The role of Project managers in navigating digitalization in a supply chain for resilience

Figures & data

Table 1. The challenges in PM.

#	Challenge	Description	References
1	Poorly defined goals and objectives	A project with clear goals and objectives will have teams that perform better; the scope of the project must be clear to the entire team.In the pharmaceutical industry, when project decisions are aligned with the corporate strategy and defined business objectives, it increases the overall commercial value and risk structure of development projects.	Asmus et al. (2015); Mirza et al. (2013);Tereso et al. (2019); van der Hoek et al. (2018); Bode Greuel and Nickisch (2008)
2	Unrealistic Deadlines	Having unrealistic deadlines for tasks in a project, in addition to having a detrimental effect on the employee, decreases the quality of the project.	Delisle (2020); Griffiths et al. (2011); Kuutila et al. (2020)
3	Scope Creep	This refers to the changes in the requirements of the project that would extend the boundaries of the project. While “scope creep” offers more flexibility and makes the customer happy, it could bring in risks due to flawed decisions and human biases.A study conducted for the implementation of an Electronic Medical Record system highlighted that change in scope can lead to confusion and lack of clarity, which will further lead to delays.	Teye Amoatey and Anson (2017);Bianchi et al. (2019); Manlapaz et al. (2016).
4	Team Conflicts	Conflicts within the team may arise due to the lack of trust, thus limiting communication to self-protection. Each member of the team may perceive conflict on a different scale with another member, thus giving rise to dysfunctional conflict relations which have implications on overall task effectiveness due to deviation from “optimal task flow patterns”. Task conflicts have a positive impact on team performance, while relationship conflict and process conflict hurt performance. A study focused on improving the decision-making process with respect to the development of economically viable medical devices has shown that a team with lesser conflicts would provide “a firm foundation for ongoing project management through the identification, at the outset, of project specific risks and strategic alliances”.	Zulfadil and Machasin (2020); Park et al. (2020); O’Neill et al. (2018); Lefley and Marešová (2021)
5	Inadequate Risk Management	Risk management has emerged as an important factor that drives a digital transformation project to success by reducing the risk of project failure. Every project that is undertaken must have risk management techniques tailored to that particular project, and these techniques must offer maximum value to the stakeholders.In a pharmaceutical R&D project, technology management decisions when combined with adequate project risk management processes leads to “a significant improvement in project selection and review”.	Vujović et al. (2020); Willumsen et al. (2019); Jacob and Kwak (2003)
6	Mid-project adjustments	Changes in scope during the project are an unexpected event, and there have been instances where it has led to the failure of the project. Constant product changes that are brought in during the course of the project must be accompanied by additional resources that are needed to ensure the project is on track and the benefits are realized.	Geraldi et al. (2010); Chandrasekaran et al. (2016)
7	Lack of accountability	The presence of a project owner, who is different from the project manager, will drive accountability for the benefits gotten through the project, thus driving the project to success. This promotes decentralization as well, which in turn increases solution quality and increases the ability to cope with environmental changes. Clear roles, responsibilities and accountabilities must be determined amongst the project stakeholders to ensure an “ethical, cohesive and transparent decision-making process for the sake of achieving the mission of the organisation”.A study conducted across 84 biotechnological projects showed that the presence of a strong project leader is vital to increase trust amongst the team members which in turn increases motivation.	Zwikael and Smyrk (2015); Badewi (2016); Curran et al. (2009)
8	Mid-project cancellation	Projects which are cancelled would lead to “loss of economic resources, despair and embarrassment”, and might even go to the extent of exterminating the organization. A study has shown that a firm’s liquidity would take a hit due to the pandemic, and hence project cancellations would have a more severe impact on the firm and may lead to layoff or downsizing to boost profits and avoid bankruptcy.Mid-project terminations in the pharmaceutical industry are prominent and can lead to significant financial and non-financial losses.	Ahonen and Savolainen (2010); De Vito and Gómez (2020); Mujtaba and Senathip (2020); Delerue and Sicotte (2020)
9	Lack of client involvement	Good involvement with the client during all the stages of the project can help reduce unexpected risk and unconstructive actions or reactions. A study has shown that active user or client participation in the project greatly reduces the chance of project failure, and another study has shown that good client involvement would set realistic expectations about the system and capabilities.	Heravi et al. (2015); Tam et al. (2020); Garg and Chauhan (2015)
10	Lack of external communication	There is a need for a “proper communication channel between the customers and the development team” to ensure project success. Lack of communication has been a challenge in project’s success in other industries as well.	Salman et al. (2021); Doloi et al. (2012); Sambasivan and Soon (2007); Sanchez et al. (2020)
11	Lack of management support	A study has shown that support from the top management can drive the project to success. This support would drive the allocation of additional resources when needed. The absence of support and feedback may lead is detrimental to the project.A study conducted in the healthcare industry in India showed that support from top management was critical for the implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) tools. It can also be seen that while top management support alone decreases innovativeness, top management support coupled with project management professionalization increases a hospital’s innovativeness.	Zwikael (2008); Bernardo et al. (2017); Garg and Agarwal (2014);Schultz et al. (2019)
12	Improper sequencing of project tasks	Complex projects have interrelated activities, and appropriate sequencing of these activities is important to reduce first-order and second-order rework time. Tasks can also be sequenced to reduce the losses during project cancellation midway.	Wen et al. (2021); Long et al. (2020)
13	Unclear project dependencies	Modern software projects are undertaken in ecosystems, which are a collection of projects which are dependent on each other. Identification of these dependencies is crucial for developers to understand how their code affects the entire ecosystem. Identification of these dependencies, both external and internal, is tedious and difficult.	Blincoe et al. (2019); Bathallath et al. (2016); Ossher et al. (2010)
14	Improper cost forecasting	Forecasting the cost of a project is vital and its importance has been highlighted through the concept of Earned Value Management, a method to evaluate the project’s current cost performance, since the 1960s. While cost underestimation would lead to cost overruns which would harm a firm financially, cost overestimation would lead to the project being cancelled during the initial phase itself.In the healthcare sector, the cost of implementation of technologies such as RFID is high, and this has been shown to be one of the major challenges to adoption of RFID in healthcare.	Batselier and Vanhoucke (2017);Andersen et al. (2016); Haddara and Staaby (2018)
15	Improper time forecasting	Planning Fallacy, which defines the act of people underestimating the time required for tasks due to cognitive bias, is a major reason for project failure in software development. While cost overruns have significantly dropped in the Information Technology industry over the years, time overruns have increased from 63% to 82% between 2000 and 2007. Underestimation due to overconfidence can result in the task not being completed, thus leading to unnecessary failures which would further lead to financial and psychological harm.	Fink and Pinchovski (2020);Nelson, R (Nelson, 2007); Makridakis and Moleskis (2015)
16	Burnouts	Burnout can be defined as a “psychological syndrome characterized by emotional exhaustion, feelings of cynicism and reduced personal accomplishment”. This can lead to a plethora of negative reactions such as absenteeism, intention to quit, job withdrawal and low organizational commitment. Burnouts can be experienced by the project manager as well due to the high expectations and pressures to deliver the project on time and within the committed cost. Burnouts are ultimately linked to low workplace efficacy.	Maslach (1993); Maslach and Leiter (2016); Jugdev et al. (2018); Pinto et al. (2014)
17	Absenteeism	The H1N1 epidemic struck in 2009, and a study conducted during the period concluded that a significant number of infected patients “spent several days bed-bound, unable to perform routine activities of daily living and too sick or unable to work”. Absenteeism during a pandemic could arise either due to the inability to report to work or the unwillingness to report to work, and in both cases, it leads to severe workforce shortages. Such absences would lead to disruption in the operations and can have a toll on the cost and time of the project.	Teh et al. (2012); Stergiou and Farmaki (2021); Lawrance et al. (2021)
18	Team Communication	With many organizations promoting work from home policy, the communication between “communication out of character, that typically happens effortlessly in co-located work settings, becomes troublesome and requires explicit attention”. Compared to face-to-face interactions, virtual interactions lack verbal (tone, volume, verbal hesitation) and non-verbal (expression, movement, body language) and hence create an absence of feedback and subtle meanings.	Kramer and Kramer (2020); Hafermalz and Riemer (2021); Warkentin and Beranek (1999)
19	Project Monitoring	Every project is expected to deviate from its baseline schedule due to variability and uncertainty, and to reduce the impact of such deviation, project monitoring is essential. With many team members now working remotely, tracking the progress of the work becomes challenging.	Martens and Vanhoucke (2019); Olson and Olson (2006)
20	Social Facilitation	Studies revolving around this factor have taken place for centuries, where it has been understood the mere presence of other people during the execution of a task, either as co-actors or spectators, may offer motivation to perform. Social Facilitation is more important in a virtual group setting than in a traditional workplace, but this is reduced in virtual teams.	Ferris et al. (1978); Markus (1978); Kayworth and Leidner (2002); Martins et al. (2004)
21	Professional Isolation	Professional Isolation refers to the belief that a person is disconnected from others in the workplace. It can lead to a decrease in performance coupled with increased turnover intention. In a study conducted in France, it was found that professional isolation was the most influential factor which impacted performance negatively. Another study concurs with the understanding that professional isolation is a major concern amongst remote team members due to a lack of interpersonal networking and informal learning.	Diekema (1992); Golden et al. (2008); Carillo et al. (2021); Charalampous et al. (2019)
22	Insufficient Technical Knowledge	Technical skills can be considered as one of the most important skills needed by a project manager to deliver successful projects and also to ensure a level of project quality performance. However, the intricate technical details are usually provided by the technical experts in the team, and the project manager is expected to have a level of technical understanding that would aid the integration of the technical subsystem of the project with the other components of the project such as cost and delivery schedule.	Sunindijo (2015); Goodwin (1993)
23	Insufficient Business Knowledge	A study conducted on 902 job advertisements by Fortune 500 companies showed that business knowledge, which refers to the knowledge of the business processes, was demanded by more than 83% of the companies surveyed. Business knowledge of the project team is one of the contributing factors that lead to the support of the top management in a project. An overlap of technical and business knowledge is thus important for delivering a system that is novel. However, it is costly and impractical for a team involved in core Information Technology activities to acquire knowledge about the business processes as it reduces the benefits of specialization. In the pharmaceutical supply chain, in-depth knowledge of the regulations is also required to deliver strong solutions.A study has shown that for a healthcare organization, having good knowledge of the business process “enabled the project teams to systematically store knowledge about the processes from different internal and external sources” and uses them as necessary.	Lee (2005); Štemberger et al. (2011); Tiwana (2012); Hoopes and Postrel (1999); Tiwana and Keil (2007); Tarafdar and Gordon (2007)
24	Lack of motivation	When teams perform interdependent complex tasks, “strong team motivation positively moderates the relationship between ability and project performance and the relationship between opportunity and project performance”. Lack of motivation amongst team members was found to be an important hindrance to projects “during the development and post-development stages”.	Dasí et al. (2021); Banaeianjahromi and Smolander (2019)
25	Cultural Differences	Cultural differences in the style and practice of the project team members stem from the reason that virtual teams have members from various countries, thus requiring “cognizant and careful team leadership”. A study showed the observation that a team member from a country, “where English is not the first language, can be quiet in conference calls”, thus creating communication gaps in the project. Another study has proven that cultural differences harm coordination between the team members.	Zwikael et al. (2021); Kiely et al. (2021); Zakaria and Mohd Yusof (2020)
26	Presenteeism	Presenteeism can be defined as “attending work when ill” and can lead to a loss in productivity which would cost greater than the costs of being absent from work and relevant medical treatment combined. Presenteeism can lead to productivity loss, thereby challenging profitability. Presenteeism also negatively impacts work engagement and job satisfaction.	Johns (2010); Collins et al. (2005); Fernando et al. (2017); Côté et al. (2021)
27	Lack of proper Project Management Tools and Techniques	The usage of appropriate project management tools and techniques can help contribute to the improvement of performance and effectiveness, thereby supporting the organization. Project management tools can also help disordered managers. A study has identified task scheduling, scope statements, requirement analysis and lessons learned as four major tools; and multi-project scheduling software, cost monitoring software and databases for various metrics as tools that are underutilized but have high value.	Sane (2019); Coetzer (2016); Besner and Hobbs (2006)
28	Unfair Performance Appraisals	Fair employee performance appraisal can drive a project to success, and biased or unfair appraisals would reduce the probability of success. A strong appraisal system in place would increase the team members’ trust in the top management and a good appraisal system in place communicates more powerfully with the employees than any other managerial message. A fair appraisal system would increase job satisfaction and job commitment, thereby increasing productivity through motivation. However, a perception of unfairness in the appraisal process would negate this motivation and lead to a reduction in performance.	Khan and Rasheed (2015); Hofstetter and Harpaz (2015); Mayer and Davis (1999); Sholihin and Pike (2009); Garland (1973)
29	Time zone differences	Development of software and its usage is now a global activity with organizations having sites around the globe. However, as the number of sites increase, there need to be proper communication channels, repositories, enhanced project monitoring, better knowledge management, knowledge of local regulations, and management of distribution effort loss (occurs for dependent task types, where an additional effort is lost due to unfinished tasks).	Binder (2009); Taweel and Brereton (2006); Yadav (2016)

Figure 1. The seven phases of this study.

Table 2. Classification of the factors in groups.

Main Group	Factors	Denoted as
Client (CL)	Scope Creep	CL-1
	Mid-project adjustments	CL-2
	Mid-project cancellation	CL-3
	Lack of client involvement	CL-4
Senior Management (SM)	Lack of accountability	SM-1
	Unrealistic Deadlines	SM-2
	Lack of management support	SM-3
	Unfair Performance Appraisals	SM-4
Project Manager (PM)	Poorly defined goals and objectives	PM-1
	Inadequate Risk Management	PM-2
	Improper sequencing of project tasks	PM-3
	Unclear project dependencies	PM-4
	Improper cost forecasting	PM-5
	Improper time forecasting	PM-6
	Project Monitoring	PM-7
	Lack of proper Project Management Tools and Techniques	PM-8
	Insufficient Business Knowledge	PM-9
Project Team (PT)	Lack of external communication	PT-1
	Team Conflicts	PT-2
	Team Communication	PT-3
	Time zone differences	PT-4
	Cultural Differences	PT-5
	Insufficient Technical Knowledge	PT-6
	Lack of motivation	PT-7
Team Member (TM)	Burnouts	TM-1
	Absenteeism	TM-2
	Presenteeism	TM-3
	Social Facilitation	TM-4
	Professional Isolation	TM-5

Table 3. Best-to-others (BO) comparisons for main group factors.

Respondent Number	Best	CL	SM	PM	PT	TM
1	PM	4	9	1	2	3
2	PM	3	8	1	3	3
3	PT	5	8	3	1	2
4	PT	8	5	2	1	2
5	PT	3	8	2	1	2
6	PT	3	8	3	1	4
7	PT	8	5	3	1	4
8	PM	4	7	1	2	3
9	TM	5	8	3	2	1
10	PM	3	8	1	2	2

Table 4. Others-to-Worst (OW) comparisons for main group factors.

Respondent Number	Worst	CL	SM	PM	PT	TM
1	SM	6	1	9	9	8
2	SM	6	1	8	7	6
3	SM	6	1	8	9	6
4	CL	1	3	7	9	8
5	SM	6	1	7	8	7
6	SM	6	1	6	8	5
7	CL	1	4	7	8	6
8	SM	3	1	7	5	5
9	SM	4	1	7	7	8
10	SM	6	1	8	9	8

Figure 2. Cluster diagram for the global weights of the factors.

Table 5. Main group weights obtained for the main groups.

Respondent Number	CL	SM	PM	PT	TM	ξ
1	0.1282	0.0342	0.4103	0.2564	0.1709	0.1026
2	0.1774	0.0403	0.4274	0.1774	0.1774	0.1048
3	0.1079	0.0346	0.1798	0.4080	0.2697	0.1314
4	0.0394	0.0945	0.2362	0.3937	0.2362	0.0787
5	0.1481	0.0370	0.2222	0.3704	0.2222	0.0741
6	0.1818	0.0455	0.1818	0.4545	0.1364	0.0909
7	0.0452	0.1206	0.2010	0.4824	0.1508	0.1206
8	0.1235	0.0484	0.4165	0.2470	0.1646	0.0775
9	0.1046	0.0396	0.1743	0.2615	0.4200	0.1030
10	0.1503	0.0347	0.3642	0.2254	0.2254	0.0867
Main Group Weights	0.1206	0.0529	0.2814	0.3277	0.2174	0.0970

Table 6. Global weights of the Factors.

Main Group	Main Group Weight	Sub-Group Code	Local Weight	Global Weight	Rank
Client (CL)	0.121	CL-1	0.405	0.049	6
		CL-2	0.315	0.038	11
		CL-3	0.068	0.008	28
		CL-4	0.212	0.026	19
Senior Management (SM)	0.053	SM-1	0.160	0.008	27
		SM-2	0.517	0.027	17
		SM-3	0.143	0.008	29
		SM-4	0.180	0.010	26
Project Manager (PM)	0.281	PM-1	0.082	0.023	20
		PM-2	0.154	0.043	8
		PM-3	0.130	0.037	12
		PM-4	0.057	0.016	24
		PM-5	0.095	0.027	18
		PM-6	0.141	0.040	10
		PM-7	0.125	0.035	13
		PM-8	0.037	0.010	25
		PM-9	0.178	0.050	5
Project Team (PT)	0.328	PT-1	0.216	0.071	3
		PT-2	0.126	0.041	9
		PT-3	0.181	0.059	4
		PT-4	0.056	0.018	22
		PT-5	0.055	0.018	23
		PT-6	0.268	0.088	2
		PT-7	0.098	0.032	14
Team Member (TM)	0.217	TM-1	0.201	0.044	7
		TM-2	0.138	0.030	16
		TM-3	0.432	0.094	1
		TM-4	0.142	0.031	15
		TM-5	0.087	0.019	21

Table 7. Factors considered for fuzzy DEMATEL.

Main Group	Factors	Denoted as
Client (CL)	Scope Creep	CL-1
	Mid-project adjustments	CL-2
Project Manager (PM)	Inadequate Risk Management	PM-2
	Improper sequencing of project tasks	PM-3
	Improper time forecasting	PM-6
	Project Monitoring	PM-7
	Insufficient Business Knowledge	PM-9
Project Team (PT)	Lack of external communication	PT-1
	Team Conflicts	PT-2
	Team Communication	PT-3
	Insufficient Technical Knowledge	PT-6
	Lack of motivation	PT-7
Team Member (TM)	Burnouts	TM-1
	Absenteeism	TM-2
	Presenteeism	TM-3
	Social Facilitation	TM-4

Table 8. The initial direct-Relation Matrix for the main groups in terms of depiction.

	CL	PM	PT	TM
CL	0	H	H	L
PM	L	0	VH	H
PT	H	VH	0	VH
TM	L	L	VH	0

Table 9. The initial direct-Relation Matrix for the main groups in terms of numerical equivalent.

	CL	PM	PT	TM
CL	0	3	3	2
PM	2	0	4	3
PT	3	4	0	4
TM	2	2	4	0

Table 10. The fuzzy initial direct-Relation Matrix for the main groups.

	CL	PM	PT	TM
CL	0	(0.5,0.75,1)	(0.5,0.75,1)	(0.25,0.5,0.75)
PM	(0.25,0.5,0.75)	0	(0.75,1,1)	(0.5,0.75,1)
PT	(0.5,0.75,1)	(0.75,1,1)	0	(0.75,1,1)
TM	(0.25,0.5,0.75)	(0.25,0.5,0.75)	(0.75,1,1)	0

Table 11. The fuzzy Total-Relation Matrix for the main groups.

	CL	PM	PT	TM
CL	(0.091,0.469,2.447)	(0.276,0.779,2.876)	(0.304,0.870,3.054)	(0.213,0.730,2.838)
PM	(0.188,0.665,2.636)	(0.156,0.641,2.611)	(0.397,0.998,3.041)	(0.308,0.854,2.876)
PT	(0.273,0.796,2.851)	(0.389,0.986,3.041)	(0.242,0.861,2.982)	(0.398,0.999,3.054)
TM	(0.175,0.621,2.471)	(0.217,0.732,2.636)	(0.369,0.932,2.851)	(0.143,0.597,2.447)

Table 12. The Crisp Total-Relation Matrix for the main groups.

	CL	PM	PT	TM
CL	0.799	1.105	1.198	1.06
PM	0.974	0.959	1.29	1.158
PT	1.101	1.276	1.175	1.288
TM	0.917	1.031	1.216	0.9

Figure 3. The final cause-effect diagram.

Figure 4. The relationship diagram.

Table 13. Final output for the main groups.

	R	D	R+D	R-D
CL	3.792	4.162	7.954	0.37
PM	4.371	4.382	8.753	0.01
PT	4.879	4.841	9.72	−0.038
TM	4.406	4.065	8.471	−0.342

Table 14. The Crisp Total-Relation Matrix for the main groups considering threshold Value.

	CL	PM	PT	TM
CL	0	1.105	1.198	0
PM	0	0	1.29	1.158
PT	1.101	1.276	1.175	1.288
TM	0	0	1.216	0

Asmus, S., Karl, F., Mohnen, A., & Reinhart, G. (2015). The impact of Goal-setting on worker performance - empirical evidence from a real-effort Production experiment. Procedia CIRP, 26, 127–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.02.086

 Google Scholar

Mirza, M. N., Pourzolfaghar, Z., & Shahnazari, M. (2013). Significance of scope in project success. Procedia Technology, 9, 722–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2013.12.080

 Google Scholar

Tereso, A., Ribeiro, P., Fernandes, G., Loureiro, I., & Ferreira, M. (2019). Project Management Practices in Private Organizations. Project Management Journal, 50(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972818810966

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

van der Hoek, M., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2018). Goal setting in teams: Goal clarity and team performance in the public sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(4), 472–493. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X16682815

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bode Greuel, K. M., & Nickisch, K. (2008). Value-driven project and portfolio management in the pharmaceutical industry: Drug discovery versus drug development – commonalities and differences in portfolio management practice. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 14(4), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.1057/jcb.2008.6

 Google Scholar

Delisle, J. (2020). Working time in multi-project settings: How project workers manage work overload. International Journal of Project Management, 38(7), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.04.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Griffiths, K. L., Mackey, M. G., & Adamson, B. J. (2011). Behavioral and psychophysiological responses to job demands and Association with musculoskeletal symptoms in Computer work. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 21(4), 482–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-010-9263-3

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kuutila, M., Mäntylä, M., Farooq, U., & Claes, M. (2020). Time pressure in software engineering: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology, 121, 106257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106257

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Teye Amoatey, C., & Anson, B. A. (2017). Investigating the major causes of scope creep in real estate construction projects in Ghana. Journal of Facilities Management, 15(4), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-11-2016-0052

 Google Scholar

Bianchi, M., Marzi, G., Zollo, L., & Patrucco, A. (2019). Developing software beyond customer needs and plans: An exploratory study of its forms and individual-level drivers. International Journal of Production Research, 57(22), 7189–7208. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1581953

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Manlapaz, P., Castillejo, L., & Herrington, S. (2016). An electronic medical record system supporting global health and medical. SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Social Responsibility. https://doi.org/10.2118/179494-ms

 Google Scholar

Zulfadil, H. S., & Machasin. (2020). The influence of emotional intelligence on team performance through knowledge sharing, team conflict, and the structure mechanism. Journal of Management Development, 39(3), 269–292. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-12-2018-0354

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Park, S., Mathieu, J. E., & Grosser, T. J. (2020). A network conceptualization of team conflict. Academy of Management Review, 45(2), 352–375. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0472

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

O’Neill, T. A., McLarnon, M. J. W., Hoffart, G. C., Woodley, H. J. R., & Allen, N. J. (2018). The structure and function of team conflict state profiles. Journal of Management, 44(2), 811–836. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315581662

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lefley, F., & Marešová, P. (2021). A pragmatic solution to the economic evaluation of medical devices from an industry perspective. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 49(1), 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1109/emr.2020.3031834

 Google Scholar

Vujović, V., Denić, N., Stevanović, V., Stevanović, M., Stojanović, J., Cao, Y., Alhammadi, Y., Jermsittiparsert, K., Van Le, H., Wakil, K., & Radojkovic, I. (2020). Project planning and risk management as a success factor for IT projects in agricultural schools in Serbia. Technology in Society, 63, 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101371

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Willumsen, P., Oehmen, J., Stingl, V., & Geraldi, J. (2019). Value creation through project risk management. International Journal of Project Management, 37(5), 731–749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.01.007

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jacob, W. F., & Kwak, Y. H. (2003). In search of innovative techniques to evaluate pharmaceutical R&D projects. Technovation, 23(4), 291–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4972(01)00116-x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Geraldi, J. G., Lee-Kelley, L., & Kutsch, E. (2010). The Titanic sunk, so what? Project manager response to unexpected events. International Journal of Project Management, 28(6), 547–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.10.008

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chandrasekaran, A., Linderman, K., Sting, F. J., & Benner, M. J. (2016). Managing R&D project shifts in high-tech organizations: A multi-method study. Production & Operations Management, 25(3), 390–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.12410

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zwikael, O., & Smyrk, J. (2015). Project governance: Balancing control and trust in dealing with risk. International Journal of Project Management, 33(4), 852–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.10.012

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Badewi, A. (2016). The impact of project management (PM) and benefits management (BM) practices on project success: Towards developing a project benefits governance framework. International Journal of Project Management, 34(4), 761–778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.05.005

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Curran, C., Niedergassel, B., Picker, S., & Leker, J. (2009). Project leadership skills in cooperative projects. Management Research News, 32(5), 458–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170910952958

 Google Scholar

Ahonen, J. J., & Savolainen, P. (2010). Software engineering projects may fail before they are started: Post-mortem analysis of five cancelled projects. The Journal of Systems & Software, 83(11), 2175–2187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2010.06.023

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

De Vito, A., & Gómez, J.-P. (2020). Estimating the COVID-19 cash crunch: Global evidence and policy. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 39(2), 106741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2020.106741

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mujtaba, B. G., & Senathip, T. (2020). Layoffs and Downsizing implications for the leadership role of human resources. Journal of Service Science & Management, 13(2), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2020.132014

 Google Scholar

Delerue, H., & Sicotte, H. (2020). Resource interdependence and project termination: An analysis in the biopharmaceutical industry. International Journal of Project Management, 38(5), 256–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.06.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Heravi, A., Coffey, V., & Trigunarsyah, B. (2015). Evaluating the level of stakeholder involvement during the project planning processes of building projects. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 985–997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.12.007

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tam, C., Moura, E. J. D. C., Oliveira, T., & Varajão, J. (2020). The factors influencing the success of on-going agile software development projects. International Journal of Project Management, 38(3), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.02.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Garg, P., & Chauhan, A. (2015). Factors affecting the ERP implementation in Indian retail sector. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 22(7), 1315–1340. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-11-2013-0104

 Google Scholar

Salman, A., Jaafar, M., Malik, S., Mohammad, D., & Muhammad, S. A. (2021). An empirical investigation of the impact of the communication and employee motivation on the project success using agile framework and its effect on the software development business. Business Perspectives and Research, 9(1), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/2278533720902915

 Google Scholar

Doloi, H., Sawhney, A., Iyer, K. C., & Rentala, S. (2012). Analysing factors affecting delays in Indian construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 30(4), 479–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.10.004

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sambasivan, M., & Soon, Y. W. (2007). Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 25(5), 517–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.11.007

 Google Scholar

Sanchez, F., Bonjour, E., Micaelli, J.-P., & Monticolo, D. (2020). An approach based on Bayesian network for improving project Management Maturity: An application to reduce cost overrun risks in Engineering projects. Computers in Industry, 119, 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2020.103227

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zwikael, O. (2008). Top management involvement in project management. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 1(3), 387–403. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538370810883837

 Google Scholar

Bernardo, S. M., Anholon, R., Novaski, O., Silva, D., & Quelhas, O. L. G. (2017). Main causes that lead strategies to decline at execution phase: An analysis of Brazilian companies. International Journal of Productivity & Performance Management, 66(3), 424–440. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-09-2015-0126

 Google Scholar

Garg, P., & Agarwal, D. (2014). Critical success factors for ERP implementation in a fortis hospital: An empirical investigation. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 27(4), 402–423. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeim-06-2012-0027

 Google Scholar

Schultz, C., Graw, J. A., Salomo, S., & Kock, A. (2019). How project management and top management involvement affect the innovativeness of professional service organizations — an empirical study on hospitals. Project Management Journal, 50(4), 460–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819857893

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wen, M., Lin, J., Qian, Y., & Huang, W. (2021). Scheduling interrelated activities in complex projects under high-order rework: A DSM-based approach. Computers & Operations Research, 130, 105246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2021.105246

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Long, X., Nasiry, J., & Wu, Y. (2020). A Behavioral study on abandonment decisions in multistage projects. Management Science, 66(5), 1999–2016. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3270

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Blincoe, K., Harrison, F., Kaur, N., & Damian, D. (2019). Reference coupling: An exploration of inter-project technical dependencies and their characteristics within large software ecosystems. Information and Software Technology, 110, 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2019.03.005

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bathallath, S., Smedberg, Å., & Kjellin, H. (2016). Project interdependency Management in IT/IS project portfolios: From a Systems perspective. Procedia Computer Science, 100, 928–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.250

 Google Scholar

Ossher, J., Bajracharya, S., & Lopes, C. (2010). Automated dependency resolution for open source software. 2010 7th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR 2010), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR.2010.5463346

 Google Scholar

Batselier, J., & Vanhoucke, M. (2017). Improving project forecast accuracy by integrating earned value management with exponential smoothing and reference class forecasting. International Journal of Project Management, 35(1), 28–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.10.003

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Andersen, B., Samset, K., & Welde, M. (2016). Low estimates – high stakes: Underestimation of costs at the front-end of projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(1), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-01-2015-0008

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Haddara, M., & Staaby, A. (2018). RFID applications and adoptions in healthcare: A review on patient safety. Procedia Computer Science, 138, 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.10.012

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Fink, L., & Pinchovski, B. (2020). It is about time: Bias and its mitigation in time-saving decisions in software development projects. International Journal of Project Management, 38(2), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.01.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nelson, R. (2007). IT project Management: Infamous failures, Classic Mistakes, and Best practices. MIS Quarterly Executive, 6(2), 67–78.

 Google Scholar

Makridakis, S., & Moleskis, A. (2015). The costs and benefits of positive illusions. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00859

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Maslach, C. (1993). Burnout: A Multidimensional Perspective. In <. I. I. A. I. B. <. Schaufeli, <. I. I. A. I. <. Maslach, & <. I. I. A. I. <. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 237–250). Taylor & Francis.

 Google Scholar

Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry, 15(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20311

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jugdev, K., Mathur, G., & Cook, C. (2018). Linking workplace burnout theories to the project management discipline. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 11(1), 198–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-02-2017-0020

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pinto, J. K., Dawood, S., & Pinto, M. B. (2014). Project management and burnout: Implications of the demand–control–support model on project-based work. International Journal of Project Management, 32(4), 578–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.09.003

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Teh, B., Olsen, K., Black, J., Cheng, A. C., Aboltins, C., Bull, K., Johnson, P. D. R., Grayson, M. L., & Torresi, J. (2012). Impact of swine influenza and quarantine measures on patients and households during the H1N1/09 pandemic. Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases, 44(4), 289–296. https://doi.org/10.3109/00365548.2011.631572

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Stergiou, D. P., & Farmaki, A. (2021). Ability and willingness to work during COVID-19 pandemic: Perspectives of front-line hotel employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 93, 102770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102770

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lawrance, N., Petrides, G., & Guerry, M.-A. (2021). Predicting employee absenteeism for cost effective interventions. Decision Support Systems, 147, 113539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2021.113539

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kramer, A., & Kramer, K. Z. (2020). The potential impact of the covid-19 pandemic on occupational status, work from home, and occupational mobility. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, 103442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103442

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hafermalz, E., & Riemer, K. (2021). Productive and connected while working from home: What client-facing remote workers can learn from telenurses about ‘belonging through technology. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(1), 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1841572

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Warkentin, M., & Beranek, P. M. (1999). Training to improve virtual team communication. Information Systems Journal, 9(4), 271–289. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2575.1999.00065.x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Martens, A., & Vanhoucke, M. (2019). The impact of applying effort to reduce activity variability on the project time and cost performance. European Journal of Operational Research, 277(2), 442–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.03.020

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Olson, J., & Olson, G. (2006). Bridging Distance: Empirical Studies of Distributed Teams. In D. Galletta, & P. Zhang (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Volume II: Applications. M. E. Sharpe, Inc.

 Google Scholar

Ferris, G. R., Beehr, T. A., & Gilmore, D. C. (1978). Social Facilitation: A Review and Alternative Conceptual Model. Academy of Management Review, 3(2), 338–347. https://doi.org/10.2307/257673

 Google Scholar

Markus, H. (1978). The effect of mere presence on social facilitation: An unobtrusive test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14(4), 389–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(78)90034-3

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kayworth, T. R., & Leidner, D. E. (2002). Leadership effectiveness in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(3), 7–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045697

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 805–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.05.002

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Diekema, D. A. (1992). Aloneness and Social form. Symbolic Interaction, 15(4), 481–500. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1992.15.4.481

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Dino, R. N. (2008). The impact of professional isolation on teleworker job performance and turnover intentions: Does time spent teleworking, interacting face-to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1412–1421. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012722

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Carillo, K., Cachat-Rosset, G., Marsan, J., Saba, T., & Klarsfeld, A. (2021). Adjusting to epidemic-induced telework: Empirical insights from teleworkers in France. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1829512

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Charalampous, M., Grant, C. A., Tramontano, C., & Michailidis, E. (2019). Systematically reviewing remote e-workers’ well-being at work: A multidimensional approach. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 28(1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1541886

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sunindijo, R. Y. (2015). Project manager skills for improving project performance. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 16(1), 67. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2015.066041

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Goodwin, R. S. C. (1993). Skills required of effective project managers. Journal of Management in Engineering, 9(3), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)9742-597X(1993)9:3(217)

 Google Scholar

Lee, C. K. (2005). Analysis of skill requirements for Systems analysts in fortune 500 organizations. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 45(4), 84–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2005.11645859

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Štemberger, M. I., Manfreda, A., & Kovačič, A. (2011). Achieving top management support with business knowledge and role of IT/IS personnel. International Journal of Information Management, 31(5), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.01.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tiwana, A. (2012). Novelty-knowledge Alignment: A theory of design convergence in Systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(1), 15–52. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222290101

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hoopes, D. G., & Postrel, S. (1999). Shared knowledge, “glitches,” and product development performance. Strategic Management Journal, 20(9), 837–865. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199909)20:9<837:AID-SMJ54>3.0.CO;2-I

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tiwana, A., & Keil, M. (2007). Does peripheral knowledge complement control? An empirical test in technology outsourcing alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 28(6), 623–634. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.623

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tarafdar, M., & Gordon, S. R. (2007). Understanding the influence of information systems competencies on process innovation: A resource-based view. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 16(4), 353–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2007.09.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dasí, À., Pedersen, T., Barakat, L. L., & Alves, T. R. (2021). Teams and project performance: An ability, motivation, and opportunity approach. Project Management Journal, 52(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972820953958

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Banaeianjahromi, N., & Smolander, K. (2019). Lack of communication and collaboration in Enterprise architecture development. Information Systems Frontiers, 21(4), 877–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9779-6

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zwikael, O., Pathak, R. D., Ling, F. Y. Y., Titov, S., Husain, Z., Sharma, B., Tay, C. Y., & Samson, D. (2021). Variation in project management practices across borders. Production Planning & Control, 33(13), 1270–1282. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1858362

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kiely, G., Butler, T., & Finnegan, P. (2021). Global virtual teams coordination mechanisms: Building theory from research in software development. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(9), 1952–1972. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2021.1909141

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zakaria, N., & Mohd Yusof, S. A. (2020). Crossing Cultural Boundaries using the Internet: Toward building a model of swift trust formation in global virtual teams. Journal of International Management, 26(1), 100654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2018.10.004

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Johns, G. (2010). Presenteeism in the workplace: A review and research agenda. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), 519–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.630

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Collins, J. J., Baase, C. M., Sharda, C. E., Ozminkowski, R. J., Nicholson, S., Billotti, G. M., Turpin, R. S., Olson, M., & Berger, M. L. (2005). The assessment of chronic health conditions on work performance, absence, and Total economic impact for employers. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 47(6), 547–557. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.jom.0000166864.58664.29

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fernando, M., Caputi, P., & Ashbury, F. (2017). Impact on employee productivity from presenteeism and absenteeism. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 59(7), 691–696. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000001060

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Côté, K., Lauzier, M., & Stinglhamber, F. (2021). The relationship between presenteeism and job satisfaction: A mediated moderation model using work engagement and perceived organizational support. European Management Journal, 39(2), 270–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2020.09.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sane, S. (2019). Effect of using project management tools and techniques on SMEs performance in developing country context. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 13(3), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-11-2018-0251

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Coetzer, G. (2016). An empirical examination of the relationship between adult attention deficit and the operational effectiveness of project managers. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(3), 583–605. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-01-2016-0004

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Besner, C., & Hobbs, B. (2006). The perceived value and potential contribution of project Management practices to project success. Project Management Journal, 37(3), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/875697280603700305

 Google Scholar

Khan, A. S., & Rasheed, F. (2015). Human resource management practices and project success, a moderating role of islamic work Ethics in Pakistani project-based organizations. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 435–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.08.006

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hofstetter, H., & Harpaz, I. (2015). Declared versus actual organizational culture as indicated by an organization’s performance appraisal. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(4), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2011.561217

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.123

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sholihin, M., & Pike, R. (2009). Fairness in performance evaluation and its behavioural consequences. Accounting and Business Research, 39(4), 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2009.9663374

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Garland, H. (1973). The effects of piece-rate underpayment and overpayment on job performance: A test of equity theory with a new induction Procedure1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3(4), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1973.tb02399.x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Binder, J. (2009). Global project Management: Communication, collaboration and Management across borders. Strategic Direction, 25(9). https://doi.org/10.1108/sd.2009.05625iae.001

 Google Scholar

Taweel, A., & Brereton, P. (2006). Modelling software development across time zones. Information and Software Technology, 48(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2004.02.006

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yadav, V. (2016). A flexible Management approach for globally distributed software projects. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 17(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-015-0118-9

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

Joseph Jerome, Jude Jegan; Sonwaney, Vandana; ON, Arunkumar (2023), ‘Responses to survey on Project Management and Resilient SC’, Mendeley Data, V1, doi: 10.17632/vd2bc8333z.1