The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance
Open accessAbstract
For an organization to create optimal value from its investment in projects there must be a clear link between the outputs created by the projects and the requirements of the organization's business strategy. This means that organizations that have a structure in place for aligning the project deliverables with their organizational goals will be better placed to realize their investment in projects, and achieve the value defined by their business strategies. This paper examines existing research, ideas and concepts of project governance and enterprise project management, and offers a framework to build on current theory development and practice. Synthesizing existing literature of project/program management, governance and portfolio management, this paper proposes four key elements to improve the performance of projects and hence create value for organizations. These four elements are (1) portfolio management: focused on selecting the right projects and programs to support the organization's strategy, and terminating ones that no longer contribute to the business success of the organization; (2) project sponsorship: providing the direct link between the executive and the project or program manager, focused on the whole project lifecycle; (3) Project Management Office (PMO): providing oversight and strategic reporting capabilities; (4) projects and program support: the effective support and management of projects and programs are the measures of an effective governance system. The purpose of the framework described in this paper is to provide guidance to organizations in the development of effective project governance to optimize the management of projects.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Survey of Corporate Governance
Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb04820.x · Cited by 16,243
Cited by
Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance: A Review and Research Framework
Papagiannidis, E., Mikalef, P., & Conboy, K. (2025) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2024.101885 · Cited by 565
The front-end of projects: a systematic literature review and structuring
Williams, T., Vo, H., Samset, K., & Edkins, A. (2019) · Production Planning & Control · doi:10.1080/09537287.2019.1594429 · Cited by 145
A framework for governance of projects: Governmentality, governance structure and projectification
Müller, R., Zhai, L., Wang, A., & Shao, J. (2016) · International Journal of Project Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.05.002 · Cited by 84
Moving goals and governance in megaprojects
Bourne, M., Bosch-Rekveldt, M., & Pesämaa, O. (2023) · International Journal of Project Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102486 · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- Too, E. G., & Weaver, P.
- Venue
- International Journal of Project Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-11
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1382-1394
- ISSN
- 0263-7863 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2149445143
- Cited by
- 507
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.