Project Management Project Failure

All this will depend on whether resources are available or not. However, the project may become crippled at any stage. The project, therefore, becomes disappointing and loose quality. The scope of the project may be poorly defined, there may be cultural disparities, the drivers may lack proper documentation of the entire project or even fail to track progress, and finally, there may be lack of communication with key stakeholders of the project. This paper analyzes poorly defined scope, cultural disparities, and inadequate risk management as causes of project failure. According to (Nibyiza 2015), aspects that are important in the scope development include time, results, and the morale of the team as well as the funding of the project. Defining the scope poorly makes the manager to lack proper orientation of the project.

The entire team may not be in a position of accurate determination of the properly allocated funding for the project. The bigger picture has it that in case there is mismanagement of the findings; the project may not be in a position to run effectively. Poorly defined objectives simply mean that the project lacks goal, and therefore cannot be run. This will eventually lead to wastage of time and resources since they may be unexpected. Since the scope also defines quality, a poorly defined scope would seemingly poorly define the quality expected. In case the project was business oriented then there is the effect of consumer satisfaction. Moreover, if the project is non-profiting for instance vaccination projects then the stakeholders alone may not be satisfied with the product.

A poorly defined scope will not be able to monitor any projected risks during execution. For instance, in a project of software development, there exist, key players, where each handles a specific task, in case the software abuses his or her cultural beliefs the project will simply require a substitute in which case, the expected goal will be altered. In a study done by Bingöl, Şener, and Çevik (2013), they demonstrated that there exists hierarchical culture in most of the organizations. This implies that in most projects, there are cultural disparities at various levels. The implication of this is that the failure of the project lies in the compromise of individual cultures. Ika, Diallo, and Thuillier (2010) concurs that cultural differences form a critical portion in all projects.

Speaking in this perspective cultural difference, therefore, implies a difference in thought, feelings, and actions of project stakeholders. This is form culture at an advanced level. In case there exists such difference then the partakers of the project will fail the project. Chipulu et al. (2014) make critical regards with reference to culture and project success. Risk management, on the other hand, is using necessary measures to manage the potential risks. In a project perspective, inadequate risk management involves lack of proper channel ls to identify potential risks and putting in place measures to manage such risks. Alfredo et al. (2014) imply that managing risks are often complicated. In order to achieve success, there must be a proper knowledge of the entire risk.

The deadline should be set, to avoid delays in execution of the project. Along the scope, the stakeholders must properly define their roles. Since culture dimorphism cannot be eliminated, the team players must ensure that they understand the cultural values of all individuals. Before drafting the scope, the players must consider various aspects in which culture may be abused and try to harmonize such cases. In case the cultural differences arouse a language barrier, the team players must form ground rules to use common language that is understandable to all. , Çiçek, I. , & Kıyak, M. The effect of organizational culture on organizational efficiency: The moderating role of organizational environment and CEO values. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1560-1573. Alfredo Federico Serpellaa* Ximena Ferradaa, Rodolfo Howarda, Larissa Rubio.