Kennesaw State University

DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University

Faculty Publications

1-1-2014

A Comparative Review of Information Technology

Project Management in Private and Public Sector
Organization
Muhammad Obeidat
Kennesaw State University, mobeida1@kennesaw.edu

Max North
Kennesaw State University, mnorth@kennesaw.edu

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/facpubs

Part of the Databases and Information Systems Commons, and the Management Information
Systems Commons

Recommended Citation
Obeidat, Muhammad and North, Max, "A Comparative Review of Information Technology Project Management in Private and Public
Sector Organization" (2014). Faculty Publications. 3695.
https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/facpubs/3695

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty
Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University. For more information, please contact
digitalcommons@kennesaw.edu.
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

A Comparative Review of Information Technology Project Management in

Private and Public Sector Organizations
Muhammad Obeidat and Max M. North
Management Information Systems, Business Administration Department
Southern Polytechnic State University, GA, USA
mobeidat@spsu.edu & max@spsu.edu

[Abstract] Both private and public sector organizations tend to recognize the prominence of information
technology within project management techniques and practices. The primary objective of this paper is to
present a comparative review of information technology within project management in private and public
sectors. Moreover, this research provides an extensive review of related topics such as the evolution of
information technology, factors contributing to project abandonment, and the tools and techniques of
management that effect project success. In conclusion, the authors present a variety of practical and
effective guidelines and recommend approaches for the successful deployment of information technology
within project management for both private and public sectors.

[Keywords] information technology; project management; private and public sector organizations

Introduction
The use of Information Technology (IT) has augmented the field of Project Management (PM) by
providing a significant set of tools and techniques to even accelerate the efficiency and effectiveness of
projects within private and public sector organizations. Furthermore, as IT becomes increasingly more
prominent globally and across all types of organizations, it becomes critically more important to
comprehend a variety of managerial techniques and “best business practices” to ultimately contribute to
the success of operational practices (Rosacker & Rosacker, 2010).
A basic survey shows topics of Information Technology related to Project Management covering a
significant volume of Project Management literature (Urli & Urli, 2000, Kloppenborg & Opfer, 2002;
Rivard & Dupre, 2009; Peslk, 2012). Of significant importance is a review by Urli and Urli analyzing
over 3,500 articles published under the auspices of project management studies, revealing that 63% of
these articles reported on information systems projects, while 24% dealt with research and development
(R&D) projects, and just 13% were aimed specifically at construction projects. Furthermore Kloppenborg
and Opfer, after 40 years of research on project management, observed that information systems have
been one of the central areas of project management. Generally, a significant portion of the project
management deals with management of information systems from industrial to government sectors, but
particularly within the software industry. Rivard and Dupre conducted an extensive search of articles
published for decades in Information Systems Project Management. Furthermore, researchers reported ten
topics encompassing IT project management, including Integration, Scope, Time, Cost, Quality, Human
Resource, Communications, Risk and Procurement.
Numerous similar empirical research reviews have been conducted in the separate fields of
information technology, project management, and private and public sector organization management;
however, there has not been a cohesive, comprehensive and comparative review that considers all these
interrelated fields. Consequently, the primary goal of this paper is to present a comparative review of
Information Technology within Project Management in private and public sector organizations.
The authors briefly provide and utilize the following working terminologies within this paper: (i)
Project Management - “Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques
to project activities to meet the project requirements." (Project Management Institute, 2008, P.6); and (ii)
Best Business Practices - The concept of “best business practices” according to (Rosacker and Rosacker,
2010) “encompasses the application of proven methods and techniques to address business situations in a
directed manner, thereby enhancing the opportunity of success.”

55
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

Evolution of IT in Organizations
Briefly exploring the evolution of IT resources will be helpful in understanding IT project management
practices in private and public sector organizations. IT resources were initially utilized for basic
transaction processing, using mainframe computers with large disk drives, reel tapes, and line printers.
These huge systems provided services for massive daily operations and produced static reports for
management with limited access to the hardware and software (Schelin, 2003). The next generation of
computing (from the late 1970s and early 1980s), with the advent of personal computers, gave birth to
distributive processing and development of productivity software such as Lotus 1-2-3, WordPerfect,
Varieties of Databases. In the 1990s, the Internet revolutionized the field of IT by introducing
communication tools such as E-mail, the World Wide Web, and file transfer tools (Melitski, 2003). More
sophisticated hardware and software continued to advance IT in the 2000s, especially technology such as
Cloud Computing, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), Application Service Provider (ASP), and Human
Resource Management Systems (HRMS). Considering these recent advances in the computing field, IT
became a valued, integral part of nearly all organizations and a particularly strong ally to management
(Rosacker & Rosacker, 2010; Anwar & Mohsin, 2011).
Ultimately, IT resources have become one of the main assets in private and public organizations, and
as these tools grow more ubiquitous, the understanding and utilization of IT resources gradually is
becoming more prominent in the public sector, closing a gap that has existed for decades (Yildiz, 2007).

IT Project Management within Private and Public Sectors

Information Technology is widely utilized in private as well as public sector organizations, as evidenced
by a great margin of financial resources allocated to IT (Grimsley, Meehan &Tan, 2007; Gross 2009;
Project Management Institute, 2013). However, a majority of IT projects in both sectors are mismanaged
and basically inefficient in accomplishing the scheduled and strategic objectives and goals (Powner, 2008).
Rosacker and Rosacker (2010) conjectured that there was a marked difference between Information
Technology in the private sector versus the public sector. The researchers divided their investigation into
three phases: The first phase was a review of the evolution of Information Technology used in
government organizations, in particular, the United States government; the second phase was to determine
the differences between public and private sector organizations; and finally, the last phase of the study
was to investigate and report on research that had identified the unique attributes of public sector
information technology. The findings of the study were that a large majority of the public sector IT
projects suffered from being over-budget, falling beyond their implementation time, and failing to
produce the “functional requirements” when they reached their completion. The authors suggested future
empirical studies to determine best practices for public sector IT projects; they recommended studies
include cultural and organizational problems unique to the public sector and focus on successful public
sector projects in order to identify successful practices.
Project management frameworks, guidelines and techniques that have been developed in the private
sector cannot be directly used in the public sector without empirically studying the similarity and
differences between them (Cats-Baril & Thompson, 1995). Further, Rosacker and Risacker (2010) report
that while the private and public sectors are similar in some aspects, they differ in at least in several ways:
(a) the private sector deals closely and intensively with competitors, and the public sector does not share
the same pressure in competition; (b) The accountability of private sector managers are to immediate
clients, shareholders, and stakeholders, in contrast, public sector managers are accountable to a broader
group of constituents (also Cats-Baril & Thompson); and (c) Public organizations can be subject to more
strenuous laws and regulation than private organizations.
Similarly, Bretschneider (1990) conducted a study which included over 1,000 public and private
organizations and provided some potential differences between two types of organizations that could
affect the success of IT projects: (a) Public and private IT managers cope differently with respect to
interdependence across organizational boundaries; (b) Public and private IT managers express different
criteria for the evaluation of hardware and software; (c) Planning is usually concerned with extra-
organizational linkage in public sector, while internal coordination in private sector; (d) In the public

56
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

sector, IT managers are placed at a lower level of the organizational structure than private-sector IT
managers.
While IT has rapidly advanced and displayed an increasingly progressive influence on project
management techniques, empirical research in the area of IT project management remains insufficient;
there are some anecdotal research that provide some insight, but none have been sufficient to fill the gap
(Grimsley, Meehan and Tan, 2007; Melin and Axelsson, 2009). Therefore, managers—and specifically
public sector managers—have made short- and long-term decisions about IT without having knowledge
well-supported by empirical research. Thus, there is a great need for empirical inquiry that eventually
leads to "best business practices" to be applied in private and as well as public sector organizations.
Sarantis, Smithson, Charalabidis, and Askounis (2010) described the fact that many government
entities are using information technology to create e-Government projects that serve to provide the public
with websites for access to services and provide accurate and up-to-date information and to improve the
workplace for government workers. The authors used exploratory research methods, reviewing journals,
books, and case studies along with personal experience to gain insight into the project management
approaches used for these projects and the issues and gaps that have occurred as they are developed.
Through their analysis, researchers identified four persistent gaps in project management: (i) Failure to
determine a clear goal-driven plan for a project; (ii) Inability to structure multidimensional projects into
workable phases; (iii) Lack of knowledge transfer when projects are completed; and (iv) Failure to cope
with the nature of e-government stakeholders. They concluded that there is a need to reassess the structure
in e-government project management.
A management system needs to be designed that considers the lifecycle of the whole project,
determines the special challenges of e-Government projects, and merges hard and soft traits of project
management. The authors stated the need for more in-depth studies in order to create a more successful e-
government project management structure.
Although there are several business practices that may significantly improve the return on investment
of IT projects, project management could reap substantial benefit through empirical research focusing on
both sectors. Information technology project management practices need to be considered for a variety of
reasons, including continuous changes of use of technology (Melin & Axelsson (2009). While there are a
good number of studies performed on “best business practices” within the private sector, a major research
gap exists for the public sector. Considering the large size of public sector agencies and large amount of
IT investments by these agencies, future research seems to be crucial and necessary (Bretschneider, 1990;
Cats-Baril & Thompson, 1995; Schwalbe, 2010).
Recently, and as mentioned earlier in this paper, Rosacker and Risacker (2010) conducted a major
review of IT project management within public sector organizations. Their research argued that applying
the lessons learned from the private sector to public organizations might be unsuitable without first
empirically inspecting their applicability.
To further investigate information technology project management within private and public sector
organizations, the forthcoming sections briefly provide reviews of research on the following topics: (i)
Factors contributing to IT project abandonment; (ii) Project management techniques and IT project
success; (iii) Maturity of IT project management; and (iv) Guidelines and approach for successful project
management.

Factors Contributing to Information Technology Project Abandonment

IT project failure and abandonment rates have remained consistently high; Standish Group (2013)
provided an in-depth study reporting that 43% of projects demonstrated issues such as being late, over-
budget, or having less than the required features and functions; additionally, 18% failed due to
cancellation before completion or delivery. Similarly, Keil, Mann, and Rai (2000) reported that 30-40% of
IT projects exhibit some degree of escalation (escalating continued commitment to a failing course of
action). The proceeding research concisely provides the primary reasons for project abandonment;
however, comprehensive coverage of this topic is not within the scope of this paper.

57
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

Ewusi-Mensah and Przasnyski (1994) identified several factors causing information technology projects
to be abandoned in organizations. They discovered senior management involvement and end-user
participation to be the primary factors of failure in the project development process. The abandonment
could be categorized of three types within the organizations; (1) Total abandonment; (2) Substantial
abandonment; and (3) Partial abandonment. Researchers suggested that the three main categories which
contribute to the abandonment of information technology projects are economic, technological, and
organizational in nature, and the results confirmed a strong similarity to the results of their earlier study as
follows: Project costs and schedule were not a major contributor to abandonment; technological issues did
not significantly contribute to the decision for abandonment of projects; and finally, considering the
organizational factors, management and end-users were possible major contributors to project
abandonment, while the information technology personnel were not considered to be a major contributor.
Cats-Brial and Thompson (1995) conjectured four deficiencies that causes severe issues for the
implementation of most IT projects; namely, failure in any or all the following: (a) assessing risk of an
individual project; (b) counterbalancing risk and benefit; (c) defining different managerial approaches for
each project; and (d) considering the aggregate implementation risk of projects under development.
Warkentin, Moore, Bekkering, and Johnson (2009) conducted research to determine why such a high
percentage of information systems development projects fail to meet their objectives. The researchers first
developed a list of the three main risk factors to systems development: technical, organizational, and
resource constraints. They designed an open-ended questionnaire that was distributed to a total of eight
experienced systems development engineers and project managers in different organizations. From the
responses of the first questionnaire, a second questionnaire designed with thirteen questions was
distributed within a specific industry to eight experienced system development personnel to obtain
feedback on perceived risks in their own projects.
The results indicated that organizational risks present the most risk to the success of a project. Unless
there are people dedicated to overseeing a project and the organization is committed to the “big picture”
of the project and provide the necessary support to successfully complete the system development project,
then the result will be failure or falling short of expectations. The researchers suggested more studies be
conducted with a larger number of respondents from a greater number of organizations.

Project Management Techniques and Information Technology Project Success

Over the past few decades, there has been a multitude of studies on information technology and various
related aspects linking information technology to effectiveness of the completed projects (Glorfeld, 1994;
Peslk, 2012; Taylor, Woelfer & Artman, 2012). Moreover, there has recently been a great quantity of
research dedicated to information technology project success and key project management techniques
contributing to the accomplishment of projects, including requirement, risk, planning, scheduling, user
involvement, management commitment, change control, management methodology, communications,
alignment to strategy, and globalization (Tarnow, 2002).
Tarnow extensively investigated the twelve mentioned techniques and concluded that project success
may be improved by utilizing selected project management techniques. For illustration, Tarnow showed
that the following selected correlations between project management techniques and success of the
projects: (a) a positive correlation between high project user involvement and high project success; (b) a
positive correlation between upper management support and high project success; (c) a very positive
correlation between a formal project communication method and high project success; (d) a strong
positive correlation between a strong project linkage to strategy and high project success; and (e) a very
strong negative correlation between project globalization and high project success.
One of the major success factors of projects seems to be the competency of the executives. Recently,
a well-recognized Standish Group (2013) conducted research of success of software development projects
across diverse industries that showed almost 39% of all projects were delivered on time, on budget, with
planned required features and functions successfully; while 43% demonstrated issue such as being late,
over budget with less than required features and functions; and 18% failed due to cancellation before
completion or delivery. It must be noticed that the success rate of projects is improving due to use of well-

58
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

known factors directly quoted from the CHAOS 2013 report: “…looking at the entire project environment
of processes, methods, skills, costs, tools, decisions, optimization, internal and external influences, and
team chemistry.” (Standish Group, 2013, p.1). Further, the CHAOS report maintains that “the single most
important advancement to improve project success rates is the increase in competency of the executive
sponsor.” (Standish Group, 2013, .1).
Furthermore, research demonstrates that upper-level management plays an important role in project
success. Lee and Anderson (2006) used a rank-order Delphi survey to determine key factors in an
organization that impact information technology project management capabilities. The researchers
believed there were other factors beyond the project management maturity model that have profound
influence on the outcome of IT project management capabilities. In order to determine these factors, the
Delphi survey was used enlisting the help of 33 panelists from a broad demographic group. The panel was
comprised of individuals with less than 5 years to more than 20 years of IT industry and/or IT project
management experience.
The survey was presented in 3 phases: the first, brainstorming to identify 35 influencing factors. Next
came the narrowing of the list of factors from 35 to the top 13 items using a Likert scale of 1 to 5 to select
these items. The third phase was to rank the top 13 in order through a face-to-face meeting. Using (W)
Kendall coefficient of concordance to calculate the results, the panel was able to determine the top 4
impact factors. The results indicate that upper management plays a key role in the success of IT project
management along with “a clear definition for success” presented to the team. This study provides
assistance to all levels of management involved in project management within an organization.
Risk management is considered to be one of the most important instruments available to a project
manager in order to insure a positive outcome for a project. Three of the main approaches most often
discussed in the literature studied are the management approach, the contingency approach, and the
evaluation approach (Didraga, 2013). Specifically, Didraga conducted a study to determine how risk
management might affect organizations in Romania using information technology in their project
management. A study and analysis of studies previously conducted then analyzed how risk management
methods affect the subjective and objective functions of a project. Using articles from 1978 through 2012,
Didraga prepared a questionnaire which was sent to a targeted IT managers, IT analysts, and projects
managers in Romanian companies. It was determined that risk was part of software development projects
and implementation projects.
The researcher expressed that in order for projects to come to a successful conclusion, processes and
procedures which follow best practices are important factors of successful projects. In the event a project
fails, the project should be examined and procedures and processes evaluated and changed to improve
future projects. Risk management was more effective in objective performance and provided negligible
influence on the subjective performance of an IT project. Researchers suggested conducting further
research, including interviews and analysis of projects with successful conclusions, in order to provide
more definitive findings.

Maturity of Information Technology Project Management

As project abandonment and failure rates are still high, organizations are searching for various approaches
that may assist them with project success (Judgev & Thomas, 2002). Thus, industry practitioners have
provided several Project Management Maturity Models (PMMMs) to increase the delivery of projects that
are more susceptible to success. To this end, Sidenko (2006) investigated by surveying over 100 IT
industry project management professionals to find out the relationship between project management
maturity and project success. The study concluded that project efficiency and direct business of
organizational success were the two most relevant factors contributing to the organizational project
management maturity level, while preparing for the future and impact to the customer was not as relevant.
Another challenge for organizations is that budget and schedule runs—or even outright failure—of
projects often results from escalating commitment to failing IT projects. To stop the escalation cycle,
Flynn, Pan, Keil, and Mahring (2009) compared and developed an integrated De-escalation Management
Maturity (DMM) model that studied three management approaches to determine a more suitable de-

59
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

escalation management approach for IT projects. By comparing the three approaches, Crisis Management
Approach, Change Management Approach, and Problem Solving Approach, the authors suggested ways
in which organizations could take the best of the three approaches and implement them into their business
structure. Knowing that most businesses could not make the change immediately or might choose not to
take on the total structure, the group provided levels of implementation so that a company could adopt the
level that suited their needs and maturity.

Guidelines and Approaches for Successful Project Management

Many projects, including IT projects, have issues with being over budget, behind schedule, and ultimately
with lower functionality that the planned system (Cats-Brail & Thompson, 1995; Anwar & Mohsin, 2011).
As a result, a good number of techniques, guidelines and frameworks have been proposed by various
groups such as academics, consultants, and practitioners to contribute to project success. For instance,
Cats-Baril and Thompson have conducted an in-depth case study of the State of Vermont’s Human
Resources Management Systems (HRMS) to show many of the issues with public sector management of
IT projects. Consequently, they have offered a remarkably successful approach. The verbatim highlight of
their six steps approach is briefly listed below:

Step 1: Evaluate the alignment of proposed project with the mission and objectives of the organization.
Step 2: Evaluate the benefits that the project will bring to the organization.
Step 3: Evaluate the risk inherent in the project.
Step 4: Cross-reference the expected benefits from the project to its inherent level of difficulty or risk.
Step 5: Decide how to manage the project to maximize the probability of successfully implementing the
project.
Step 6: Decide whether or not the organization has the necessary skills and the environment is
propitious for the project.

Furthermore, Cats-Baril and Thomson provided a comprehensive lessons-learned from the State of
Vermont’s HRMS based on the above approach that could be utilized and considered for other public
organizations and which, with additional empirical research, may also be incorporated in approaches and
guidelines for private sector organizations.
As information technology is rapidly evolving, specialized software and systems directly and
effectively contribute to the success of project management in both private and public sectors (Ali, Anbari
& Money, 2008; Kastanoulia, Petropoulos, Litsa, Nikitas, Pagourtzi & Assimakopulos, 2011; Anwar &
Mohsin, 2011). Ali, Anbari and Money realized that as project management and the nature of projects
themselves had become more complex, there was a need to find new approaches to update project
management capabilities using IT. Thus, software was designed to take care of the constraints of project
management which do not require the quantitative skills of previous methods. The objectives of the
researchers study was threefold: 1) To develop a standard of factors that project management software for
this type of organization should possess, 2) to determine what influence the software would have on the
project’s team performance, and 3) to define how successful use of the software packages could be
measured. After conducting an extensive literature research, they developed a survey using a 7-point
Likert scale for the responses. Two independent samples were derived from the survey: one from an
online source directed to project management professionals and educators and the other from the Project
Management Institute.
The results were that system characteristics were the top factor affecting the use of software in
project management. Perceived performance value was increased by 35% per unit when project
management software was utilized. Also top factors were quality, system functionality and ease of use, all
of which had positive and unequivocal connection to the use of project management software. The
researchers indicated that additional research is needed to determine if the use of IT in project
management had a direct correlation to project success and whether it affected the organization’s position
with similar companies.

60
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

Conclusion
In this brief paper, authors investigated different factors of information technology effecting project
management in both private and public sector organizations. Differences were explored in IT project
management within private and public sectors, while factors contributing to IT projects abandonment
were also presented. Later, authors provided a research review on project management techniques and
information technology project success. Finally, authors offered guidelines and approaches for successful
project management using a variety of management tools and techniques, including the possibility of
using software to cover the lack of quantitative skills of previous methods. In conclusion, there seem to be
a good number of practical and successful management tools and techniques supporting successful
projects in the private sector that might also be useful for public sector; however, there is still a great need
for empirical research to be conducted to investigate and validate their fits for public sector organizations.

References
Ali, A.S.B., Anbari, F.T., & Money, W.H. (2008). Impact of organizational and project factors on
acceptance and usage of project management software and perceived project success. Project
Management Journal, 39(2), 5-33.
Anwar, S., & Mohsin, R. (2011). ERP project management in public sector - key issues and strategies.
HICSS '11 Proceedings of the 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,
pp.1-10.
Bretschneider, S. (1990). Management information systems in public and private organizations: An
empirical test. Public Administration Review, 50(5), 536-545.
Cats-Baril, W., & Thompson, R. (1995). Managing information technology projects in the public sector,
Public Administration Reviews, 55(6), 559-561.
Didraga, O. (2013). The Role of Risk Management in IT Project Success. Informatica Economica, 17(1),
86-98.
Ewusi-Mensah, K., & Przasnyski, Z.H. (1994). Factors contributing to the abandonment of information
systems development projects. Journal of Information Technology, 9, 185-201.
Flynn, D., Pan, G., Keil, M., & Mahring, M. (2009). De-escalating IT projects: The DMM model.
Communications of the ACM, 52(10), 131-134.
Judgev, K., & Thomas, J. (2002). Project management maturity models: The silver bullets of competitive
advantage? Project Management Journal, 33(4), 4-14.
Glorfeld, K. (1994). Information Technology: Measures of Success and Impact. Ph.D. Dissertation.
University of Arkansas.
Grimsley, M., Meehan, A., & Tan, A. (2007). Evaluative design of e-government projects: a community
development perspective. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 1(2), 174-93.
Gross, G. (2009). Cloud computing, security to drive US Government IT spending, CIO. Retrieved from
www.cio.com.
Kastanoulia, M., Petropoulos, F., Litsa, A., Nikitas, M., Pagourtzi, E., & Assimakopulos, V. (2011).
Project management and financial monitoring in public sector: an information support system.
International Journal of Electronic Finance, 5(2), 105-125.
Keil, M., Mann, J., & Rai, A. (2000). Why software projects escalate: an empirical analysis and test of
four theoretical models? Communications of the ACM, 24(4), 631-664.
Kloppenborg, T. J., & Opfer,W. A. (2002). The current state of project management research: Trends,
interpretations, and predictions. Project Management Journal, 33(2), 5-18.
Lee, L., & Anderson, R. (2006). An exploratory investigation of the antecedents of the IT project
management capability. e-Service Journal, 5(1), 27-42.
Melin, U., & Axelsson, K. (2009). Managing e-service development - comparing two e-government case
studies, Transforming Government. People, Process and Policy, 3(3), 248-70.
Melitski, J. (2003). Capacity and e-government performance an analysis based on early adopters of
internet technologies in New Jersey. Public Performance & Management Review, 26(4), 376-90.

61
International Management Review Vol. 10 No. 1 2014

Peslak, A.R. (2012). Information technology project management and projct success, International
Journal of Information Technology Project Management, 3(3), 31-44.
Project Management Institute (2013). Retrieved from http://www.pmi.org/
ProjectManager.com (2013). Five critical measures for your project. Retrieved from
http://www.projectmanager.com/5-critical-measures-project.php
Powner, D. (2008). Information technology OMB and agencies need to improve planning, management,
and oversight of projects totaling billions of dollars, GAO-08-1051T, Washington, DC, July 31.
Rivard, S., & Dupre, R. (2009). Information systems project management in PMJ: A brief history. Project
Management Journal, 40(4), 20-29.
Rosacker, K.M., &Rosacker, R.E. (2010). Information technology project management within public
sector organizations. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 23(5), 587-594.
Sarantis, D. S., Smithson, S., Charalabidis, Y., & Askounis, D. (2010). A Critical Assessment of Project
Management Methods With Respect to Electronic Government Implementation Challenges.
Systemic Practice & Action Research, 23(4), 301-321.
Schelin, S. (2003). E-government: an overview. In Garson, G.D. (Ed.), Public Information Technology:
Policy and Management Issues. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, 120-37.
Schwalbe, K. (2010). Information technology project management, Course Technology, Boston, MA.
Sidenko, S. (2006). Information technology project management: Project management maturity and its
effect on project success. Master of Science in Administration Thesis. Concordia University.
Standish Group. CHAOS. (2013). Retrieveed from
http://versionone.com/assets/img/files/ChaosManifesto2013.pdf
Tarnow, T. A. (2002). Project management techniques that contribute to information technology project
success in the finance industry. Ph.D. Dissertation. Colorado Technical University.
Taylor, H., Woelfer, J.P., & Artman, E. (2012). Information technology governance in practice: A project
management office’s use of early risk management as relational mechanism. International
Journal of Information Technology Project Management, 3(3), 14-30.
Urli, B., & Urli, D. (2000). Project management learning: What the literature has to say. Project
Management Journal, 34(4), 33-39.
Warkentin, M. M., Moore, R.S., Bekkering, E., & Johnson, A.C. (2009). Analysis of Systems
Development Project Risks: An Integrative Framework. The DATA BASE for Advances in
Information Systems, 40(2), 8-27.
Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward.
Government Information Quarterly, 24(3), 646-65.

62