SOFTWARE MANAGEMENT PROJECT REVIEW

Software Management Project Review
Structured Abstract

Background
The aim of the research was to identify why some software management projects were
successful while others were not. Success in the management of the project is based on whether
the project achieved the cost and schedule estimates while failure referred to those that ran late,
were over budgeted, or were canceled before completion. Ideally, the research was meant to
investigate and identify the reasons why software projects fail based on extensive research into
some large software development projects over the course of a few years. The emphasis in the
research was placed on the software management practices that assured the success or failure of
a project.
Aims
The objectives of the study were to identify the causative factors of failures in software
development projects. In an attempt to determine what led to the failure of some software
projects, two working hypotheses emerged. First, poor quality control is the largest contributor to
cost and schedule overruns and, secondly, poor project management is the leading cause of
inadequate quality control.
Method
The research was carried out through the analysis of 250 large software projects each
found to be at or above 10,000 function points in size. The software projects were drawn from
those that were examined by the author’s company over the course of a nine-year period between
1995 and 2004. It should be noted that 10,000 function points are roughly equivalent to
1,250,000 statements in the C programming language.
Results
When the author’s company undertook a comparison of the large software development
projects, some relevant results were observed. In the comparison, it was found that, of the large
projects under comparison, some were effective and achieved their cost and schedule estimates
while others failed since they ran over their time schedules, went over their budget, or were
canceled before reaching completion. From an examination of the projects that succeeded against
those that failed, six common problems were observed. The reasons for the failure of any
software development project were found to be directly linked to poor milestone tracking, poor
project planning, poor measurements, poor cost estimating, poor change control, and poor quality
control (Jones, 2004). In contrast to these results, it was found that successful software
development projects tended to perform better than average on all six counts that were
responsible for failure in projects. Perhaps the most significant aspect of these findings was that
the six problem areas that were associated with failures in software development projects were as
a result of failure in management rather than with the technical personnel involved in the project.
Conclusion
The conclusion that was derived from the research was that for a software development
project to be successful, project planning, cost estimation, measurements, milestone tracking,
change control, and quality control have to be better than average. Further, the management
aspects of a software development project are more likely to cause failure in the project than the
technical aspects.

Software Management Project Review 3

Review

One of the key concerns in the management of software development projects is the high
rates of failure that are seen in the software engineering industry (Stellman & Greene, 2006).
Many researchers have been confounded by the reasons why some software development
projects experience a failure while others do not. Similar concerns abound over why some
software development projects can yield high-quality code while others produce low-quality
code. Concerns over the high rates of failure in the industry are reflected in the number of
software engineering researchers who have tried to examine the causes of failure in software
development projects and the number of peer-reviewed articles on the same topic. While many
theories abound, and researchers choose to focus on a variety of issues, most of them are in
agreement that the management of the software development project is the single most important
concern when it comes to determining the rates of success or failure for the project. Moreover,
there was demonstrated the need for an article that appeared in a peer-reviewed journal, was
written by an author who is an expert in their field. It is with these issues in mind that a paper on
the success and failure rates in software development projects that focused on management of the
said projects was chosen as a basis for this review. The suitability of the research paper for
consideration was subject to its identification of the relevant factors that contribute to the success
of software development project as well as how the document is structured. Further, the paper
was found to be suitable because it was peer reviewed, involved long-term research, and was
authored is an expert in the field of software engineering.
“Software Project Management Practices: Failure Versus Success” by Jones (2004)
clearly identifies the role of management in software project development. Management is quite
easily the most important factor in project management. Numerous researchers document this
interesting fact, that the success of a project is directly tied to the person or persons charged with
overseeing the said project. The project manager is typically charged with keeping the projects
on schedule, delivering on client expectations, maintaining the quality of code to acceptable
standards, keeping the project costs within the budget, and fostering healthy interaction between
the different members of the team and helping them succeed in their individual roles. One of the
fundamental observations made in the field of software engineering project management is that
high-quality software is not expensive. The high-quality software has been found to be faster and
cheaper to build and maintain than low-quality software, from initial development all the way
through total cost of ownership (Jones & Bonsignour 2011). The project management team
ensures that the code is built faster and cheaper, and that costs remain within budget. With all the
roles that fall on the management, the project management team is evidently the centerpiece of a
successful project. The author of the paper recognizes this and structures his research on the
fundamental project management practices that need to be adopted for a successful project.
The document is logically structured with clearly identified research questions as well as
a well-organized result set. For a research paper to achieve its intended purpose, that of
advancing or updating knowledge in the field in which it is based, it has to be able to meet some
predefined requirements. Chief among these, the research has to be able to articulate clearly the
background on which it is based, together with its aims and preferred method. Moreover, the
analysis should clearly outline the results or findings and whether they reinforce or invalidate the
original hypotheses on which the research was based. In this regard, the paper excels since it has
a transparent background that forms a basis for the analysis along with a well-outlined
hypotheses for testing. The study also breaks down the findings into useful management

Software Management Project Review 4

practices that make implementation easy and actionable. The results are divided into six action
points: project planning, cost estimating, measurements, milestone tracking, change control, and
quality control. The action points present a relevant checklist of project management best
practices that a project management team can apply to ensure that the project is successful. The
paper not only outlines two hypotheses on possible causes of failure of projects but also
effectively investigates them and draws up relevant ways in which project success can be
assured.
The selected article has been peer reviewed and as such the paper meets the minimum
threshold for a quality check. The research process is never perfect and errors are likely to creep
into the research process and, as a result, affect the results or findings. Peer-reviewed research
articles have some distinct advantages over those that are not. Chief among these benefits is that
by subjecting research material to review by experts in the field of research, relative quality and
merit of the research is assured. Similarly, the review process allows a diversity of opinions to be
introduced into the research process, and in this way eliminates any personal biases or pre-set
ideas that the author might have. Even more important, reviewers are generally experts in their
fields, well versed with the latest developments or advancements in the topic the research covers.
As a result, papers that are plagiarized, have duplicated content, or do not in any way update
current knowledge in the field of research are not published. Also, poor quality work,
substandard or poor science does not reach publication. Since the paper has been peer reviewed,
it attests to the relative quality of the research, and ensures that the paper offers a unique and
valuable perspective on its subject matter.
The author of the document is recognized as an expert in his field. Capers Jones, the
author of the research document is known as a specialist in software engineering, specifically in
software engineering methodologies. He is considered as an authority on the function point
model of cost estimation, particularly as it regards the calculation of the costs of a project. Jones
has held positions in two of the largest enterprise software development companies, International
Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) and International Business Machines (IBM). Also, Jones has
found or co-found several companies including Software Productivity Research (SPR) and
Namcook Analytics that deal with the management of large software project management
enterprises. Moreover, he collects data on software risks, software quality, and software best
practices with his numerous computer science publications on the subject being widely adopted
by business organizations and education institutions. Furthermore, Jones is an advisor to and
consultant for the Consortium for IT Software Quality (CISQ), an organization that brings
together industry insiders in software engineering to address challenges that arise from the
quantification of software quality. Based on the author’s credentials and extensive experience, it
can be concluded that the paper offers a truly unique perspective and value-added contributions
to the body of research that the author undertakes.
The research that forms the basis of the article was carried out over an extended period
and took into consideration a large number of cases. Long-term experiments and observations
offer some advantages over those that are conducted over a shorter period. Short-term
observation furnishes the researcher with information on how a project is controlled at the time
and place of the manipulation. Information that is garnered is limited to the initial limiting
factors and their subsequent interactions with each other. For complex systems, however, their
very nature makes short-term observation less than stellar and produces the deliverables expected
by the research. Software development projects are complex systems with multiple components,

Software Management Project Review 5

each operating on different time scales and having different trajectories. Where a short-term
observation of the software development project would have yielded information on the
conditions at a point in time, a long-term study can show the changes in the conditions over time,
subject to their interactions with other elements in the system. Thus, long-term research as in this
case will ensure that the results of the study are accurate and reliable. Further, since the study
involved a large number of cases, the possibility of making generalizations that are untrue is
significantly lower compared to research that employs a lower number of cases.
For the project, the pre-estimate accounted for twenty-one study hours from the start to
the completion of the project. Three of the hours were set aside for looking into research issues
in the field of software engineering with particular emphasis on software project management.
From the research, it was identified that one of the most critical concerns in the area of software
engineering lies in assuring the success of software development projects through effective
project management. Thus, an additional three hours were set aside to look for relevant papers on
the software project management. Further, and additional nine hours, three for each paper, were
set aside for researching the various aspects of project management the paper covered and
identify which of the three was most relevant towards the assurance of successful projects.
Subsequently, three hours were allocated for the creation of a draft of the review, with another
two hours for the writing of the draft. Finally, an hour was assigned to go over the final copy for
errors and corrections. By identifying the different component processes that would be required
for successful completion of the project, and ensuring that pre-assessment schedule was strictly
adhered to, the assignment was completed in time and using minimal resources. Thus, the task
could be considered a success.
In conclusion, the selection of the paper for review was as a result of how well the
research topic addressed the factors that resulted in successful software development projects as
well as how the findings of the study were structured. Also, the paper being peer reviewed,
having an author who was an expert in their field, and involving long-term research played a part
in the decision. Project management is critical to the success of a project and thus the fact that
the paper focused on this presented a significant advantage in its favor. Further, the paper was
well structured, particularly in the presentation of the research findings. Finally, the paper that
was selected was peer reviewed, involved research that was undertaken over a long period and
was written by an author who is an expert in the field of software engineering.

Software Management Project Review 6

References

Jones, C., 2004. Software project management practices: Failure versus success. CrossTalk: The
Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 17(10), pp.5-9.
Jones, C. and Bonsignour, O., 2011. The economics of software quality. Addison-Wesley
Professional.
Stellman, A. and Greene, J. (2006). Applied software project management. Sebastopol, CA:
O’Reilly.