Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Proje Portföy Sistemlerinin Uygulanmasında Başarı Faktörlerinin Belirlenmesi ve Metodolojiye Karar Verilmesi: TÜİK’te Hibrit, İki Katmanlı Bir Çözüm

Yıl 2022, , 353 - 366, 30.12.2022
https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1167407

Öz

Amaç: Büyük kuruluşlarda kısıtlı kaynaklarla stratejik amaç ve hedeflere ulaşırken portföy-proje yönetimi (PPY) gibi sistemler giderek daha popüler hâle gelmektedir. Birçok kuruluş, finansal kaynak yetersizliği, portföy yönetiminin öneminin farkında olunmaması gibi çeşitli nedenlerden dolayı projeleri yönetebilecek bir yazılım sistemine sahip değildir. Bu makalenin amacı, organizasyon çapındaki projeleri yönetmek için etkili ve uygun maliyette bir PPY sisteminin kurulması esnasında üç yılda edinilen deneyimlerin paylaşılmasıdır. Yöntem/Tasarım: Bu çalışmada, çeşitli proje yönetimi araçlarının hangi özelliklerinin Proje Yönetim Enstitüsü (PYE) bilgi alanlarının ihtiyaçlarını karşıladığını anlamak için karşılaştırma yapılmıştır. Ardından Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK) bünyesinde geliştirilen hibrit, iki katmanlı bir portföy yönetim aracı tanıtılmıştır. İlk katman, açık kaynaklı bir araç olan Redmine ve satın alınabilir eklentileri üzerine inşa edilmiştir. İkinci katman ise Redmine'in uygulama programlama arayüzlerini (API) kullanan, kurum içinde geliştirilen bir yazılım uygulamasıdır. Bulgular: İhtiyaç odaklı, daha az maliyetli olarak geliştirilen hibrit sistem, portföy-proje yönetimi bilgi alanları kapsamındaki projelerin planlama, yönlendirme, izleme ve kontrol süreçlerinde oldukça başarılı sonuçlar vermiştir. Kısıtlar: Sistemin avantajlarının yanı sıra, kalite yönetimi ve satın alma yönetimi gibi bazı bilgi alanı faaliyetleri henüz geliştirilen hibrit sistem tarafından yönetilememektedir. Özgünlük: İki katmanlı yaklaşım, sınırlı kaynaklara sahip diğer kuruluşlar için de en iyi uygulama örneği olabilir.

Kaynakça

  • Abbasi, G. Y., & Al-Mharmah, H. A. (2000). Project management practice by the public sector in a developing country. International Journal of Project Management(18), pp. 105-109. doi:10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00074-X
  • Ahmed , R., & Azmi, M. (2017, September). Development and validation of an instrument for multidimensional top management support. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 66(7), 873-895. doi:10.1108/IJPPM-12-2015-0182
  • Belassi, W., & Tukel, O. I. (1996). A new framework for determining critical success/failure factors in projects. International Journal of Project Management, III(14), pp. 141-145. doi:10.1016/0263-7863(95)00064-X
  • Blichfeldt, B., & Eskerod, P. (2008, May). Project portfolio management – There’s more to it than what management enacts. International Journal of Project Management, 26(4), 357-365. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.06.004
  • Cooper, R., Edgett, S., & Kleinschmidt, E. (1997, September). Portfolio management for new product Development: Lessons from the Leaders. Research Technology Management, 40(5), 16-28. doi:10.1080/08956308.1997.11671170
  • Crawford, L. H., & Helm, J. (2009, March). Government and Governance: The Value of Project Management in the Public Sector. Project Management Journal, 40(1), pp. 73-87. doi:10.1002/pmj.20107
  • Erduran, M., Bulu, G., & Orhan, B. (2018). Kamu Sektöründe Bütünleşik Proje Yönetimi. Mühendislik ve Teknoloji Yönetimi Zirvesi 2018– ETMS2018 (pp. 119-128). İstanbul: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi & Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi.
  • European Commission. (2021, March). PM² project management methodology. Retrieved from Publications Office the European Union: https://op.europa.eu/s/o9oR
  • Evdokimov, I., Tsarev, R., Yamskikh, T., & Pupkov, A. (2018). Using PERT and Gantt charts for planning software projects on the basis of distributed digital ecosystems. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1074 012127 (s. 1-7). IOP Publishing. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1074/1/012127
  • Ford, R., & Randolph, W. (1992, June 01). Cross-Functional Structures: A Review and Integration of Matrix Organization and Project Management. Journal of Management, 18(2), 267-294. doi:10.1177/014920639201800204
  • Hyvari, I. (2006, April). Project Management Effectiveness in Project-Oriented Business Organizations. Inernational Journal of Project Management, 24, pp. 216-225. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.09.001
  • Jaques, T., & Weinstein, J. (2010). Integrating project management across government operations. PMI® Global Congress 2010. North America, Washington, DC.: PA: Project Management Institute.
  • Killen, C., Jugdev, K., Drouin, N., & Petit, Y. (2012, July). Advancing project and portfolio management research: Applying strategic management theories. International Journal of Project Management, 30(5), 525-538. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.12.004
  • Majstorovic, A., & Majstorovic, V. (2020). Practical Application Of Contemporary. 31st Daaam International Symposium On Intelligent Manufacturing And Automation. 7.1. Annals of DAAAM & Proceedings.
  • Martinsuo, M., Gemünden, H., & Huemann, M. (2012, August). Toward strategic value from projects. International Journal of Project Management, 30(6), 637-638. doi:10.1177/014920638801400102
  • Matosa, S., & Lopesa, E. (2013). Prince2 or PMBOK – a question of choice. CENTERIS 2013 - Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / PRojMAN 2013 - (pp. 787 – 794). Lisbon: Procedia Technology. doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2013.12.087
  • Nessel, S. (2005). Nessel, S. W. (2005). Using Project Management to Develop Training Programs. PMI® Global Congress 2005. Toronto, Canada: Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
  • Pinto, J. K., & Prescott, J. E. (1988, March). Variations in Critical Success Factors Over the Stages in the Project Life Cycle. Journal of Management, 14(1), pp. 5-18. doi:10.1177/014920638801400102
  • Project Management Institute. (2008). PMI Scheduling Professional (PMI-SP) Examination specification. Newtown Square, Pa: Project Management Institute.
  • Project Management Institute. (2017). A guide to the project management body of knowledge. PMBOK GUIDE. (Sixth edition ed.). Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute, Inc.
  • Rosacker, K. M., & Rosacker, R. E. (2010). Information Technology Project Management within Public sector Organizations. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 23(5), pp. 587-594. doi:10.1108/17410391011083047
  • Sinclair, J. M. (1984). Is the matrix really necessary? Project Management Journal, 15(1), 49-52.
  • Stuckenbruck, L. (1979, September). The matrix organization. Project Management Quarterly, 10(3).
  • Zwikael, O. (2008, September). Top management involvement in project management. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 4, 498-511. doi:10.1108/17538370810883837

Identifying Success Factors, Deciding On Methodology and Implementation of Project Portfolio Systems: A Hybrid, Two-Layer Solution in TurkStat

Yıl 2022, , 353 - 366, 30.12.2022
https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1167407

Öz

Purpose: In order to manage projects to achieve strategic goals and targets with limited resources, portfolio-project management (PPM) systems become increasingly popular tools for large organizations. Nevertheless, due to various reasons such as lack of financial resources, awareness of the significance of portfolio management many organizations do not have a software system that can keep up with the projects. The purpose of this paper is to share The experience gained within three years during the establishment of an effective and inexpensive PPM system to manage organisational projects. Design/methodology/approach: In this study, several project management tools are compared to understand what features of these tools meet the needs of Project Management Institute (PMI) knowledge areas. Afterwards, a hybrid, two-layer portfolio management tool developed in the Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat) is introduced. The first layer is built on Redmine, an open-source tool, and its purchasable plugins. The second layer is an in-house developed software application which uses the application programming interfaces (APIs) of Redmine. Findings: This needs-oriented, less costly hybrid system has yielded remarkably successful results in planning, leading, monitoring and controlling processes of projects under the knowledge areas of PMI. Limitations: Besides the advantages of the system, some knowledge area activities still cannot be managed by the hybrid system like quality management and procurement management. Originality: The two-layer approach can be an example of the best practice solution for other organisations with limited resources as well.

Kaynakça

  • Abbasi, G. Y., & Al-Mharmah, H. A. (2000). Project management practice by the public sector in a developing country. International Journal of Project Management(18), pp. 105-109. doi:10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00074-X
  • Ahmed , R., & Azmi, M. (2017, September). Development and validation of an instrument for multidimensional top management support. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 66(7), 873-895. doi:10.1108/IJPPM-12-2015-0182
  • Belassi, W., & Tukel, O. I. (1996). A new framework for determining critical success/failure factors in projects. International Journal of Project Management, III(14), pp. 141-145. doi:10.1016/0263-7863(95)00064-X
  • Blichfeldt, B., & Eskerod, P. (2008, May). Project portfolio management – There’s more to it than what management enacts. International Journal of Project Management, 26(4), 357-365. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.06.004
  • Cooper, R., Edgett, S., & Kleinschmidt, E. (1997, September). Portfolio management for new product Development: Lessons from the Leaders. Research Technology Management, 40(5), 16-28. doi:10.1080/08956308.1997.11671170
  • Crawford, L. H., & Helm, J. (2009, March). Government and Governance: The Value of Project Management in the Public Sector. Project Management Journal, 40(1), pp. 73-87. doi:10.1002/pmj.20107
  • Erduran, M., Bulu, G., & Orhan, B. (2018). Kamu Sektöründe Bütünleşik Proje Yönetimi. Mühendislik ve Teknoloji Yönetimi Zirvesi 2018– ETMS2018 (pp. 119-128). İstanbul: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi & Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi.
  • European Commission. (2021, March). PM² project management methodology. Retrieved from Publications Office the European Union: https://op.europa.eu/s/o9oR
  • Evdokimov, I., Tsarev, R., Yamskikh, T., & Pupkov, A. (2018). Using PERT and Gantt charts for planning software projects on the basis of distributed digital ecosystems. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1074 012127 (s. 1-7). IOP Publishing. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1074/1/012127
  • Ford, R., & Randolph, W. (1992, June 01). Cross-Functional Structures: A Review and Integration of Matrix Organization and Project Management. Journal of Management, 18(2), 267-294. doi:10.1177/014920639201800204
  • Hyvari, I. (2006, April). Project Management Effectiveness in Project-Oriented Business Organizations. Inernational Journal of Project Management, 24, pp. 216-225. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.09.001
  • Jaques, T., & Weinstein, J. (2010). Integrating project management across government operations. PMI® Global Congress 2010. North America, Washington, DC.: PA: Project Management Institute.
  • Killen, C., Jugdev, K., Drouin, N., & Petit, Y. (2012, July). Advancing project and portfolio management research: Applying strategic management theories. International Journal of Project Management, 30(5), 525-538. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.12.004
  • Majstorovic, A., & Majstorovic, V. (2020). Practical Application Of Contemporary. 31st Daaam International Symposium On Intelligent Manufacturing And Automation. 7.1. Annals of DAAAM & Proceedings.
  • Martinsuo, M., Gemünden, H., & Huemann, M. (2012, August). Toward strategic value from projects. International Journal of Project Management, 30(6), 637-638. doi:10.1177/014920638801400102
  • Matosa, S., & Lopesa, E. (2013). Prince2 or PMBOK – a question of choice. CENTERIS 2013 - Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / PRojMAN 2013 - (pp. 787 – 794). Lisbon: Procedia Technology. doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2013.12.087
  • Nessel, S. (2005). Nessel, S. W. (2005). Using Project Management to Develop Training Programs. PMI® Global Congress 2005. Toronto, Canada: Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
  • Pinto, J. K., & Prescott, J. E. (1988, March). Variations in Critical Success Factors Over the Stages in the Project Life Cycle. Journal of Management, 14(1), pp. 5-18. doi:10.1177/014920638801400102
  • Project Management Institute. (2008). PMI Scheduling Professional (PMI-SP) Examination specification. Newtown Square, Pa: Project Management Institute.
  • Project Management Institute. (2017). A guide to the project management body of knowledge. PMBOK GUIDE. (Sixth edition ed.). Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute, Inc.
  • Rosacker, K. M., & Rosacker, R. E. (2010). Information Technology Project Management within Public sector Organizations. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 23(5), pp. 587-594. doi:10.1108/17410391011083047
  • Sinclair, J. M. (1984). Is the matrix really necessary? Project Management Journal, 15(1), 49-52.
  • Stuckenbruck, L. (1979, September). The matrix organization. Project Management Quarterly, 10(3).
  • Zwikael, O. (2008, September). Top management involvement in project management. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 4, 498-511. doi:10.1108/17538370810883837
Toplam 24 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Bilgisayar Yazılımı
Bölüm Hakemli Makaleler
Yazarlar

Furkan Metin 0000-0001-5782-6581

Nesibe Gül 0000-0001-6491-1047

Müge Naz Yıldırım Vural 0000-0001-6530-9226

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Aralık 2022
Gönderilme Tarihi 26 Ağustos 2022
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022

Kaynak Göster

APA Metin, F., Gül, N., & Yıldırım Vural, M. N. (2022). Identifying Success Factors, Deciding On Methodology and Implementation of Project Portfolio Systems: A Hybrid, Two-Layer Solution in TurkStat. Bilgi Yönetimi, 5(2), 353-366. https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1167407

15529