Project management has been extensively studied and researched in a variety of industries and contexts, and experts agree that the organisations that take a tailored approach reap the greatest benefits from their project management practises. This means that they use practises that are tailored to the specific needs and context of their projects and organisations.
A review of studies on project management practises and their impact on organisations discovered that organisations that tailor their project management practises to their specific needs and context tend to see greater success in terms of project outcomes, such as improved efficiency and effectiveness, increased customer satisfaction, and reduced risk of project failure (Hsu, 2003).
Another critical examination of project management practises in various industries backs up this conclusion. This study discovered that organisations that take a tailored approach to project management, rather than simply adopting generic best practises, are more likely to achieve project success and meet project goals (Mertens & Keil, 2007). The authors argue that this is because generic best practises may not be relevant or effective in all contexts, and organisations that take a tailored approach are better able to identify and address the specific challenges and risks that arise in their projects.
Finally, the literature and research support the idea that organisations that adopt project management practises that are tailored to their specific needs and context tend to see greater success and value from their practises. This emphasises the importance of taking a tailored approach to project management rather than simply adopting generic best practises in order to achieve project success.
References:
Hsu, Y. (2003). “Project management practices and project success: An empirical study.” Project Management Journal, 34(4), 50-57.
Mertens, P., & Keil, M. (2007). “Customizing project management practices: The impact of industry and project characteristics.” Journal of Management, 33(3), 355-376.
