Project risk management practices: the organizational maturity influence

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify patterns of project risk management (PRM) practices’ adoption, and provides empirical evidence concerning the importance (and key attributes) of organizational PRM maturity to the use of risk-related practices and project performance. Design/methodology/approach The research involved two phases: interviews with five project managers, and a worldwide survey of project managers that resulted in the analysis of 865 valid questionnaire responses. Cluster analysis was used to classify PRM practices’ use, factor analysis to detect the structure of the relationship between the variables measuring PRM practices’ use and a multiple regression analysis (with canonical correlation) to further reveal the different degrees to which PRM practices and organizational maturity are associated. Findings The identified patterns of risk practices’ adoption indicate that different contexts of organization PRM maturity and project complexity influence practices selection. The PRM practices related with targets (e.g. time-phased budget plan) are the most used, and those related to tools and techniques (e.g. S-curve) are the least used. Additionally, the obtained results confirm that organizational PRM maturity influences risk practices’ usage, moderated by project complexity, and organizational PRM maturity influences project performance. Originality/value Empirical methods were used to investigate the relationship between organizational PRM maturity and a large set of PRM practices with project complexity as a moderator. Gaps in the use of PRM practices (i.e. areas where more PRM knowledge and training are needed) were identified. Finally, this work identifies the attributes of organizational maturity with implications in practices’ usage and project performance.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 40 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.