8. Project Success

Accepted wisdom holds that a project is successful if its outputs are delivered fit-for-purpose, on time and within budget. If, however, as is implied by the Input-Transform-Outcome (ITO) model, beneficial outcomes reflect a project’s purpose, then the conventional view is inappropriate (because it judges success without reference to the realisation of target outcomes and hence the eventual generation of benefits). In this chapter, we introduce an assessment framework for projects and explore some key issues surrounding its application. According to this framework, “project success” involves separate judgements across three distinct layers—not just one. Two of these relate to the performance of two key players—the project manager and the project owner, respectively. The third relates to the performance of the investment represented by the project from the funder’s point of view. This approach to judging success employs the concepts of project “worth” and “return” introduced in Chap. 7. We also review the results of some research into the way project success is treated in practice and go on to consider some important determinants of success—in particular the concept of Critical Success Factors (CSF). The discussion examines some limitations of that concept and investigates an alternative approach, entitled Critical Success Processes (CSP).