i

PROJECT MANAGEMENT OFFICE AT THE GAUTENG DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH: KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS

By

MBAVHALELO MULALO RAEDANI

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree

MASTER’S DEGREE IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (MBA)

in the

Business School

Faculty of Management Sciences

TSHWANE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

Supervisor: Prof Carol Allais

April 2014

ii

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this research report is my own unaided work, except as indicated in the

acknowledgements, the text, and references. It is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements

for the degree Master Business Administration at TSHWANE UNIVERSITY OF

TECHNOLOGY, Pretoria. It has not been submitted before in whole or in part, for any degree or

examination at any other institution of higher education. I further declare that all sources cited or

quoted are indicated and acknowledged by means of a comprehensive list of references.

M.M. RAEDANI

Copyright © Tshwane University of Technology 2014

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly and foremost I wish to express my gratitude to God for His never-ending love and His

mercy on me.

To my supervisor, Professor Carol Allais, I would like to express my deepest appreciation and

respect for her never-ending support and encouragement in conducting meaningful research for

this dissertation.

None of this would have been possible without the continued support from my family. Thank you

for your understanding of my limited availability during my dissertation endeavours.

My sincere thanks and appreciation also goes to my fellow colleagues at the GDoH for their

willingness to participate in this study, my friends, and all who offered their assistance in various

ways in the course of my research – I thank you guys.

To my friend Mashudu, thank you for your continuous support throughout my study.

iv

ABSTRACT

The Gauteng Department of Health (GDoH) has been experiencing the challenges of deteriorating

health infrastructure and has been struggling to deliver projects on time and within budget for a

number of years. Time and budgetary constraints demand more effective management of projects

than ever before. The AGSA (2010:7) audit report also revealed that the failure to effectively

monitor and evaluate the progress of the projects was largely caused by the lack of a proper Project

Management Office (PMO) in place to provide an overall view of project status.

The purpose of this exploratory research was to determine the knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and

perceptions of employees managing projects in the GDoH with regard to project management

(PM) within the department; and to determine the training required by employees to manage the

infrastructure related projects more effectively. The researcher made use of quantitative and

qualitative research designs to gather data.

The sample consisted of 15 employees working with infrastructure projects within the IM

directorate of the GDoH. Face-to-face interviews were conducted and semi-structured

questionnaires were used to gather the data.

The research revealed that GDoH infrastructure management respondents do not have a positive

view of PM within the department, mainly as a result of PM methodologies not being clearly

defined. The findings also show that there is insufficient training to advance knowledge and skills

in PM that will enable the department to manage infrastructure projects more effectively.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ ix LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ x

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... xi CHAPTER 1 SCOPE OF RESEARCH .......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Background ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Literature review .............................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Problem statement ............................................................................................................ 5 1.5 Aim of the study ............................................................................................................... 6

1.6 Objectives of the study ..................................................................................................... 7 1.7 Research methodology ..................................................................................................... 7

1.7.1 Sampling method .................................................................................................... 7 1.7.2 Data collection ........................................................................................................ 8

1.7.3 Data analysis ........................................................................................................... 9 1.7.4 Ethical considerations ........................................................................................... 10

1.8 Definition and scope of the study ................................................................................... 10

1.9 Limitation of the study ................................................................................................... 11

1.10 Outline of the study .................................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................... 13

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 13

2.2 Project and project management background ................................................................ 13 2.2.1 Definition of a project ........................................................................................... 14

2.2.2 Definition of project management ........................................................................ 15 2.2.3 Difference between Projects and Operations ........................................................ 15

2.3 Project management methodologies............................................................................... 16

2.3.1 Project life cycle ................................................................................................... 16 2.3.2 Project management knowledge areas .................................................................. 17

2.4 The role of a project manager ........................................................................................ 18 2.5 Current challenges for managing projects ...................................................................... 20

2.5.1 Lack of business alignment ................................................................................... 20 2.5.2 Project participants are not engaged ..................................................................... 20 2.5.3 Lack of accountability within the project ............................................................. 20 2.5.4 Problems with data collection ............................................................................... 20 2.5.5 Lack of involvement with key managers .............................................................. 21

2.6 Project Management Office background........................................................................ 21 2.7 PMO methodology ......................................................................................................... 22 2.8 Types of PMOs............................................................................................................... 23

2.9 Functions of the PMO .................................................................................................... 23 2.9.1 PM methodology, standards implementation/management .................................. 23

2.9.2 Project policies, procedures, template implementation/management ................... 24 2.9.3 Project/program monitoring and controlling ........................................................ 24

vi

2.9.4 PM coaching and mentoring ................................................................................. 24 2.9.5 Project/program initiation ..................................................................................... 25 2.9.6 Governance processes implementation/management ........................................... 25 2.9.7 Multi-project coordination .................................................................................... 26

2.9.8 Project/program closing ........................................................................................ 27 2.9.9 Project performance monitoring/controlling ......................................................... 27 2.9.10 Dashboard/scorecard implementation/management ............................................. 28

2.10 Challenges of PMO .................................................................................................... 29 2.10.1 Poor project execution .......................................................................................... 29

2.10.2 Too many processes or methodology ................................................................... 29 2.10.3 Lack of consistency............................................................................................... 30

2.10.4 Company realignment ........................................................................................... 30 2.10.5 Lack of neutrality .................................................................................................. 30

2.11 PMO Framework ........................................................................................................ 31 2.11.1 Monitoring and controlling project performance .................................................. 31

2.11.2 Develop PM competency and methodology ......................................................... 32 2.11.3 Multi-Project Management ................................................................................... 32

2.11.4 Strategic management ........................................................................................... 33 2.11.5 Organizational learning ......................................................................................... 34 2.11.6 Common characteristics of the PMO .................................................................... 34

2.12 PMOs and organizational project management maturity ........................................... 35

2.13 PMO cultural alignment ............................................................................................. 41 2.13.1 People .................................................................................................................... 41 2.13.2 Politics................................................................................................................... 41

2.13.3 Power .................................................................................................................... 41 2.13.4 Pressures ............................................................................................................... 41

2.13.5 Policies .................................................................................................................. 42 2.13.6 Process .................................................................................................................. 42 2.13.7 Purpose .................................................................................................................. 42

2.14 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 42 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 44

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 44

3.2 Research method and design .......................................................................................... 44 3.2.1 Mixed model research method .............................................................................. 45 3.2.2 Qualitative method ................................................................................................ 46

3.2.3 Quantitative method .............................................................................................. 48 3.3 Sampling method............................................................................................................ 48 3.4 Sample population .......................................................................................................... 49 3.5 Data collection................................................................................................................ 49 3.6 Data analysis .................................................................................................................. 51

3.7 Validity and reliability ................................................................................................... 53 3.8 Ethical considerations .................................................................................................... 54 3.9 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 55

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 55 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 55 4.2 Section A- Profile information ....................................................................................... 56

vii

4.2.1 Gender and employment type ............................................................................... 56 4.2.2 Number of years in the department ....................................................................... 57 4.2.3 Salary level............................................................................................................ 58

4.3 Theme 1: Perception of PM within the department ....................................................... 58

4.3.1 Basic functions of a project manager .................................................................... 59 4.3.2 Views of PM within the department ..................................................................... 59 4.3.3 Understanding on how projects are managed within the department ................... 60 4.3.4 PM development opportunities within the department ......................................... 60 4.3.5 Requirements of advanced PM training courses to manage projects ................... 62

4.3.6 Resources to perform work optimally................................................................... 63 4.3.7 Reasons for project changes within the directorate .............................................. 63

4.3.8 Project reviews to determine individual help........................................................ 65 4.4 Theme 2: Understanding and knowledge of PM ............................................................ 66

4.4.1 PM methodology or processes utilized ................................................................. 67 4.4.2 Explanation for the chosen methodology ............................................................. 67

4.4.3 Views on the current PMO (i.e. PMSU) within the department ........................... 68 4.4.4 Views on the functions or roles that the PMO undertakes.................................... 69

4.4.5 Definition of project success ................................................................................. 70 4.4.6 Factors hindering success in managing projects effectively ................................. 71 4.4.7 Required improvements to manage projects effectively ....................................... 72

Figure 4.13: Required improvements to manage projects effectively .................................. 73

4.4.8 Percentages of projects completed on time ........................................................... 73 Figure 4.14: Distribution of respondents regarding project completion ............................... 74 4.4.9 Support received from superiors to manage projects effectively .......................... 75

4.4.10 Project phases........................................................................................................ 75 4.4.11 The longest project managed within the department ............................................ 76

4.4.12 The challenges encountered when managing the longest running project ........... 76 4.5 Theme 3: Training .......................................................................................................... 77

4.5.1 Sufficient training in project management ............................................................ 78

4.5.2 PM courses undertaken ......................................................................................... 79 4.5.3 NQF level for the course ....................................................................................... 80

4.5.4 PM courses required to improve PM understanding and skills ............................ 80

4.5.5 PMO software program training ........................................................................... 80 4.5.6 Time interval to utilize PPO to update project details .......................................... 80 4.5.7 Encouragement by superior to obtain a PM certificate or degree ......................... 81

4.6 Theme 4: Major limitations of projects .......................................................................... 82 4.6.1 Contributions to project failure ............................................................................. 82

4.7 Theme 5: Job- related questions ..................................................................................... 83 4.7.1 Periods working with projects within the department .......................................... 83 4.7.2 What is liked about their job ................................................................................. 83

4.7.3 What is disliked about their job ............................................................................ 84 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 86

5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 86

5.2 Research findings ........................................................................................................... 87 5.2.1 Perceptions of project management within the department .................................. 87 5.2.2 Understanding and knowledge of project management ........................................ 88

viii

5.2.3 Training ................................................................................................................. 89 5.2.4 Reasons for project failure .................................................................................... 90 5.2.5 Job-related questions ............................................................................................. 92

5.3 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 93

5.3.1 Perceptions of project management within the department .................................. 94 5.3.2 Understanding and knowledge of project management ........................................ 94 5.3.3 Training ................................................................................................................. 97 5.3.4 Major reasons for project failure........................................................................... 97 5.3.5 Job related questions ............................................................................................. 99

5.4 Recommendations for future research............................................................................ 99 5.5 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 100

References ................................................................................................................................... 100 Appendix A- Letter of Informed Consent .................................................................................. 109 Appendix B- Questionnaire ....................................................................................................... 111 Appendix C- Research approval letter by GDoH ...................................................................... 115

ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AGSA Auditor General of South Africa

CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research

DoH Department of Health

GDoH Gauteng Department of Health

IDMS Infrastructure Delivery Management Systems

IM Infrastructure Management

MOA Memorandum of Agreement

NDH National Department of Health

PFMA Public Financial Management Act

PIM Project Implementation Manual

PM Project Management

PMBOK Project Management Body of Knowledge

PMO Project Management Office

PMP Project Management Professional

PMSU Project Management Support Unit

PPO Project Portfolio Office

R&D Research and Development

SAHNORM South African Hospital Norms

SLA Service Level Agreement

TOR Terms of Reference

x

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1: Distribution of respondents by type of employment

Figure 4.2: Distribution of respondents by number of years in the department

Figure 4.3: Distribution of respondents by salary level

Figure 4.4: Project Management development opportunities in the department

Figure 4.5: Responses regarding advanced PM training

Figure 4.6: Availability of resources for optimal performance

Figure 4.7: Major reasons for project changes

Figure 4.8: Distribution of responses regarding project management methodology

Figure 4.9: Distribution of respondents regarding PMO effectiveness

Figure 4.10: Distribution of respondents regarding PMO responsibilities

Figure 4.11: Distribution of respondents regarding project success

Figure 4.12: Distribution of respondents regarding factors hindering project success

Figure 4.13: Required improvements to manage projects effectively

Figure 4.14: Distribution of respondents regarding project completion

Figure 4.15: Support received from superiors

Figure 4.16: Time scale for the longest project

Figure 4.17: Sufficient training on PM

Figure 4.18: Time interval of utilizing PPO

xi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Overview of twenty PMO Functions

1

CHAPTER 1 SCOPE OF RESEARCH

1.1 Introduction

Project Management Office (PMO) is an emerging concept that has become a global phenomenon

impacting the structure of organizations all over the world (Valle, Silvia & Soares, 2008:1). The

PMO is described by Dai & Wells (2004:526) as an organizational entity established to assist

project managers, teams and various management levels on strategic matters and functional entities

throughout the organization in implementing project management principles, practices,

methodologies, tools and techniques.

According to Schwalbe (2006:29) many companies began creating PMOs in the 1990s to help

them handle the increasing number and complexity of projects. Dai & Wells (2004:526) also note

that PMOs first started becoming popular in 1994 and that their number has been growing

significantly since. Today many companies comply with the concept of the PMO, which supports

the implementation of project management expertise.

The increased recognition of Project Management (PM) as an effective means of completing large

and complex endeavours has led to a proliferation of projects within organizations. This has

intensified interest in developing PMOs to coordinate projects across organizations (Parth,

2002:1).

The Gauteng Department of Health (GDoH) has been experiencing the challenges of deteriorating

health infrastructure and has been struggling to deliver projects on time and within budget for a

number of years. Time and budgetary constraints demand that the Department has to manage

projects more effectively than ever before. To address the challenges that the GDoH is facing, the

National Department of Health introduced PMO as a way to boost efficiency, cut costs, and

improve on project delivery in terms of time and budget.

The GDoH manages different construction projects within the Infrastructure Directorate. These

include hospital revitalization programmes, maintenance projects and capital projects. These

projects need to be completed within budget, scope and time frames. Most projects within the

GDoH often take more time and resources than initially planned and fail to deliver desired

2

outcomes due to an ineffective PMO, poor planning and failure to adequately monitor and evaluate

project progress.

More and more companies now regard the PMO as mandatory for the survival of the organization.

The need for the GDoH to continuously improve and sustain service delivery is no longer a choice,

but is essential for effective and efficient project management. This can be achieved when the

PMO is effectively understood and properly utilized.

The purpose of this exploratory research is to determine the knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and

opinions of employees managing projects in the GDoH with regards to their work.

1.2 Background

Prior to the 1994 democratic elections, South Africa had a fragmented health system designed

along racial lines with a highly resourced system benefitting the white minority and a severely

under-resourced system serving the black majority. The new South African Constitution has

outlawed any form of racial discrimination and guarantees the principle of socio-economic rights,

including the right to health.

The health system for the public sector, however, still has underperforming institutions (hospitals,

clinics, etc.). This has been attributed to poor management, underfunding and deteriorating

infrastructure. To address the issue of deteriorating infrastructure, the National Department of

Health, through the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), conducted an audit on

health facilities between 1995 and 1996 (Health System Trust, 1997:120).

Following the 1995/96 health facilities audit, the Hospital Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Grant

was implemented in 1998. When reassessed after two years, it was clear that the programme was

focused on resolving capital backlog (rehabilitation of buildings) rather than achieving the planned

transformation reflected in government policy. In an attempt to solve the problems, a more

comprehensive approach of a hospital revitalisation programme was adopted that would be a

nationally funded programme essentially becoming the focus of the conditional grant. The

revitalisation programme is deliberately holistic in approach, recognising that simply dealing with

3

parts of the system will not achieve the objective of the revitalisation of public hospitals DoH

(2011-12:6).

The Hospital Revitalization Programme manages projects through the Department of Health

Project Implementation Manual (PIM 2011-12), developed by the National Department of Health

as guidance for the management and implementation of the Hospital Revitalization Programme.

The PIM is expected to assist provinces to develop project business cases, briefs and operational

narratives, initial project implementation plans and an annual project implementation plan (DoH

2011-12:4).

Hospital Revitalization seeks to provide good quality health facilities that are fit for purpose. The

aim of the Infrastructure Management Directorate is to ensure that the building is in a good

functional state for utilization and that it meets good practice principles, acceptable standards of

function and is based on the latest technological requirements. As stated in the DoH (2011-12:32),

the implementation of the infrastructure is still guided by legislation and regulations such as the

South African Hospital Norms (SAHNORM), National Building Regulations as well as

Occupational Health and Safety regulations.

Revitalization of hospitals includes rationalizing and improving the condition and quality of

hospital buildings and design; rationalizing and improving the condition of hospital equipment;

decentralization of hospital management; organizational development and strengthening

management capacity; continuous quality improvement and improving the status of Emergency

Medical Services (DoH 2011-12:7).

Capital and maintenance programmes include the upgrading, rehabilitation and maintenance of

community health centres and clinics, as well as district, provincial, specialized and academic

hospitals and other health-related facilities. This programme is implemented through the strategic

goal of operating optimally, while also including the provision of support in strengthening the

district health system. Projects are managed from the initial to the final stage by the Infrastructure

Management (IM) directorate; it could be argued, therefore, that the PMO is essential in managing

these projects more effectively and efficiently.

4

The most popular purposes of the establishment of a PMO, according to Dinsmore & Cooke-

Davies (2006:77), are to standardize project management methodology, improve information flow,

and administer controlled systems over the projects run concurrently. Heldman (2002:27) also

observes that the most common reason a company creates a PMO is to establish and maintain

procedures and standards for project management methodologies. Crawford (2011:38) too,

observes that the PMO is responsible for developing and maintaining processes and methodologies

pertaining to the management of projects. The PMO also incorporates lessons learned from

projects nearing completion into the PM methodology. According to PMI (2008:443), the

responsibilities of the PMO range from providing project management support functions to

actually being responsible for the direct management of a project.

The promotion and effective utilization of the PMO will harness the power of cross-functional

teams, provide ownership and accountability for critical efforts, and provide guidance on best

practices and standards to projects managed by the GDoH.

1.3 Literature review

The purpose of this literature review is to provide an understanding of the PMO conceptual

framework and to identify its strengths and limitations as far as providing acceptable answers to

challenges that the GDoH is currently facing.

The PMO is described by Dai & Wells (2004:2) as an organizational entity established to assist

project managers, teams and various management levels on strategic matters and functional entities

throughout the organization in implementing project management principles, practices,

methodologies, tools and techniques.

The requirement for the PMO emanates from the mounting number and complexity of projects

that need to be managed throughout the Department. According to PMI (2008:443) the

responsibilities of the PMO range from providing PM support functions to the actual direct

management of a project. Heldman (2002:27) emphasizes that the PMO establishes and maintains

procedures for PM methodologies.

According to Heldman & Mangano (2009:7), a PMO provides a centralized organizational unit

that oversees the management of projects and programs throughout the organization. They further

5

state that the PMO is responsible for managing resources, the objectives of projects, and measuring

project performance. Crawford (2011:28) also supports the view that the PMO facilitates cross-

functional team management.

Hill (2004:1) further explains that the PMO assists the project managers and organizations to

understand and apply the professional practices of PM. Aubry, Hobbs and Thuillier (2007:2) state

that the PMO improves PM performance and effectiveness by generating strategic alignment and

collaboration between projects.

Verzuh (2003:372) believes that a formally established PMO sends a powerful message to the

organization that management is committed to achieving superior performance in the execution of

projects. With reference to the opinions above, it is clear that effective utilization of the PMO

within GDoH has the potential to deliver value and improve project delivery within time, cost,

scope and quality.

1.4 Problem statement

As indicated previously, GDoH manages projects within the Infrastructure Directorate, which

include hospital revitalization programmes and maintenance and capital projects. These projects

are expected to be completed within budget, scope and time frame.

The Department is currently facing the challenge of projects not being completed within time,

scope or budget, which negatively affects the Department. The failure to deliver these projects to

hospitals on time has contributed to some of the service delivery protests that have been witnessed

around the country. Some of these projects can be lifesavers, such as the building of new clinics;

hence any delays in delivering these projects can put people’s lives at risk. Currently within the

GDoH there are no clearly defined processes as to how to manage strategic projects from beginning

to end, resulting in projects being approved that have no strategic benefit to the GDoH.

According to the audit results from AGSA (2010:6), the Gauteng Department of Health, together

with the Gauteng Department of Infrastructure Development, has failed to effectively monitor and

evaluate the progress of projects to ensure timely, cost-effective and high quality projects on

selected projects that were audited. None of the projects selected for auditing were completed

6

within expected time frames. With some of the projects, the expected completion date was

exceeded by up to forty one months.

The AGSA (2010:7) audit report also revealed that the failure to effectively monitor and evaluate

the progress of the projects was largely caused by the lack of a proper PMO in place to provide an

overall view of project status. Another problem that the GDoH is facing is due to changes in

original scope, which result in delays during the planning stage of the project, as reported in the

audit report AGSA (2010:4). The AGSA (2010:7) report also highlighted PM processes not being

utilized and deployed effectively within the organization as another challenge facing the

department.

The GDoH (2011:139) annual performance plan identifies the challenges faced by health

infrastructure as being: poor planning processes; scope changes by the end-user; failure to

adequately monitor progress of the projects; the appointment of inexperienced or unqualified

contractors; cash flow challenges experienced by the Department; and serious shortage of

experienced project managers within the Department.

1.5 Aim of the study

The incapacity of the Infrastructure Directorate to monitor and evaluate projects is largely

attributed to having insufficient controls in place to provide a consolidated view of the status of

the projects. Currently, performance assessment is based on the submission of quarterly

performance reports to the National Department of Health and Treasury. There is no measurement

of individual project performance in place. This results in underperforming projects not being

identified promptly and poor performance management of projects out of line with departmental

objectives.

The overall aim of this exploratory and descriptive study is to explore ways to improve the

implementation of projects within the GDoH, with a view to proposing a PMO framework model

for the GDoH that will allow for a more effective project implementation practice.

7

1.6 Objectives of the study

The specific objectives of this study are as follows:

1. To determine the perceptions, understanding and knowledge of employees managing the

infrastructure related projects within the IM directorate of GDoH in order to uncover the

factors contributing to project failures within GDoH.

2. To determine the training needs and types of training required by employees managing the

infrastructure related projects.

1.7 Research methodology

A case study method of research design has been selected for this research, since it emphasizes the

understanding of processes alongside their organizational contexts (Cassell & Symon, 2004:324).

The research will follow a mixed, (i.e. qualitative and quantitative), methodological approach to

establish and determine the major contributors to the current state of project failures within the

GDoH. The researcher will collect primary data from the employees who are currently managing

projects and working within the infrastructure directorate by means of interviews.

1.7.1 Sampling method

According to Wegner (2007:213) there are two basic methods of sampling, namely, probability

samples (where the probability of selection of each respondent is known) and non-probability

samples (where the probability of selection of each respondent is unknown). Wegner further

explains that the non - probability based sampling method consists of four types: convenience

sampling, judgment sampling, quota sampling and snowball sampling.

The study followed a non-probability sampling method whereby employees managing projects

were selected to participate in the study. Within the non-probability method, purposive sampling

was selected as the most suitable method as this sampling allowed the researcher to select cases

that enabled her to provide the information that would best meet the objectives of the study. As

stated by Babbie (2011:207), when using purposive sampling it is sometimes appropriate to select

a sample on the basis of knowledge of a population, its elements, and the purpose of the study.

8

1.7.2 Data collection

The data collection method is concerned with the way in which data is collected. To ensure that

the result of any research is credible, the data collected needs to be consistent and accurate. Houser

(2008:271) emphasizes the fact that effective data collection must be designed to be clear,

unbiased, reliable, and valid to answer the research question.

The researcher decided on primary data collection. According to Houser (2008:272), primary data

collection entails the data being collected directly from the subjects by the researcher or a trained

data collector. The researcher selected primary data collection as it provides an opportunity to

verify the accuracy of the data while the subject matter is still available.

The fieldwork for the research was conducted between 25th February 2014 and 10th March 2014

where data was collected by means of interviews with open-ended and closed ended questions.

These questions are explained by Johnson & Christensen (2010:169) as follows:

Open ended question – the participant does not have a predetermined form of answering the

question and provides any answer. It is used mainly when the researcher would like to provide the

participant with an opportunity to provide alternative responses or would like to use the exact

words of participants.

Closed ended question – the researcher provides predetermined responses for the participant to

choose from. The participant selects from a limited number of responses or responds by rating on

a scale. There are three main types of closed questions, forced-choice questions where the

participant chooses a single response from the list, dichotomous questions which provide only two

choices and scales on which the participants are expected to rank their responses in a particular

order. The following process was followed:

o The respondents were identified. The selection criterion used was the use of employees

working with infrastructure projects within the infrastructure management directorate

of the GDoH.

o Questionnaires were initially distributed by email and then in person to the

participants.

9

o Face to face interviews were then conducted with the participants at a mutually agreed

upon time.

o Notes taken were immediately clarified with the participants after the interview.

Data was collected from a sample size of nineteen purposively selected employees working with

infrastructure projects within IM directorate. The study made use of a descriptive design, as its

aim was to find out more about a particular phenomenon.

1.7.3 Data analysis

Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed involving interviews conducted and review of

questionnaires. Data from the interviews were analyzed following the Morse cognitive process of

analyzing qualitative data. The qualitative analyzing method encompasses a wide range of

philosophical positions, methodological strategies, and analytical procedures.

According to (Morse 1994:25) four cognitive processes appear integral to all qualitative methods

when analyzing qualitative data. These four cognitive processes occur more or less sequentially

because the researcher must reach a reasonable level of comprehension before being able to

synthesize (to make generalized statements about the participants).

The four cognitive processes are as follows:

o Comprehending the phenomenon under study;

o Synthesizing a portrait of the phenomenon that accounts for relations and linkages

within its aspects;

o Theorizing about how and why these relations appear as they do; and

o Re-contextualising, or putting the new knowledge about phenomena and relations back

into the context of how others have articulated the evolving knowledge.

Although the form that each of the above steps takes might vary according to such factors as the

research question, the researcher's orientation to the inquiry, or the setting and context of the study,

10

the set of steps above helps to depict a series of intellectual processes by which data in its raw form

is considered, examined, and reformulated to become a research product.

1.7.4 Ethical considerations

According to Cooper & Schindler (2003:120) ethics refers to norms or standards of behaviour that

guide moral choices about our behaviour and our relationships with others. Ethics in research

design are aimed at protecting the respondents and participants. In light of this, the following

ethical guidelines that are applicable with regard to this research were put in place for the purpose

of the study:

o Permission was obtained from the GDoH to conduct the research and to interview the

project managers (See Appendix C);

o Informed consent - Study participants were told in advance about the nature of the study

and informed that participation was entirely voluntary;

o Security - The identity and responses of all participants were protected during the period

the collected data sheets were stored in a secure place;

o Confidentiality was maintained on all information obtained during the course of this study

and throughout the research; and

o Honesty - The findings of the research were reported in complete honesty by ensuring that

data was not manipulated to fit outcomes

1.8 Definition and scope of the study

This research study comprised an in-depth investigation of the importance of a PM and PMO and

the strategic role that they can contribute to the improvement and sustainability of project delivery

within the GDoH.

11

1.9 Limitation of the study

The limitation of this study is based on the following:

o The researcher only interviewed infrastructure management directorate employees dealing

with infrastructure projects within the GDoH with the exception of higher level

management who are currently the decision makers in terms of approving project related

matters; and

o The research only covers infrastructure construction related projects and excludes any other

types of projects within the GDoH.

1.10 Outline of the study

Chapter 1

This introductory chapter briefly introduces the concept of the PMO and provides the rationale for

the use of the PMO at the GDoH. The research problem, aim and objectives of the study, a

summary of the literature review and research methodology are also covered in this chapter.

Chapter 2

This chapter presents the literature review, which provides an overview of the PMO, the

requirements of the PMO and its implementation. This chapter also explores the various aspects

of the project and PM with a view to determine the factors that contribute to project failure.

Chapter 3

In this chapter, the research methodology used in the study is presented and discussed: The

following areas are covered: the qualitative, quantitative and descriptive research design; case

study method; sampling technique; data collection method; data analysis; ethical considerations

and limitation of the study.

This chapter reflects on the research methodology paradigm for this study, research design and

measuring instruments. It also addresses the population and sampling size that will be used.

12

Chapter 4

This chapter deals with the presentation and analysis of data collected from the participants with

key informants, and briefly interprets the main findings of the study.

Chapter 5

This chapter presents the conclusions of the study and makes recommendations regarding PMO

methodology that can be used as the strategic tool to improve and sustain project delivery in the

GDoH.

13

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

PM has been recognized as a profession since the early 1980s, resulting in a growing need for

dedicated project managers. Today, PM is one of the most rapidly growing professions around the

world, and the demand for project managers and project staff is increasing with every passing day.

This is so because the complexities and risks of projects are increasing, and the stakes and money

involved is getting higher. To cater for risks and to minimize the chances of project failure, one

needs a PM office with well trained staff to manage the project and to ensure its success.

The purpose of this literature review is to provide an understanding of the PMO conceptual

framework; to identify its strengths and limitations; and to provide acceptable answers to the issues

under consideration. Theories are drawn from the Project Management Body of Knowledge

(PMBOK) work of the Project Management Institute (PMI), PM journals and other leading

strategy, planning, and organizational change management research institutes.

2.2 Project and project management background

While project management (PM) is often thought of as a modern discipline, its major concepts

have their roots in the late nineteenth century.

PM, in its modern form, began to take root a few decades ago. Starting in the early 1960s,

businesses and other organizations began to see the benefit of organizing work around projects.

This project-centric view of the organization evolved further as organizations began to understand

the critical need for their employees to communicate and collaborate while integrating their work

across multiple departments and professions and, in some cases, whole industries. (Morris & Pinto,

2007:271)

Projects are an essential part of human history and the profession of PM is growing at a very rapid

pace (Richman 2012:6). The success of the project can also be based on the way in which the

project came into existence. Richman (2012:5) points out that some projects originate from myth,

some in wartime, some from faith, and others from science and commerce. Some projects are

monumental, and others are more modest.

14

Newell (2002:1) also views PM as speedily becoming the method of management for more and

more industries. The reasons for this is that PM works, and people are discovering that it is the

most comprehensive method of management available today. Verzuh (2005:16) believes that the

popularity of PM in recent years owes much to its ability to transcend boundaries.

PM emanates from the need to plan and coordinate large, complex, multi-functional efforts.

Heldman (2007:6) describes PM as bringing together a set of tools and techniques performed by

people to describe, organize, and monitor the work of project activities.

According to Howes (2001:11) projects should be established with a clearly documented purpose.

Even if the project is an exploratory research effort there should be specific problems or issues that

the project seeks to address. The goal of a project should always be to achieve some beneficial

change within the organization. Richman (2012:19) advocates the idea that projects should be seen

as investments and should produce beneficial results, which may be defined in a variety of ways.

At the most basic level, a project should actually respond to a need and a solution to a problem

(Heerkens, 2002:10).

Heerkens (2002:8) describes PM as an art and a science as it relates to the fact that projects are

really about people getting things done and it requires a keen knowledge of human behavior

coupled with the ability to skilfully apply appropriate interpersonal skills.

2.2.1 Definition of a project

It is imperative that we start by providing the definition of a project. The PMI (2008:5) defines a

project as a temporary endeavour to create a unique product, services, or result.

The definition of a project was further extended by Pickens & Solak (2005:19) to include the

process through which an enterprise applies resources to execute a set of activities designed to

accomplish some objective, usually the implementation or enhancement of a business process, to

achieve a defined business goal.

The above PMI (2008:5) definition highlights the three major characteristics of the project which

can be elaborated further:

15

o It is temporary – This means that the projects are not a permanent feature. Regardless of

the length of the project, it has a starting date and ending date. (It is important to mention

too that the completion date of a project must be specified in order for it to be characterized

as a project);

o It is unique – No matter how similar projects may be, there are differences which make

them unique; and

o It must have a deliverable – All the projects must have a deliverable, which means that it

must have a target; an objective that has to be achieved. The deliverable can be a specified

product, a service or a result. The project is declared closed once all the objectives of the

project have been accomplished or once it is felt that the deliverables of the project are no

longer necessary.

2.2.2 Definition of project management

PMI (2008:6) defines project management as the application of knowledge, skills, tools and

vendor/contractor performance techniques to project activities to meet project requirements.

Project management is regarded by Kerzner (2001:4) as the management of activities that

incorporate planning, organizing, directing, and controlling of company resources for a relatively

short term objective that has been established to complete specific goals and objectives.

2.2.3 Difference between Projects and Operations

Turner (1993) in Camilleri (2011:5) highlights four major differences between a project and

operations:

o The operation environment is relatively stable, whereas the project environment is very

flexible and may change from day to day;

o Operations become increasingly more efficient through a variety of work study methods.

However, it is more difficult to attain efficiency gains with projects because being unique

they have no precedent. Hence, the project team must be effective in achieving its

objectives;

16

o Operations personnel have predefined roles, whereas the role of project teams are

constantly changing and at times require individuals to fulfil several roles concurrently;

and

o Projects are prone to considerable risk depending on their level of uniqueness. Having no

precedent the project team is constantly uncertain as to whether the targets will be achieved.

Once operational processes have been functioning for some time delivery targets are

predictable.

2.3 Project management methodologies

Projects of any size can be managed using PM methodology. PM methodologies are the various

ways in which projects are initiated, planned, and executed to completion. For different industries

and distinctive types of projects, there are specific methodologies that can be used. The success of

a project depends on choosing a good PM methodology at the beginning.

Whereas Crawford (2011:105) describes methodology as a body of practices, procedures, and rules

used by those who work within a discipline or engage in an inquiry, Charvat (2003:3), describes it

as a set of guidelines or principles that can be tailored and applied to a specific situation. In a

project environment, these guidelines might be a list of things to do or a set of working methods.

Hill (2004:1) believes that a PM methodology provides a standard, repeatable process to guide

project performance from concept to completion. He further states that the PM methodology

introduces and applies generally accepted PM techniques and practices that fit within the culture

and business needs of the relevant organization. PM methodology includes identification of the

roles and responsibilities associated with each process step, as well as specification of the input

and output for the desired sequence of process steps.

2.3.1 Project life cycle

The project life cycle refers to a logical sequence of activities to accomplish the project’s goals or

objectives (Velpuri & Das, 2011:25). Newell (2002:396) defines project life cycle as a collection

of generally sequential project phases whose name and number are determined by the control needs

within the organization or organizations involved in the project. Project activities are grouped into

17

phases so that the project manager and the core team can efficiently plan and organize resources

for each activity.

All projects go through a life cycle that starts at the initial project inception through a project shut

down. PMI (2004:38) describes the project life cycle in terms of PM process groups; these are

categorized into five as follows:

o Initiating defines and authorizes the project or a project phase;

o Planning defines and refines objectives, and sets the course of action required to attain the

objectives and scope that the project was undertaken to address;

o Executing integrates people and other resources to carry out the PM plan for the project;

o Monitoring and Controlling regularly measures and monitors progress to identify

variances from the PM plan so that corrective action can be taken when necessary to meet

project objectives; and

o Closing formalizes acceptance of the product, service or result and brings the project or a

project phase to an orderly end.

Each of these groups has a number of interrelated processes that must be carried out for the success

of a project.

2.3.2 Project management knowledge areas

PM knowledge and skills can help you complete projects on schedule, within budget, and in full

accordance with project specifications. At the same time, they help achieve the other goals within

the organization, such as productivity, quality, and cost-effectiveness. By definition, every project

is unique and has a specific set of tasks aligned to meet requirements, (Richman, 2012:1).

The PM knowledge areas describe PM knowledge and practice in terms of the various component

processes (PMI, 2008:67). These processes have been organized into nine knowledge areas, as

described below.

18

o Project Integration Management process coordinates the other areas to work together

throughout the project;

o Project Scope Management is a set of processes used to ensure that the project includes

all the requirements, and no new requirements are added in a way that could harm the

project;

o Time Management involves processes to ensure that the project is completed on schedule;

o Cost Management involves processes to ensure that the project is completed within

budget.

o Quality Management ensures that the project meets its requirements, or do what it is

expected to do;

o Human Resource Management includes all the processes used to develop, manage and

put the project team together;

o Communication Management determines what information is needed, how that

information will be sent and managed, and how project performance will be reported;

o Risk Management involves identifying, managing, and controlling risk on a project; and

o Procurement Management is the group of processes used to acquire the materials and

services needed to complete the project.

2.4 The role of a project manager

The project manager according to Richman (2011:42), is the person assigned to manage a project

and is accountable to meet its approved objectives, including project scope, budget, and schedule.

The project manager is responsible for achieving project results; hence he/she must ensure that

he/she understands the project scope so that he can adequately convey the project’s overall goal

and specific objectives. The project managers must therefore do everything required to make the

project successful as they are responsible for accomplishing the project objectives. This view is

also supported by Schwalbe (2006:7) who states that project managers must not only strive to meet

specific scope, time, cost and quality goals of the projects, but also facilitate the entire process to

19

meet the needs and expectations of people involved in or affected by project activities. As the

project manager is also the steward of the project scope, Richman (2011:17) recommends that even

if he or she inherits a project where the project has been predefined and there is little flexibility,

the first obligation should be to validate the project goals, objectives, and scope.

The project manager is responsible for coordinating and integrating activities across multiple

functional lines. In order to do this, the project manager needs strong communicative and

interpersonal skills, must become familiar with the operations of each line organization, and should

have general knowledge about the technology being used (unless he/she is managing R&D

activities, in which case a command of technology is more important than a general understanding)

(Kenzer, 2001:19).

The responsibilities of project manager are viewed by Heerkens (2002:30) as incorporating four

broad areas:

o The project - you are expected to meet the cost, schedule, functionality, and quality

targets. You must run the project efficiently. You must act as an arbiter of the differing

objectives that will inevitably exist within and across the team;

o Your organization - the project you are managing is expected to provide a tangible return

for your organization. You are expected to adhere to the policies throughout the

organization, act within the limits of your authority, and generally take decisions that are

in the best interests of the organization. Proactively keeping organizational management

informed of project status as well as forecasting whether things will go well or badly is one

of your most important responsibilities as a project manager for your organization;

o Your team - Responsibilities you have to your team include ensuring that it is properly

informed throughout the project, providing constructive feedback when warranted, and

giving positive, fair, and appropriate recognition for performance; and

o Yourself - The responsibility for your personal growth and development falls largely upon

yourself.

20

2.5 Current challenges for managing projects

Many projects fail for a variety of reasons. Understanding those reasons is important for the

success of one’s own projects (Jack Phillips, Brantley, & Pulliam Phillips, 2012:5). These authors

identify the reasons for projects failing as:

2.5.1 Lack of business alignment

Too many projects are ‘‘fuzzy’’ when it comes to the alignment with specific business measures.

This seems a little odd when we consider that most projects start with a business initiative. While

that may be the case, the alignment is sometimes very nonspecific (Phillips et al, 2012:5).

2.5.2 Project participants are not engaged

The project team must be fully engaged. The project team consists of individuals who must make

the project work. They must clearly understand the need and reason for the project. Lack of

explanation or lack of persuasion can create an adverse reaction to the project, dooming it to

failure. It is important to ensure that expectations are clearly outlined, and engagement occurs early

(Phillips et al, 2012:5).

2.5.3 Lack of accountability within the project

Too often, project participants and other stakeholders do not feel that success is their responsibility.

If no one accepts accountability, then no one is accountable, and the project will fail as a

consequence. Ideally, every person involved must understand his or her responsibility, clearly

defined with expectations and very specific objectives. It should be apparent to the project manager

and other stakeholders that the project team members are meeting their goals, standards, and

expectations. Without that commitment, the project could easily drift and ultimately fail (Phillips

et al, 2012:5).

2.5.4 Problems with data collection

Some projects fail because the appropriate data could not be collected, was not available, or there

was no specific responsibility to collect the data. Data collection will always be an issue. At the

impact level, business data should be readily available in the system and records of an organization.

Additional data collection is needed, some at the project level, and some at the department or work

21

unit level where the project is being implemented. Data collection must be carefully planned. If a

particular data set is not readily available, it should be developed from the specifications of those

who must collect and present it to the PM team (Phillips et al, 2012:5).

2.5.5 Lack of involvement with key managers

Outside the project team, there are other managers that support the project and make it successful.

Sometimes these are the managers of the participants involved in the project. At other times, in the

area where the project is being implemented. In either case, their support and reinforcement is

essential to the project’s success. These managers must be identified early, and steps must be taken

to ensure that they live up to their roles and responsibilities, and provide the proper reinforcement

and support needed to make the project successful (Phillips et al, 2012:5).

2.6 Project Management Office background

In today's complex business environment, new projects are constantly being developed as

organizations seek new ways to reduce costs, improve processes, increase productivity, and build

their bottom line. Managing these diverse projects along with their people, resources, technology,

and communication is a difficult endeavour of which the risk of failure is often far too high. An

effective solution, created to establish a more centralized management structure for large groups

of projects, is the Project Management Office (PMO).

Many companies began creating the PMO in the 1990s to help them handle the increasing number

and complexity of projects (Schwalbe 2006:29). PMOs first started to become popular in 1994 and

their number has been growing significantly since (Dai & Wells 2004:526). Nowadays, many

companies comply with the concept of PMO which supports the implementation of the PM know-

how.

PMO is a professional entity that defines and maintains the standards of processes related to PM,

within the organization (Shai & Vitner, 2009:37). They further highlight the fact that the PMO

strives to standardize and introduce effectiveness in the execution of projects as it is the source of

established procedures, documentation, guidance and metrics within the practice of PM.

22

PMI (2008:443) defines the PMO as an organizational body or entity assigned various

responsibilities related to the centralized and coordinated management of those projects under its

domain. The PMO is described by Dai & Wells (2004:2) as ‘an organizational entity established

to assist project managers, teams and various management levels on strategic matters and

functional entities throughout the organization in implementing PM principles, practices,

methodologies, tools and techniques.

2.7 PMO methodology

The PMO has responsibility for overseeing the initial and ongoing design and development of PM

methodology (Hill, 2008:48). As part of this effort, the PMO must determine how often and when

any updates or revisions of PM methodology will be pursued. The PMO must then plan and

conduct methodology modification as per the change and improvement recommendations received

from project managers, project team members, other stakeholders in the PM environment and the

end users of PM methodology.

Methodology is the framework and materials that allow the PMO to conduct its work as project

manager to successfully deliver projects on time, within scope and within budget. These materials

include process documents, best practices, guidelines, policies, and tools and templates. An

effective PMO should develop processes for proactively evaluating the validity and efficiency of

all its processes. The PMO should also have procedures for enacting changes to its processes and

communicating these changes to stakeholders (Johnson, Joyner & Martin 2002:5).

A process can be defined as a repeatable series of actions, changes, or functions with a goal of

bringing about a result. Johnson et al. (2002:1) believe that the key to success of any PMO

implementation effort is effective management of the numerous processes that weave through the

life cycles of various projects. They further point out that the PM processes provide the

fundamental building blocks for establishing procedures and training. The methods used during

the development of the processes can help reduce the organization’s resistance to change. The

tools and techniques can increase efficiency of the PMO implementation and ultimately reduce the

cost of building and maintaining its processes.

23

2.8 Types of PMOs

A PMO, according to Crawford (2011:31), may exist at any one of three levels within the

organization, or may exist at all three levels concurrently as follows:

Type 1: The Project Control Office - the project control office is defined as an entity that

typically handles substantial, complicated single projects, the project is normally so substantial

and so complex that it requires multiple schedules, which may need to integrate into an overall

program schedule (such as a Euro conversion project or the creation of a new type of airplane).

Type 2: Business Unit PMO - in this type, a PMO may still be required to provide support for

individual projects, but its challenge is to integrate a large number of multiple projects of varying

sizes, from small, short-term initiatives that require few resources to those requiring dozens of

resources, large dollar amounts, and complex integration of technologies. The value of this type

of PMO is that it begins to integrate resources at an organizational level, and it’s at the

organizational level that resource control begins to play many high-value roles in the payback of

a PM system.

Type 3: Strategic PMO - The Strategic PMO operates at the appropriate level to facilitate the

selection, prioritization, and management of projects that are of corporate interest. It ensures the

PM methodology is tailored towards the needs of the entire organization, not just one department

or business unit.

2.9 Functions of the PMO

The top ten PMO functions according to Pmsolution (2012:9) are as follows:

2.9.1 PM methodology, standards implementation/management

The most popular purposes of PMOs, according to Dinsmore & Cooke-Davies (2006:77), are to

standardize PM methodology, improve information flow, and administer controlled systems.

Heldman (2002:27) believes that the most common reason a company starts a PMO is to establish

and maintain procedures and standards for PM methodologies.

Crawford (2011:38) describes the PMO as being responsible for developing and maintaining

processes and methodologies pertaining to the management of projects. The project office also

24

incorporates lessons learned on projects nearing completion into the PM methodology. The

responsibilities of the PMO range from providing PM support functions to actually being

responsible for the direct management of a project (PMI 2008:443).

2.9.2 Project policies, procedures, template implementation/management

The PMO is seen by Desta, Root & Diederichs (2006:1) as an organizational entity entrusted to

instil PM practices and culture within an organization and is portrayed as the focal point of PM

practices and the locus where an organization’s knowledge management and PM practices

intersect.

According to Crawford (2011:34), the PMO provides methodology, orientation, standardization

of processes not only for PM, but also for strategic management of portfolios, programs and

project-related processes through data collection and analysis, documentation and reporting,

flowcharts and diagrams, templates and forms, spreadsheets and checklists, standard clauses and

contracts, procurement and audits, communications and collaborative environments, organizing

the decision-making process. These elements are applied, or not, to all projects in the

organizations. Crawford (2011:38) describes the PMO as a central library for these standards.

2.9.3 Project/program monitoring and controlling

As the project is executed, monitoring and control activities are continuously undertaken to ensure

that the project is on track. Corrective and preventive actions are implemented to ensure that the

project stays within the plan. Some of the tools and knowledge used to monitor and control projects

are change control, earned value management plus monitoring and controlling risks (Phillips et al,

2012:21).

2.9.4 PM coaching and mentoring

Mentoring is the most effective way to bring new project managers up to speed quickly. Once the

basics are learned through training, PM expertise is gained from on-the-job training. Experience,

under the tutelage of a mentor, is the foremost teacher and the finest way to bring new project

managers up to speed in a hurry (Crawford, 2002:250).

25

According to Rad & Levin (2007:2), mentoring occurs when the team has the right number of staff

members, but the team members do not possess the appropriate PM competency in order to carry

out their respective duties. In such circumstances, the PMO assigns a seasoned professional to

assist, in working with those team members who have shortfalls in their competencies.

Consulting is described by Rad & Levin (2007:2) as the mode of assistance of choice when the

team members feel comfortable performing most of their assigned duties, although they would like

the comfort of validating the correctness of analysis, and the viability of assumptions with a

seasoned professional. Another mode of consultancy would be where the PMO staff members

periodically evaluate the work of team members through a shadowing work arrangement. Again,

one would hope that, as the team members become more competent and as the team’s comfort

level is elevated, the consultancy incidents will be minimized.

2.9.5 Project/program initiation

According to Phillips et al. (2012:16), initiating is the first step in the PM process. They further

explain that the project selection takes place in this stage. Project selection is an upper-level

business decision where high-level analysis determines a project’s viability and its ties to the

organization’s overall strategy. The project description, justification, scope, deliverables, duration,

resources, financials, and risks are identified at this level.

2.9.6 Governance processes implementation/management

According to Hill (2008:153), the PMO is responsible for ensuring that the preferred business

practices of the relevant organization are properly conveyed for use within the PM environment.

The "project governance" function provides the authority and guidance necessary to enable the

PMO and other project stakeholders to pursue PM objectives in a manner that is consistent with

business interests and operating standards. It also provides for the ongoing examination of how

well authority and guidance are being applied within the PM environment, where the PMO serves

the dual roles of examiner and examinee.

26

This "project governance" function enables the PMO to:

o Establish its authority to develop, implement, and manage PM practices and associated

business interests within the relevant organization;

o Introduce and apply organizational and business standards, policies, and directives within

the PM environment;

o Confer authority and responsibility for project performance to project managers;

o Facilitate executive and senior management involvement in PM; and

o Convene management and technical advisory boards, councils, and committees to

collaborate decisions and provide guidance relevant to the project environment.

Hill (2008) further elaborates by saying that the PMO ensures that PM and PMO functions are

conducted within accepted boundaries of established business practices and guidance. At the same

time, it translates business requirements and develops methods for conducting business within the

PM environment. Furthermore, it can also contribute to PM practices to influence how business

objectives are achieved outside the PM environment. This is the two-way nature of the PMO's

"project governance" function.

The PMO provides better corporate results optimizing efforts and resources between projects,

sharing risks and contingencies, accelerating schedules, reducing costs, optimizing project cash

flows and the overall cash flow, reducing and managing conflict, enhancing communication,

documentation, applying best practices, standardization, templates, tools, techniques and software.

In this way the PMO drives the governance development process (Valle et al. 2008:6).

2.9.7 Multi-project coordination

Valle et al. (2008:6) believe that the PMO establishes mechanisms for project control that allow

the integrated planning and control of all projects, summarizing standard information through

effective communications in order to achieve the strategic goals within the organization, aligned

to corporate strategic planning. PMI (2004:17) Book of Knowledge, supports the view as they

27

believe that the PMO focuses on the coordinated planning, prioritization and execution of projects

and sub-projects that are tied into the parent organization’s or client’s overall business objectives.

2.9.8 Project/program closing

Projects must be formally closed. Phillips et al. (2012:22) identify three tools or processes which

are used to close projects:

o Contract Closure - Contracts must be closed out in order to complete the project. There

are many legal ramifications involved in a contract closeout, and it is imperative to protect

the organization’s interest in this process. A contracting specialist or legal counsel can

provide guidance throughout the contract closing process and its ramifications;

o Lessons Learned - This provides the opportunity to establish best practices for your

organization. Many organizations resort to finger-pointing when things don’t go so well. It

is natural for employees to go into survival mode when this occurs, and it can create a

condition where project problems are hidden. This culture can be avoided by creating and

encouraging an open environment where problems can be openly addressed and analyzed

for solutions. This will allow for prevention or reduction of these types of events occurring

in the future; and

o Project Closeout - Closeout involves recording and archiving the project documentation.

The project accomplishments will be a reference for other project managers as they

undertake new projects of their own. Archived project plans become the foundation for

developing an organization’s maturity in PM. Lessons learned from past projects are

contained in these project plans, and prospective project baselines can be established based

on project performance. Project variance and forthcoming estimated improvements can

also be implemented.

2.9.9 Project performance monitoring/controlling

Project performance is sometimes evaluated using success criteria. Project success is measured by

business objectives, while PM success is evaluated instead by traditional criteria such as respect

for costs, schedule and quality (Aubry et al., 2007:331).

28

Aubry et al. (2007:2) state that the PMO improves PM performance and effectiveness by

generating strategic alignment and collaboration of the relations between projects. Heldman &

Mangano (2009:7) support this by alluding to the PMO as being responsible for managing the

objectives of projects and resources plus measuring project performances.

Verzuh (2003:372) argues that a formerly established PMO sends a powerful message to the

organization that management is committed to achieving superior performance during the

execution of projects.

2.9.10 Dashboard/scorecard implementation/management

Project support also maintains issue tracking. Much like change control issues, action item tracking

can be substantial depending upon the number of projects and the number of people within the

organization. Project progress reports roll up into summaries for the appropriate functional areas

which are further summarized for suitable levels within the matrix organization, and so on up to

managerial management. Thus, the project support organization is accountable for the managerial

dashboard (Crawford 2011:35). In other words, they are accountable for executive reporting, but

the dashboard typically is focused on keeping a reporting structure that is confined to one page.

Executives should be able to look at one page of information and see that projects on the whole

are on schedule or not, and if they are not, where they can go to find the issues that are creating

problems for the projects. Therefore, the executive dashboard might be an electronic or paper

report, but, in all cases, it needs to be a summary type: succinct, precise, and focused specifically

on the information that executives need for decision making.

The balanced scorecard helps companies clarify what their strategy is and ask the right questions

(and take the right measurements) to determine if it has been implemented. Portfolio management

and strategic PM are attempting to eliminate that disconnect between strategy and projects, while

the balanced scorecard provides a structured framework for that purpose (Crawford 2002:233).

29

2.10 Challenges of PMO

In order to analyze and understand the challenges of PMO adequately, it does not suffice to simply

identify them without looking at a way to avoid them and taking action on them immediately.

Letavec & Bolles (2010:191) identify the killers of the PMO and how they can be avoided:

2.10.1 Poor project execution

The biggest killer of PMO value according to (Letavec & Bolles, 2010:191) is poor execution of

a critical project. This can quickly destroy the perceived value to the organization. Make sure that

proper attention is spent on critical projects, and wherever possible, ensure that every project is

successful. Be sure projects are queued for success at the start. If projects have not embarked along

a path to success, they will not be successful.

Naturally, there will be project failures, or projects that need to be canceled during project

execution because the business needs change. In both cases, it is important that the reason for these

challenges is not the project manager or the PMO.

2.10.2 Too many processes or methodology

Many sources will attempt to add processes and methodology to the PMO. But excessive

methodology can actually reduce the PMO's influence. Careful attention should be paid to

preventing the perception that running a project through the PMO will only burden the project with

paperwork. The goal of PM methodology should be for consistency, control, and support of the

end goal. Find a balance that is in line with your company culture, one which meets the need for

organizational control and regulatory compliance, and does not add more process methodology

just because someone believes it is necessary. Carefully evaluate all feedback and the goal of each

process that is suggested. Make sure that it adds value, reduces confusion and provides consistency

or clarity. If it does not meet one of these objectives, it is probably not worth adding (Letavec &

Bolles, 2010:191).

30

2.10.3 Lack of consistency

In our society, people quickly forget what was accomplished in the past and are constantly looking

for what has been done for them lately. This is especially true during times of financial trouble in

the company. It is important that you are consistent in initiation, execution, and providing metrics

to show your ongoing value. The majority of prosperous companies are affluent because their

products are consistently produced. This should be the case for the PMO. The company should be

able to achieve consistent results in delivery. If the reliability of the organization changes, it will

quickly impact the value that has been created (Letavec & Bolles, 2010:191).

2.10.4 Company realignment

When a company goes through an acquisition or a major reorganization, the PMO will be evaluated

for its value. During this time, it is critical that the execution of projects remains at the forefront.

Changing PMO methodology or processes during this time will only add confusion to the

company, and may provide a further reason to have it reduced or eliminated (Letavec & Bolles,

2010:191).

2.10.5 Lack of neutrality

A PMO that does not maintain neutrality will immediately run into delivery problems on its

projects. The author has had experience with a PMO that was aligned with a particular technical

director. As projects came into the workflow, the projects for that individual’s department

eventually gained the highest level of priority for delivery.

Proposed projects from other divisions were seriously questioned, and additional justification was

required for that work to begin. As a result, the divisions that needed PM assistance stopped

requesting projects and began to sabotage the projects of the technical director. These other

divisions, by simply not providing resources to projects, were able to impact the delivery of those

projects. The result was that its value was destroyed.

Managers in the PMO need to continually look for bias in their organization, and evaluate how

that bias may impact the PMO’s reputation. Without a reputation of neutrality and always keeping

31

the best in mind for the company, it will not achieve a high level of success (Letavec & Bolles,

2010:191).

2.11 PMO Framework

Dr. Brian Hobbs (2007) conducted a study between 2004 and 2007 where a web-based survey was

designed to gather descriptive data on PMOs. A survey collected the description of 500 PMOs and

the data was analyzed extensively, resulting in a report containing 17 key findings. Boyce, (2010:2)

and Hobbs, (2007:24) put together a framework for PMO types as shown below in figure 1 based

upon the findings from a survey conducted by Dr. Brian Hobbs by the University of Québec in

Montréal Canada published in 2007.

Figure 2.1: PMO Framework

2.11.1 Monitoring and controlling project performance

In this role, the PMO will directly support project governance by providing the information that

managers need to take decisions and control the project. Hobbs, (2007:24) describes the

monitoring and controlling functions in Group 1 as “the most important” group of functions

PMO

Framework

Monitoring and controlling

project performance

Develop PM Competency & Methodology

Multi-Project Management

Strategic Management

Organisational Learning

32

performed by the PMO. According to Tinnirello (2001:393), a PMO can take over the role of

monitoring project progress once projects have commenced as it is already a common role of

PMOs. By implementing and reviewing regular status reporting, a PMO can monitor elements

such as cost, resource utilization, timing, and progress against the plan. This information provides

a basis for exercising control over projects. Remedial action can be taken on projects that are

failing to meet cost and other planned targets.

2.11.2 Develop PM competency and methodology

According to Crawford (2011:41), the PMO is the center of focus for PM and team training. It

identifies competencies needed by high-performing project managers as well as for executive

awareness and team member participation. The PMO participates, with a specialized PM training

vendor typically, in tailoring standardized courses around the culture and methodologies that

specifically apply throughout the organization.

Crawford (2011:74) further explains that the PMO performing the role of developing PM

competency, and methodology will identify the appropriate training that is required, participates

in the selection of the trainers, identifies the needed levels of knowledge and competency and the

requisite segments of training that are necessary in order to achieve maximum performance. The

PMO will also train project managers, team members, and clients regarding PM principles, tools,

and techniques

According to Kerzner (2004:298), it is important to have an assessment of skill sets, plans for

training and improvement, as well as measures for continuous improvement when developing PM

competency and methodology. It is therefore, essential to be able to motivate individuals as well

as enhance project delivery. Unmotivated participants will not perform as expected and will not

create superior organizations, regardless of other factors.

2.11.3 Multi-Project Management

The exposure of a PMO to multiple projects places it in a good position to both manage

communication among and between projects and other parts of the organization. This role may

extend to provide managerial updates on projects to an executive group. Communication can be

mediated either by direct communication such as providing newsletters and presentations, or

33

indirectly by providing access to project repositories such as shared directories or intranet sites.

These roles become more important for larger organizations or organizations with many projects.

In these cases, a PMO has the potential to provide a summarized and focused overview of projects

according to Tinnirello, (2001:391).

Some PMOs have mandates to manage entire sets of projects in a coordinated fashion as revealed

by Hobbs (2007:25). Managing whole sets of projects often involve program or portfolio

management. The coordination of interdependencies within programs and portfolios is a central

issue in multi- PM. Therefore, the PMO functions can range from the following:

o Coordinate between projects;

o Identify, select, and prioritize new projects;

o Manage one or more portfolios;

o Manage one or more programs; and

o Allocate resources between projects.

2.11.4 Strategic management

PMOs were established to coordinate portfolios of projects from the executive board and facilitate

selection, monitoring and controlling of projects (Andersen, Henriksen & Aarseth, 2007:1).

Crawford, Turner & Hobbs (2005:39), believe that having portfolio management is a sign of

organizational recognition of linking strategy with execution. According to Laurence & Patel

(2009:8) project portfolio management forms a quantitative base for removing redundant projects

and optimizing available project expenditure to align resources with strategic priorities.

Strategic management is concerned with delivering successful projects, which are fully aligned to

the business strategy and which will deliver long-term benefits expected of projects and also

provide advice to upper management in order for strategic plans to be effectively executed and

monitored at appropriate levels. According to Aubry et al. (2007:2) The PMO improves PM

performance and effectiveness by generating strategic alignment and collaboration of the relations

between projects.

34

2.11.5 Organizational learning

Building a world-class set of processes and methodologies also involves taking advantage of the

lessons your own project managers learn while engaged in projects. An archive of lessons learned,

plus methods and process documentation are some of the PMO’s key contributions to

standardizing the methodology across the organization (Crawford, 2011:39). Over time, valuable

lessons are learned on projects. These can be captured and applied to impending projects, resulting

in tremendous savings and efficiency gains for the organization. High maturity organizations have

a process for capturing these lessons in a database and using them for the benefit of prospective

projects (Verzuh, 2003:359).

Hobbs (2007:26) identifies a number of functions in which PMO can be actively involved in

organizational learning, and those functions include monitoring and controlling the performance

of PMOs, plus managing the archives of project documentation. Further functions include

conducting post-project reviews and project audits, implementing and managing a database of

lessons learned, plus implementing and managing a risk database.`

2.11.6 Common characteristics of the PMO

Kendall & Rollins (2003:8), identify four characteristics of a PMO that executives will embrace:

o It must drive more projects through completion, without correspondingly increasing

recourses (e.g. 50% more projects);

o More projects must be completed in drastically shorter times (e.g. 25% reduction in average

cycle times);

o The impact of the PMO must be clearly felt on both the top and bottom lines within the

organization (even in non-profit organizations); and

o Executives and managers throughout the organization must feel that they are getting the

benefit out of the PMO (i.e. They must see what is in it for them).

35

2.12 PMOs and organizational project management maturity

According to PMI (2004:17), PMOs can operate along a continuum, from providing PM support

functions in the form of training, software, standardized policies, and procedures, to actual direct

management and responsibility for achieving the project objectives.

Hill (2004:45) develops five stages of PMO capabilities along a competency continuum which are

project office, basic PMO, standard PMO, advanced PMO, and center of excellence as shown on

the diagram below. Each PMO stage suggests a particular level of functional capability that the

PMO will have achieved if functions are fully implemented. The five PMO stages are also

indicative of an organization’s maturity in PM, with the PMO’s role and responsibilities advancing

from PM oversight and control at the lower end of the competency continuum to strategic business

alignment at the higher competency stages. Stages of PMO

Figure 2.2: PMO capabilities

Hill (2008:6) describes the project office, as a formal or informal entity which is the fundamental

agent of PM methodology implementation. Traditionally, project oversight has relied on the

36

practices that each project manager has brought to bear, based on personal skill and experience.

With the establishment of a project office, project managers can now contribute those valuable

individual capabilities to the development of practices that can be applied across similar, related

projects. Ultimately, these practices will form the foundation of more structured, repeatable PM

processes that can be shared across the organization.

The basic PMO is presumed to be “the highest centralized entity of PM that pursues its mission

under the leadership and guidance of one designated program manager” (Hill, 2004:47). With

emphasis on establishing control in the PM environment, the fundamental PMO performs a variety

of centralized PM activities such as establishing a standard approach to how PM is conducted in

the relevant organization, compiling aggregate results and analyses of various projects’ status and

progress as a way of identifying problems and improving on successes.

The standard PMO introduces a new focus on support that optimizes individual and project

performance in the PM environment. This PMO first ensures that a standard, structured, and

repeatable process for conducting PM is established within the organization. This can begin with

incremental development of only the most critical processes and later expanded to encompass a

more complete methodology as the organization gains additional understanding and benefits from

the initial processes. The standard PMO responsibilities range from managing multiple projects

and multiple project managers and may even include overseeing or aligning with one or more

program managers.

The advanced PMO performs comprehensive, centralized PM oversight, control, and support

activities, together with expanded functionality that represents a mature and business oriented PM

organization. These activities include:

o Appearing more and more like a separate business unit. If a PMO budget has not already

been established at an earlier PMO stage, the leading PMO normally prepares and manages

its own budget as a means of pursuing the development and implementation of progressive

PM practices and business integration activities;

37

o Collaborating with business units within the relevant organization and participating in the

development or adaptation of practices and processes that are common to both the business

and the PM environments; and

o Providing distinct expertise in state-of-the-art PM practices and procedures. Senior staff

members are assigned full-time and represent highly skilled and knowledgeable

professionals who apply business acumen and advanced business and PM concepts to

solutions implemented in the PM environment. These individuals help implement, for

example, functionality as mentoring services, project audits, and project recovery services.

They monitor and manage project results in terms of business performance. The advanced

PMO staff can also include business analysts and specialists from diverse professional

disciplines, such as legal, contract and procurement management, customer service, and so

forth, as needed full-time or part-time to achieve PMO functionality.

The center of excellence performs any necessary methodology development, deployment, and

reviewing activities, formulating solutions and guiding process collaboration across business units.

As the interface with senior management, the center of excellence recommends and implements

policy for development and deployment of PM methodology.

The fundamental objectives of the PMOs "PM methodology" function across the PMO continuum

is as follows:

o Determine and implement PM process solutions that align with the relevant organization's

business interests;

o Support the organization's technical work performance; and

o Assist project managers and project teams in achieving project objectives.

Hill (2004: xvii), further identifies twenty function models that can be used to guide deliberation

and development of PMO operational capability as shown in the table below. These models

suggest what capability can be realized through comprehensive implementation of each PMO

function. Likewise, when a PMO function model prescribes an action or activity for the PMO to

perform, it should fulfil those efforts to the extent permitted by existing PMO competency and

38

maturity, current business capability, and acceptance within the overriding organizational culture.

The PMO function models enumerate what is needed for the PM environment to effectively

conduct PM oversight, control, or support.

39

Table 2.1: Overview of twenty PMO Functions (Hill, 2004)

Practice Management Infrastructure Management Resource Integration Technical Support Business Alignment

Project Management

Methodology

Establish the basis for project management methodology

Examine current practices Develop project life cycle

solution Conduct methodology

implementation Manage methodology

maturity

Project Governance

Prepare and maintain a PMO charter

Develop project management policies

Develop project classification guidance

Establish project manager authority

Establish an executive control board

Align business and technical committees

Resource Management

Acquire project resources

Assign project resources Deploy project resources Manage resource

performance Close out project

resource assignments

Mentoring

Establish the project management mentoring program

Engage project management mentors

Conduct project management mentoring

Evaluate mentoring program

Project Portfolio

Management

Set up project portfolio management

Perform project selection Integrate projects in the

portfolio Conduct project and

portfolio reviews Manage portfolio attrition

Project Management Tools

Select project tools Implement project tools Evaluate project tools

Assessment

Conduct competency assessments

Conduct capability assessments

Conduct maturity assessments

Training and Education

Establish training program

Manage a training program

Evaluate a training program

Planning Support

Establish project planning support

Conduct project planning support

Conduct adjunct planning support

Customer Relationships

Manage customer relationships

Manage customer contracts Manage customer

satisfaction

Standards and Metrics

Implement project management standards

Determine project metrics requirements

Introduce and use metrics.

Organization and Structure

Set up the PMO structure Establish project

management structure Develop stakeholder

participation

Career Development

Develop a project management career path

Support project management career planning

Establish professional certification

Project Auditing

Set up project auditing capability

Conduct projects auditing.

Manage project auditing results

Vendor/Contractor

Relationships

Manage vendor/contractor relationships Manage vendor/contractor acquisition

Manage vendor/contractor performance

40

Table 2.1: Overview of twenty PMO Functions (Hill, 2004)

Practice Management Infrastructure Management Resource Integration Technical Support Business Alignment

Project Knowledge

Management

Establish a knowledge management framework

Introduce a knowledge management system

Implement he system

Facilities and Equipment

Support

Establish project team requirements

Manage project facilities Manage project equipment

Team Development

Facilitate cohesive team formation

Facilitate virtual team setup

Enable project team development

Monitor performance

Project Recovery Develop the recovery

assessment process Plan and conduct

project recovery. Capture recovery

lessons learned.

Business Performance

Develop integrated business solutions

Manage business collaboration

Manage PMO business fulfillment

41

2.13 PMO cultural alignment

According to Letavec & Bolles (2010:178), a primary key to creating and proving a value for the

PMO is to ensure that it is properly established within the culture of the company. Mark (in Letavec

& Bolles 2010:178), identifies seven cultural elements which companies can use to evaluate

culture in order to ensure success for the PMO. These areas are people, politics, purpose, process,

policies, power, and pressures.

2.13.1 People

People are the key to overall alignment. People, not the projects or the process, will have the

biggest impact upon the success or failure of the PMO alignment within the company. The PMO

should encourage project managers to share their personal lessons learned just as much as their

project lessons learned.

2.13.2 Politics

Defining the culture of the PMO to align it with the political climate within the company is not an

easy task. In this area, it is more important to make sure that it does not add to the political

underpinnings of the company. It needs to remain neutral in political issues, since siding with a

corporate political party will cause the value to the organization to be an issue.

2.13.3 Power

Every company has its power players: those individuals who can quickly destroy a project plan or

the PMO. Since the PMO is completely reliant on others within the company for its success, its

management must be aware of those people within the company who hold the most power over

the PMO and its project portfolio. It is critical that all areas of the PMO align with how these power

players operate in the company.

2.13.4 Pressures

Every company is defined by the pressures that are exerted against it. These pressures can be

financial, such as quarterly results for Wall Street, or cost-saving goals. They can be driven by

others, such as competitive products. All of these pressures play a part in the success of the PMO

42

as they will be evident in the project delivery and will need to be handled by the project managers.

Although there are a variety of ways to align the PMO with the pressures, the company faces, it is

important that the PMO enables the project managers to understand what these pressures are and

the results that may follow from these pressures, so that they can adapt their projects accordingly.

2.13.5 Policies

Every company must operate under defined policies. These policies dictate to the company and

divisions what must occur to be compliant with governmental laws and regulations. It is important

that the PMO doesn't only understand what these policies are, but should also be a leader in

ensuring that the work with the project teams aligns with these policies. The PMO should take it a

step further and actually make sure that the project managers are aware of the organization’s

policies, so they can ensure that their projects meet these standards.

2.13.6 Process

The greatest failure area for PMOs in cultural alignment relates to processing. Process alignment

involves identifying and becoming familiar with the processes that must be followed in the

company to implement change. These processes include change management, procurement,

funding, provisioning, sales, request for proposals, etc. It is important that the PMO management

team clearly understands and communicates the major processes that are used within the company,

so that these processes can be properly aligned with the PM methodology.

2.13.7 Purpose

The final element is the purpose. Every organization has a purpose. This purpose is more than the

plaque on the wall that states the vision of the company. It is the driving force that causes the

company to move in a given direction. It is the end goal that is being pursued. The mission of the

PMO should be to ensure that every project selected for inclusion in the portfolio is in line with

this purpose.

2.14 Summary

This chapter has provided an overview of the literature supporting the need for this study. The

intent of this research was to examine the functions of a Project Management Office at the Gauteng

43

Department of Health with the view to evaluating the perceptions, knowledge and training in

managing projects within the Infrastructure Directorate. This chapter was structured by first

exploring the various aspects of the project and PM in order to determine the factors that contribute

to project failure.

A review of research literature relevant to the subject indicates that projects should come into

existence with an evidently documented purpose even if the project is an exploratory research

effort; there should be specific problems or issues that the project seeks to address. The origins of

projects and PM have been discussed, showing that the core principles of PM have been in place

and utilized for centuries.

Further research demonstrates that organizations are likely to experience a high probability of

project failure because of a variety of reasons and understanding those reasons helps to achieve

success with future projects. The effective utilization of the PMO, on the other hand, has the

potential to deliver value and avoid project failure keeping within time, cost, scope and quality

constraints.

The most prevalent and consistent theme throughout the review of the literature on the PMO

concept is that it provides PM support functions and develops and maintains processes and

methodologies pertaining to the management of projects. Lastly, the literature review looked into

the primary key to creating and proving value for the PMO within the culture of the organization.

44

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter addresses the research methodology paradigm for this study, research design and

measuring instruments. It also addresses the population and sampling size that was used. This

chapter also addresses issues of validity and reliability.

Research is the systematic and rigorous process of inquiry which aims to describe phenomena and

to develop and test explanatory concepts and theories. Ultimately it aims to contribute to a

scientific body of knowledge (Bowling, 2002:1). Research methodology is defined by Ethridge

(2004:26) as a process that focuses on developing information and knowledge, which may provide

application knowledge and/or additional disciplinary understanding.

3.2 Research method and design

Research methods refer to the behaviour and instruments used in selecting and constructing

research techniques. The research methods may be understood as methods/techniques that are used

for conducting research (Kumar, 2008:4).

A case study method of research design has been selected for this research, since it emphasizes the

understanding of processes alongside their organizational contexts (Cassell & Symon, 2004:324).

The research followed a mixed method (i.e. qualitative and quantitative) methodological approach

to establish and determine the major contributors to the current state of project failures within the

GDoH. The researcher collected primary data from the employees who are currently managing

projects and working within the IM directorate by means of interviews.

In a case study, a single person, program, event, process, institution, organization, social group or

phenomenon is investigated within a specified time frame, using a combination of appropriate data

collection devices (Creswell, 1994:12). All organizations and individuals have their common and

unique features. Case study researchers according to Bell (2010:9) aim to identify such features,

to identify or attempt to identify the various interactive processes at work, to show how they affect

the implementation of systems and influence the way an organization functions. These processes

may remain hidden in a large-scale survey but could be crucial to the success or failure of systems

or organizations.

45

The main aim of a research design is to explain how you will find answers to your research

questions (Kumar, 2011:23). Blumberg, Cooper & Schindler (2008:195) define research design as

the plan and structure of investigation so conceived as to obtain answers to the challenges of

infrastructure projects not completed on time within the IM directorate of the GDoH.

3.2.1 Mixed model research method

This research collected both qualitative and quantitative data making use of semi-structured

interviews. The type of research in which a researcher or team of researchers combines elements

of qualitative and quantitative approaches (e.g., use of qualitative and quantitative viewpoints, data

collection, analysis, inference techniques) for the purpose of breadth and depth of understanding

and corroboration is described by Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, and Turner (2007:123) as mixed

methods research.

Creswell and Plano Clark (2011:13) believe that mixed methods research is “practical” in the sense

that the researcher is free to use all methods possible to address a research problem. It is also

“practical” because individuals tend to solve problems using both numbers and words, combine

inductive and deductive thinking, and employ skills in observing people as well as recording

behaviour. It is natural, then, for individuals to employ mixed methods research as a preferred

mode for understanding the world. The study made use of both numbers and words as some of the

findings were captured in percentages and some were narrated.

Creswell & Plano Clark (2007:5) define mixed methods research as a research design with

philosophical assumptions as well as methods of inquiry. As a methodology, it involves

philosophical assumptions that guide the direction of the collection and analysis and the mixture

of qualitative and quantitative approaches in many phases of the research process. As a method, it

focuses on collecting, analyzing, and mixing both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study

or series of studies. Its central premise is that the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches, in

combination, provides a better understanding of research problems than either approach alone.

46

Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011:5 adequately describe core characteristics of mixed methods

research as follows:

o Collecting and analyzing persuasively and rigorously both qualitative and quantitative data

(based on research questions);

o Mixing (or integrating or linking) the two forms of data concurrently by combining them

(or merging them), sequentially by having one build on the other, or embedding one within

the other;

o Giving priority to one or to both forms of data (in terms of what the research emphasizes);

o Using these procedures in a single study or in multiple phases of a program of study;

o Framing these procedures within philosophical worldviews and theoretical lenses; and

o Combining the procedures into specific research designs that direct the plan for conducting

the study.

3.2.2 Qualitative method

Bless, Higson-Smith & Kagee (2006:43) define qualitative research as research conducted using a

range of methods which use qualifying words and descriptions to record and investigate aspects of

social reality. A qualitative research design is the “logic that links data to be collected (and the

conclusions to be drawn) to the initial questions of the study” (Yin, 2003: 24). The purpose of

qualitative research is to describe and understand social phenomena in terms of the meaning people

bring to them.

The research questions are studied through flexible methods enabling contact with the people

involved to an extent that is necessary to grasp what is going on in the field. The methods produce

rich, descriptive data that need to be interpreted through the identification and coding of themes

and categories leading to findings that can contribute to theoretical knowledge and practical use

(Boeije, 2010:11). The Qualitative method for this research was necessary in order to narrate the

findings and make use of selected quotations to underscore them as they inform the researcher’s

understanding of the phenomena.

47

Characteristics of qualitative research as described by Merriam, (2009:14) are as follows:

o Focus on meaning and understanding

The overall purposes of qualitative research are to achieve an understanding of how people

make sense of their lives, delineate the process (rather than the outcome or product) of

meaning-making and describe how people interpret what they experience.

In order to discover the participants’ point of view within the IM directorate of the GDoH,

qualitative social scientists have to collect data that capture this view, and when analysing

the data they will have to be sensitive to extract only what is relevant. People talk about

their social reality, they express their opinions on what they think is happening, they share

experiences, show what they feel, demonstrate what they do. So there is an already

interpreted reality from which researchers must then make their interpretation of how

participants understand their daily lives. (Boeije, 2010:13).

o Researcher as primary instrument

A second characteristic of all forms of qualitative research is that the researcher is the

primary instrument for data collection and analyses.

o An inductive process

Often qualitative researchers undertake a qualitative study because there is a lack of theory

or an existing theory fails to adequately explain a phenomenon. Therefore, another

important characteristic of qualitative research is that the process is inductive; that is,

researchers gather data to build concepts, hypotheses, or theories rather than deductively

testing hypotheses as in positivist research.

o Rich description

48

Finally, the product of a qualitative inquiry is richly descriptive. Words and pictures rather

that numbers are used to convey what the researcher has learned about a phenomenon.

However, researchers cannot present ‘raw data’ alone, such as a transcribed interview;

instead they are required to re-interpret the information while preserving the participant’s

meaning. It is while analysing the data that they reduce, select, interpret and decide what

they will use to convey their message to the reader (Boeije, 2010:14).

3.2.3 Quantitative method

Quantitative research is described by Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill (2003:486-488) as "the

systematic collection of data whose values can be numerically measured” and “the subsequent

interpretation of information generated by this data with a clear purpose to find things out.

Qualitative data of this research was expressed in percentages to gauge perception of project

management within the department.

3.3 Sampling method

A sample is defined by Field, Miles & Field (2012:925) as a smaller (but hopefully representative)

collection of units from a population used to determine truths about that population. The purpose

of sampling according to Babbie (1998:75) is to select a set of elements from a population in such

a way that descriptions of those elements or statistics accurately describe the total population from

which they are selected.

According to Wegner (2007:213) there are two basic methods of sampling, namely, probability

samples (where the probability of selection of each respondent is known) and non-probability

samples (where the probability of selection of each respondent is unknown). Wegner further

explains that the non - probability based sampling method consists of four types: convenience

sampling, judgment sampling, quota sampling and snowball sampling. Judgement sampling is also

called purposive sampling.

The study followed a non-probability sampling method whereby employees who managed projects

were selected to participate in the study. Within the non-probability method, purposive sampling

was selected as the most suitable method as this sampling allowed the researcher to select cases

49

that enabled her to provide the information that would best meet the objectives of the study. As

stated by Babbie (2011:207), when using the purposive sampling method it is sometimes

appropriate to select a sample on the basis of knowledge of a population, its elements, and the

purpose of the study. According to Ritchie & Lewis (2003:79) purposive sampling is precisely

what the name suggests. Members of a sample are chosen with a 'purpose' to represent a location

or type in relation to a key criterion. This has two principal aims. The first is to ensure that all the

key constituencies of relevance to the subject matter are covered. The second is to ensure that,

within each of the key criteria, some diversity is included so that the impact of the characteristic

concerned can be explored.

3.4 Sample population

Population is defined as every object which possesses data on the random variable under study

(Wegner, 2007:212). A population according to Polit & Beck (2004, 289) refers to the entire

aggregation of cases in which a researcher is interested. The research population sample of this

study is 19 employees working with infrastructure projects within the IM directorate of the GDoH.

Fifteen of these employees agreed to be interviewed at a mutually agreed upon time. The duration

of the interview was approximately 30 minutes. The interviews were conducted between February

and March 2014 (from 25 February 2014 to 10 March 2014).

3.5 Data collection

Data collection is described by Bouma & Ling (2006:8) as a process whereby the researcher

collects evidence about the research question.

The process includes collecting data, summarising and organising this data.

The researcher consulted with the TUT statistical analyst to obtain guidance on how data can be

collected and also on how questions can be constructed for this study. The researcher then decided

on primary data collection. According to Houser (2008:272), primary data collection entails the

data being collected directly from the subjects by the researcher or a trained data collector. The

researcher has selected primary data collection as it provides an opportunity to verify the accuracy

of the data while the subject matter is still available.

50

Data was collected qualitatively and quantitatively by means of interviews with open-ended and

closed-ended questions. The open ended and closed ended questions have been explained by

Johnson & Christensen (2010:169) as follows:

Open ended question – the participant does not have a predetermined form of answering the

question and providing any answer. It is used mainly because the researcher provides the

participants an opportunity for alternative responses or would like to use the exact words of the

participants.

Closed ended question – the researcher provides predetermined responses for the participant to

choose from. The participant selects from a limited number of responses or responds by rating on

the scale. There are three main types of closed questions, forced-choice questions where the

participant chooses a single response from the list, dichotomous questions which provide only two

choices and scales whereon the participants are expected to rank their responses in a particular

order.

As the purpose of this research was to capture the perceptions of project participants within the IM

directorate, individual interviews were conducted. Individual interviews are probably the most

widely used method in qualitative research. They take different forms but a key feature is their

ability to provide an undiluted focus on the individual. They provide an opportunity for detailed

investigation of people's personal perspectives, for in-depth understanding of the personal context

within which the research phenomena are located, and for very detailed subject coverage. They

are also particularly well suited to research that requires an understanding of deeply rooted or

delicate phenomena or responses to complex systems, processes or experiences because of the

depth of focus and the opportunity they offer for clarification and detailed understanding (Ritchie

& Lewis, 2003:36).

Individual interviews were semi-structured and conducted face to face in order to provide more

information and obtain pertinent opinion on the management of projects and problems encountered

by participants within the IM directorate. “In semi-structured interviews the interviewer is free to

probe and explore within these predetermined inquiry areas. Interview guides ensure good use of

51

limited interview time; they make interviewing multiple subjects more systematic and

comprehensive; and they help to keep interactions focused” (Hoepfl, 1997:52).

Due to time constraints and the fact that evaluation questions were simple, the tape recording

approach was not used, but instead detailed notes were taken during the interview. Each interview

began with expression of appreciation for their participation by the researcher. A friendly and

warm conversation was initiated to make the interview process simple and comfortable. After the

interview, participants were given an opportunity to check the interview notes and clarify their

responses. The researcher also clarifies interview notes immediately after the interview to avoid

distortion since the information is still fresh in the mind.

The following process was followed:

o The respondents were identified. The selection criteria used were employees working

with infrastructure projects within the IM directorate of the GDoH;

o Questions were distributed by email and in person to the participants;

o Face to face interviews were conducted with the participants at a mutually agreed upon

time; and

o Notes taken were immediately clarified after the interview.

3.6 Data analysis

How data is analyzed is very important for any research study. Since the research study followed

the mixed method approach, qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed which involved

analyses of interviews conducted and review of questionnaires.

Bogdan & Biklen (1982:145) define qualitative data analysis as “working with the data, organising

them, breaking them into manageable units, coding them, synthesising them, and searching for

patterns”. The aim of analysis of qualitative data is to discover patterns, concepts, themes and

meanings.

52

A list of themes and questions was prepared in advance to guide the direction of the interview. The

interviews were transcribed into a Microsoft Word (MS Word) document and sent to the

participants by email to clarify written statements. That was done to ensure that written statements

are accurate and are a complete representation of the conversation. The participants were given a

due date for returning the documents and to amend sections where they felt that they had been

misrepresented.

Data from the interviews were analyzed following the Morse cognitive process of analyzing

qualitative data. The qualitative analyzing method encompasses a wide range of philosophical

positions, methodological strategies, and analytical procedures.

According to (Morse 1994:25) four cognitive processes appear integral to all qualitative methods

when analyzing qualitative data. These four cognitive processes occur more or less sequentially

because the researcher must reach a reasonable level of comprehension before being able to

synthesize (to make generalized statements about the participants), and until the researcher is able

to synthesize.

The four cognitive processes are as follows:

o Comprehending the phenomenon under study;

o Synthesizing a portrait of the phenomenon that accounts for relations and linkages

within its aspects;

o Theorizing about how and why these relations appear as they do; and

o Re-contextualising, or putting the new knowledge about phenomena and relations back

into the context of how others have articulated the evolving knowledge.

Although the form that each of the above steps takes might vary according to such factors as the

research question, the researcher's orientation to the inquiry, or the setting and context of the study,

this set of steps above helps to depict a series of intellectual processes by which data in their raw

form are considered, examined, and reformulated to become a research product.

53

Quantitative data collected from the questionnaires was expressed in percentages to facilitate

easier analysis as most of the quantitative questions require a yes or no answer.

3.7 Validity and reliability

In order for the research to stand the test of time and be accepted as scientific proof by other

researchers, validity and reliability need to be the cornerstone of the scientific method applied in

the research. The research needs to withstand rigorous questioning and scepticism.

The validity of qualitative research is often referred to as trustworthiness or credibility. Common

methods of assessing validity include consistency checks (Suter, 2011:346). In this study, the

researcher ensured validity of the interview questions by checking whether the questions posed

were in fact linked to the key research questions and would provide answers that were relevant to

the problem statement. Validity was further increased by allowing the respondents an opportunity

to elaborate on their experiences.

Lincoln & Guba, 1985 in the book of Suter (2011:363) pointed out that many qualitative

researchers agree that data trustworthiness, whether collected from direct observations, focus

groups, or interviews, is evidenced by the following:

o Transferability;

o Dependability;

o Conformability; and

o Credibility.

Transferability refers to evidence supporting the generalization of findings to other contexts across

different participants, groups, situations, and so forth. This is akin to the notion of external validity

used by quantitative researchers. Transferability is enhanced by detailed descriptions (as is typical

in qualitative research) that enable judgments about a “fit” with other contexts (Suter, 2011:363).

Dependability is akin to the concept of reliability in quantitative research paradigms. In this case,

the qualitative researcher gathers evidence to support the claim that similar findings would be

obtained if the study were repeated. Naturally, even if the study were repeated in the same context

with the same participants, it would become a “new” study, given the ever-changing social world

54

and perceptual shifts (including news events that may change our thinking overnight) (Suter,

2011:363).

Golafshani (2003:598) defines reliability as the extent to which results are consistent over time

and an accurate representation of the total population under study. Bless, Higson-Smith and Kagee

(2006:150) point out that when an instrument produces different scores every time it is used to

measure an unchanging value, it is regarded as having low reliability, while if it produces the same

values when measured against the unchanged values, it is regarded as having high reliability.

Conformability refers to objectivity (neutrality) and the control of researcher bias. Bias in

qualitative research is an ever-present concern, but unbiased interpretations are more likely once

researcher self-reflection recognizes them overtly and factors them into the design by, for example,

intentionally seeking potentially contradictory evidence predicted by alternatives (essentially

different bias or worldviews) (Suter, 2011:363).

Credibility refers to the believability of the findings and is enhanced by evidence such as

confirming evaluation of conclusions by research participants, convergence of multiple sources of

evidence, control of unwanted influences, and theoretical fit (Suter, 2011:363).

3.8 Ethical considerations

According to Cooper and Schindler (2003:20) ethics refers to norms or standards of behaviour that

guide moral choices about our behaviour and our relationships with others. Ethics in research

design are aimed at protecting the respondents and participants. In light of this, the following

ethical guidelines that are applicable to this research were put in place for the purpose of the study:

o Permission was obtained from the GDoH to conduct the research and to interview the

project managers;

o Informed consent- Study participants were told in advance about the nature of the study

and that participation was entirely voluntary. A hard copy Letter of Informed Consent

was signed by the participant prior to the interview;

55

o Security - The identity and responses of all participants were protected at all times

during secure storage of the data sheets;

o Confidentiality was maintained on all information obtained during the course of this

study and throughout the research; and

o Honesty- The findings of the research were reported in complete honesty by ensuring

that data was not manipulated to fit outcomes.

3.9 Summary

The research method and design for the study was explained in this Chapter. This study used a

mixed method approach (i.e. qualitative and quantitative method) to determine perceptions of the

participants on project management in order to uncover contributors to the current state of project

failures within the GDoH.

The study population involved participants of the GDoH who are currently managing projects and

working within the infrastructure management directorate. Population, sampling size, issues of

validity and reliability were outlined. Data collection and analysis procedures of the study were

also discussed.

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

The results of the study are presented and interpreted in this chapter. Firstly, the profiles of the

research participants are outlined (Section A). In Section B, the results are organised thematically

56

according to the research questions of the study: Perceptions of PM within the department;

Understanding and knowledge of PM; Training; Reasons for project failure; and Job related issues.

The themes were derived from the objectives of the study.

Questions were distributed by email and in person to 19 participants who were selected to

participate in the study. Fifteen participants agreed to be interviewed (i.e. a 79% response rate).

Face to face interviews were then conducted with the participants at a mutually agreed upon time.

In terms of the multi-method methodological approach of the study, both quantitative and

qualitative data are presented in this chapter.

4.2 Section A- Profile information

Section A of the questionnaire gathered profile information of the respondents. Information that

was gathered included gender, type of employment contract, number of years employed within the

department and salary level.

4.2.1 Gender and employment type

Figure 4.1 below indicate the distribution of gender and type of employment of the respondents.

The results indicated that 53% of the respondents were females and 47% of the respondents were

male. This can be explained by the government policies encouraging women's representation

within government (Figure 4.1). This is an accurate representation of the target population

employed within the department, but may also be interpreted as females being more willing to

participate in the study than males.

57

Figure 4.1: Distribution of respondents by type of employment

As shown in Figure 4.1, all the respondents who participated in the study were hired on a

permanent basis.

4.2.2 Number of years in the department

Figure 4.2: Distribution of respondents by number of years in the department

The majority of the respondents (73%) had been working in the department for more than 5 years.

Only 14% of the respondents for 1-2 years and 13% of the respondents for 3-4 years.

Male Female Permanent contract

Gender Employment type

47%53%

100%

0%

Gender and employment type

Series1

14%

13%

73%

No of years employed

1-2 years

3-4 years

More than 5 years

58

4.2.3 Salary level

Figure 4.3: Distribution of respondents by salary level

The majority of the respondents (73%) fell between salary levels 9-12. The salary level of about

20% of the respondents was level 13 and above and only 7% of the respondents fell between levels

7-8.

4.3 Theme 1: Perception of PM within the department

This theme was divided into several sub-themes formulated as the following questions:

1. In your opinion, what are the basic functions of a project manager?

2. What is your view of project management within the department?

3. Do you feel you have had a good understanding on how projects are managed within the

department? Please explain

4. Do you think there are project management development opportunities within the

department?

5. Do you think that employees managing projects require advanced project management

training courses to manage the projects?

6. Do you have the necessary resources to perform your work optimally?

7. Within your directorate, what do you think are the reasons for project changes?

8. Does your department conduct project reviews to determine whether you need help?

7%

73%

20%

Salary level

Level 7-8

Level 9-12

13 and above

59

4.3.1 Basic functions of a project manager

In terms of the basic functions of a project manager, all respondents had similar views that the

project manager should monitor and manage projects against goal, schedule, and cost and projects

must be delivered in good quality. One respondent added a statement of coordination and brief

development as part of the basic functions a project manager should undertake. Another

respondent tried to simplify and summarise the basic functions of a project manager as follows:

"A project manager must ensure that projects are completed within set time-frames, with required

quality and at a reasonable cost”. This sentiment appeared to be supported by most of the

respondents.

The literature review in chapter 2 also confirms that a project manager is a person assigned to

manage a project and who is accountable for meeting its approved objectives, including project

scope, budget, and schedule (Richman, 2011:42).

4.3.2 Views of PM within the department

The literature in chapter 2 defines PM as the process of scoping, planning, staffing, organizing,

directing, and controlling the development of an acceptable system at a minimum cost within a

specified time-frame (Kerzner, 2001:4).

In general, the present practice of PM within the department does not have proper processes and

those respondents managing projects did not have a positive view of PM within the department as

they feel that they only manage crises. Some felt that PM within the department did not exist. One

respondent expressed the view that: “PM within the department is very poor since there are no

clearly defined processes being followed”.

The problems with PM within the department were also expressed by another respondent who

stated that “Within the department, PM is managed by two sector departments which make it

difficult to control and manage the total project since documents are not shared freely and they

are not freely available as required”. Some of the respondents believed that the GDoH is only

responsible for monitoring and evaluating the projects' progress and provide feedback to middle

management, as the implementation agent is managing projects on behalf of the GDoH.

60

The majority of the respondents felt that PM within the department does not have enough trained

people to manage the projects. As a result the department is not following the proper methodology

as scoping, planning and controlling is not properly executed and the cost of the project is normally

above the initial agreed cost and project timeframes are always extended.

4.3.3 Understanding on how projects are managed within the department

The majority of responses indicated that they had a good understanding of how projects are

managed within the department as they had been working there long enough. Most highlighted the

many challenges within the department. Some felt that mentorship was lacking and they had

acquired experience as they went along. There was also a feeling that the lack of defined processes

to be followed was frustrating; that they spent most of the time working in silos; and that there was

no platform for learning and experience sharing.

One respondent expressed the view that projects are delegated with the assumption that those who

were assigned to manage projects had project know-how and authority, but in his experience most

of the project managers were only following the leadership of consultants for the delivery of the

projects.

4.3.4 PM development opportunities within the department

Figure 4.4 illustrates the responses to Project Management opportunities for development within

the department.

61

Figure 4.4: Project

Management

development

opportunities

in the department

Fifty three percent of the

respondents thought that

there were development

opportunities

within the department but some felt that they were not really given the opportunity to develop as

their workload was too heavy and there was always something that needed to be done within a

short period of time (see Figure 4.4 above). One respondent expressed the view that the

management style was a top to bottom approach which he did not think was fruitful. Forty seven

percent of respondents indicated that there was no staff development. While most respondents did

not elaborate on this aspect, one respondent believed that they are managed by seniors who were

only interested in goal achievement without providing the required support.

One respondent responded to the question regarding the development of staff as follows: I don’t

think so; PM within the department is not treated in a true sense of how it should be. For example,

most of project contracts are not really handled by Health but by Gauteng Department of

Infrastructure (GDID) as they are our implementation agent in most of the projects and one cannot

really develop as most of the project management functions are not done within Health.

According to Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart & Wright (2004: 274), PM development opportunities

refers to formal education, job experiences, relationships and assessment of personality and

abilities that help employees prepare for the future.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Development NoDevelopment

PM development opportunities in the department

Series1

62

4.3.5 Requirements of advanced PM training courses to manage projects

Figure 4.5 illustrates the responses from participants when asked whether they believed that

advanced PM training courses to manage projects were required.

Figure 4.5: Responses regarding advanced PM training

Dollinger (2008: 35) contends that to allow businesses to adapt to ever-changing environments,

knowledge based resources are required. The survey revealed that 80% of the research participants

believed that ongoing training was essential as the PM environment was always changing and there

was a need to keep abreast of the latest trends (see Figure 4.5 above). One responder commented

that Training is needed but that the whole exercise should not be purely theoretical but that theory

should be accompanied by practical exercises to ensure mastering of the profession in PM.

It is imperative for the employees working with projects to be competent in various PM related

requirement competencies as these are the foundations of project success. On the other hand, 20%

of the respondents believed that more application rather than training is required. One respondent

expressed the view that the basics (MS project basic training, PM training, one week certificates

etc) had not worked and that more practice in utilizing PM methods is required.

Training required No training required

80%

20%

PM training

63

Another respondent was doubtful about the benefits of training and expressed the view that

Training will just be a benefit as we are not really managing projects and rely on implementation

agents that are managing projects on our behalf. We are actually managing the implementation

agent.

4.3.6 Resources to perform work optimally

The majority of the respondents (53%) indicated that not all necessary resources were available;

even basic resources like stationary were sometimes not available (see Figure 4.6 below). Some

participants felt that the latest technologies that support PM tools and other resources that support

best PM practice were essential.

Figure 4.6: Availability of resources for optimal performance

Figure 4.6 indicates that forty seven percent of the respondents believed that the minimum required

resources were available but that more resources were needed to cope with the backlog and

improvement of the system. The lack of optimal resources can be regarded as the failure or lack

of support from senior management.

4.3.7 Reasons for project changes within the directorate

No resources available

53%

Resource available

47%

Availability of resources for optimal performance

64

Figure 4.7 indicates eight major reasons highlighted by the respondents that cause the changes in

projects.

Figure 4.7: Major reasons for project changes

As shown in Figure 4.7 above, the majority of the respondents felt that there was no stability on

senior management (the decision makers of the department) levels as a whole. Some also expressed

the belief that changes in senior level management are brought about by politics. This has several

implications. This sentiment was articulated by one respondent who said Political changes

influence changes in senior leadership or management, bringing different management styles and

requirements.

Changes in management have a range of implications. One respondent mentioned that Change of

leadership could influence the scope of the project.

Policy amendments appeared to be one of the major reasons for project changes and the majority

of the respondents felt that this affected project delivery. One respondent elaborated on the issue

of long supply chain processes as they lead to needs changes and strategic goal changes before the

projects even started: By the time projects start a lot has changed and there are new requirements

by the end-user or additional work. This sentiment was expressed by other respondents.

Major reasons of project changes as

suggested by respondents

Budget constraints

Long supply chain

processes

Inconsistence of senior

management

Policy amendments

Unclear brief and scope

End-users new requests

Politics

Poor planning

65

Other issues which impacted on project changes which emerged from the responses were:

o Non-performance of the project;

o Lack of proper planning, monitoring and evaluation in projects;

o Lack of budget;

o Lack of human resources;

o Lack of knowledge and skills with regard to the development of the project;

o Lack of effective decision making within the department;

o Approval challenges; and

o Incorrect scoping.

4.3.8 Project reviews to determine individual help

Project meetings are held on a monthly basis and are conducted to discuss and report on project

related issues only and do not address the needs of the individuals carrying out the work.

Responses revealed that the majority of respondents felt that they were not being supported and

that their contributions were not being valued.

When respondents asked whether reviews are conducted to determine if individuals need help or

not some of the respondents replied as follows:

Not too sure, but project review meetings are conducted only on project issues but not so much to

determine whether individuals need help or not.

No; however, project and portfolio meetings are conducted as and when needed to determine the

performance of the project in terms of progress, budget and project related issues.

No, only project review meetings. We do crisis management, when things go wrong you will then

be called to explain or write a report.

A few respondents, however, did share the sentiment that project reviews conducted on a weekly

or monthly basis did address the support issues and needs of individuals. These responses clearly

show that there is something that the department is not doing right as the majority felt that they are

not supported enough and their contributions are not valued.

66

4.4 Theme 2: Understanding and knowledge of PM

Twelve questions were asked in order to determine participants’ understanding and knowledge of

PM:

1. Which of the following project management methodology or processes is your

department currently utilizing?

a) PMBOK

b) PRINCE 1 or PRINCE 2

c) A combination of different methodologies

d) In-house methodology

e) Other, please specify

f) No methodology

2. Describe your understanding of the chosen methodology

3. Do you think the current PMO (i.e. PMSU) within the department is effective? Please

explain

4. In your opinion, what are the most important functions or roles that the PMO

undertakes?

5. In your own view, how do you define project success?

6. What are the factors hindering your success in managing projects effectively?

7. What do you think can be done better in order to manage departmental projects more

effectively?

8. What percentages of your projects are completed on time?

9. Do you feel that you receive enough support from your superior to help you manage

projects better?

10. A project has multiple phases (i.e. initiate, plan, execute & closedown). How many

phases have you managed?

11. What has been the time-scale of the longest running project that you have managed

within the department?

12. What were some of the challenges you have came across when managing the longest

running project?

67

4.4.1 PM methodology or processes utilized

a) PMBOK

b) PRINCE 1 or PRINCE 2

c) A combination of different methodologies

d) In-house methodology

e) Other, please specify

f) No methodology

To determine which PM methodology or processes the department is currently utilizing, the

respondents were asked to choose from the given methodologies. Their responses are illustrated

in Figure 4.8. This was one of the most interesting questions because some participants even

asked the interviewer to help them choose the methodology.

4.4.2 Explanation for the chosen methodology

None of the respondents could really define their understanding of the chosen methodology. Thirty

three percent of the respondents believed that there was no methodology and the department did

not have a proper or clearly defined methodology that was being followed to manage projects (see

Figure 4.8 below).

Figure 4.8: Distribution of responses regarding project management methodology

13%

34%

7%13%

33%

Project management methodology

a)      PMBOK

b)      PRINCE 1 or PRINCE 2

c)      A combination ofdifferent methodologies

d)     In-house methodology

e)      Other, please specify

f)       No methodology

68

In Figure 4.8 above, just over 30% of the respondents thought that the department was using a

combination of different methodologies as in some of the projects they make use of norms and

standards developed by National Health which are mostly derived from PMBOK and Prince 2 as

guidance on how you start a project and processes to be followed until the end of the project. One

respondent expressed the view that The department does not have defined procedures in terms of

project methodology, however financial planning and budgeting for projects are done within the

Public Financial Management Act (PFMA) and other financial and government policies.

Thirteen percent of the respondents who chose Prince 2 described their understanding by saying

that the methodology is used worldwide and was specific for the management of projects as it

provides project information and methodology in managing projects. A further 13% of the

respondents could not specify the methodology being used. The lack of knowledge regarding PM

methodology is also revealed in the following response: I just heard that the department utilizes

Prince 2 but I have not seen anything yet in writing and I do not have much information on how it

works and I haven’t been trained on Prince 2.

Seven percent who chose in-house methodology thought that the methodology was not clear and

was not really defined but projects were planned as per the last successful project.

4.4.3 Views on the current PMO (i.e. PMSU) within the department

Figure 4.9 indicates the feedback from respondents regarding the effectiveness of the PMO. Only

33% of the respondents believed that the PMSU within the department is effective as they are

assisting the department in putting together a few systems and processes i.e. Process Map (see

Figure 4.9 below). They also consider the PMSU as the department which is also assisting project

managers in the training of the PPO and making sure it is being utilized effectively. One respondent

expressed his view by saying that the PMSU is assisting in identifying and reporting on critical

projects that need urgent attention as they are monitoring the program, advising on how to

improve and evaluating projects.

69

Figure 4.9 Distribution of respondents regarding PMO effectiveness

Noticeable 67% of the respondents in Figure 4.9 disagreed that the PMSU within the department

is effective as their mandate is not clear and their achievements are not yet realised.

One of the respondents, who has been with the department for over 5 years declared that: I do not

know the PMSU mandate and I cannot really comment as to whether they are effective or not. The

PMSU keeps on changing people and when they came, they do different things some where you do

not see achievements. At the moment the PMSU manages to introduce and roll out the project

management office tool (PPO).

4.4.4 Views on the functions or roles that the PMO undertakes

Thirty seven percent of the respondents believed that the most prominent functions of the PMO

are the roll-out of PM tools, providing training to project managers and the introduction of PM

standard and tools, whereas a surprisingly large number (43%) believed that the PMO was

responsible for skills development, managing budget and coordination of project activities (see

Figure 4.10 below). This might be interpreted as the respondents being aware of the basic function

a PMO should undertake even though the current PMSU within the department did not provide

some of the roles mentioned by the respondents.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

PMO effective PMO noteffective

PMO Effectiveness

Series1

70

Figure 4.10 Distribution of respondents regarding PMO responsibilities

Only 20% of the respondents believed that support for the PM personnel and support for the project

itself should be included in the roles and responsibilities of the PMO.

One respondent expressed the view that the PMO should provide support to project managers and

increase capacity where necessary.

4.4.5 Definition of project success

When respondents were asked to define a project's success, 67% believed that a project can be

deemed successful when three spheres of PM are met, namely the project should be (1) completed

within time, (2) cost and (3) according to agreed quality standards. This was summarized by one

of the respondents when she said: The project is successful when it’s completed on time, within

budget and following acceptable norms and standards and in good quality with brief, scope and

specifications being followed.

Series10%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Rollout,training,

standards &tools

Skills, budget& coordination

Support

PMO Responsibilities

Series1

71

Figure 4.11 Distribution of respondents regarding project success

Only 33 % of the respondents believed that the project is considered to be successful when the

project on completion serves the intended purpose while satisfying all the stakeholders’ needs at

the same time.

4.4.6 Factors hindering success in managing projects effectively

Figure 4.12 Distribution of respondents regarding factors hindering project success

Cost, Time & Quality

67%

Purpose & Stakeholders

33%

Project success

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Standards,Methodology &

contractors

Effectiveenvironment

Non-Effectiveenvironment

Factors hindering project success

Series1

72

Just over 50% of the respondents identified lack of clear standards and methodology guidelines,

lack of disciplinary measures on service providers not delivering projects and contractors who are

being appointed regardless of poor performance on their last projects as detrimental to project

success.

While only 27% of the respondents indicated that the environment was not PM orientated, 20% of

the respondents believed that the environment is moving in the right direction. However tuning is

still required in some areas in order to improve the overall status of managing a project

successfully.

The lack of a proper Project Management Office was also mentioned by 20% of the respondents

as one of the hindering factors in managing projects effectively. One of the respondents expressed

her point by saying There is no place where the buck stops which can result in the department

being easily influenced by anyone at a higher position.

Ineffective communication between stakeholders where suggestions from subordinates are not

taken into account resulted in projects not being managed effectively according to 33% of the

respondents. Poor leadership, poor decision making, management style and appointment of

incompetent contractors were also factors hindering effective PM cited by just over 47% of the

respondents.

4.4.7 Required improvements to manage projects effectively

The majority of the respondents (33%), believed that ensuring implementation of project

guidelines, standards and methodology could improve the management of projects more

effectively.

Twelve percent of the respondents were of the opinion that adhering to and force penalty clauses

on the service providers who are not completing their projects within agreed time frames would

encourage them to manage their projects more effectively to avoid penalties.

73

Figure 4.13: Required improvements to manage projects effectively

Thirty four percent of the respondents believed that technical projects related approval should be

delegated to the chief director’s level as this will improve the success of the projects since the chief

directors would then have the mandate to make decisions without sending documents to the Head

of Department (HOD), who sometimes does not have a basic understanding of the technical

approval of projects.

Whereas 14% of the respondents indicated that the Gauteng Department of Health should have a

clear service level agreement (SLA) with the GDID on the control and management of the projects,

7% of the respondents felt that it was also imperative for the end-user to be included in the project

processes at all times as they are the custodian of services being affected by the project.

4.4.8 Percentages of projects completed on time

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Required improvements to manage projects effectively

Series1

74

Figure 4.14: Distribution of respondents regarding project completion

The majority of respondents (40%) indicated that the percentage of their projects that were

completed on time was between 0% - 25%, which means that most of the projects are not

completed on time. One respondent expressed the view that one of the reasons for not completing

projects in time is as follows: At the moment we are performing between 0% - 25% due to lack of

leadership and management.

Thirty three percent of the respondents thought that 26%-50% of projects were being completed

on time. One respondent expressed the view that No projects are being completed on time, but

that 26 %-50% could be completed with the approval of one extension of time.

Twenty percent of the respondents thought that 51%-75% of projects were being completed on

time. One respondent, however, expressed the view that 51%-75% of maintenance projects were

completed in time because they were short projects.

Only 7% of the respondents thought that 76%-100% of projects were completed on time, especially

maintenance projects.

7%

20%

33%

40%

Project completion %

76%-100%

51%-75%

26%-50%

0 %-25%

75

4.4.9 Support received from superiors to manage projects effectively

Sixty seven percent of respondents felt that they did not receive enough support from their

superiors. One of the respondents expressed the view that no support was received from higher

level management at all except when managing crises.

Figure 4.15: Support received from superiors

A few respondents, (20%), said they did receive support from superiors, but that was limited to

one senior level above themselves.

Thirteen percent were not really sure but one of the respondents explained the limited support they

receive: Yes and no, they wish you well to deliver your projects in time but there are no strategies

in place to empower you as a project manager to deliver every project successfully.

4.4.10 Project phases

The majority of responses indicated that respondents have been involved in all four phases of a

project (Initiation, Planning, Execution and Closeout). One respondent indicated that he had never

seen a proper closeout report and another reported that project closeout within the department was

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Support Not sure No support

Support received from superiors

Series1

76

not done properly as most of the projects do not get to closure. Some felt that their involvement

focused more on planning and monitoring of the project.

4.4.11 The longest project managed within the department

Figure 4.16: Time scale for the longest project

The longest running projects managed in the department varied from 5 years and longer to less

than a year. According to the responses, 33% have managed the longest running projects, i.e. 5

years and above; 20% of the respondents have managed the longest running project for 3-4 years;

34 % indicated that the longest running project that they had managed within the department was

between 1-2 years; 13% of the respondents have managed the longest running project for less than

a year.

4.4.12 The challenges encountered when managing the longest running project

The following are the more prominent reasons offered regarding challenges encountered when

managing the longest running project:

o Lack of ownership (“Too many bosses”);

o Environment not suitable for PM;

o Over-expenditure and wasteful expenditure;

13%

34%

20%

33%

Time scale

Less than a year

1-2 Years

3-4 Years

5 years and above

77

o Budgets exceeding initial project costs due to escalation, variations, poor workmanship and

change of scope;

o Delays of payment to the contractor and approvals which lead to extension of time;

o Inadequate budget or unavailability of budget from the start of project;

o Duplication of payments;

o Lack of capacity, scope not defined properly or incorrect scoping and long lead approval

times;

o Lack of PM tools i.e. AutoCAD to draw plans, Ms Project to draw programmes and

programmes for costing;

o Delays in procurement of equipment and commissioning of the building;

o Losing project information due to changes of project managers managing the project that

also affects actions to be taken in the project;

o Change of management or key stakeholders resulting in a change of scope; and

o Amendments to policy and regulations.

In conclusion, the majority of the responses indicated that slow decision-making processes within

the department affected the project as it caused work delays on site. Some of the contractors had

to delay work or waste resources while waiting for the department to approve certain issues

affecting the project. Some of the delays were linked to long supply chain management processes

that in turn caused variations due to new requests by the end-user. In most cases the project briefs

would have to be revised to accommodate new needs at the time resulting in increases in the project

time and cost. The appointment of incompetent contractors was also mentioned by some

respondents. This resulted in poor performance by the contractor, poor quality of work and

subsequent termination of the contractor. This can be linked to the supply chain processes of

awarding the contractors where in most cases projects are awarded to the lowest bidder, or

politically connected contractors, or where joint ventures are awarded large and complex projects

in which they have little or no experience but just because of their connections.

4.5 Theme 3: Training

Seven questions relating to training were asked:

78

1. Do you feel that you have had sufficient training in project management?

2. What project management courses have you undertaken?

3. At what NQF level is that course?

4. Please specify which project management courses you would like to attend that will

improve your PM understanding and skills.

5. Have you been trained on PMO software programs i.e. Project Portfolio office (PPO)?

6. If yes, how often do you utilize PPO to update project details?

Every day [ ]

Once a week [ ]

Twice a week [ ]

Other. Please specify

7. Does your employer encourage you to obtain a project management certificate or degree?

4.5.1 Sufficient training in project management

To become an expert in the field that one is working in, in this case PM, training should be highly

considered and recommended as one needs to have a good understanding of PM principles, tools

and techniques. As PM is a changing environment, training needs to be continuous, planned,

managed and evaluated to achieve maximum performance. The goal of training is to ensure that

employees master the knowledge, skills and behaviours they need to translate them into business

operations (Noe, Hollenbeck, Gerhart & Wright, 2003: 261).

79

Figure 4.17: Sufficient training on PM

When asked the question whether they felt they had received sufficient training, the majority of

respondents indicated that they had not yet received sufficient training in PM. This shows that the

need for continuous improvement within the department is essential as it will help in assessing

project managers' competencies by finding gaps in the area that needs improvement so proper

competency improvement training courses can be arranged.

Some felt that they had received enough training but without mentorship it became useless since

the in-service training has more weight and allows one to grasp practical work easily. Crawford

(2002:250) highlighted mentoring as the most effective way to bring new project managers up to

speed quickly. Once the basics are learned through training, PM expertise is gained from on-the-

job training. One respondent expressed the view that: PM training can never be sufficient as the

environment keeps on changing; it should actually be continuous.

4.5.2 PM courses undertaken

The majority of respondents indicated that they had attended basic PM courses but these were

mostly short courses. Some respondents had attended advanced PM training. This shows that the

need for advanced training courses to enhance their skills and knowledge is required. According

to Moroka (2007:7) there is a strong need for intense PM training programmes for new

27%

73%

Sufficient training on PM

PM training No PM training

80

professionals to enhance their programme and PM capacity to be able to handle infrastructure

delivery programmes.

4.5.3 NQF level for the course

The majority of the respondents did not know the NQF level of the course that they had attended.

Only 33% knew i.e. NQF4, NQF5 and NQF6. This might indicate that the courses are not really

valued within the department as their level does not count for anything.

4.5.4 PM courses required to improve PM understanding and skills

o IDMS;

o Building and Contract management;

o Basic and advanced PM;

o Ms Project and advanced Ms Excel;

o Project Management Professional (PMP) certification; and

o Master’s Degree in PM.

4.5.5 PMO software program training

The majority of respondents (93%) reported that they had been trained on the PPO. Some felt that

the training was not sufficient as it did not cover all the programmes the PPO software can do. One

of the respondents said that he/she had been trained but It was just a crash course ( not full

training). Only 7 % of the respondents had not received training on PPO at all.

4.5.6 Time interval to utilize PPO to update project details

Two respondents said they use it once in two months; Two had not used it; and One uses it once

in three months. The majority of the respondents (33 %) utilize the PPO every day. Fifteen percent

of the respondents utilize the PPO once every week and more than 20% utilize the PPO twice a

week. This shows that PPO was not fully utilized at the time the study was done.

81

Figure 4.18: Time interval of utilizing PPO

4.5.7 Encouragement by superior to obtain a PM certificate or degree

Employees managing or working with projects need to master PM processes in order to

complement their practical work and employers should encourage training as a way of assisting

personnel to manage projects more effectively. According to Noe (2007:3) training refers to a

planned effort by a company to facilitate employees’ learning of job-related competencies.

Competencies include knowledge, skills, or behaviours that are critical for successful job

performance.

One of the respondents explained that: They do remind us on a monthly basis to improve our skills

ourselves but those who have tried to motivate for training on PM related courses did not get a

positive feedback if any feedback at all.

The lack of support was also explained by another respondent who said: I don’t know, actually

not really because we have completed a request to attend the PM courses and the requests were

not supported.

The majority of the respondents believed that they are only encouraged verbally but in practice

their requests are not approved. This in turn discourages others to even try to apply for required

training. This can be regarded as the failure of the current management within the department to

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Every day Everyweek

Twice aweek

Once intwo

months

once inthree

months

Not yetutilized

Time interval of utilizing PPO

82

show commitment and a planned effort to facilitate employees’ learning of job-related

competencies.

4.6 Theme 4: Major limitations of projects

One question regarding major limitation was asked:

1. In your opinion, what contributes to project failure?

4.6.1 Contributions to project failure

This question was aimed at determining a deeper understanding of what contributes to project

failure within the GDoH. Unexperienced professionals plus the lack of management and leadership

in some of the projects which lead to poor performance, was overwhelmingly seen by all

participants as the largest contribution to project failure.

One respondent emphasized the fact that: Some of the professionals were hired because of their

political connection and not necessary the PM and construction management experience that is

needed to deliver the project successfully.

Almost 40% of the respondents alluded to lack of resources and the appointment of incompetent

contractors as the second largest contributor to project failure. This is encapsulated in the response

the appointment of incompetent contractors e.g. appointing a Security Company on specialized

work which requires a mechanical engineer.

While over 30% of the respondents believed that a lack of budget and teamwork contributed to

project failure, the remainder of the respondents did not consider the lack of budget as a factor as

they believed that the government always supported health sector projects. One respondent

expressed the view that: Poor budgeting techniques are contributing to project failure as budget

is received late and causes delays in some of the project activities.

It was interesting to note that only one of the respondents mentioned “corruption of the officials”

as a contributor to project failure, which is contradictory to a greater belief that government

officials are corrupt.

83

The majority of responses indicated delays in payment to the service provider as the major

contributor to project failure as some of the service providers delayed work on site or leave the

site until they are paid. Long processes of approval were also seen as a contributing factor. One

respondent expressed the view that Delays in payment to the professionals and contractors due to

long processes of approval within health cause delays of service delivery.

4.7 Theme 5: Job- related questions

Three job- related questions were asked:

1. How long have you been working with projects within the department?

2. What do you like about your job?

3. What do you dislike about your job?

4.7.1 Periods working with projects within the department

The main objective of this was to determine whether the views of employees are dependent on the

years they have been employed in the department or whether all employees within infrastructure

management shared the same view about the department. Three quarters of the employees have

been working with projects in the department for five years or more. Most of the respondents

shared the same view of PM and project failure within the department regardless of their working

period.

This suggests that most of the employees within the department understand and know how the

projects are being managed as they have been working there for a long time. This also shows that

the employees are committed as they understand the system and its dynamics or alternatively they

are finding it difficult to find employment somewhere else even though they are not happy.

4.7.2 What is liked about their job

Just over 60% of the respondents indicated that they take pride in completing their projects as these

impact on people’s lives. It was heartening to hear one respondent (Project Manager) declare that

My job gives satisfaction in providing services to the community, and making a difference to

people’s lives and building a better tomorrow for South Africans. The pride respondents take in

84

their work was echoed by another respondent who said nothing can take away the appreciation

from people whose services made a difference in their lives.

Learning new things and career growth opportunities were mentioned by over 60% of the

respondents as contributing to job satisfaction. However, when the researcher asked a follow-up

question, they all believed that future career growth would take place outside of the GDoH.

Twenty percent of the respondents indicated that they didn’t like their jobs. They cited stress,

working long hours and the working environment as some of the things contributing to job

dissatisfaction.

Other reasons for liking their job were:

o Changes in the PM environment;

o The idea of changing people’s lives within the health environment;

o Problem solving;

o Sense of accomplishment from overseeing a job from start to finish;

o Flexibility;

o The challenges offered by the job;

o Colleagues; and The sense of accountability.

4.7.3 What is disliked about their job

The open-ended nature of this question gave respondents an opportunity to respond and explain in

their own words how they feel about their job. One of the respondents who is a project manager

and has been with the department for just over five years commented that I do not know whether

we are going or coming and I sometimes do not know what is expected of me.

Human resource constraints were identified as a source of discontent. The majority of responses

revealed that the department had severe human resource constraints, and they were consequently

forced to work overtime with no compensation. The need for more technical support was seen as

a priority. Some respondents felt that the department lacked even basic supply chain management

and procurement management skills. As a result they did not even manage to spend the allocated

budget for some urgent projects, or budgets intended to address infrastructure backlogs.

85

These ties in with the views of some respondents (4.7) when responding about what they

considered to be the contributing factors to project failure, they mentioned poor management

leadership. Some respondents, however, preferred not to elaborate on what they dislike about their

job. This can possibly be ascribed to fear of sanction.

Other reasons for disliking their jobs mentioned by respondents included:

o Not being appreciated by superiors;

o Disregard of personal time (overworking);

o Overload of work due to limited capacity;

o Not being appreciated by the department despite the effort you put in;

o Lack of support by senior management;

o Lack of leadership;

o Changes in leadership and management which lead to lack of decision-making and

authority;

o Long turn-around time for approvals;

o Projects that took longer to be completed and the delays causing tension between the

stakeholders;

o Too much focus on the budget and not enough on people;

o The way the department is being run;

o Lack of resources; and

o Too few programmes to assist in doing the work optimally.

Dissatisfaction and unhappiness were articulated by some respondents as follows: The

environment within the department is not good and how the department operates; I actually dislike

everything.

Other responses which exemplified dissatisfaction with their jobs were: Having somebody who

has to decide on what I must do when they have no clue on what needs to be delivered or done,

and

Being office bound and some of the admin work is frustrating usually short notice report required

to be submitted within unreasonable time urgently.

86

4.8 SUMMARY

This chapter provided a presentation analysis of the respondents from the interview conducted

with 15 participants at infrastructure management of the GDoH. The intention was to determine

the perception of PM by employees working with projects in order to uncover factors contributing

to project failure. The training needs of the participants were also presented. Research questions

were analysed and narrated; and some of the data was presented in numerical form.

The profile information data showed that all respondents are permanently employed with different

salary levels. The research reveals that GDoH infrastructure management respondents do not have

positive views of PM within the department, mainly as a result of PM methodologies not being

clearly defined. The findings also show that the department requires training to advance their

knowledge and skills in PM. The research also presented and analysed challenges contributing to

project failure as most of the projects are not completed in time. The conclusions and

recommendations will be discussed in the next chapter.

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

The main objective of the study was to explore ways to improve the implementation of projects

within the IM of the GDoH, with a view to proposing a PMO framework model for the latter which

will effectively improve project implementation practice.

The presentation and the analysis of results gathered in Chapter four together with the guidelines

of the research methodology outlined in Chapter three forms the baseline for addressing the aim

and objectives of this study.

The conclusions are drawn from the findings of this study and are discussed in terms of the five

themes as outlined in Chapter four as follows:

o Job related questions;

o Perception of PM within the department;

o Understanding and Knowledge of PM;

87

o Training; and

o Major limitations on the projects.

5.2 Research findings

5.2.1 Perceptions of project management within the department

The Gauteng Department of Health’s infrastructure management (IM) directorate is mandated to

carry out projects aimed at improving facilities within hospitals, clinics and other related health

buildings within its jurisdiction. The Department is currently facing the challenge of projects not

being completed within time, scope and budget. There are several constraints facing PM within

the department. PM, especially within IM of the GDoH involves monitoring of projects by project

managers and supervisors, as well as physical observation and assessment of work on site initiated

and executed by the contractors appointed by the implementation agent.

The implementation agent manages projects on behalf of the GDoH. Projects within the

department are complex and unique and therefore require constant monitoring to ascertain whether

they comply with norms and standards of health buildings. In order for the department to achieve

the goals of the project, close monitoring of project progress from initiation to completion is

crucial.

Lack of a project management environment

Whilst there is a general understanding of the basic functions and responsibilities (safeguarding

the budget, cost, schedule and quality of projects), of the project manager, PM within the GDoH

is viewed negatively. The general feeling is that a PM environment does not exist within the

department and the roles and responsibilities between project managers and implementing agents

are not fully clarified.

Project management methodology

88

PM methodology provides a standard and repeatable process to guide project performance from

concept to completion. PM methodology introduces and applies generally accepted PM techniques

and practices that fit within the culture and business needs of the relevant organization (Hill

2004:1). The majority of the respondents were unable to provide, define or identify the standards

that are utilised by IM of the GDoH.

No clear project management process

The AGSA report (2010:7) highlights the lack of PM processes as one of the biggest challenges

facing the department. The lack of proper or clear PM processes within the department was also

confirmed in this study.

Inclusion of senior stakeholders

The power given to the implementation agent in managing SCM processes is a matter of concern.

As SCM processes include advertising of tenders, evaluation and scoring of bids, Departmental

Acquisition Committee (DAC) approval, awarding and termination of professional service

providers and contractors, the inclusion of relevant GDoH senior employees involved in

departmental projects in these processes is essential in order to combat and eliminate the

appointment of incompetent professional service providers and contractors.

Changes in management

Frequent changes in higher levels of management, who are the main decision makers of the

department, create major challenges and result in confusion and lack of focus. Change in

management results in different management and leadership styles which affect the way in which

projects are implemented. Changes in management also create delays in critical decision-making

with respect to projects. Changes in management are attributed to changes in the political

environment as most of the higher level managers are appointed politically. New management

often starts introducing new projects that were not catered for in the budget and this requires the

shifting of funds to accommodate interference by political mandates.

5.2.2 Understanding and knowledge of project management

89

PM methodologies

The lack and use of a combination of PM methodologies is a major source of confusion within IM

of the GDoH. This can be attributed to the fact that there is no known prescribed methodology set

by the department. While PMBOK and Prince II methodologies were the most familiar ones, there

were different interpretations of these within the department.

The lack of a PSMU which acts as the PMO to provide support to the PM team also contributes to

ineffectiveness in project delivery. This is the result of unclear mandates of the PMSU and the

continual changing of staff.

Support and communication

The lack of support from senior managers to project managers to enable them to manage their

projects effectively is problematic. This was ascribed to the lack of open communication between

project managers and their superiors.

5.2.3 Training

Insufficient training

Training is defined by Edwards and Pinnington (2000:185) as a planned and systematic effort to

modify or develop knowledge, skills and attitude through a ‘learning’ experience, to achieve

effective performance in an activity or range of activities. The department does not provide

sufficient training to increase employee knowledge which would assist them to understand the

changing PM environment or to adapt to the latest trends.

Specialized and ongoing training

The GDoH manages very complex projects that require specialised technologies. The need for

ongoing training cannot be overemphasized as the skills and knowledge of employees have to be

continuously improved. Training alone is not sufficient and should be complemented with

practical experience in order to master PM.

Mentorship and development

90

Mentorship and development is required to master the profession and will assist in identifying the

skills gaps of employees. Most of the respondents have been trained on PM software (PPO)

introduced by the PMSU.

While development of opportunities within the department is largely recognised, work overload

prevents employees from benefitting from these opportunities and developing skills.

The perception also exists that employees are not valued and that there is no development in the

department. They are led by seniors who are only interested in goal achievement and not in

supporting staff. Employees are not encouraged to improve their qualifications as their requests

for further study opportunities (e.g. certificates or degrees in PM) were usually not approved.

5.2.4 Reasons for project failure

Inexperienced service providers and contractors

Project failure is a common phenomenon at the GDoH. Very few projects are completed within

timeframes and budget. The biggest issue appears to be the appointment of inexperienced

professional service providers and contractors in some of the projects which results in poor

performance and termination of the project in some cases. This is largely ascribed to corrupt

officials and mismanagement.

Payment delays

Project failure is also seen as a result of delayed payment of professional service providers and

contractors which leads to poor performance by the contractors and slow progress on site. Some

payment delays are the result of poor budgeting techniques where budgets are received late. This

delays project activities and these delays make it impossible to enforce contractual penalties when

projects exceed timeframes and budget. Often quality is compromised. Invoices are not paid within

30 days as required by the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA). Lengthy processes to have

documents approved also cause serious delays in completion of the projects in time and within

budget.

Procurement delays

91

Delays in the procurement of professional service providers and contractors are one of the

significant factors which also accounts for project failure. By the time the project starts or

appointments are made, a lot has changed. This can be attributed to scope change as end-users

have additional needs and new requirements that have to be adhered to and accommodated within

the project. These procurement delays also affect the spending of the allocated budget within the

financial year leading to treasury reducing budgets in ensuing financial years.

Lack of end-user involvement

The absence of end-user involvement in project initiation can also be a reason for project failure

as this may result in sloppy deals and poor project execution. This could pose a security risk for

the project itself as the safety of the project cannot be guaranteed.

Lack of teamwork

The lack of teamwork between the project managers is also a potential cause of project failure.

Teamwork provides a platform for discussion, for avoiding mishaps, providing advice and mutual

assistance.

Lack of capacity

The majority of the respondents have been trained to use a PM Tool (PPO). As the rationality of

the PM software PPO depends on the amount of accurate information distributed to the system by

PPO users, it is crucial that the correct information be loaded as the Infrastructure Reporting Model

(IRM) is derived from the PPO. Due to capacity problems within the department incumbents do

not have time to load information and review accuracy information in the PPO. The capacity

problem comprises a lack of competent personnel, skills, as well as recruiting and retaining

qualified people. The department does not have sufficient resources to implement everything that

is required to improve projects successfully.

Policy amendments

92

The issue of policy amendments has affected many projects that were in progress as scope had to

be reviewed to accommodate the new policy requirements. As health buildings are unique, new

technologies are always being developed which in turn forces the government to introduce new

policies to meet standards and deliver the best service to the community at large.

Project shortcuts

In the name of fulfilling political promises made to communities, undue pressure is brought to bear

on projects resulting in some projects taking shortcuts, especially during the planning phase of the

project. This normally leads to problems during construction like a lack of planning, poor design

and poor PM resulting in scope changes, variation orders, cost escalations and extension of time.

(An example was given of a project where construction started without any detailed technical

drawings which led to variation orders). Unreasonable stress as a result of political pressure or

unreasonable targets set by senior level managers to meet deadlines for completion and

commissioning compromises the quality of some of the projects. In instances where projects are

hurried, performance and execution standards or specification are normally overlooked simply to

settle for completion.

MOAs and SLAs

In some instances there is no signed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or Service Level

Agreement (SLA) between the GDoH and the implementing agent detailing the responsibilities

between them; reporting requirements; emphasis on thorough supervision, monitoring and

evaluation of projects and termination of poor/non performing professional service providers and

contractors. These are significant factors in project failure.

5.2.5 Job-related questions

It is significant to note that the majority of the respondents had a bigger list of what they do not

like about their job than what they liked. Instead of answering what they like some indicated what

they did not like. Few of the respondents feel that there is really nothing to like about their job as

they only do what has to be done.

Sources of job satisfaction

93

The flexibility of their work is viewed by some as a source of satisfaction as they are not always

office bound. Visiting sites, meeting new people and resolving issues that are beneficial to the end-

user of the project are important.The majority of the respondents have been working within the

department for over five years and all respondents were permanently employed. There was a

general feeling of satisfaction when services were delivered which make a difference in people’s

lives. Making a difference and making end-users feel they were appreciated was a great source of

job satisfaction. Daily learning opportunities on the job, the challenges of the ever-changing PM

environment and the unique and different nature of projects were also sources of job satisfaction.

Colleagues who made it worthwhile to work around them was another source of job satisfaction.

Self-fulfilment

When employees are fulfilled in their jobs it is usually an indication of good treatment by their

senior managers. The study revealed a general lack of well-being and self-fulfillment within the

GDoH. There is a sense of employees not feeling appreciated by seniors no matter how much effort

is put into the job. Employees are overloaded with work and are not compensated and recognized

for their commitment and hard work. Employees feel isolated and on their own and senior

managers do not encourage them to grow in their jobs. The feeling exists that seniors are more

focused on budgets than on people.

Employees do not feel optimistic about coming to work every day or about their future within the

department. Some of the employees are finding work unpleasant and work only because they have

to. Even if they like their job they do not feel motivated at all as they do not like the way the

department operates.

5.3 Recommendations

These recommendations are drawn from the findings of the study.

94

5.3.1 Perceptions of project management within the department

In order to improve the success rate of project implementation within the GDoH, the following

recommendations are made by the researcher.

o Monitor and review project progress to determine if the objectives are being met;

o In order to improve management, monitoring and evaluation of project goals within the

GDoH, the department should address and provide clear standard definitions of PM

processes;

o Determine problems relating to implementation of the project;

o Determine lessons learned for use in future projects;

o Facilitate the approval of additional resource commitments or funding;

o Liaise with the end-users to make sure their needs are accommodated as per the brief;

o Follow up on payments to contractors and professional service providers;

o The roles and responsibilities between the implementation agents and project managers

should be clearly defined and there must be agreement regarding the appointment of

professional service providers and contractors; and

o Synergy between teams should be encouraged.

5.3.2 Understanding and knowledge of project management

Crawford (2011:105) & Hill (2004:1) assert that a prescribed methodology should provide

standards, guidelines, practices, procedures, and rules to be used by those who work within a

discipline or engage in an inquiry. In order to improve understanding and knowledge of PM, it is

recommended that the GDoH introduce a unified methodology to be implemented within the

department. This methodology should be clear and precise in terms of the steps that need to be

followed. Internal workshops need to be conducted by experts for all employees and stakeholders

involved in managing the projects.

The successful adoption of PM requires the establishment of a shared set of values and beliefs (i.e.

a PM culture) that aligns with the social and technical aspects of PM in order to achieve the

organization’s business objectives. The success of PM relies on four dimensions: (1) the project

manager's skills and competencies; (2) organizational structure, (3) measurement systems; and (4)

95

management practices that represent an organization’s culture. Organizational values provide the

linkages between the members of the organization, structure, systems, and processes used in the

adoption of PM methods (Kendra & Taplin, 2004: 34). The GDoH should ensure that all four

dimensions as described by Kendra & Taplin (2004: 34) are assessed and implemented.

The provision of the PMO or PSMU within the department is also crucial as it is considered to be

a professional entity that defines and maintains the standards of processes related to PM (Shai &

Shai & Vitner 2009:37). This entity should be fully defined and promoted within the department

so that all the project managers know where to get assistance and clarity when they require it.

Senior PMs with appropriate PM qualifications and experience should be the custodians of this

entity.

It is also recommended that the department introduce more effective PM workshops and these

should be conducted as per agreed timelines with all stakeholders, including superiors. These

workshops should be used as the platforms where project status is provided, including the requests

that are needed from superiors. During these workshops, project managers should also outline the

project objectives and baselines used in accessing the project status.

The recommended PMO framework within the department should include some of the following

functions:

o Project management

The PMO will standardize and maintain processes and methodology pertaining to the

management of projects. The PMO will be responsible for management of the

infrastructure programme as well as physical project implementation activities while

ensuring:

Identification, selection and prioritisation of new projects;

Management of all projects to meet overall objectives and specific key performance

indicators;

Budgeting control for all the projects;

The coordination of regular progress meetings and liaising with all stakeholders;

96

That the associated PM administrative functions, from project registration and

evaluation through to final project completion reports, are taken care of;

The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the GDoH and the

implementation agent is signed and renewed detailing and defining the

responsibilities between them; reporting requirements; emphasis on rigorous

supervision, monitoring and evaluation of projects and the termination of poor/non

performing suppliers and contractors.

o Financial management

The PMO will be responsible for administration and financial management of project

grants within the department. It will also be responsible for motivating for additional

funding and payment of suppliers.

o Procurement management and contract administration

The PMO will sign off all Terms of Reference (TOR) and specifications for the

appointment of professional teams and contractors respectively. The PMO will also

represent the department in the SCM processes of the implementation agent.

o Project monitoring and evaluation

The PMO will monitor and evaluate the performance of projects against construction

programmes, schedules and cash-flows by implementing and reviewing regular status

reporting and visiting project sites. The PMO will identify delays and also ensure that

corrective and preventive actions are implemented on projects that are not performing so

that the project stays within the plan. Implementation and managing of the database of

lessons learned is also recommended.

o Develop project management competency

The PMO performing the role of developing PM competency and methodology will

identify the appropriate training that is required, participate in the selection of trainers,

identify the required levels of knowledge and competency and the requisite segments of

training that are necessary in order to achieve maximum performance (Crawford 2011:74).

The PMO will ensure that training is budgeted for and employees undergo training as

identified.

97

5.3.3 Training

The following training was identified to improve PM understanding and skills:

o Infrastructure Delivery Management Systems (IDMS);

o Building and contract management;

o Basic and advanced PM;

o Ms Project and advanced Ms Exel;

o Project management professional (PMP) certification; and

o Masters Degree in PM

According to Kerzner (2004:298), it is important to have an assessment of skill sets, plans for

training and improvement, as well as measures for continuous improvement when developing PM

competency and methodology. The pursuit of training and development is a decision that the

GDoH has to consider to develop employee skills and knowledge. The department should conduct

skills audits in order to identify areas for development and training. Departments should make the

effort to develop and facilitate plans for continuous PM training and improvement as well as in-

service training and mentoring programs.

It is also essential to motivate individuals to enhance project delivery. Unmotivated participants

will not perform as expected and will not create superior organizations, regardless of other factors.

5.3.4 Major reasons for project failure

To capture lessons learned, the GDoH should encourage and strengthen the use of PM knowledge

systems such as PPO as it has the capability of capturing lessons learned.

To improve planning and implementation of projects, a standardized framework for planning must

be developed. The GDoH should jointly take responsibility for the planning process for project

briefs, and development of concepts and designs with the implementation agent so that the scope

can be evaluated and approved.

To discourage the practice of appointing incompetent professional service providers and

contractors, The GDoH should take part in SCM processes which appoint, recommend and

approve to ensure that the processes are as open and transparent as possible. This will limit

98

corruption of officials and ensure that competent contractors are approved and appointed to render

services and thus ensure an increase in project success rates.

The GDoH should advise their finance department to closely monitor the payment process and

fast-track the releasing of payments to professional service providers and contractors within

contractual requirements. This will prevent slow progress and poor performance as contractors

normally exploit payment delays, the contributing factor to poor quality and extension of time. To

shorten the lengthy processes of approvals, authority should be delegated to the director, chief

director and head of the infrastructure level to ensure that project activities are not delayed.

The GDoH is encouraged to shorten or expedite the supply chain management process (SCM) to

avoid project scope change and failure. Early engagement of infrastructure management with

treasury to secure funding is recommended. This will enable the GDoH to explain the reasons

behind poor budget spending and motivate for the required budget for services that have to be

rendered.

The GDoH should ensure that end-users are fully engaged as they are individuals who make the

project work. It is important that the GDoH ensures that expectations are clearly outlined, and

engagement with the end-user commences early and takes place until the end of the project.

Understanding of the environment and support for a project creates a moral basis for its success as

they are the operators of the services being rendered.

Senior level managers in the GDoH should encourage team work within the PM environment as

employees will be able to share information and advise one another when necessary. This will also

allow the vision and objectives of the department to be articulated and shared amongst the team.

The GDoH should allocate budget for team-building to enhance enthusiasm within the team and

to foster a sense of belonging.

To ensure continued use of PPO, the GDoH should monitor the weekly use of the system and

evaluate the quality of the information loaded in the system. In order to deal with the issue of

capacity, The GDoH should appoint competent personnel in the technical, administrative and

financial fields as a matter of urgency.

99

Little can be effected by the GDoH regarding policy amendments, but it should enforce compliance

with those policies even though they affect project scope, budget, time and programme. It is

important that the GDoH understands the extent of those and ensure that the work on site aligns

with those policies so that projects meet the standards.

The GDoH should ensure that projects are shielded as much as possible and not easily influenced

by political mandates. This will ensure that only feasible and realistic projects are embarked upon.

This will also ensure proper planning and implementation of projects takes place allowing for easy

manageability until completion.

The GDoH should ensure that the SLA is reviewed and approved on an annual basis and also make

sure that the content of the agreement is respected by the implementation agent through vigorous

supervision.

5.3.5 Job related questions

Kaplan and Norton (1996: 130) argue that employee satisfaction is generally considered as the

driver of employee retention and productivity. Satisfied employees are a precondition for

increasing productivity, responsiveness, quality, and customer service. For employees to stay

satisfied, GDoH senior managers should develop, empower and allow employees to make

decisions about their own work that contribute to success or quality outcomes.

Employees are normally more engaged and motivated if they feel that their contribution is valued

and they are empowered with some level of control over their careers and future career paths. Good

work performance should be acknowledged and senior managers should ensure that employees are

recognized and awarded accordingly for good work performance. GDoH senior managers should

improve the work environment by providing the necessary resources and introducing programmes

that will assist employees in doing their work optimally.

5.4 Recommendations for future research

In terms of the objectives of the study, the latter focused only on GDoH employees who are

working with IM projects to discover their perceptions, training, and their knowledge of PM and

did not cover in detail areas such as budget and project planning including the Service

100

Transformation Plan (STP) , procurement processes and delays per each stage of the projects and

their impact. This creates an opportunity for possible future research to determine ways to improve

planning and procurement processes and reduce project delays per stage.

5.5 Summary

This chapter provides conclusions on the perception of employees working with projects within

IM in order to uncover factors contributing to project failure. The research confirms that the

department lacks PM processes and hence projects are doomed to failure as the environment is not

conducive to project success. Project failure is one of the biggest challenges the department is

facing and it has significant service delivery impact on communities and therefore, effective PM

is of fundamental importance.

The research provided recommendations on what the IM could do to improve on the management

of projects in order to ensure project success. The research also recommended a PMO framework

model for IM which will effectively improve project implementation practice.

Possible areas for future research that can be considered in order to provide more insight into

procurement processes and planning within IM were also provided.

References

Andersen, B., Henriksen, B. & Aarseth, W. 2007. Benchmarking of Project management office

establishment: extracting best practices. Journal of Management in Engineering, 23:101.

101

Aubry, M., Hobbs, B., & Thuillier, D. 2007. A new framework for understanding organizational

project management through PMO. International Journal of Project Management, 25(4): 328-336.

Auditor-General South Africa (AGSA). 2010. Management report of the Auditor-General on a

performance audit of the infrastructure delivery process at the Department of Health of the Gauteng

Provincial Government. South Africa: AGSA.

Babbie, E.R. 2011. The basics of social research. (5th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage

Learning.

Bell, J.2010. Doing your research project: A guide for first time researchers in education, health

and social Science. (5th ed).UK: McGraw-Hill.

Bless, C., Higson-Smith, C. & Kagee, A. 2006. Fundamentals of social research methods: an

African perspective. (4th ed). Cape Town, South Africa: Juta.

Blumberg, B., Cooper, D.R. & Schindler, P.S. 2008. Business research methods. (2nd ed).

Berkshire: McGraw-Hill.

Boeije, H.R. 2010. Analysis in qualitative research. London: Sage.

Bogdan, R.C., & Biklen, S.K. 1982. Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory

and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Bouma, G.D. & Ling, R 2006. The research process. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bowling, A. 2002. Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services. (2nd ed).

Buckingham: Open University Press.

102

Boyce, A.R. 2010. A Framework for describing Project Management Office (PMO) functions and

types. Ottawa, ON: SOMOS Consulting Group.

Camilleri. E. 2011. Project success: Critical factors and behaviours. England: Gower.

Cassell, C., & Symon, G. 2004. Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research.

London: SAGE.

Charvat, J. 2003. Project management methodologies: selecting, implementing, and supporting.

USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Cooper, R.D., & Schindler, P.S. 2003. Business research methods. New York: McGraw-

Hill/Irwin.

Crawford, J.K. (2002). The strategic project office. New York, NY : Marcel Dekker AG.

Crawford, J.K. 2011. The strategic project office. (2nd ed). London: CRC Press.

Crawford, L., Turner, R., Hobbs, B. (2005). Aligning Capability with Strategy: Categorizing

project to do the right projects and to do them right. Newtown Square, PA: PMI.

Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. 2007. Designing and conducting mixed methods research.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. 2011. Designing and conducting mixed methods research.

(2nd ed). USA: Sage.

Dai, C.X. & Wells, W.G. 2004. An exploration of project management office features and their

relationship to project performance. International Journal of Project Management 22(7): 523-532.

103

Department of Health (DoH). 2011-2012. Revitalisation of health infrastructure: Project

implementation manual (PIM). South Africa. National Department of Health.

Desta, S., Root, D & Diederichs, C.J. 2006. The practice of project management office (PMO)

concept within the German architect, Engineer, Contractor (AEC) sector. Journal of Engineering,

Design and Technology 4 (1).

Dinsmore, P.C. & Cooke-Davies, TJ. 2006. The right projects done right : From business strategy

to successful project implementation. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

Dollinger, M. 2008. Entrepreneurship: Strategies and Resources. (4th ed). Lombard IL: Marsh.

Edwards, T & Pinnington, A. 2000. Introduction to Human Resource Management. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Ethridge, D.E. 2004. Research methodology in applied economics. Blackwell.

Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. 2012. Discovering statistics using R. London: Sage.

Gauteng Department of Health (GDoH). 2011. Annual Performance Plan 2012/13-2014/15. South

Africa: GDoH.

Golafshani, N. 2003. Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The qualitative

report, 8(4): 597-607.

Health System Trust. 1997. South African Health Review. South Africa: Health System Trust.

Heerkens G.R. 2002. Briefcase books: Project management. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Heldman, K. & Mangano, V. 2009. Project management professional (PMP) exam review guide.

Indianapolis: Wiley.

104

Heldman, K. 2002. Project management professional (PMP) study guide. San Francisco: SYBEX.

Heldman, K. 2007. Project management professional exam study guide. (4th ed). Indianapolis:

Wiley.

Hill, G.M. 2004 .The complete project management office handbook. New York: Auerbach.

Hill, G.M. 2004. Evolving the project management office: A competency continuum. Information

system management journal 12(2):58

Hill, GM. 2008 .The complete project management office handbook. New York: Auerbach.

Hobbs, B. 2007. The multi-project PMO: A global analysis of the current state of practice. White

paper. Newton Square, PA: Project Management Institute.

Hoepfl, M.C. 1997. Choosing qualitative research: a primer for technology education researchers.

Journal of Technology Education, 9(1): 47- 63.

Houser, J. 2008. The importance of research as evidence in nursing. Nursing research: Reading,

using, and creating evidence. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett.

Howes, N.R. 2001. Modern project management: successfully integrating project management

knowledge areas and processes. New York: American Management Association.

Johnson, A.M., Joyner, GT &. Martin, JR. 2002. Process-driven project management office

implementation. Washington, DC: AACE International Transactions.

Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. 2010. Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed

approaches. USA: SAGE.

105

Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Turner, L.A. 2007. Toward a definition of mixed methods

research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2): 112–133.

Kaplan, R.S., & Norton, DP. 1996. The balanced scoreboard: translating strategy to action.

Boston: Harvard Business School.

Kendall, G.I & Rollins, C.S. 2003. Advanced project portfolio management and the PMO. USA:

International Institute for learning & J.Ross.

Kendra, K. & Taplin, L.J. 2004. Project Success: A Cultural Framework. Project Management

Journal, 35 (1): 30-45.

Kerzner, H. 2001. Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and

controlling. (7th ed). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Kerzner, H. 2004. Advanced project management: Best practices on implementation. (2nd ed).

New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Kumar, C.R. 2008. Research methodology. New Delphi: APH.

Kwak, H.P.Y & Dai, C.X . 2000. Assessing the value of project management offices (PMO).

Washington, DC: PMI.

Laurence, L & Patel, K. 2009. Project marketing implementation and its link with project

management and project portfolio management. Communications of the International Business

Information Management Association ( IBIMA) 10.

Letavec, C.J & Bolles D. 2010. The PMOSIG's Program Management Office Handbook: Strategic

and Tactical Insights for Improving Results. USA: J Ross.

Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass.

106

Moroka, M. 2007. Addess by Manye Moroka, Directo-General of the Department of Public Works

at the 2nd Built Environment Conference. Higher Education. Available from

http://www.cbe.org.za/news_speeches.html (Accessed 14 March 2014).

Morris, P & Pinto, J.K .2007. The wiley guide to project organization and project management

competencies. Hobokens, New Jersey: Wiley and sons.

Morse, J.M. 1994. Emerging from the data: the cognitive processes of analysis in qualitative

inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Newell, M.W. 2002. Preparing for the Project Management Professional (PMP) Certification

Exam. (2nd ed). New York: American Management Association.

Noe, R. 2007. Employee Training & Development. New. York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Noe, R.A., Hollenbeck, J.R., Gerhart, B., Wright, P.M. 2003. Human Resource Management:

Gaining a Competitive Advantage. (4th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Noe, R.A., Hollenbeck, J.R., Gerhart, B., Wright, P.M. 2004. Fundamentals of Human Resource

Management. (4th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Parth, F.R. 2002. Implementing a PMO within Toyota financial services. Rancho Santa Margarita:

Project auditors.

Phillips, J., Brantley W., & Phillips P. 2012. Project management ROI: A step-by-step guide for

measuring the impact and ROI for projects. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Pickens, S. & Solak, J. 2005. Successful healthcare programs and projects: Organization portfolio

management essentials. Journal of Healthcare Information Management 19(1).

107

PM Solutions Research . 2012. The State of the PMO 2012. New York: PM solutions.

Pole to Pole Communications. 2009. The value of the project management office. USA: CA

Technologies.

Polit, D.F. & Beck, C.T. 2004. Nursing Research: Principles and Methods. (7th ed). Philadelphia:

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Project management institute (PMI). 2004. A guide to the project management body of knowledge.

(3rd ed). Newtown Square, PA: PMI.

Project management institute (PMI). 2008. A guide to the project management body of knowledge.

(4th ed). Newtown Square, PA: PMI.

Rad, P. & Levin, G. 2007. Project management sophistication and EPMO. Washington, DC:

AACE International Transactions.

Rad, P. & Levin, G. 2007. Project portfolio management tools & techniques. (1st ed). Washington,

DC: AACE International Transactions.

Richman, L. 2011. Successful project management.( 3rd ed). New York: American Management

Association International.

Richman, L. 2012. Improving your project management skills. (2nd ed) . New York: American

Management Association International.

Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J. 2003. Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and

researchers. London: Sage.

Rozenes, S. & Vitner, G. 2009. The training methodology of project management office (PMO)

personnel. Industrial and Commercial Training Journal 41(1): 36-42.

108

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. 2003. Research methods for business students. (3rd ed).

Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Schwalbe, K. 2006. Introduction to project management. USA: Thomson course technology.

Shai, R. & Vitner, G. 2009. The training methodology of project management office (PMO)

personnel. Industrial and Commercial Training Journal, 41 (1): 36-42.

Suter, N.W. 2011. Introduction to educational research: A critical thinking approach. (2nd ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tinnirello, C.P . 2001. New directions in project management. New York: Auerbach.

Valle S., Silvia J.A., Soares P.W., & Alberto C. 2008. Project management office (PMO):

Principles in practice. Washington DC: ACEE International Transaction.

Velpuri, R. & Das, A. 2011. Clarity PPM Fundamentals. New York: Springer Science & Business

Media.

Verzuh, E. 2003. The portable MBA in project management. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley

& Sons.

Verzuh, E. 2005. The fast forward MBA in project management. (2nd ed). New Jersey: John Wiley

& Sons.

Wegner, T. 2007. Applied business statistics: Methods and excel-based applications. (2nd ed).

Cape Town: Juta.

Yin, R. 2003. Case study research: Design and methods. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

109

Appendix A- Letter of Informed Consent

RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

110

UTILIZING PROJECT MANAGEMENT OFFICE: A CASE STUDY OF THE

GAUTENG DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

Dear study participant,

My name is Mbavhalelo Raedani employed by the Gauteng Department of Health. I am currently

in the final stage of completing my Masters of Business Administration (MBA) degree with

Tshwane University of Technology. I am conducting a research study entitled “Utilizing Project

Management Office (PMO): A case study of the Gauteng Department of Health” and you are

kindly requested to participate in this study. Your valuable participation will involve an estimated

30-minute face-to-face or telephone interview at a mutually agreed upon time. Your participation

in this study is voluntary and if desired, you may withdraw from this study at any time.

The study seeks to determine the perceptions, understanding and knowledge of employees

managing the infrastructure related projects within the infrastructure directorate of the GDoH in

order to uncover the factors contributing to project failures within the GDoH. The answers to the

study questions will help me to gain greater understanding and develop meaningful

recommendations.

Please note that:

1. The interview should not take more than 30 minutes;

2. Participation in this research is completely voluntary;

3. Any information provided during the interview process is strictly confidential, and your personal

anonymity is guaranteed;

4. There are no correct or incorrect answers.

As a participant in this research, should you have any complaints concerning the manner in

which this research is conducted, please do not hesitate to contact the researcher named below.

Alternatively, if an independent person is preferred then please do not hesitate to contact my

supervisor Prof AC Allais at carol.allais@gmail.com.

Thank you in advance for your willingness to participate in this study. Your cooperation is

highly valued and will ensure the success of the research.

111

Kind Regards

Mbavhalelo Raedani

Email: Mbavhalelo.Raedani@gauteng.gov.za

Consent to act as a research participant

“By signing this form I acknowledge that I have been given and have understood the explanation

of this research project and the means by which my identity will be kept confidential. I give my

permission to voluntarily serve as a participant in the study described”.

Signed:

Name of participant:

Date:

Appendix B- Questionnaire

SECTION A: PROFILE INFORMATION

1. Gender Male Female

112

2. Type of employment contract : Contract Permanent

3. Number of years employed within the department

Less than 1 year 1-2 years 3-4 years More than 5 years

4. Salary level

4-6 7-8 9-12 13 and above

SECTION B THEME 1: PERCEPTION OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE

DEPARTMENT

The project manager must monitor and report progress against goals, schedule, and costs,

and make appropriate adjustments when necessary.

9. In your opinion, what are the basic functions of a project manager?

Project management is the process of scoping, planning, staffing, organizing, directing, and

controlling the development of an acceptable system at a minimum cost within a specified

time frame.

10. What is your view of project management within the department?

11. Do you feel you have a good understanding on how projects are managed within the

department? Please explain

12. Do you think there are project management development opportunities within the

department?

13. Do you think that employees managing projects require advanced project

management training courses to manage the projects?

14. Do you have the necessary resources to perform your work optimally?

113

If the project's importance changes during the project, or if the management or the

business reorganizes, projects should be reassessed for compatibility with those changes

and their importance to the business.

15. Within your directorate, what do you think are the reasons for project changes?

16. Does your department conduct project reviews to determine whether you need

help?

SECTION B THEME 2: UNDERSTANDING AND KNOWLEDGE OF PROJECT

MANAGEMENT

13. Which of the following project management methodology or processes is your

department currently utilizing?

g) PMBOK

h) PRINCE 1 or PRINCE 2

i) A combination of different methodologies

j) In-house methodology

k) Other, please specify

l) No methodology

14. Describe your understanding of the chosen methodology

15. Do you think the current PMO (i.e. PMSU) within the department is effective?

Please explain

16. In your opinion, what are the most important functions or roles that the PMO

undertakes?

A project is considered successful if, (1) the resulting information system is acceptable to

the customer; (2) the system was delivered on time; (3) the system was within budget; and

(4) the system development process had a minimal impact on ongoing business operations.

17. In your own view, how do you define project success?

18. What are the factors hindering your success in managing projects effectively?

19. What do you think can be done better in order to manage departmental projects

more effectively?

20. What percentages of your projects are completed on time?

76%-100%, 51%-75%, 26%-50%, 0 %-25%

114

21. Do you feel that you receive enough support from your superior to help you manage

projects better?

22. A project has multiple phases (i.e. initiate, plan, execute & closedown). How many

phases have you managed?

23. What has been the time-scale of the longest running project that you have managed

within the department?

24. What were some of the challenges you have come across when managing the longest

running project?

SECTION B THEME 3: TRAINING

8. Do you feel that you have had sufficient training in project management?

9. What project management courses have you undertaken?

10. At what NQF level is that course?

11. Please specify which project management courses you would like to attend that will

improve your understanding and skills of project management.

12. Have you been trained on PMO software programs i.e. Project Portfolio office

(PPO)?

13. If yes, how often do you utilize PPO to update project details?

Every day [ ]

Once a week [ ]

Twice a week [ ]

Other. Please specify

14. Does your employer encourage you to obtain a project management certificate or

degree?

SECTION B THEME 4: MAJOR LIMITATIONS OF PROJECTS

The causes of failed projects include shortcuts taken during the project, expectation

mismanagement, lack of or unreasonably precise targets, poor estimating techniques, budget

overruns, missed schedules, and lack of management and leadership

115

1. In your opinion, what contributes to project failure?

SECTION B THEME 5: JOB RELATED QUESTIONS

1. How long have you been working with projects within the department?

2. What do you like about your job?

3. What do you dislike about your job?

Appendix C- Research approval letter by GDoH

116