The purpose of this research effort is to develop a model for improving the performance of global projects using the underlying relations among the important enablers and barriers of global project performance. A number of factors are identified in the study, using a literature review to develop the model. A survey was used to determine the impact of these factors on global project performance. The model suggests different management practices for global projects versus traditional, co-located projects. Different from the outcomes of traditional projects, research results suggest that leadership and establishing trust is a first step in the initial stages of the global project.
AdenfeltM., & LagerströmK. (2006). Enabling knowledge creation and sharing in transnational projects. International Journal of Project Management, 24, 191–198.
2.
AnantatmulaV. (2008). Role of technology in project manager performance model. Project Management Journal, 39(1), 34–48.
3.
BakerG. (2002). The effects of synchronous collaborative technologies on decision making: A study of virtual teams. Information Resources Management Journal, 15(4), 79–93.
4.
BarczakG., McDonoughE. F., & AthanassiouN. (2006, May-June). So you want to be a global project leader. Research Technology Management, pp. 28–35.
5.
BeranekP., BroderJ., ReinegB., RomanoN., & SumpS. (2005). Management of virtual project teams: Guidelines for team leaders. Communications for the Association for Information Systems, 16, 247–259.
6.
ByosiereP., & LuethgeD. J. (2007). Project management processes across borders: A comparison of EU-US corporate subsidiary project activities. Project Management Journal, 38(2), 18–29.
7.
DamodaraK. U. (2000, November-December). Global project management—Not business as usual. Journal of Management in Engineering, pp. 29–33.
8.
DialloA., & ThuillierD. (2005). The success of international development projects, trust and communication: An African perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 23, 237–252.
9.
DodsonW. R. (1998, April). Virtually international: Managing globalized project teams. PM Network, pp. 29–31.
10.
DubéL., & ParéG. (2001). Global virtual teams. Communications of the ACM, 44(12), 71–74.
11.
EricksonJ. M., & RanganathanC. (2006). Project management capabilities: Key to application development offshore outsourcing. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 199–208).
12.
EvansJ., & MavondoF. T. (2002). Psychic distance and organizational performance: An empirical examination of international retailing operations. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, 515–532.
GrosseC. U. (2002). Managing communication within virtual intercultural teams. Business Communications Quarterly, 65(4), 22–38.
15.
HalpinD. W., & HuangR. Y. (1995). Competition and future needs of international clients. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 121, 191–196.
16.
HamiltonJ. B., KnouseS. B., & HillV. (2009). Google in China: A manager-friendly heuristic model for resolving cross-cultural ethical conflicts. Journal of Business Ethics, 86, 143–157.
17.
HofstedeG. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind, intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival.New York: McGraw-Hill.
18.
HoriiT., JinY., & LevittR. E. (2005). Modeling and analyzing cultural influences on project team performance. Computational & Mathematical Organizational Theory, 10, 305–321.
19.
JarvenpaaS., & LeidnerD. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 791–815.
20.
KanawattanachaiP., & YooY. (2002). Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11, 187–213.
21.
KerznerH. (1995). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (5th ed.). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
22.
KhangD. B., & MoeT. L. (2008). Success criteria and factors for international development projects: A life-cycle-based framework. Project Management Journal, 39(1), 72–84.
23.
KhattabA. A., AnchirJ., & DaviesE. (2007). Managerial perception of political risk in international projects. International Journal of Project Management, 25, 734–743.
24.
KhazanchiD., & ZigursI. (2005). Patterns of effective management of virtual projects—An exploratory study.Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
25.
Lee-KelleyL. (2006). Locus of control and attitudes to working in virtual teams. International Journal of Project Management, 24, 234–243.
26.
Lee-KelleyL., & SankeyT. (2008). Global virtual teams for value creation and project success: A case study. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 51–62.
27.
LehmannH. (2004). The Australasian produce cooperative: A global information system project. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 13, 220–232.
28.
LientzB. L., & ReaK. P. (2003). International project management.San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
29.
LinB.W., & BergD. (2001). Effects of cultural differences on technology transfer projects: An empirical study of Taiwanese manufacturing companies. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 287–293.
30.
MahalingamA., & LevittR. E. (2007). Institutional theory as a framework for analyzing conflicts on global projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133, 517–528.
31.
MajchrzakA., RiceR., MalhotraA., KingN., & BaS. (2000). Technology adaption: The case of a computer supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24, 569–600.
32.
MarmerC. (1998, November). Building teams across borders. Global Workforce, pp. 13–17.
33.
MowshowitzA. (1997). Virtual organization. Communications of the ACM, 40(9), 30–37.
OrrR. J., & ScottW. R. (2008). Institutional exceptions on global projects: A process model. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 562–588.
36.
PintoJ. K., & PrescottJ. E. (1987). Variations in critical success factors over stages in the project life cycle. Journal of Management, 14(1), 5–18.
37.
PintoJ. K., SlevinD. P., & DennisP. (1987). Critical factors in successful project implementation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 34(1), 22–27.
38.
Project Management Institute (PMI). (2008). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)—Fourth Edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.
39.
RadP. F., & AnantatmulaV. (2009 June-July). Attributes of a harmonious project team. Presented at the AACE International 53rd Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA.
40.
SarkerS., & SahayS. (2002). Information systems development by US-Norwegian virtual teams: Implications of time and space. Presented at the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
41.
SchweigerD. M. (1998, January-March). Networking global style. Business Economic Review, pp. 3–6.
42.
SennaraM., & HartmanF. (2002). Managing cultural risks on international projects. Proceedings of the PMI Annual Seminars and Symposium. Retrieved February 17, 2010, from http://www.risksig.com/members/2002_papers/global07.pdf
43.
SimonsM. (2006). Global software development: A hard problem requiring a host of solutions. Communications of the ACM, 49(10), 32–33.
44.
SingerC. (2001, April). Leveraging a worldwide project team. PM Network, pp. 36–40.
45.
SnowC. C., SnellS. A., & DavisonS. C. (1996). Use transnational teams to globalize your company. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 50–67.
46.
TavcarJ., ŽavbiR., VerlindenJ., & DuhovnikJ. (2005). Skills for effective communication and work in global product development teams. Journal of Engineering Design, 16, 557–576.
47.
WallerR. J. (1975). Application of interpretive structural modeling to priority-setting in urban systems management. In BaldwinM. (Ed.), Portraits of complexity(Battelle Monograph No. 9). Columbus, OH: Battelle Memorial Institute.
48.
WangX., & LiuL. (2007). Cultural barriers to the use of western project management in Chinese enterprises: Some empirical evidence from Yunnan Province. Project Management Journal, 38(3), 61–73.
49.
WarfieldJ. N. (1973). Intent structures. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 3(2), 133–140.
50.
YasinM. M., MartinJ., & CzuchryA. (2000). An empirical investigation of international project management practices: The role of international experience. Project Management Journal, 31(2), 20–30.
