An Interdisciplinary Approach to Scoping Service Delivery

作者: Ofer Zwikael , John Smyrk

DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1869386

关键词:

摘要: When being considered for funding, all projects and service delivery initiatives should have a clearly defined scope. The scope project is formally declared in statement of scope, which amongst other things, identifies the outputs (deliverables) to be produced during exercise. scoping cornerstone business case. Early Initiation key players face, what called, “the problem”: alternative lists that might proposed, (if any) are “correct”? problem exists at two levels: one related deciding on list outputs, fitness-for-purpose characteristics applied each adopted output. If not solved correctly, situations can emerge: •A underscoped if its missing an it cannot generate target outcomes (equivalent benefits). outcomes, case realised – thus exposing failure. overscoped includes superfluous outputs. costs will unnecessarily high timeframe long making less attractive. Furthermore, eventual worth lower than achievable leading underperformance organisation’s investment portfolio. A reliable precondition estimation project’s duration, require logical sequence: estimates resources, comprehensive model work involved statement. Conventional approaches assume issue has been decided forums lie outside proper so focus their attention how produce elsewhere. PRINCE2 (OGS, 2007) acknowledges necessary relationship between benefits, but fails explain mechanism linking two. Aside from general agreement need somehow contribute goals, little provided existing literature by way tools techniques solve problem. Organisations appear address this simply adopting arbitrary or intuitive judgements about whether particular out eventually completed, benefits flow completely determined produced. were set arbitrarily statement, then equally resulting net exercise may make sensible investment. Clearly such expose unreliable scoping. Following complexity delivery, objective research develop interdisciplinary approach scoping: based effective models areas Organisational Behaviour, Strategic Management, General Management Operations Management.

参考文章(13)
Richard Makadok, Abagail McWilliams, Claudio Piga, Donald Siegel, The Theory of Value and the Value of Theory: Breaking New Ground versus Reinventing the Wheel Academy of Management Review. ,vol. 27, pp. 10- 13 ,(2002)
Dov Dvir, Aaron J. Shenhar, Reinventing project management : the diamond approach to successful growth & innovation Harvard Business Review Press. ,(2007)
Aaron J. Shenhar, Dov Dvir, Toward a typological theory of project management Research Policy. ,vol. 25, pp. 607- 632 ,(1996) , 10.1016/0048-7333(95)00877-2
David P. Lepak, Ken G. Smith, M. Susan Taylor, Value Creation and Value Capture: A Multilevel Perspective Academy of Management Review. ,vol. 32, pp. 180- 194 ,(2007) , 10.5465/AMR.2007.23464011
Ofer Zwikael, Shlomo Globerson, From Critical Success Factors to Critical Success Processes International Journal of Production Research. ,vol. 44, pp. 3433- 3449 ,(2006) , 10.1080/00207540500536921
Ofer Zwikael, Arik Sadeh, Planning effort as an effective risk management tool Journal of Operations Management. ,vol. 25, pp. 755- 767 ,(2007) , 10.1016/J.JOM.2006.12.001
O. Zwikael, S. Globerson, Evaluating the quality of project planning: a model and field results International Journal of Production Research. ,vol. 42, pp. 1545- 1556 ,(2004) , 10.1080/00207540310001639955
Christos N. Pitelis, The Co-Evolution of Organizational Value Capture, Value Creation and Sustainable Advantage Organization Studies. ,vol. 30, pp. 1115- 1139 ,(2009) , 10.1177/0170840609346977
Bastian Hanisch, Andreas Wald, A Project Management Research Framework Integrating Multiple Theoretical Perspectives and Influencing Factors Project Management Journal. ,vol. 42, pp. 4- 22 ,(2011) , 10.1002/PMJ.20241