Estudio de las necesidades del consumidor

The subject of project success is at the heart of project management, and it is not surprising that the topic has interested academics and practitioners for decades and continues to be of relevance (Muller & Judgev, 2012). De Wit (1988) considers a project successful if the project meets the technical performance specification and mission specified and satisfies the

Project management Intergartion management system Scope management system Time management system Cost management system Quality management system Human resource management system Procurement management system Risk management system Communication management system

63 project sponsors, project team and end users of the project. The Project Management Institute (PMI) (2008) described project success as meeting or exceeding stakeholder needs and expectations from a project that invariably involves placing consideration on cost, time, and quality as the core criteria for project success. Project success is meeting the criteria identified and agreed at the start of the project to the best satisfaction of the client (Association of Project Management (APM) body of knowledge, (2006). Apparently, Cleland (1986 cited in Prabhakar, et al., 2008), espoused that the definition of project success is quite ambiguous except considered from two vantage points: the degree to which the project’s technical performance objective was attained and the contribution that the project made to the strategic mission of the enterprise. However, certain elements are salient: performance and satisfaction.

Literature documents various criteria to measure project success. For instance, Bryde and Brown (2004) some stakeholders judge project success based on performances, while Muller and Turner (2007) judge project success based on the fulfillment of personal objectives. In a study by Reiss (1993), project success from a client’s perspective is based on effective cost and time performances, as are key criteria whereas from contractor’s perspective profit margins and turnover is key criteria. Liu and Walker (1998) identified functionality/quality/technical specification, safety and environmental sustainability and the satisfaction of the claimant(s) as key criteria to measure project success. According to Koushki et al. (2005), time, cost and quality performance are key criteria in addition to contractor’s profitability, the absence of claims and court proceeding and service performance for occupiers. Mollaoglu-Korkmaz et al. (2011) described some subjective criteria such as – operability, functionality, reliability and long-term gains. A critical examination of several studies on project success particularly from the client and the PMT perspectives shows a consensus on four main criteria that defines successful project delivery- effective cost, time, quality, and service performance.

However, some scholars such as Prabhakar (2008) and Baccarini (1999), associates cost, time, and quality performance with project management success. Views by Nkado et al (2001), are on the contrary. They synchronized successful project delivery with project management success and client satisfaction (Table 2.7) and established that cost, time, quality performance and service attitude are key criteria at the project delivery phase. Hence,

64 it is deduced that the non-attainment of these criteria at the project delivery can result in client dissatisfaction or project failure.

Table 2. 7: Synchronising project success and client satisfaction

Source: Adapted from Nkado et al (2001)

Similar studies in the context of LcH project delivery by Ahadzie, (2010) and Adinyira et al. (2012) show 15 success criteria associated with project delivery and project operation stages. (Figure 2.11). Findings from their investigations show that cost of individual units and overall cost performance ranked the most important success criteria followed by quality and time performances. They prioritised effective project cost, time and quality performance as key success criteria in LcH project delivery.

Evidence from studies (Ogbu & Adindu, 2012; Abimaje & Akingbohungbe, 2013; Makinde 2014; Amade, et al., 2015; Obi & Arif 2015) on public sector housing projects delivery in Nigerian reveal similar findings. They all highlight effective cost and quality performances as key criteria for measuring project success. Similarly, this view is emphasised in the NHP aim “To ensure that all Nigerian own or have access to decent, safe, and sanitary housing in a healthy environment with infrastructural services at affordable cost…” (FMLHUD, 2012, p. 2). Furthermore, a report by the former Coordinating Minister for the Economy and Hon. Minister of Finance Okonjo-Iweala, in the 6th Global Housing Finance Conference World Bank Headquarters, Washington, DC in 2014 buttress these criteria. According to her, to achieve successful LcH project delivery is to promote good quality and efficient houses at reduced costs, which is essential to address the current LcH supply-side concerns. Furthermore, the vision 2020 proposes massive LcH developments across the country

Stage Operating satisfaction component Satisfaction Criteria

Project delivery Design, costing, management and construction Cost performance Time performance Quality performance Service attitude Project Operation

Building features/in-use performance User requirements functional performance

65 estimated at 157 billion naira at an estimate of 3.5 million Naira per 2-3 bedroom (FMLHUD, 2012). This budget per unit is stringent emphasising the need for viable strategies to deliver effective project cost performance.

Figure 2. 11: LcH Project success criteria Source: Adapted from Ahadzie, et al. (2008)

From the above review effective cost, quality and time performances are key success criteria for successful LcH project delivery. However, the prioritization of the criteria may vary from one client to another and across varying countries context as in the case of Ghana and Nigeria where cost and quality are highly prioritised. Given that the client is one of the main reason for the project existence (Wateridge, 1998, cited in Westerveld, 2003), the priority of the PMT should align with the criteria highlighted by the client to measure the success. This study is situated in their view where achieving effective cost performances is a key success criterion for the project delivery phase that cumulatively sums up to the overall project

Overall project cost performance Cost of individual house-units Overall project quality performance Quality of individual house-units Overall project duration performance

Rate of delivery of individual house-units Technology transfer

Overall risk containment

Risk containment on individual house-units Overall health and safety measures

Overall environmental impact Project related

Key themes _{Project success criteria}

Environmental impact of individual house-units Overall Health and safety on individual house-units Overall Customer satisfaction

Customer satisfaction on individual house units User related

66 success. Therefore, the PMT is expected to employ effective strategies to ensure that the set project success criteria and satisfaction of the client are achieved.

The next section discusses the concept of cost performances as one of the prioritised criterion defining LcH project success. This review aims to give a clearer understanding of project cost performance as used in this context.