The DOI matches its Crossref record.
PMMM Kerzner Questionnaire Validation for Project Management Maturity Level Assessment: One of the Largest Indonesia's State-Owned Banks
Abstract
In achieving a digital transformation, one of the largest state-owned banks in Indonesia is trying to develop systems and applications that support its business processes. Based on the Project Status Report 2020, the success rate of the project was only 66%. In assessing the maturity level of APD group project management, the researcher would use the Project Management Maturity Model (PMMM) by Kerzner that applied PMBOK as a guideline. However, the existing questionnaire had not covered ten knowledge areas of PMBOK and used the old version of PMBOK that used Human Resource Management over terms of Resource Management. Thus, the researcher validated the PMMM Kerzner questionnaire before used it to assess the project management maturity level. This study aims to validate the questionnaire of PMMM Kerzner, confirmed the importance of using all PMBOK's areas, and formulate a final questionnaire. The researcher used the qualitative method by interviewing five experts using confirmatory questions and designated twenty-four questions. The researcher analyzed the data and information gathered using thematic analysis. The analysis result conveyed that four out of five experts agreed that PMBOK's ten knowledge areas should be measured. Moreover, the experts gave feedback and improvement input to the twenty-fourth question. This study output was a validated and completed PMMM questionnaire that relevant be used to measure the maturity level of project management.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Use of special methods for determining maturity in IT projects, such as CMMI or PMMM, can identify strengths and weaknesses of management and increase the loyalty of potential customers.
“the use of special methods for determining maturity in IT projects, such as CMMI or PMMM, can not only identify strengths and weaknesses of management, but also increase the loyalty of potential customers who seek to conclude contracts with reliable contractors (contractors, suppliers) (Odeh et al. 2021;Hutabarat et al. 2021).”
From Analysis of 105 IT Project Risks (2023) · cites this paper as Hutabarat et al. 2021
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- 10.1108/IJMPB-10-2013-0049 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.094 · DOI · Paper page
- torres, 2014, A contingency view on the effect of project management maturity on perceived performance
- kwak, 2000, Assessing Project management Maturity, Project Management Journal, 32
- vianaa, 2016, Enhancing Organizational Project Management Maturity: a framework based on the value focused thinking model, Production, 313
- 10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.03.003 · DOI
- 10.18267/j.cebr.196 · DOI
- lianyinga, 2011, The Project Management Maturity Model and Application Based on PRINCE2, 2012 International Workshop on Information and Electronics Engineering
- khoshgoftar, 2008, Comparison of Maturity Models, 2nd International Conference On Built Environment In Developing Countries
- kerzner, 2001, Strategic Planning for Project Management Using a Project Management Maturity Model
- 10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000200 · DOI
- 10.21002/seam.v7i1.1521 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICITSI.2017.8267968 · DOI
- 10.4018/IJITPM.2017040101 · DOI
- 10.14569/IJACSA.2014.050917 · DOI
- marchewka, 2015, Information Technology Project Management
- kerzner, 2019, Using the Project Management Maturity Model Strategic Planning for Project Management
- 2017, Project Management Body of Knowledge A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge
- kaul, 2018, Maturity Models with 'Inflection Points' directly support Organizational Adaptability and Innovation, Conference and Doctoral Symposium IRNOP
- 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.379 · DOI
- 10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2281 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Analysis of 105 IT Project Risks
Nikolaenko, V., & Sidorov, A. (2023) · Journal of Risk and Financial Management · doi:10.3390/jrfm16010033 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Hutabarat, N., Raharjo, T., Hardian, B., Suhanto, A., & Wahbi, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Indonesia (ID)
- ORCID
- Raharjo, Teguh
- Venue
- 2021 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems (ICACSIS)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2021-10-23
- OpenAlex
- W4200514825
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 1.10
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Construction Project Management and Performance
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Economic and Technological Systems Analysis
- Keywords
- project management maturity model, questionnaire validation, project management maturity levels, PMBOK knowledge areas, state-owned banks, digital transformation, project success rate, resource management, expert interviews
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