Constructive performance evaluation to support project management in technology startups
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22279/navus.2021.v11.p01-22.1544Keywords:
project management, performance evaluation, MCDA-C, decision support, startups.Abstract
The concern with performance in project management happens in all types of organizations. The advancement of technologies has made markets more competitive, requiring greater speed and giving opportunity for innovative businesses to grow rapidly. In this context, the present research proposes the development of a model that allows building knowledge in the decision makers of this type of organization and supporting them in the project management process, considering the environment they are inserted in, which is dynamic and of limited knowledge. To achieve this end, the MCDA-C methodology was used to build a decision support model that considers the values and preferences of decision-makers through two case studies carried out with technology-based startups that undergo an incubation process in the city of Florianopolis. The results of this research demonstrated that the method is able to assist managers in the identification, ordering and elaboration of improvement in their project management processes.
Downloads
References
Ahmadi, H.; OCass, A. The role of entrepreneurial marketing in new technology ventures first product commercialisation. Journal of Strategic Marketing, v. 24, n. 1, p. 47–60, 2016.
Alqahtani, N.; Uslay, C. Entrepreneurial marketing and firm performance: Synthesis and conceptual development. Journal of Business Research, v. 113, p. 62–71, 2020.
Albert, M., Balve, P., & Spang, K. (2017). Evaluation of project success: a structured literature review. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 10(4).
Ashrafi, A., & Zare Ravasan, A. (2018). How market orientation contributes to innovation and market performance: the roles of business analytics and flexible IT infrastructure. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 33(7), 970–983.
Bana e Costa, C. A. B., & Vansnick, J. C. (1995). General overview of the MACBETH approach. Advances in multicriteria analysis, 93-100.
Barclay, C., & Osei-Bryson, K.-M. (2010). Project performance development framework: An approach for developing performance criteria & measures for information systems (IS) projects. International Journal of Production Economics, 124(1), 272–292.
Bortoluzzi, S. C., Ensslin, S. R., Ensslin, L., & de Almeida, M. O. (2017). Multicriteria decision aid tool for the operational management of an industry: a constructivist case. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, 14(2), 165–182.
Brady, T., & Davies, A. (2004). Building project capabilities: from exploratory to exploitative learning. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1601–1621.
Bredillet, C. (2005). Understanding the very nature of project management: A praxiological approach. Project Management Institute (PMI) Research Conference, 2004.
Brown, S., & Bessant, J. (2003). The manufacturing strategy‐capabilities links in mass customisation and agile manufacturing–an exploratory study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23(7).
Calvetti, E. S., de Oliveira Lacerda, R. T., & Bernardes, M. L. (2019). Um estudo bibliométrico sobre avaliação de desempenho no processo de desenvolvimento ágil de software sob a perspectiva do construtivismo. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação, 6(3), 1–28.
Carayannis, E. G., Ferreira, J. J. M., Jalali, M. S., & Ferreira, F. A. F. (2018). MCDA in knowledge-based economies: Methodological developments and real world applications. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 1–3.
Castela, B. M. S., Ferreira, F. A. F., Ferreira, J. J. M., & Marques, C. S. E. (2018). Assessing the innovation capability of small-and medium-sized enterprises using a non-parametric and integrative approach. Management Decision, 56(6).
Castro, M., Müller, A., Mazute, J., & Vasconcellos, R. (2015, 17 set.) Entrevista com os empresários em 17 set 2015. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Laboratório de Inovação e Gestão CAD/CSE.
Ciric, D., Lalic, B., Gracanin, D., Tasic, N., Delic, M., & Medic, N. (2019). Agile vs. Traditional Approach in Project Management: Strategies, challenges and reasons to introduce agile. Procedia Manufacturing, 39, 1407–1414.
Collyer, S., & Warren, C. M. J. (2009). Project management approaches for dynamic environments. International Journal of Project Management, 27(4), 355–364.
Davies, A., & Hobday, M. (2005). The business of projects: Managing innovation in complex products and systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Din, S., Abd-Hamid, Z., & Bryde, D. J. (2011). ISO 9000 certification and construction project performance: The Malaysian experience. International Journal of Project Management, 29(8), 1044–1056.
Eden, C. (1988). Cognitive mapping. European Journal of Operational Research, 36(1), 1-13.
Ensslin, L., Mussi, C. C., Ensslin, S. R., Dutra, A., & Fontana, L. P. B. (2020). Organizational knowledge retention management using a constructivist multi-criteria model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(5).
Ensslin, L., Montibeller Neto, G., & Noronha, S. M. (2001). Apoio à decisão: Metodologias para estruturação de problemas e avaliação multicritério de alternativas. Florianópolis: Insular.
Ghezzi, A. (2019). Digital startupstartups and the adoption and implementation of Lean Startup Approaches: Effectuation, Bricolage and Opportunity Creation in practice. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 945–960.
Gil, A. C., & Vergara, S. C. (2015). Tipo de pesquisa. Pelotas: Universidade Federal de Pelotas.
Glass, R. L. (2005). IT failure rates-70% or 10-15%? IEEE Software, 22(3), 110–112.
Gunasekaran, A., Yusuf, Y. Y., Adeleye, E. O., & Papadopoulos, T. (2018). Agile manufacturing practices: the role of big data and business analytics with multiple case studies. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1–2), 385–397.
Gunasekaran, A., Yusuf, Y. Y., Adeleye, E. O., Papadopoulos, T., Kovvuri, D., & Geyi, D. G. (2019). Agile manufacturing: an evolutionary review of practices. International Journal of Production Research, 57(15–16), 5154–5174.
Harms, R., & Schwery, M. (2020). Lean startup: Operationalizing lean startup capability and testing its performance implications. Journal of Small Business Management, 58(1), 200–223.
Helfat, Constance E; PETERAF, Margaret A. The dynamic resource‐based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic management journal, v. 24, n. 10, p. 997–1010, 2003.
Huff, A. S., Milliken, F. J., Hodgkinson, G. P., Galavan, R. J., & Sund, K. J. (2016). A conversation on uncertainty in managerial and organizational cognition. In Uncertainty and strategic decision making. In K. J. Sund, R. J. Galavan, A. S. Huff (Eds.). Uncertainty and strategic decision making. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 1-30.
Jones, R.; Suoranta, M.; Rowley, J. Strategic network marketing in technology SMEs. Journal of Marketing Management, v. 29, n. 5–6, p. 671–697, 2013b.
Jordão, R. V. D., Pelegrini, F. G., Jordão, A. C. T., & Jeunon, E. E. (2015). Fatores críticos na gestão de projetos: um estudo de caso numa grande empresa latino-americana de classe mundial. Gestão & Produção, 22(2), 280–294.
Kerzner, H. (2006). Gestão de Projetos: As Melhores Práticas. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
Kristiansen, J. N., & Ritala, P. (2018). Measuring radical innovation project success: typical metrics don’t work. Journal of Business Strategy, 39(4).
Lacerda, R. T. O. (2012). Metodologia de apoio à decisão estratégica para geração contínua de vantagens competitivas a partir dos recursos organizacionais. (Tese, Doutorado em Engenharia de Produção). Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis.
Lacerda, R. T. de O., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S. R., Knoff, L., & Martins Dias Junior, C. (2016). Research opportunities in business process management and performance measurement from a constructivist view. Knowledge and Process Management, 23(1), 18–30.
Lacerda, R. T. O., Ensslin, L., & Ensslin, S. R. (2011). A performance measurement view of IT project management. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 60(2), 132-151.
Lacerda, R. T. de O., Sacco Calvetti, E., Bernardes, L. M., & Cargnin da Silveira, J. F. (2020). Research opportunities about measuring agility in software development: A constructivist perspective. Revista de Gestao e Projetos, 11(2).
Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2011). Project Management the Managerial Process, 37 McGraw Hill. New York, 38.
Longaray, A. A., Ensslin, L., Dutra, A., Ensslin, S., Brasil, R., & Munhoz, P. (2019). Using MCDA-C to assess the organizational performance of industries operating at Brazilian maritime port terminals. Operations Research Perspectives, 6(1).
Marafon, A. D., Ensslin, L., Lacerda, R. T. de O., & Ensslin, S. R. (2015). The effectiveness of multi-criteria decision and methodology. European Journal of Innovation Management, 18(1).
Mehrabi, H., Coviello, N., & Ranaweera, C. (2019). Ambidextrous marketing capabilities and performance: How and when entrepreneurial orientation makes a difference. Industrial Marketing Management, 77, 129–142.
Molin, K. (2003). Divided loyalties in project management. Proc. 3rd Eur. Acad. Manage. Conf.
Neely, A. The performance measurement revolution: why now and what next?
International journal of operations & production management, v. 19, n. 2, p. 205-
, 1999
O’Connor, G. C., & Rice, M. P. (2013). A comprehensive model of uncertainty associated with radical innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30, 2–18.
Picciotto, R. (2020). Towards a ‘New Project Management’movement? An international development perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 38(8), 474–485.
Pich, M. T., Loch, C. H., & Meyer, A. de. (2002). On uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity in project management. Management Science, 48(8), 1008–1023.
Qureshi, S.; Kratzer, J. An Investigation of Antecedents and Outcomes of Marketing Capabilities in Entrepreneurial Firms: An Empirical Study of Small Technology-Based Firms in Germany. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, v. 24, n. 1, p. 49–66, 2011.
Radujković, M., & Sjekavica, M. (2017). Project management success factors. Procedia Engineering, 196, 607–615.
Raupp, F. M., & Beuren, I. M. (2006). Metodologia da pesquisa aplicável às ciências. In I. M. Beuren (Org.). Como Elaborar Trabalhos Monográficos Em Contabilidade: Teoria e Prática. São Paulo: Atlas, 76–97.
Roberts, F. S. (1979). Measurement theory, Vol. 7. Encyclopedia of mathematics and its applications. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Shah, R., & Ward, P. T. (2007). Defining and developing measures of lean production. Journal of Operations Management, 25(4), 785–805.
Shepherd, D. A., & Gruber, M. (2020). The lean startup framework: Closing the academic–practitioner divide. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16.
Tasca, J. E., Ensslin, L., & Ensslin, S. R. (2012). A avaliação de programas de capacitação: um estudo de caso na administração pública. Revista de Administração Pública, 46(3), 647–675.
Tasca, J. E., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S. R., & Alves, M. B. M. (2010). An approach for selecting a theoretical framework for the evaluation of training programs. Journal of European Industrial Training, 34(7).
Williams, T. (2005). Assessing and moving on from the dominant project management discourse in the light of project overruns. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(4), 497–508.
Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321–332.
Zhang, Y., & Fan, Z.-P. (2014). An optimization method for selecting project risk response strategies. International Journal of Project Management, 32(3), 412–422.
Zopounidis, C., Galariotis, E., Doumpos, M., Sarri, S., & Andriosopoulos, K. (2015). Multiple criteria decision aiding for finance: An updated bibliographic survey. European Journal of Operational Research, 247(2), 339–348.
Zwikael, O., & Meredith, J. (2019). Evaluation of project success: a structured literature review. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 10(4), 796-821.
Published
Issue
Section
License
O conteúdo da revista é de acesso público e gratuito, podendo ser compartilhado de acordo com os termos da Creative Commons Atribuição-Uso não-comercial-Vedada a criação de obras derivadas 4.0 Brasil. Você tem a liberdade de compartilhar — copiar, distribuir e transmitir a obra, sob as seguintes condições:
a) Atribuição — a atribuição deve ser feita quando alguém compartilhar um de seus artigos e deve sempre citar o nome da revista e o endereço do conteúdo compartilhado.
b) Uso não-comercial — você não pode usar esta obra para fins comerciais.
c) Vedada à criação de obras derivadas — você não pode alterar, transformar ou criar em cima desta obra.
Ficando claro que:
Renúncia — qualquer das condições acima pode ser renunciada se você obtiver permissão do titular dos direitos autorais. Domínio Público — onde a obra ou qualquer de seus elementos estiver em domínio público sob o direito aplicável, esta condição não é, de maneira alguma, afetada pela licença.
Outros Direitos — os seguintes direitos não são, de maneira alguma, afetados pela licença:
- Limitações e exceções aos direitos autorais ou quaisquer usos livres aplicáveis;
- os direitos morais do autor;
- direitos que outras pessoas podem ter sobre a obra ou sobre a utilização da obra, tais como direitos de imagem ou privacidade.
Aviso — para qualquer reutilização ou distribuição, você deve deixar claro a terceiros os termos da licença a que se encontra submetida esta obra.
A revista se reserva o direito de efetuar, nos originais, alterações de ordem normativa, ortográfica e gramatical, com vistas a manter o padrão culto da língua, respeitando, porém, o estilo dos autores.
Os trabalhos publicados passam a ser propriedade da revista Navus: Revista de Gestão e Tecnologia que deve ser consignada a fonte de publicação original. Os originais não serão devolvidos aos autores.
As opiniões emitidas pelos autores nos artigos são de sua exclusiva responsabilidade.
Esta obra está licenciada sob uma Creative Commons Atribuição-Uso não-comercial-Vedada a criação de obras derivadas 4.0 Brasil.
