Page 87 - Rižnar, Igor, and Klemen Kavčič (ed.). 2017. Connecting Higher Education Institutions with Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 87
The Maturity of Project Management in Slovenian Companies
• Level 3 – Defined process: This represents the ability in an organi-
sation to identify a properly defined process that the organisation
has confirmed. This process already has the role of a standardised
business process within an organisation.
• Level 4 – Managed process: This represents the ability in an organi-
sation to identify the implementation of project management and
the measurement of the process.
• Level 5 – Optimised process: The organisation of the process of
project management is continually optimised and upgraded.
The main disadvantage of the p3m3 model lies in the fact that there
are no systematic studies about it that confirm benefits for the organ-
isation that use it. Nevertheless, by using this model, organisations
should be able to achieve a higher rate of return, higher production ef-
ficiency, lower productions costs, better quality results, improved cus-
tomer satisfaction and improved morale of employees (Goldenson and
Gibson 2003).
The Project Management Maturity Model (Prommm)
The ‘Project Management Maturity Model’ or the Maturity Model of
Project Management (Prom m m) was developed with the purpose of
fulfilling an organisation’s needs and is an advancement of the c m m
maturity model. The Prommm model is an upgrade of the efq m qual-
ity model and maturity risk (the Risk Maturity Model). The maturity
model of project management describes four levels of project manage-
ment ability. The objective of Prom m m is to secure a structural path
towards excellence for project management. Moreover, it allows com-
panies to compare (benchmark) processes of project management and
to support effective project management. Specific levels are defined in
the way the organisation measures its own stage or level that this model
defines (Hillson 2001):
• The first level presents organisations that are ‘Naïve’ about project
management (Prom m m level 1). In this level, the organisation is
not aware of project management, and does not have a defined
structured approach towards projects. Processes within an organ-
isation are repeatable and reactive. The organisation does not try
to learn from the past and does not prepare for future threats and
uncertainties.
• The second level presents organisations that are ‘Novices’ in project
management (Prommm level 2). Organisations on this level exper-
85
• Level 3 – Defined process: This represents the ability in an organi-
sation to identify a properly defined process that the organisation
has confirmed. This process already has the role of a standardised
business process within an organisation.
• Level 4 – Managed process: This represents the ability in an organi-
sation to identify the implementation of project management and
the measurement of the process.
• Level 5 – Optimised process: The organisation of the process of
project management is continually optimised and upgraded.
The main disadvantage of the p3m3 model lies in the fact that there
are no systematic studies about it that confirm benefits for the organ-
isation that use it. Nevertheless, by using this model, organisations
should be able to achieve a higher rate of return, higher production ef-
ficiency, lower productions costs, better quality results, improved cus-
tomer satisfaction and improved morale of employees (Goldenson and
Gibson 2003).
The Project Management Maturity Model (Prommm)
The ‘Project Management Maturity Model’ or the Maturity Model of
Project Management (Prom m m) was developed with the purpose of
fulfilling an organisation’s needs and is an advancement of the c m m
maturity model. The Prommm model is an upgrade of the efq m qual-
ity model and maturity risk (the Risk Maturity Model). The maturity
model of project management describes four levels of project manage-
ment ability. The objective of Prom m m is to secure a structural path
towards excellence for project management. Moreover, it allows com-
panies to compare (benchmark) processes of project management and
to support effective project management. Specific levels are defined in
the way the organisation measures its own stage or level that this model
defines (Hillson 2001):
• The first level presents organisations that are ‘Naïve’ about project
management (Prom m m level 1). In this level, the organisation is
not aware of project management, and does not have a defined
structured approach towards projects. Processes within an organ-
isation are repeatable and reactive. The organisation does not try
to learn from the past and does not prepare for future threats and
uncertainties.
• The second level presents organisations that are ‘Novices’ in project
management (Prommm level 2). Organisations on this level exper-
85
