Critical Analysis Essay 2022

SID:
Word count: 1,300 Essay only (not including the template and reference list)
ENG5811 CRITICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY
LITERATURE ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK
Citation Brief
Overview
Line of
argument Research
Methods
Limitations
& critique
Recommendatio
ns
(Savolainen,
Ahonen and
Richardson,
2012)
The author
provides
supplier
perspectiv
e on
project
failure.
The
authors
proposed
different
criteria for
assessing
project
success
and
failure.
The authors
used a
qualitative
assessment
to analyze
factors.
The paper
examines
only seven
articles and
the
research.
The authors
recommend in-
depth research
on the supplier
perspective.
(Sage, Dainty
and Brookes,
2014)
The
authors
assess
four
different
perspectiv
es of
project
failure.
The
author
proactivel
y declares
factor for
the failure
of
constructi
on
projects in
the United
Kingdom.
The authors
execute
qualitative
research
with of
project
managers in
UK
construction
companies.
The
research
pertains to a
specific
group of
managers.
The authors
recommend
research on
different
domains of
project
parameters.
(Gupta et al.,
2019)
The
proposed
work
provides
project
monitoring
and
success
assessme
The
authors
use a
systemati
c review
of project
assessme
nt models.
The authors
use the
Systematic
review
methodology
on journal
articles.
The
proposed
work
highlights
journal
articles from
an electronic
database till
The author
recommends
models project
failure
prediction
models.

nt. 2016.
(Albert, Balve
and Spang,
2017)
The paper
presents
stakeholde
rs take on
project
success
and failure.
The
authors
highlight
factors of
project
success.
A conceptual
methodology
is
implemented
based on
recent
journal
articles.
The authors
face the
limitation of
digitally
available
papers.
The authors
recommend
assessment
models for
project success.
(Adebisi, Ojo
and Alao,
2018)
The paper
highlights
factors for
the failure
to execute
multi-story
buildings in
Nigeria.
The
authors
provide
empirical
data for
the
Nigerian
constructi
on
company.
The
researchers
use
descriptive
quantitative
methodology
in conducting
surveys and
questionnair
es through
Nigerian
contractors.
The authors
conduct 243
questionnair
es in Lagos
State of
Nigeria.
The authors
recommend risk
assessment and
financial
implications of
multi-storey
buildings.
(Lehtinen et
al., 2014)
The author
highlights
relationshi
ps of
factors of
failure in
software
projects.
The
authors
determine
d the flaw
in
software
project
failure
related to
processes
.
The authors
use
quantitative
methodology
for project
failures in
different
companies.
The
research-
based
purely on
data
collected
from four
software
product
companies.
The authors
recommend
statistical
analysis of
heavy data and
empirical
analysis of
complex
mechanisms in
software project
processes.
(Taherdoost
and
Keshavarzsal
eh, 2016)
The paper
targets key
factors that
account for
the failure
and
success of
projects in
a global
marketplac
e.
The
authors
highlight
the flaw in
recent
research
on project
failures.
The authors
use the
theoretical
methodology
to propose a
framework
for analyzing
project
success and
failure
factors from
The
proposed
work lacks
statistical
analysis of
the extent of
factors
affecting the
project
execution
The authors
provide success
factors for
project
execution are
provided for
organizations.

a global
perspective.
process.
(Montequin,
Cousillas,
Alvarez and
Villanueva,
2016)
The
authors
examine
observer
perspectiv
e of
managers
on project
success
and failure.
The
authors
derive
patterns
of cause
on the
success
and
failures of
the
projects in
eyes of
the
managers
.
The authors
use
quantitative
research
methodology
with surveys
and
questionnair
es.
The survey
is deployed
on LinkedIn
to 36
different
project
managemen
t groups.
The authors
recommend to
extend the
analysis on
proposed
methods.
(Antony and
Gupta, 2019)
The author
proposes
ten
reasons of
failure of
process
improveme
nt projects.
Failure of
projects
incur huge
cost
losses,
therefore,
the
authors
provide
ten
reasons
with
remedy
analysis
to
incorporat
e the
issue.
The research
is qualitative
with
extensive
review of
literature and
case studies.
The review
presented in
research is
mainly
bases on
author
reviews and
managemen
t
professional
s.
The research
must be
extended to
surveys and
journal reviews
for more in-
depth analysis.
(Navandar, Bari
and Gaikwad,
2021)
The author
discusses
failure
factors for
private and
governmen
t and
constructio
n firms in a
developing
country.
A
compariso
n between
private
and
governme
nt
constructi
on firms is
the main
motivation
of
research.
Quantitative
analysis is
selected for
the research.
The analysis
is done on
some
government
and private
firms of
India.
The work
presented helps
contruction
policy makers in
minimizing
project failures.

DRAWING ON THEORY AND EVIDENCE, CRITICALLY ANALYSE THE CLAIM AND
ITS IMPLICATIONS THAT THE PERCEIVED CAUSES OF PROJECT FAILURE WILL
VARY DEPENDING ON THE WAY THE FAILURE IS ASSESSED
A project is creating a product or providing a service to the customers by integrating
several processes. The analysis of project success and failure is of prime importance for
organisations to ensure the effective operation of their objectives. Project monitoring allows
smooth long-term success of organisations for continued improvement. Project failures incur
a massive loss in resources and costs that provide the basis of motivation for analysing key
factors that account for project failures.
Several researchers explain the failure of projects in execution due to numerous
reasons. Countable researchers formulate frameworks for the effective operations of projects
that depend on various factors, including social, organisational, environmental and political
factors. Also, the project success of a different organisation depends upon interconnected
factors that are unique to every organisation. A critical analysis of the perceived factors of
project failures is highlighted using different research on particular organisations' domains.
Sage, Dainty and Brookes, (2014) discuss the factors of project failure in construction
companies of the United Kingdom. They assess four different perspectives of project failure
that define critical project studies: positivism, structural Marxism, interpretivism, and ANT
theories. The authors execute qualitative research methodology for construction companies in
the UK. The authors also conducted interviews and surveyed project managers of
construction companies in the UK in their research to highlight deep residing factors that
account for the failure of projects they execute. The critical aspects of project failures from
the four perspective theories are highlighted. The success and failures are assessed on
perception as failures and successes in project execution derive from different scopes and
aims of implementation. The authors relate project failure to a lack of management, critical
for assessing project success. The author proactively declares project management the most
significant factor accounting for the failure of construction projects in the United Kingdom.
After examining four theories, the authors provide a pluralist analysis that highlights the
social and political aspects of project management that supports the central theme of their
research.

Gupta et al., (2019) aims at providing project monitoring and success assessment
approaches due to limited research on project failure prediction processes. It also addresses
the issues related to project failures that were previously unanswered. The authors use the
systematic review methodology to endorse the strength of their review. It extends researchers'
customised and generalised approach to assessing project failures with its extensive
systematic literature review. The research provides significant knowledge on failed projects
by assessing similarities and differences between project evaluation and performance
indication under various scenarios. The failure of projects occurs due to poor
communicational structure, the ineffectiveness of the manager, lack of organisational support
and unproductive workspace culture. The research provides recommendations for proposing
more models responsible for predicting project failure under different project process
parameters. The authors propose an input-process-output model for project evaluation and
monitoring.
Albert, Balve and Spang, (2017) present project success criteria for different patterns
in various fields of the project. The author integrates project success criteria with its
assessment, including the stakeholder point of view in the assessment of criteria. With
verification of Barnes's Iron Triangle, the authors highlight other specific factors relating to
different domains of project success to minimise project failures. The authors define these
factors based on two criteria; hard criteria and soft criteria. The hard criteria deal with cost,
time and performance, and economic and product quality indicators. In contrast, the soft
criteria include stakeholders' satisfaction, their connections with organisations and the trade-
off agreements between them. Finally, the authors recommend using assessment models for
project success with quantitative and qualitative analysis of factors of project failure.
The factors of failure of execution of multi-story buildings in Nigeria has implications
of project management in executing projects (Adebisi, Ojo and Alao, 2018). The authors find
the exact reasons specific to the Nigerian community unique to the construction industry and
highlight critical factors in different applications. The factors highlighted include insufficient
funding by clients in multi-storey building projects, ineffective construction plans and
methods, structural failure, contractor bankruptcy, irregular project contract schedules, and
lack of trained personnel for heavy construction that accounts for high-level construction

project failures. The authors recommend risk assessment and financial implications of multi-
storey buildings. Highlighting the absence of professional staff, the authors prescribe the
training of workers for substantial construction projects. There must be laws and regulations
for providing multi-storey building projects for qualified contractors.
Lehtinen et al., (2014) study four different companies to analyze factors accounting
for the failure and the interconnected relationship. Not only do the authors highlight the
issues, but they also relate the problems with the most relevant project processes. The authors
determined the flaw in software project failure related to the subsequent factors of processes.
The authors declare several interconnected and interrelated factors that account for software
project failure. The research findings declare lack of cooperation between employees and
managers, improper task assigning and execution, and lack of advanced software as the main
factors contributing to the failure of projects. It also concludes that tasks, employees,
management, project execution methods and organizations’ motives define the relationship
between project and management. The authors also recommend statistical analysis of heavy
data and empirical analysis of complex mechanisms in software project processes.
Taherdoost and Keshavarzsaleh, (2016) highlight critical factors that account for the
failure and success of projects in the global marketplace. It highlights the unification of
project scope with the goal and objective of the organisation executing it. This paper
excellently associates the domain of project execution and its relation with organisational
objectives on global terms. The authors highlight the flaw in recent research that highlights
success and failure factors about projects and the remedies they provide for the effectiveness
of project execution. These previous researches fail to include the implication of critical
factors in determining project success or failure. Therefore, the authors provide a framework
for global practitioners in assessing individual factors accounting for project failure and
success. The authors, through their research, provide success factors of project execution to
the organizations following their scope of work. They also highlight the effects of growing
modernization on the attributes of success factors and their ability to change according to
subsequent industry. The authors vehemently promote their framework in every organization
due to its completeness and effectiveness. Managerial skills, technical abilities of workers,
unique attributes of projects and the overall environment of the organization define the
success rate of project execution from global perspectives. A good relationship between

project management and processes defines the projects' effectiveness. They recommend
research on the relationship of factors and their interconnected effects on each other.
Savolainen, Ahonen and Richardson, (2012) provide supplier perspective on project
failure with an assessment of different criteria, namely project success, project management
and supplier's perspective on project success and failure. The authors proposed different
criteria for assessing project success and failure, depending on multiple influencing factors.
The success factor of project management and the successful execution of the project
depends on the project's cost, goals, and processes. These factors aim at developing a short-
term and long-term goal for the supplier. The supplier signs the deal according to the benefits
he receives from the projects organisations execute. The authors recommend providing
research on the supplier perspective domain due to little research contribution. The analysis
should have been on more articles with surveys and questionnaires for the suppliers.
Sectorial, geographical and cultural differences in project management account for the
success and failure of projects (Montequin, Cousillas, Alvarez and Villanueva, 2016). The
authors examine these factors on global perspectives of project management and for this,
designed questionnaires and surveys for managers and deduce the behaviours of their
observances on the pointed factors of failure and success. The respondents were divided into
9 groups and each group represent a different analysis based on their observation. It is seen
through cluster and statistical analysis that al the groups responded differently on the three
main factors for project failure.

REFERENCES
Sage, D., Dainty, A. and Brookes, N., 2014. A critical argument in favor of theoretical
pluralism: Project failure and the many and varied limitations of project management.
International journal of project management, 32(4), pp.544-555.
Gupta, S.K., Gunasekaran, A., Antony, J., Gupta, S., Bag, S. and Roubaud, D., 2019.
Systematic literature review of project failures: Current trends and scope for future
research. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 127, pp.274-285.
Albert, M., Balve, P. and Spang, K., 2017. Evaluation of project success: a structured
literature review. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business.
Adebisi, E.O., Ojo, S.O. and Alao, O.O., 2018. Assessment of factors influencing the failure
and abandonment of multi-storey building projects in Nigeria. International Journal of
Building Pathology and Adaptation.
Lehtinen, T.O., Mäntylä, M.V., Vanhanen, J., Itkonen, J. and Lassenius, C., 2014. Perceived
causes of software project failures–An analysis of their relationships. Information and
Software Technology, 56(6), pp.623-643.
Taherdoost, H. and Keshavarzsaleh, A., 2016. Critical factors that lead to projects’
success/failure in global marketplace. Procedia Technology, 22, pp.1066-1075.
Savolainen, P., Ahonen, J.J. and Richardson, I., 2012. Software development project success
and failure from the supplier's perspective: A systematic literature review. International
Journal of Project Management, 30(4), pp.458-469.
Montequin, V., Cousillas, S., Alvarez, V. and Villanueva, J., 2016. Success Factors and
Failure Causes in Projects: Analysis of Cluster Patterns Using Self-organizing
Maps. Procedia Computer Science, 100, pp.440-448.

Antony, J. and Gupta, S., 2019. Top ten reasons for process improvement project failures.
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 10(1), pp.367-374.
Navandar, Y., Bari, C. and Gaikwad, P., 2021. Failure factors–a comparative study of private
and government construction firms. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management,.