A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Shankar, Kelkar Girish
- Critical Success Factors for the ‘Start-up Projects’ in India
Authors
1 Vihar Lake, Mumbai–400087, IN
2 NITIE, Mumbai, IN
Source
Indira Management Review, Vol 12, No 1 (2018), Pagination: 53-65Abstract
This study deals with exploration, identification and study of Critical Success Factors (CSFs) that influence the project performance with particular reference to ‘Start-up Projects’ in select industry sectors such as engineering, infrastructure, construction, telecom and software projects, especially in India. It is clear that the ‘strategic intent’ that gives birth to a project, is to bring about certain changes that are necessary for organizational effectiveness. Thus, the projects, particularly the start-up projects, must have a strong link with the ‘Business Strategy’ of an organization. In practice, however, the ‘Project Performance’ is influenced by the ‘Business Environment’, technology changes and notably the market factors and the expectations of a variety of stakeholders.
The research undertaken is based on 30 case studies across a few industry verticals. The main aim of this study is to understand Critical Success Factors (CSFs) that affect the success probability of the start-up projects, especially in India. It was additionally important to find out if the conventional CSFs are adequate to manage project progress, or, if there is a need to enlist additional success factors for start-up projects, especially in India. The data about the 30 cases was compiled based on field work, questionnaire and personal interviews with project personnel. The data compiled was thoroughly analyzed and subjected to statistical analysis for validation of the results obtained from the study.
The analysis indicates that there is a strong case for incorporating two additional CSFs namely, ‘Flexibility in Planning’ and ‘Dynamic Feasibility Study’ for inclusion in the list of CSFs, especially for Indian Start-up Projects. Inclusion of ‘Flexibility in Planning’ envisages multiple levels, namely organizational, strategic, and operational levels. ‘Dynamic Feasibility Study’ is essential since the current static; one time approach to feasibility assessment is no longer valid when the project environment undergoes major changes. Additionally, it is seen that ‘Risk Management’ and diligent analysis of ‘Scope’ need specific formal attention from the project teams.
Keywords
Start-up Projects, Project Success, Success Criteria, Critical Success Factors, Engineering Projects, Developing Economy, Flexibility, Dynamic Feasibility Study (DFS), Preliminary Project Feasibility Study (PPFS).Full Text
References
- Prabhakar, G.P. (Sept., 2008). What is Project Success: A Literature Review, International Journal of Business and Management, 3(9).
- Kelkar G.S., Pundir A.K. and Ganapathy, L. (2016): Need for Flexibility as a Critical Success Factor in Startup Projects, IJREM, 3(4), ISSN: 2278-7089.
- Kelkar G.S., Pundir, A.K. and Ganapathy, L. (April, 2017). Challenges in Project Management for Startup Projects in ‘Select African Countries’, Paper Presented at IEOM 2017 Conference, Morocco.
- Kelkar G.S., Pundir, A.K. and Ganapathy, L. (Nov., 2016). Dynamic Feasibility Study Report (DFS) as an Essential Step in Projects Especially for the Startup Projects in India, NCIETM Conference at NITIE.
- Lavagnon A. Ika (2009). Project Success as a Topic in Project Management Journals, Project Management Journal, 40(4), pp. 6–19.
- Pundir A.K., Ganapathy, L. and Sambandam, N. (2012). NITIE: A Success Factor approach to Project Management, Conference Proceedings.
- Shahu R., Pundir, A.K. and Ganapathy, L. (2013). An Empirical Study on Flexibility: A Critical Success Factor of Construction Projects, Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, doi: 10.1007/s40171-012-0014-5.
- Rockart J.F. and Nancy S.F. (1989). Critical Success Factors: An Annotated Bibliography, MIT.
- Turner, J.R. and Müller, R. (2005). The Project Manager’s Leadership Style as a Success Factor on Projects: A Literature Review. Project management journal, 36(1), pp. 49–61.