Emerging trends indicate that programs are being used to deliver benefits that may not be fully harnessed from single sets of uncoordinated projects. To support this movement, it is essential to have suitable measurement frameworks to assess the contribution of these activities and supply decision makers with valuable data on whether their objectives are being realized. This paper introduces the Multi-Objective Realization Method (MORE) to help measure the strategic contributions of programs. The main principles of MORE underline the importance of a formal strategy to elicit and develop program objectives and to frame those objectives within defined measurement dimensions.
AgarwalN., & RathodU. (2006). Defining ‘success’ for software projects: An exploratory revelation. International Journal of Project Management, 24, 358–370.
2.
AtkinsonR. (1999). Project management: Cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, it's time to accept other success criteria. International Journal of Project Management, 17, 337–342.
3.
BarclayC. (2008). Towards an integrated measurement of IS project performance: The project performance score-card. Information Systems Frontiers, 10, 331–345.
4.
BarclayC., & Osei-BrysonK.-M. (2008). The project objectives measurement model (POMM): An alternative view to information systems project measurement. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 11(3), 139–154.
5.
BasiliV. R. (1999). Foreword. In van SolingenR., & BerghoutE. (Eds.), The Goal/Question/Metric Method: A practical method for quality improvement of software development (pp. xii–xiv). London: McGraw Hill.
6.
BasiliV. R., CaldieraG., & RombachH. D. (1994). The goal question metric approach. In MarciniakJ. J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of software engineering (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 578–583). New York: Wiley.
7.
BasiliV. R., & WeissD. M. (1984). A methodology for collecting valid software engineering data. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 10, 728–738.
8.
BenbasatI., GoldsteinD. K., & MeadM. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11, 368–386.
BrysonN. (1997). Supporting consensus formation in group support systems using the qualitative discriminant process. Annals of Operations Research: Interface between Information Systems and Operations Research, 71, 75–91.
11.
ChenS. C., & DhillonG. S. (2003). Interpreting dimensions of consumer trust in e-commerce. Information Technology and Management, 4, 303–318.
12.
CohenD. J., & GrahamR. J. (2001). The project manager's MBA: How to translate project decisions into business success.San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
13.
DarkeP., ShanksG., & BroadbentM. (1998). Successfully completing case study research: Combining rigor, relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems Journal, 8, 273–289.
14.
DeLoneW. H., & McLeanE. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: Ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30.
15.
DenzinN. K., & LincolnY. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
DhillonG., & TorkzadehG. (2006). Value-focused assessment of information system security in organizations. Information Systems Journal, 16, 293–314.
17.
DrevinL., KrugerH. A., & SteynT. (2007). Value-focused assessment of ICT security awareness in an academic environment. Computers & Security, 26(1), 36–43.
18.
EngwallM. (2003). No project is an island: Linking projects to history and context. Research Policy, 32, 789–808.
19.
EstevesJ. M., PastorJ., & CasanovasJ. (2003). A goal/question/metric research proposal to monitor user involvement and participation in ERP implementation projects. Paper presented at the Information Resources Management Association Conference (IRMA), Philadelphia, PA.
20.
Ewusi-MensahK., & PrzasnyskiZ. H. (1991). On information systems project abandonment: An exploratory study of organizational practices. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 67–89.
21.
GareisR. (1999). May the PMBOK Guide be challenged by new project management paradigm. Paper presented at the PMI Seminars & Symposium, Newtown Square, PA.
22.
GrigoroudisE., & SiskosY. (2002). Preference disaggregation for measuring and analyzing customer satisfaction: The MUSA method. European Journal of Operational Research, 143(1), 148–170.
23.
HartmanF., & AshrafiR. A. (2002). Project management in the information systems and information technologies industries. Project Management Journal, 33(3), 5–15.
24.
HevnerA. R., & MarchS. T. (2003). The information systems research cycle. Computer, 36(11), 111–113.
25.
HevnerA. R., MarchS. T., ParkJ., & RamS. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.
26.
HochsteinL., BasiliV. R., VishkinU., & GilbertJ. (2008). A pilot study to compare programming effort for two parallel programming models. Journal of System and Software, 81(11), 1920–1930.
27.
IpsilandisP. G., SamarasG., & MplanasN. (2008). A multi-criteria satisfaction analysis approach in the assessment of operational programmes. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 601–611.
28.
JugdevK., & MullerR. (2005). A retrospective look at our evolving understanding of project success. Project Management Journal, 36(4), 19–31.
29.
KaplanR. S., & NortonD. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79.
30.
KeeneyR. L. (1992). Value-focused thinking: A path to creative decisionmaking.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31.
KeeneyR. L. (1996). Value-focused thinking: Identifying decision opportunities and creating alternatives. European Journal of Operational Research, 92, 537–549.
32.
Leonard-BartonD. (1990). A dual methodology for case studies synergistic use of a longitudinal single site with replicated multiple sites. Organization Science, 1(3), 248–266.
33.
LycettM., RassauA., & DansonJ. (2004). Program management. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 289–299.
34.
LyytinenK. (1988). Expectation failure concept and systems analysts’ view of information system failures: Results of an exploratory study. Information & Management, 14(1), 45–56.
35.
LyytinenK., & HirschheimR. (1988). Information systems failures—A survey and classification of the empirical literature. In ZorkoczyP. (Ed.), Oxford surveys in information technology (pp. 257–309). New York: Oxford University Press.
36.
MajchrzakA., RiceR. E., MalhotraA., KingN., & BaS. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24, 569–600.
37.
MaylorH., BradyT., Cooke-DaviesT., & HodgsonD. (2006). From projectification to programmification. International Journal of Project Management, 24, 663–674.
38.
NormannR. (2001). Reframing business: When the map changes the landscape.New York: Wiley.
39.
NormannR., & RamirezR. (1993). From value chain to value constellation: Designing interactive strategy. Harvard Business Review, 71, 65–77.
40.
Office of Government Commerce (OGC). (2007). Managing successful programs.Norwich, Norfolk, UK: Author.
41.
OrlikowskiW. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organisations. Organization Science, 11, 404–428.
42.
PellegrinelliS. (1997). Programme management: Organising project-change. International Journal of Project Management, 15, 141–149.
43.
PouloudiA., & WhitleyE. A. (1997). Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: Gaining insights for drug use management systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 6, 1–14.
44.
Project Management Institute (PMI). (2004). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® guide)— Third edition.Newtown Square, PA: Author.
45.
Project Management Institute (PMI). (2006). The standard for program management.Newtown Square, PA: Author.
46.
Project Management Institute (PMI). (2008a). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® guide)—Fourth edition.Newtown Square, PA: Author.
47.
Project Management Institute (PMI). (2008b). The standard for program management (2nd ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Author.
48.
SchwartzP. (1991). The art of the long view.New York: Doubleday.
49.
SharpH., FinkelsteinA., & GalalG. (1999). Stakeholder identification in the requirements engineering process. Paper presented at the 10th International Workshop on Database & Expert Systems Applications.
50.
ShenharA. J., DvirD., LevyO., & MaltzA. C. (2001). Project success: A multi-dimensional strategic perspective. Long Range Planning, 34, 699–725.
51.
SiauK., ShengH., & NahF. F.-H. (2004). The value of mobile commerce to customers. Paper presented at the Third Annual Workshop on HCI Research in MIS, Washington, DC.
52.
SmallM. B., & BriggsD. K. (1987). Scenarios as research tools for investigating social issues. Studies in Educational Administration, 45, 1–17.
53.
SolingenR. V., & BerghoutE. (1999). The goal/question/metric method, a practical method for quality improvement of software development.New York: McGraw-Hill.
54.
SubramaniM. (2004). How do suppliers benefit from information technology use in supply chain relationships?MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 45–73.
55.
ThiryM. (2002). Combining value and project management into an effective programme management model. International Journal of Project Management, 20, 221–227.
56.
TurnerJ. R., & MullerR. (2003). On the nature of the project as a temporary organization. International Journal of Project Management, 21, 1–8.
57.
WarrenR., DillerD. E., LeungA., FergusonW., & SuttonJ. L. (2005). Simulating scenarios for research on culture & cognition using a commercial role-play game. Paper presented at the Winter Simulation Conference, Orlando, FL.
WinterM., & SzczepanekT. (2008). Projects and programmes as value creation processes: A new perspective and some practical implications. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 95–103.
60.
YinR. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing.
61.
YinR. K. (2003). Case study research: Designs and methods (3rd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing.
