THESIS RESEARCH REPORT NOTESProject relationship managemen.docx

THESIS RESEARCH REPORT NOTES
Project relationship management
and the Stakeholder Circlee
Lynda Bourne
Stakeholder Management Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, Australia, and
Derek H.T. Walker
RMIT University, Melbourne Australia
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to summarise a successfully
completed doctoral thesis.
The main purpose of the paper is to provide a summary that
indicates the scope of, and main issues raised
by, the thesis so that readers that are undertaking research in
this area may be aware of current cutting
edge research that could be relevant to them. A second key aim
of the paper is to place this in context with
doctoral study and further research that could take place to
extend knowledge in this area.
Design/methodology/approach – Research reported in this paper
was based upon action learning
from a series of case studies where a project management tool
for managing stakeholder relationships
was tested and refined.
Findings – The tool is useful in helping the project delivery
team identify major influencing

stakeholders and visualise their potential impact. This tool then
helped the studied project delivery
teams to develop stakeholder engagement strategies. While it
was initially tested as a planning tool to
be used at the early stages of a project it can be used through
the whole implementation phase of a
project as the flow of major stakeholders and their influence
changes during a project.
Practical implications – The tool was further improved during
2006 and commercialised in 2007
and is currently being used by numerous organisations. In
observing how it is being used and can be
used, it is suggested that over time a useful data base of
stakeholder behaviours is being established
that can be mined and used to better predict stakeholder types
and their likely actions.
Originality/value – This paper provides a summary of cutting-
edge research work and a link to the
published thesis (see URL
www.mosaicprojects.com.au/Resources_Papers_021.html for a
pdf (7meg))
that researchers can use to help them understand how the
research methodology was applied as well
as how it can be extended.
Keywords Stakeholder analysis, Project management, Action
learning
Paper type Research paper
Summary of the research thesis
Project success and failure is directly related to its
stakeholders’ perceptions of the value
created by the project and the nature of their relationship with

the project team. This
dissertation (Bourne, 2005) demonstrates a direct link between
the successful management
of the relationships between the project and its stakeholders and
the stakeholder’s
assessment of a successful project outcome. The project’s
success, or failure, is strongly
influenced by both the expectations and perceptions of its
stakeholders, and the capability
and willingness of project managers to manage these factors and
the organisation’s politics.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is
available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1753-8378.htm
The authors would like to acknowledge Dr Jennie Carroll who
co-supervised the thesis.
Project
relationship
management
125
Received 2 June 2007
Accepted 3 August 2007
International Journal of Managing
Projects in Business
Vol. 1 No. 1, 2008
pp. 125-130

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1753-8378
DOI 10.1108/17538370810846450
A stakeholder management methodology and visualisation tool,
the Stakeholder
Circlee (Figure 1), was developed to assist in this process and
was the foundation for
this research. The Stakeholder Circle is based on the premise
that a project can only exist
with the informed consent of its stakeholder community. The
methodology supported
by the tool provides an effective mechanism for assessing the
relative influence of a
project’s stakeholders, understanding their expectations and
defining appropriate
engagement procedures to influence the key stakeholders
expectations and perceptions
to the benefit of the project. Influence is based on power,
proximity and urgency which is
a well established method of gauging stakeholder influence
Cleland (1999, p. 151). The
tool has since become commercialised (See URL
www.stakeholder-management.com for
more details). Key elements of the Stakeholder Circle are:
concentric circle lines that
indicate distance of stakeholders from the project or project
delivery entity; the size of
the block, its relative area, indicates the scale and scope of
influence; and the radial
depth can indicate the degree of impact (Bourne, 2005; Bourne
and Walker, 2005c).

Patterns and colours of stakeholder entities indicate their
influence on the project –
for example, orange indicates an upwards direction – these
stakeholders are senior
managers within the performing organisation that are necessary
for ongoing
organisational commitment to the project; green indicates a
downwards direction –
these stakeholders are members of the project team; purple
indicates a sidewards
direction – peers of the project manager essential as
collaborators or competitors; and
blue indicates outwards – these stakeholders represent those
outside the project such
as end-users, government, “the public” shareholders. The final
colour coding is dark
hues and patterns for stakeholders internal to the organisation
and light hues and
patterns for those external to the organisation.
The approach leads to identification of risks and uncertainty.
The Stakeholder
Circle methodology consists of five parts:
. Step 1 – identify;
. Step 2 – prioritise;
Figure 1.
The Stakeholder Circlee
tool
Asset Management Project
Sponsor

Project Team
CEO
Senior Leadership Team
Core Team for Stage 1
IT Specialists Assigned to Project
Functional Manager #1
Functional Manager #2
Councillors
Information Management Group
Contractors from Supplier
Asset Specialists Stage 1
Asset Specialists Stage 2, 3, 4 & 5
Auditors
SAM Supplier
The
Project
IJMPB
1,1
126

. Step 3 – visualise;
. Step 4 – engage; and
. Step 5 – monitor (Bourne, 2005, p. 56).
The outcomes from this process is a series of recommendations
for action plans that
lead to risk mitigation plans, stakeholder engagement plans and
while this may appear
to generate reactionary strategies to potential negative outcomes
from the analysis it
actually can trigger proactive strategies as well as being used to
accentuate positive
traits and trends in stakeholder influence.
This research was designed to improve a project’s chances for
success by
identifying ways to develop effective relationships with these
key stakeholders, and
through refinement and testing of the Stakeholder Circle,
develop an effective way to
provide support for the project manger and project team to build
and maintain
relationships with the right stakeholders at the right time.
There are four themes to the research: the first theme is to
identify reasons for
project failure and to address them in the methodology as a link
between project
success and stakeholder management. The second theme is
refinement and testing of
the Stakeholder Circle methodology and visualisation tool for
support of relationship

building and maintenance. The third theme is to gauge the
methodology’s effectiveness
in building and maintaining robust project relationships.
Finally, the fourth theme is to
identify the skills and willingness of project managers to build
these relationships with
the support of the tool.
This research adopted a qualitative approach. Data were
collected through
interviews, document analysis, observation and from the results
of the iterative
refinement cycles of the Stakeholder Circle. Case study
descriptions of the six
participant projects provided a rich picture of the project and
the organisation that
supported interpretation of the resulting profiles of each
project’s unique stakeholder
community. The iterative methodology refinement resulted in a
practical methodology
that has been refined until there were no further adverse
comments from the research
participants.
Findings from the research can be categorised into three groups.
The Stakeholder
Circle was evaluated as a valuable tool that can support project
teams in identifying
the “right” stakeholders to engage; the second was an
understanding of the level of
capability and willingness of people in different organisations
to manage project
relationships. Finally, serendipitous findings about the
relationship between the profile
of stakeholder community as shown by the Stakeholder Circle
and the informal power

structures of the performing organisation have aroused interest
in the project
management community.
The research contributed to the body of knowledge in at least
five areas. The first
three areas are concerned with synthesis of new theory to
address gaps noted in the
literature. The first area was a synthesis of theory into an
interdependent model of
project success. This model incorporates a balance of focus on
delivery of value, the
management of risk and building effective relationships. The
second gap was that
there was no apparent means of identifying the right
stakeholders for the right time of
the project lifecycle and no organisational or project culture to
encourage it. The
refinement of the prototype Stakeholder Circle and its
development for practical use
addressed this gap. The third gap related to the personal
qualities necessary to build
Project
relationship
management
127
and maintain relationships with key stakeholders. This gap was
addressed through an
identification of levels of skills and experience building to
“wisdom” – the project

manager’s willingness and capability to use the Stakeholder
Circle to build and
maintain robust project relationships for project success.
The final two areas are concerned with practical benefits. The
project team benefits
from use of the Stakeholder Circle methodology and tool by
sharing knowledge about
each of the stakeholders, and through the act of building team
relationships through
negotiating for agreement on the relative importance of each
stakeholder. These
experiences will contribute to the growth of the project team
members along the path to
“wisdom”. Their organisations benefit from the increased
awareness of the project
team members of the importance of project relationship
management and how to
achieve it. Through the additional knowledge the project team
gains the organisation
will increase its “knowledge capital”. An additional benefit will
arise from a decrease in
failed projects with the consequential decrease in wasted funds
and resources.
The new approaches to project relationship management in the
form of the theory
implicit in the Stakeholder Circle methodology and
visualisation tool should benefit the
profession through improving the chances of project success.
These approaches should
in turn increase the value of projects to organisations, and with
their continuing
success, improve the reputation of the project management
profession.

Context of the thesis
This thesis was the final and summative (See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Summative_assessment for a description of this type of
assessment) submission of
work for the Doctor of Project Management (DPM) degree at
RMIT University. The
doctoral program is structured to provide an online doctorate for
practicing project
managers that can take part in the program from anywhere in
the world. They enter
the program with a Masters Degree and a minimum of eight
years of experience in PM
environments.
The DPM is approximately 33 per cent coursework comprising
four core courses
undertaken in an online group work mode together with
individual assignment
assessment. Three of these are compulsory and one is a freely
negotiated elective study
course. Compulsory core courses are concerned with: PM
leadership; knowledge
management and innovation; PM procurement and ethics with a
strong focus on how
procurement processes can be designed and undertaken to
maximise sustainable value
generation rather than being focused on cost competition; an
elective choice course is
also part of the core program component. An important adjunct
to this coursework is
the reflective learning courses. Each of the three compulsory
core courses has an
associated reflective learning course. These are undertaken on
an individual basis
(online) where the candidate and supervising tutor agree on how

to best extend an
aspect or aspects of interest to the candidate related to the core
course with a series of
readings to either broaden their knowledge of this area or
deepen a part of that area
and to produce a 5,000-6,000 word individual paper. A number
of these papers have
subsequently been amended and published as conference papers
for example (Bourne
and Walker, 2003, 2005b; Bourne, 2004) and refereed journal
papers (Bourne and
Walker, 2004, 2005c, 2005a, 2006). A research methods course
is also part of the
coursework component of the DPM. The remainder of the
program is devoted to
research undertaken, usually by the candidate in their
workplace, or else in another PM
IJMPB
1,1
128
setting if they are unable to source the research on the projects
they are engaged in.
Thus, the nature of research is very much in tune with the idea
of a reflective
practitioner as espoused by Schön (1983). Further, many of the
candidates undertaking
the DPM research degree component follow an action learning
approach in which they
are active participants who help design interventions based
upon their knowledge of
relevant aspects of PM theory (Coghlan, 2001; Coghlan and

Brannick, 2005) that they
then fully participate in and make sense out of. This
sensemaking (Weick, 1995) is an
important facet of the research process.
In the case of this research project, the prime aim was to
demonstrate how to improve
project success through developing a stakeholder engagement
process through
development of a stakeholder influence visualisation tool
together with a set of
strategies that could follow identifying key stakeholders and the
nature of their
influence. Naturally, there was a further aim for the researcher
to demonstrate command
of the relevant literature, research methods and to hone their
researcher skills.
Discussion and conclusions
This thesis provides an example of current work undertaken in a
vital area of PM
theory. Stakeholder management has been one of the core soft
skills area that has been
highlighted as being necessary for PM to advance (Crawford,
2005; Morris et al., 2006;
Winter et al., 2006).
The research thesis substantiated that identifying the right
stakeholder at the
right stage of a project lifecycle did have a positive impact upon
the likelihood of
project success. It also indicated the kind of skills that PM
teams need to develop
to better engage with stakeholders. Case study organisations did
see the need to
develop new skills and changed PM processes to improve

stakeholder engagement
and took steps to do so. The tool was commercialised and is
now being rolled out
globally.
Some interesting data resulted from of the analysis of the
Stakeholder Circle
developed for each participant project and the comparisons with
other projects.
The stakeholder communities shown by the visualisation tool
were quite different, in
some cases the same individual had different roles and different
levels of importance
for the projects that they had involvement with. Other projects
from the same sectors
showed very different blends of individuals and relative
importance in their
stakeholder communities. Inferences about meaning of each
Stakeholder Circle were
made through reference to interpretations of the data collected
about the project
organisation and the performing organisation during the
research. These inferences
were presented to the organisations themselves for confirmation
of the researcher’s
interpretations. The prospect that the Stakeholder Circle could
be used to provide
information about perceptions of the organisation’s power
structure and the project’s
connections to the organisation is an exciting one and should be
pursued.
Finally, we believe that researchers can benefit from this
research as it presents a
series of cases where this new tool was developed. The thesis
provides a model of how

to develop a new PM tool, how to test the effectiveness of these
tools and how to also
link development of these tools with an effective process of
how to use them. Thus, this
thesis managed to make explicit some of the tacit knowledge
generated about how
stakeholders can be better engaged on projects and as a
consequence has expanded
this area of knowledge in a practical way.
Project
relationship
management
129
References
Bourne, L. (2004), Paradox of Project Control, PMOZ –
Maximising project value, Melbourne,
PMI – Melbourne Chapter (CD-ROM paper).
Bourne, L. (2005), “Project relationship management and the
stakeholder circle”, Doctor of Project
Management, Graduate School of Business, RMIT University,
Melbourne.
Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2003), “Tapping into the power
lines-a 3rd dimension of project
management beyond leading and managing”, paper presented at
17th World Congress on
Project Management, Moscow, 3-6 June (CD-ROM).

Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2004), “Advancing project
management in learning
organizations”, The Learning Organization, MCB University
Press, Vol. 11 No. 3,
pp. 226-43.
Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2005a), “The paradox of
control”, Team Performance
Management, Vol. 11 Nos 5/6, pp. 157-78.
Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2005b), “Stakeholder
chameleon – ignore at your peril!”, paper
presented at PMI Global Congress 2005 – Asia Pacific,
Singapore, 21-23 February, Project
Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA.
Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2005c), “Visualising and
mapping stakeholder influence”,
Management Decision, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 649-60.
Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2006), “Using a visualising tool
to study stakeholder influence –
two Australian examples”, Journal of Project Management, Vol.
37 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
Cleland, D.I. (1999), Project Management Strategic Design and
Implementation, 3rd ed.,
McGraw-Hill, Singapore.
Coghlan, D. (2001), “Insider action research projects:
implications for practicing managers”,
Management Learning, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 49-60.
Coghlan, D. and Brannick, T. (2005), Doing Action Research in
Your Own Organization, 2nd ed.,
Sage, London.

Crawford, L. (2005), “Senior management perceptions of
project management competence”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp.
7-16.
Morris, P.W.G., Jamieson, A. and Shepherd, M.M. (2006),
“Research updating the APM Body of
Knowledge 4th edition”, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 24 No. 6,
pp. 461-73.
Schön, D.A. (1983), The Reflective Practitioner – How
Professionals Think in Action, BasiAshgate
ARENA, Aldershot.
Weick, K.E. (1995), Sensemaking in Organizations, Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Winter, M., Smith, C., Morris, P.W.G. and Cicmil, S. (2006),
“Directions for future research in
project management: the main findings of a UK government-
funded research network”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24 No. 8, pp.
638-49.
Corresponding author
Derek H.T. Walker can be contacted at: [email protected]
IJMPB
1,1
130
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail:
[email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details:

www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.
S P R I N G 2 0 1 5
Timothy J. Kloppenborg
Debbie Tesch
How Executive
Sponsors
Influence Project
Success
The role of project sponsors is often overlooked. But for every
stage of a project, there are key executive sponsor behaviors
that can make the difference between success and failure.
Vol. 56, No. 3 Reprint #56307 http://mitsmr.com/1El4ouy
http://mitsmr.com/1El4ouy
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU SPRING 2015 MIT SLOAN
MANAGEMENT REVIEW 27
How Executive Sponsors
Influence Project
Success
The role of project sponsors is often overlooked. But for every
stage of a project, there are key executive sponsor behaviors

that
can make the difference between success and failure.
BY TIMOTHY J. KLOPPENBORG AND DEBBIE TESCH
COMPANIES UNDERTAKE PROJECTS to create and improve
their products, systems and
services. To improve the chances that projects will be
successful, it’s common for organizations to
choose senior executives with an interest in the outcome to act
as the project’s sponsors. Executive
sponsors are responsible for lining up the nec-
essary resources at the beginning, managing (or
personally performing) certain activities while
the project is underway, and ultimately deliver-
ing results.1 Since executive sponsors rarely
have enough time to manage projects person-
ally, they must rely heavily on project managers.
So which activities and behaviors can busy
sponsors perform in the course of a project to
increase the chances of a project’s success?
According to recent studies, this is an im-
portant question. The Project Management

Institute, a professional association for project
management professionals based in Newtown
Square, Pennsylvania, states that having exec-
utive sponsors who are actively engaged is the
leading factor in project success.2
In researching what makes for successful
project sponsorship, we used a project life-cycle
model with four stages: (1) initiating — from
the preliminary idea through approved charter;
(2) planning — from approved charter through
approved project plan; (3) executing — from
approved project plan through acceptance of
major deliverables; and (4) closing — from ac-
ceptance of major deliverables through final
THE LEADING
QUESTION
What can
executive
sponsors do
to facilitate
project
success?

FINDINGS
�For every project
stage, there are suc-
cess factors that
project sponsors
should consider.
�Effective partner-
ships with project
managers require a
great deal of infor-
mal dialogue.
�When a project is
wrapping up, spon-
sors should work to
apply lessons from
the project.
P R O J E C T M A N A G E M E N T : E X E C U T I V E S
P O N S O R S
28 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW SPRING 2015
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
P O N S O R S
completion. Projects come in many shapes and
sizes, and many life-cycle models are used to guide
behavior and understanding. We chose to use the

simplest model.
Most successful organizations are familiar with
the initiating stage of a project. Also well accepted is
that there are steps that need to be taken to close
down the project after the major project deliver-
ables are completed. While the first and last stages
of projects are clear, in some settings, the planning
takes place before executing starts; other times,
there is overlap between planning and executing, or
the two are iterative. To ensure that our research
was valid for all types of projects, we specifically
asked participants in our planning study to focus
on planning behaviors and participants in the exe-
cuting study to focus on executing behaviors.
No matter what stage a project is in, there are
established success factors that project sponsors
should consider. In the past, project success has been
defined by the so-called “iron triangle” of cost,

schedule and performance. Thanks to several well-
known studies3 that have tended to build on each
other, our understanding of project success has be-
come broader yet more specific. Essentially, there
are three important success factors. The first in-
volves customer impact: specifically, the extent to
which the project creates deliverables that meet the
needs of the project’s customers — whether those
customers are internal or external to the organiza-
tion. Meeting customer needs is almost always the
most important success measure. The second suc-
cess factor involves meeting agreements: Was
the project completed on time, on budget and to
specifications? The third success factor is tied to
the future benefits to the company — be they new
technology, new products and/or commercial success.
We conducted separate studies of each of the
four project stages (initiating, planning, executing

and closing), with literature reviews, focus groups,
surveys and factor analysis in order to examine ex-
ecutive sponsor behavior and project success
factors. (See “About the Research.”) In each project
life-cycle stage, we found that two or three behav-
iors had a significant impact on the project success
factors. (See “Key Executive Sponsor Behaviors.”)
The Initiating Stage
During the initiating stage, we identified three im-
portant sponsor activities and behaviors: setting
performance goals, selecting and mentoring the
project manager, and establishing priorities.
Set performance standards. Part of setting per-
formance standards can be accomplished in the
project charter by stating goals about the project’s
strategic value and how it will be measured. How-
ever, beyond what’s stated in writing, the sponsor
and the project manager need to develop a clear

understanding of expectations about performance.
Effective sponsor–project manager partnerships
require a great deal of informal dialogue, especially
during the project’s early phases. Later, as project
managers gain experience and prove themselves
worthy of the sponsor’s trust, the conversations can
take place less often and be less detailed.
Select and mentor the project manager. When
a sponsor selects and mentors a project manager,
both the organization and its customers benefit.
Since the sponsor and the project manager share
responsibility for the project, it’s important to
select the project manager wisely and make sure
that the person is up to the task. Once the project
ABOUT THE RESEARCH
We conducted four separate studies: one for each
of the stages of initiating, planning, executing and
closing. In all, more than 1,000 people participated
in our research (about one-third executives, one-
third managers, and one-third consultants,
educators and researchers). The participants
were recruited from professional groups, confer-

ences and networks. About half had more than 25
years of experience. Just over half of the projects
were less than one year in duration. About two-
thirds of the participants were from the United
States. No respondent helped in two consecutive
parts of the research (such as focus group and
pilot survey) or in the studies of two consecutive
stages (such as initiating and planning).
For each study, we started with literature
searches, discovering generally more than 100
possible sponsor behaviors. We then conducted
focus groups with senior managers from various
industries to help us document similar behaviors,
express ideas more clearly and eliminate irrele-
vant data. We conducted pilot surveys to
reduce the length of the study and eliminate any
possible confusion. Then we conducted large-
scale surveys. Finally, for each project stage, we
conducted principal components analysis to iden-
tify, reduce and confirm both sponsor-behavior
factors and project-success factors. To estimate
the effects of sponsor-behavior factors on the
project-success factors, a path model was cre-
ated for each project stage. This identified the
core sponsor behaviors that a sponsor should
perform at each project stage and the specific
success factor each helps achieve. Detailed find-
ings from our research were reported in the
February/March 2014 issue of Project Manage-
ment Journal, in an article coauthored with our
late colleague Chris Manolis.i

SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU SPRING 2015 MIT SLOAN
MANAGEMENT REVIEW 29
manager has been chosen, the sponsor needs to act
as a mentor. Among the sponsor’s key responsibili-
ties are explaining how the project fits into the big
picture, defining the performance standards and
helping the project manager set priorities.
Establish priorities. In setting priorities, the
most compelling questions are (1) what needs to
happen first? and (2) how should conflicts be set-
tled? Sponsors should address these questions both
at the organizational and project level. The sponsor
needs to ensure that benefits to the business are
clearly explained and fully understood by the proj-
ect manager and the executive team. The sponsor
also needs to make sure that the project manager
knows which aspects of the project are most urgent
and which aspects can be postponed.

The Planning Stage
For the planning stage, we identified two critical
sponsor behaviors and activities. The first is to en-
sure that all the necessary planning is accomplished
on a timely basis; the second is to develop produc-
tive relationships with stakeholders.
Ensure planning. Executive sponsors need to
ensure all the necessary planning activities are com-
pleted, although most of these will be performed by
a project manager and team. Sponsors need to pro-
vide leadership so that the project manager and team
can set project goals that align with the vision and
the broader organizational goals. Before committing
to a particular approach, it’s important to consider
different options. Sponsors also usually need to en-
sure that project managers develop a schedule, a
budget, a resource plan, a risk management plan, a
communication plan, a change control process, an
escalation process and a periodic review structure.

Develop relationships with stakeholders. We
found that when an executive sponsor personally
works to establish good relationships with the proj-
ect’s key stakeholders, the organization often benefits.
Sponsors should ensure that all stakeholders are
identified and should meet frequently with peers in
client organizations to seek understanding. In addi-
tion to seeing that project stakeholder wants and
needs are identified and understood, executive spon-
sors should make sure that stakeholders’ emotional
concerns are given adequate consideration. Success-
ful executive sponsors create an environment that is
conducive to effective communication between proj-
ect teams and stakeholders. In some circumstances, it
may be necessary for sponsors to become personally
involved in that communication. It’s up to sponsors
to maintain effective communication and to ensure
that the project’s customers are involved in its plan-

ning and understand the project’s value.
The Executing Stage
During the executing stage, we found that there
were three important sponsor behaviors and activi-
ties. They are: ensuring adequate and effective
communication, maintaining relationships with
stakeholders and ensuring quality.
Ensure adequate and effective communication.
As the project progresses, communication needs to
take place regularly between the project team, the proj-
ect manager and the stakeholders to make sure that the
expectations are being met. The executive sponsor can
facilitate this communication by visibly empowering
the project manager. However, sponsors must also
stand ready to manage the organizational politics with
internal and external stakeholders. Effective sponsors
can remove obstacles, resolve conflicts and encourage
input. In addition, they can personally communicate

their concerns to appropriate executives.
Maintain relationships with stakeholders. Exec-
utive sponsors can work with project managers
behind the scenes to make sure that the project man-
ager and project team communicate effectively. Yet
there may be situations when a team member wants
to interact directly with the sponsor. Effective spon-
sors need to be open to direct feedback from team
KEY EXECUTIVE SPONSOR BEHAVIORS
In each stage of a project’s life cycle, there are two or three
critical
sponsor behaviors.
PROJECT STAGE KEY SPONSOR BEHAVIOR
Initiating Stage •Set performance goals
•Select and mentor project manager
•Establish priorities
Planning Stage •Ensure planning
•Develop relationships with stakeholders
Executing Stage •Ensure adequate and effective communication
•Maintain relationships with stakeholders

•Ensure quality
Closing Stage •Identify and capture lessons learned
•Ensure capabilities and benefits are realized
30 MIT SLOAN MANAGEMENT REVIEW SPRING 2015
SLOANREVIEW.MIT.EDU
P O N S O R S
members, both as individuals and groups. Sponsors
ensure continued customer involvement and ensure
that the expectations of key stakeholders are met.
They should also plan to communicate directly with
key stakeholders to explain significant aspects of the
project and why they are relevant.
Ensure quality. We identified several sponsor
activities and behaviors that help ensure quality. To
begin with, executive sponsors can act as role models
to ensure that ethical standards are upheld. They can
also practice appropriate decision-making methods

and work to resolve issues fairly. Finally, they can in-
sist on using proven processes for managing change,
monitoring risk, escalating issues and applying
timely corrective actions. Sponsors should also work
to ensure that the project’s customers are satisfied
with the project deliverables.
The Closing Stage
In the closing stage, we found two activities spon-
sors should stress. The first involves knowledge
management. The second involves verifying that
the organizational capabilities have been improved
and promised project benefits achieved.
Identify and capture lessons learned. During
the closing stage, sponsors need to make sure that
meaningful lessons learned from the project are
identified and captured. Such lessons need to be cat-
egorized, stored and distributed in such a manner
that future project teams will be able to understand

and capitalize on them. Sponsors should insist that
any new projects begin with a review of the knowl-
edge repository to determine which lessons from
prior experiences to apply.
Ensure that capabilities and benefits are real-
ized. Part of wrapping up a project is asking how the
organization might increase its capabilities based
upon what employees learned from the project.
These capabilities could include employees becom-
ing more committed and more capable, and
processes that are more effective and more efficient.
Assessing capability increases can begin as soon as
the project ends. A second aspect of a project closing
is verifying that the deliverables that were specified at
the beginning were actually provided, work correctly
and satisfy customers’ needs. It usually makes sense
to wait a few months to see how the project deliver-
ables are actually working. Although there’s a

temptation to close the book and move ahead, spon-
sors need to push for this follow-up. Otherwise, it is
unlikely to happen, and the company will miss an
important opportunity to receive valuable input
from the project customers regarding how they use
the deliverables, how well their needs have been met
and ultimately how satisfied they are. This input can
help companies serve their stakeholders better on
future projects. After all, the needs of the project’s
customers are the primary reason for undertaking a
project and the most important measure of success.
Timothy J. Kloppenborg is an emeritus professor of
management and entrepreneurship at Xavier Universi-
ty’s Williams College of Business in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Debbie Tesch is an associate professor of management
information systems at Xavier University. Comment on
this article at http://sloanreview.mit.edu/x/56307, or
contact the authors at [email protected]
REFERENCES
1. See Project Management Institute, “A Guide to the Proj-
ect Management Body of Knowledge” (PMBOK Guide),
fifth ed. (Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Manage-
ment Institute, 2013): 32; and United Kingdom Office of
Government Commerce, “An Introduction to PRINCE2™:

Managing and Directing Successful Projects” (Norwich,
United Kingdom: The Stationery Office, 2009): 21.
2. See Project Management Institute and Boston Consult-
ing Group, “Executive Sponsor Engagement: Top Driver
of Project and Program Success,” (Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania: PMI/BCG, October 2014), p. 2.
3. See, for instance, J.K. Pinto, “The Elements of Project
Success,” in “Field Guide to Project Management,” ed.
D.I. Cleland (Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,
2004): 14-27; K. Jugdev and R. Müller, “A Retrospective
Look at our Evolving Understanding of Project Success,”
Project Management Journal 36, no. 4 (December 2005):
19-31; A. Shenhar and D. Dvir, “Reinventing Project Man-
agement” (Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business
School Press, 2007): 25; A. Malach-Pines, D. Dvir and
A. Sadeh, “Project Manager-Project (PM-P) Fit and
Project Success,” International Journal of Operations &
Production Management 29, no. 3 (2009): 268-291;
T.J. Kloppenborg, D. Tesch and C. Manolis, “Investigation
of the Sponsor’s Role in Project Planning,” Management
Research Review 34, no. 4 (2011): 400-416; and P. Morris,
“Reconstructing Project Management Reprised: A
Knowledge Perspective,” Project Management Journal
44, no. 5 (October 2013): 6-23.
i. T.J. Kloppenborg, D. Tesch and C. Manolis, “Project
Success and Executive Sponsor Behaviors: Empirical
Life Cycle Stage Investigations,” Project Management
Journal 45, no. 1 (February/March 2014): 9-20.
Reprint 56307.
Copyright © Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2015.
All rights reserved.

PDFs Reprints Permission to Copy Back Issues
Articles published in MIT Sloan Management Review are
copyrighted by the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology unless otherwise
specified at the end of an
article.
MIT Sloan Management Review articles, permissions, and back
issues can be
purchased on our Web site: sloanreview.mit.edu or you may
order through our
Business Service Center (9 a.m.-5 p.m. ET) at the phone
numbers listed below.
Paper reprints are available in quantities of 250 or more.
To reproduce or transmit one or more MIT Sloan Management
Review articles by
electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying or
archiving in any
information storage or retrieval system) requires written
permission.
To request permission, use our Web site: sloanreview.mit.edu
or
E-mail: [email protected]
Call (US and International):617-253-7170 Fax: 617-258-9739
Posting of full-text SMR articles on publicly accessible Internet
sites is
prohibited. To obtain permission to post articles on secure
and/or password-
protected intranet sites, e-mail your request to [email protected]
MITMIT SLSLOOAN MANAAN MANAGEMENGEMENT

REVIEWT REVIEW
LEADING YLEADING YOUR TEAMOUR TEAM
Copyright © Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2015. All
rights reserved. Reprint #56307 http://mitsmr.com/1El4ouy
http://sloanreview.mit.edu
http://sloanreview.mit.edu
mailto:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
http://mitsmr.com/1El4ouy
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without
permission.
56307Wx.pdfd41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e14.pdfSpring
2015How Executive Sponsors Influence Project SuccessHow
Executive Sponsors Influence Project SuccessGet this article
free as part of a special collection on project management.Free
download, compliments of:About the ResearchKey Executive
Sponsor BehaviorsThe Initiating StageSet performance
standards.Select and mentor the project manager.Establish
priorities.The Planning StageEnsure planning.Develop
relationships with stakeholders.The Executing StageEnsure
adequate and effective communication.Maintain relationships
with stakeholders.Ensure quality.The Closing StageIdentify and
capture lessons learned.Ensure that capabilities and benefits are
realized.About the AuthorsReferences

THESIS RESEARCH REPORT NOTESProject relationship managemen.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to THESIS RESEARCH REPORT NOTESProject relationship managemen.docx

Similar to THESIS RESEARCH REPORT NOTESProject relationship managemen.docx (20)

More from christalgrieg

More from christalgrieg (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

THESIS RESEARCH REPORT NOTESProject relationship managemen.docx