PMO 역량에 따른 프로젝트 성과에 관한 연구 = An Exploratory Study on the Project Performance by PMO Capability

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In recent years, although numbers of corporations are bringing in PMO, they seem to be indifferent to PMO performance measurement. This demonstrates that there are also other reasons beside performance measurement of information systems (IS) project being ambiguous by introducing PMO; the lack of acknowledging the concrete function of PMO, and the scarcity of empirical study about the effect of PMO on the project members and project performance. In this sense, this study is aimed at proposing a new research model in which project success factors (i.e., standardization, management advocacy, and staff expertise) affect PMO capability (i.e., knowledge management, resources management, and problem solving competency) positively, leading to project performance (i.e., task outcomes, psychological outcomes, and organizational outcomes) eventually. To empirically test the research model, data are surveyed from PMO department and IS department. To prove the validity of the proposed research model, PLS analysis is applied with valid 132 questionnaires. By employing PLS technique, the measurement reliability and validity of research variables are tested and the path analysis is conducted to do the hypothesis testing. The path analysis results can be organized into 7 ways in large scale. First, standardization of project success factors has a positive association with knowledge management, resources management, and problem solving competency of PMO capabilities. The findings of this result indicate that the multiple or single project management should satisfy standardization in order to operate an effective PMO. Second, management advocacy of project success factors has a positive association with knowledge management, resources management, and problem solving competency. Management advocacy refers to the willingness of management to provide the required resources and authority for project success. There is agreement among researchers regarding the importance of management advocacy for favorable PMO capability. Third, staff expertise of project success factors has a positive association with knowledge management, resources management, and problem solving competency. The findings of this result indicate that the formation of an exceptional consultant or members with a proficient knowledge for staff expertise of project member is the key factor to elevate the PMO capability. Past research suggests that experience and knowledge and the resultant familiarity with the problem faced can be an important determinant of PMO capability. A capable project with appropriate staff expertise means that it enjoys a diversity of abilities and experiences. Fourth, knowledge management competency of PMO capabilities has a positive impact on psychological outcomes but has no direct effect on task outcomes and organizational outcomes. In domestic case of S. Korea, PMO was finally introduced to many other corporations in 2005 though it started bringing in 2000. Therefore, it had neither a significant impact on the task outcomes nor organizational outcomes by lacking the contents and the infrastructure of the knowledge management because the knowledge consolidation and management period of PMO is comparatively shorter by terms than other foreign nations. Fifth, resources management competency of PMO capabilities has a positive association with task outcomes, psychological outcomes, and organizational outcomes. In addition, problem solving competency of PMO capabilities has a positive association with task outcomes, psychological outcomes, and organizational outcomes. Therefore, the findings of this results stress that PMO capabilities has a positive impact on project performance. Sixth, according to the path analysis of the hypothesis, which suggested in this research, problem solving competency is the PMO capability which is the key success factor for task, psychological, and organizational outcomes as an integrated performance model. Further, the analysis rev

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 구본재, "경영혁신을 위한 IT 거버넌스" 네모북스 2006

2 Igbaria, M., "Work experiences, job involvement, and quality of work life among information systems personnel" 18 (18): 175-201, 1994

3 Hackman, J.R., "Work Redesign" Addison Wesley 1980

4 Rai, A., "The effects of development process modeling and task uncertainty on development quality performance" 37 (37): 335-346, 2000

5 Chin, W.W., "The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling" Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 295-336, 1998

6 Barclay, D., "The Partial Least Squares (PLS) Approach to Causal Modeling, Personal Computer Adoption and Use as an Illustration" 2 (2): 285-324, 1995

7 Frame, J.D., "The New Project Management: Tools for an Age of Rapid Change, Corporate Reengineering, and Other Business Realities, Jossey-Bass"

8 Baccarini, D., "The Logical Framework Method for Defining Project Success" 30 (30): 25-32, 1999

9 BIA(Business Improvement Architects), "The Impact of Implementing a Project Management Office-Report on the Results of the On-Line Survey" Research Report 2-5, 2005

10 Todd, P.A., "The Evolution of IS Job Skills: A Content Analysis of IS Job Advertisements from 1970 to 1990" 19 (19): 1-27, 1995

11 Cooprider, J.G,, "Technology-Process Fit: Perspectives on Achieving Prototyping Effectiveness" 7 (7): 67-88, 1991

12 Stelzer, D., "Success Factors of Organizational Change in Software Process Improvement" 4 : 227-250, 1998

13 "Standish Group International, The Standish Report, The Standish Group International, Inc., 2006"

14 Nidumolu, S.R., "Standardization, Requi- rements Uncertainty and Software Project Performance" 31 (31): 135-150, 1996

15 Deephouse, C., "Software processes and project performance" 12 (12): 187-205, 1996

16 Jurison, J., "Software Project Management: The Manager’s View" 2 (2): 2-57, 1999

17 Haley, T.J., "Software Process Improvement at Raytheon" 13 (13): 33-41, 1996

18 Humphrey, W., "Software Process Improvement at Hughes Aircraft" 8 : 11-23, 1991

19 Wold, H., "Soft Modeling: the Basic Design and Some Extensions, in System Under Indirect Observations: Part 2, Amsterdam North-Holland: K.G. Joreskog and H. Wold(eds)"

20 Ravichandran, T., "Quality Management in Systems Development: An Organizational System Perspective" 24 (24): 381-415, 2000

21 Elliot, C., "Qualities of a Data Processing Manager" 13 (13): 35-37, 1975

22 Atkinson, R., "Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria" 17 (17): 337-342, 1999

23 Desouza, K.C., "Project management offices: A case of knowledge-based archetypes" 26 (26): 414-423, 2006

24 Pinto, J.K., "Project Success: Definitions and Measurement Techniques" 19 (19): 53-58, 1988

25 Ward, L., "Project Management Terms: A Working Glossary, 2nd Edition, ESI International" 2000

26 Kenrick, D.T., "Profiting from controversy: Lessons from the person-situation debate" 43 (43): 23-34, 1988

27 Anthony, R.N., "Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis" Harvard University Press 1965

28 PMI, "Organizational project management maturity model (OPM3): knowledge foundation, Newton Square" Project Management Institute 2003

29 Yoo, Y.J., "Media and Group Cohesion: Relative Influences on Social Presence, Task Participation, and Group Consensus" 25 (25): 371-390, 2001

30 Miller, J., "Measuring the Effectiveness of Computer-based Information Systems in the Financial Services Sector" 11 (11): 107-124, 1987

31 Henderson, J.C., "Managing I/S design teams: A control theories perspective" 38 (38): 757-777, 1992

32 Karlsen, J.T., "Management roles for successful IT projects" 8 (8): 7-13, 2002

33 Chin, W.W., "Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling" 22 (22): 7-16, 1998

34 DeLone, W.H., "Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable" 3 (3): 60-95, 1992

35 Kerzner, H., "In Search of Excellence in Project Management" 38 (38): 30-40, 1987

36 Bates, W., "Improving Project Management" 30 (30): 42-43, 1998

37 Wateridge, J., "IT Projects: A Basis for Success" 13 (13): 169-172, 1995

38 ITGI(IT Governance Institute), "IT Governance Global Status Report, IT Governance Institute"

39 Hill, G.M., "Evolving the Project Management Office: A Competency Continuum" 21 (21): 45-51, 2004

40 Fornell, C., "Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unob- servable Variables and Measurement Error" 18 (18): 39-50, 1981

41 Nelson, R.R., "Educational Needs as Perceived by IS and End-User Personnel: A Survey of Knowledge and Skill Requirements" 15 (15): 503-525, 1991

42 Lee, D., "Critical Skills and Knowledge Requirements of IS Professionals: A Joint Academic/Industry Investigation" 19 (19): 313-340, 1995

43 O’Reilly, C.A., "Corporations, Culture, and Commitment: Motivation and Social Control in Organizations" 31 (31): 9-25, 1989

44 Howel, J.M., "Champion of Technological Innovation" 35 (35): 317-341, 1990

45 Kaplan, R.S., "Balanced Scorecard" Harvard Business SchoolPress 1996

46 Kwak, Y.H., "Assessing the Value of Project Management Offices (PMO)" 2000

47 Igbaria, M., "Antecedents and consequences of job satisfaction among information center employees" 9 (9): 145-174, 1993

48 Dai, C.X., "An exploration of project management office features and their relationship to project performance" 22 (22): 523-532, 2004

49 Karlsen, J.T., "An empirical evaluation of knowledge transfer mechanisms for IT projects" 44 (44): 112-119, 2003

50 Aladwani, A.M., "An Integrated Perfor- mance Model of Information Systems Projects" 19 (19): 185-210, 2002

51 Byrd, T.A., "An Explor- atory Analysis of the Value of the Skills of IT Personnel: Their Relationship to IS Infrastructure and Competitive Advantage" 32 (32): 21-54, 2001

52 Wixom, B., "An Empirical Investigation of the Factors Affecting Data Warehousing Success" 25 (25): 17-41, 2001

53 Goldenson, D.R, "After the appraisal: a systematic survey of process improvement, its benefits and factors that influence success, CMU/SEI-95-TR-009, Software Engineering Institute"

54 Niazi, M., "A maturity model for the implementation of software process improvement: an empirical study" 74 : 155-172, 2005

55 Aubry, M., "A New Framework for Understanding Organizational Project Management through the PMO" 25 (25): 328-336, 2007

56 Andres, H.P., "A Contingency Approach to Software Project Coordination" 18 (18): 41-70, 2002

57 Rainer, A., ""Key Success Factors for Implementing Software Process Improvement: a Maturity based Analysis" 62 : 71-84, 2002

58 Dyba, T., ""An Instrument for Measuring the Key Factors of Success in Software Process Improvement" 5 : 357-390, 2000