part of project development, it is an important part and should be taken seriously because of the copious benefits that it can provide to a project. Having team members who 245 are slacking in their responsibilities for recording data can lead to serious gaps that can impact the project’s success. As an obvious benefit, the use of the leadership factors of Systematic Information Capturing and motivation helped to refocus the team members and aided them in working more diligently on the project. As mentioned, missing pieces of information could mean that issues go unaccounted for until it is too late. While not always the case, this can lead to the failure of the project. Having team members motivated to do their work, meant that the project would run more smoothly. Of course, this was not the only benefit to the project that these leadership factors provided. Less apparent benefits occurred as well. One such benefit came from the implementation of the Systematic Information Capturing system that the project manager devised. It proved to be highly valuable to the project in terms of standardising the input information which in turn made for less work later on when the information was being reviewed to sort out issues and write up project reports. This meant that fewer valuable resources were spent focusing on filling in blanks, tying varying data recordings together, and simplifying over-extended recordings. These resources were then able to be used elsewhere in the project. On top of this, the implementation of a standardised system benefitted future projects as well. It provided a format that could be easily updated as necessary to fit a different project’s requirements, thus ensuring that all projects moving forward within the organization would save time and energy. In addition, utilizing the leadership factor of motivation was incredibly beneficial to the project as a whole. While continuing to have motivated and engaged team members is important no matter the stage that the project is in, it tends to be much more difficult to maintain during the more tedious tasks required of the monitoring and controlling phase. By providing incentives to the team members and making the more tedious tasks a bit more enjoyable, the overall morale of the team was increased, the quality of work improved, and as an added benefit, the team members were more likely to request working with the project manager on future projects. This added benefit was useful given that many of the team members were highly knowledgeable and would be assets to future projects.