MPM – Master of Project Management
The state of Benefit Realisation Management in Iceland
And how to move forward
June, 2018
Student: Lára Böðvarsdóttir
Supervisor: Hera Grímsdóttir
10 ECTS for the degree of Master of Project Management (MPM)
1
THE STATE OF BENEFIT REALISATION MANAGEMENT IN ICELAND -
AND HOW TO MOVE FORWARD
Lára Böðvarsdóttir1
Reykjavík University2
ABSTRACT
Benefit Realisation management (BRM) has been around for almost forty years. It's often referred as “common sense but not common practice”. Its maturity is not high in organisations in the world but is increasing. BRM is all about realising what are the benefits firm want, where does it want to be in so many years time and work back to determine the required changes that are needed in order to reach that goal for the organization. The aim of this thesis was to investigate the state of BRM in Iceland. Qualitative research through interviews with five experts, all of whom have extensive experience in project management, was conducted. None of the participants had heard of the phrase Benefit Realization Management and so the interview focused on their organization´s project management process, alignment with strategic goals, and measurement of benefits. The results of the interviews have been presented by common themes and topics that emerged during the interview process. The organizations interviewed were also then benchmarked against a list of best practices that characterize mature BRM practice. Each company was given a score on how well they perform and the average of these scores are used to gauge the state of BRM in Iceland. The research results suggest three areas that Icelandic companies should focus on to develop a more mature BRM practice, 1) sustaining benefits through more advanced benefits assessment and monitoring benefits going forward, 2) identifying benefits based on BRM and portfolio project management theory and 3) aim to develop experience and knowledge in using soft metrics when measuring benefits. Key words: benefit realisation management, benefit management, portfolio management, measurements.
1 Lára Böðvarsdóttir. Email: [email protected]. Tel.: +354 8633244. 2 Reykjavík University, School of Science and Engineering, Reykjavík, Iceland. Email: [email protected].
2
1. INTRODUCTION
Company’s strategy is the foundation of how the company operates and performs.
Companies identify, plan and execute projects for product development, service lines
and processes all to execute the company’s strategy. As such, project management is a
key element in achieving the company's strategic goals.
Aligning projects with strategic goals is essential to maximize project benefits. It is
traditional to define project benefits in monetary terms. Does the project increase
revenues or reduce costs, resulting in higher profits? Increased efficiency which
ultimately leads to reduced cost is a perfect example of traditional project benefits
measurement.
In recent decades, businesses have been acknowledging the importance of non-financial
benefits which could contribute equally to achieving strategic goals as financial
benefits. A few examples would include increasing market share, increasing customer
satisfaction, blocking new competition, developing new technology for next generation
of products and reducing dependency of unreliable suppliers (Larson & Gray, 2014).
Project benefits in those cases cannot be measured with traditional financial metrics
only.
Organizations spend millions of dollars on project that never meet expectations to
deliver intended benefits to the business. Still, many of these projects are considered a
success. They come in on time, on budget, and meet original goals and business intent.
But, too often, the “business intent” focuses on outputs and outcomes, and not the
benefits that advance the business over time (Project Management Institute, 2016a, p.
3). So often in organisations people come up with a solution which may be new
systems, new buildings, new technologies, some other kinds of change and then hunt
for benefits to justify that investment. (Bradley, G., 2015)
Many Icelandic companies have realized substantial growth, often outside the borders,
resulting in more complex projects that use a lot of resources. Resources are scarce and
projects need to be evaluated based on the benefits they produce. The benefits must be
clear from the initiation of the project and project planning needs to be structured and
3
well executed. A well planned project is more likely to deliver higher benefits (Bradley,
2010). The idea for this research thesis comes from Össur, an Icelandic based prosthetic
manufacturer.
Ossur was founded in 1971 and has a wide-ranging expertise in the development,
production, and sale of non-invasive orthopedics. Össur is a perfect example of fast
growing company which implements many strategic projects on a regular basis. Össur
has emphasized using best practice in every aspect of its operation and a lot of effort
and resources are used for business development. The company runs three Project
Management Office´s (PMO), IT, R&D and Global. When projects are initiated Össur
has acknowledged the value of good project planning and clear identification and
measurement of benefits for projects (Sigurðardóttir, A., director of GPMO, personal
communication, January 29th, 2018).
The idea is to research Benefit Realisation Management (BRM), a field within the
project management literature. The aim of this research project is to define the state of
BRM within Icelandic companies compared to international best practices, whether
companies are using the BRM literature and which methods are being used to measure
benefits, in particular non-financial benefits. Also, based on the results, how to move
forward to a more mature BRM environment.
4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 What is Benefit Realisation Management?
Benefits Realization Management (BRM) is an aspect of project management that has
received increasing attention in the past years. It's now seen as central to project,
program and portfolio management, with it even begin suggested that BRM is the glue
that binds together all the other management techniques. BRM originally developed in
the 1980s and 1990s because of a need to understand the return on investment from IT
spend (Bradley, 2010) and overcome the limitations of traditional investment appraisal
techniques (APM, 2009)
Figure 1: The relationship between BRM and other management disciplines (Bradley, 2010).
BRM is a process for achieving maximum benefits from change within an organization.
It starts with establishing the end goal, which might be expressed as a vision or a set of
quite specific objectives or even some quite clear end benefit, and then it works back
from that to determine what kind of change needs to be made. As it works back through
that path it creates route map from where we are today to where we want to be in maybe
2, 5 or 10 years time. As it creates that map it will identify a lot of steps on the way to
the ultimate end benefits, objectives or vision as the end goal (Bradley G., 2015).
Benefit Realisation
Management(BRM) Change
Management
Programme Management
Stakeholder Management
Performance Management
Portfolio Management
Project Management
5
Figure 2: Focus on the real goal – the end point. (Bradley, 2010)
Although projects in an organizational portfolio can address different objectives
(Jenner, 2010), they are mainly undertaken to support the execution of business
strategies (Buttrick, 2000). Therefore, organizations need to ensure the success of their
projects in order to succeed in executing their strategy and in turning their vision into
reality (Serra & Kunc, 2015).
Despite the clear role projects have in implementing business strategies, projects are
evaluated by their efficiency, not by the delivered benefits and a large group of
organizations claims that project benefits are very hard to measure, (Zwikael & Smyrk,
2011) especially benefits realized during product operation, often long after project end
(Yu, Flett & Bowers, 2005).
The project portfolio life-span extends well beyond the project life cycle to include
identification of needs and opportunities on the front end and the realisation of benefits
at the other end. Project Portfolio Management (PPM) recognizes this, bridging the
traditional gap between the projects and operations functions and delivering maximum
value from limited resources (Levine, 2005, p. 13).
To be
As isCurrent Position
Drivers for change
StakeholdersCultural Factors
EnablersBenefit
Realisation Management
Business Change
Vision
Objectives
Benefits
6
In order for an organization to acquire a desired future status involves series of changes.
Each change is expected to produce benefits and the combination of them all will fill
the value gap so the business gets its desired value, as illustrated in figure 1. (Serra &
Kunc, 2015)
Figure 3: Filling the value GAP, adapted from Serra & Kunc (2015)
This journey starts by having projects delivering outputs, these create outcomes, which prepare
operations to realise benefits.
Figure 4: Journey from current to desired business value, adapted from Serra & Kunc (2015).
It is vital that the change portfolio, like any investment portfolio, is actively managed
in order to optimise the flow of benefits for the whole portfolio, relative to the degree
of risk the organisation is prepared to accept. As such active portfolio management
becomes a key part of the embedding of BRM within an organisation and embedding
BRM within an organisation is a key part of portfolio management. (Bradley, 2010 p.
281)
7
2.2 Defining benefits
A benefit is described as “an advantage on behalf of a particular stakeholder or
stakeholder group” according to Ward and Daniel, 2006. However, this definition is
extended on the basis of different considerations. First, no benefits can be realized
without a change in the current state (Serra & Kunc, 2015). Second, for each aspect of
project success (management and investment), measures should be established to define
the success criteria, from article Muller and Turner, 2007. Third, benefits should be
owned and assigned to a certain person or department, made responsible for realizing
them. According to Winch and Leiringer, 2016; Chih and Zwikael, 2015, indeed,
without an owner, the benefit will never accrue because nobody will be interested in
using the project output to capturing the benefits according to Peppard, 2007 (Badewi,
2016, p. 763).
Benefits can be tangible and intangible (capable or incapable of being measured).
Project benefits, which can be reflected by Key Performance Indicators (KPI), can be
financial or non-financial. (Larson & Gray, 2014). KPI´s are a quantifiable measure
used to evaluate the success of an organization, employee, etc. in meeting objectives
for performance.
While financial benefits can be measured and estimated before the starting of the
project, non-financial benefits may either be measurable (e.g. the defect rate) or non-
measurable (the organization’s market reputation). However, non-financial benefits
cannot easily be considered in a project´s investment success without articulating,
quantifying and measuring how they can affect the financial benefits. Furthermore,
quantifying the benefits is necessary for managing, monitoring and controlling their
realization according to Lebas, 1995; Otley, 1999, in other words what cannot be
measured cannot be managed (Badewi, 2016, p. 763).
2.3 What defines a mature BRM practice?
As an example of BRM best practices one could use the BRM framework developed
by PMI (Project Management Institute, 2016b). The framework includes the following
three phases:
8
1. Identification of benefits to determine whether projects, programs, and
portfolios can produce the intended business results.
2. Execution of benefits management to minimize risks to future benefits and
maximize the opportunity to gain additional benefits.
3. Sustain benefits to ensure that whatever the project or program produces
continues to create value. As such the project delivers continuous value from
outputs and outcomes once they transition back to the business.
The framework discusses the use of commonly used BRM tools such as:
The benefits register, which is a collection and list of planned benefits which is
used to measure and communicate the delivery of benefits throughout the
duration of the project or program. These might include both tangible,
intangible, short-term and/or long-term benefits.
The benefits realization plan, that is a document outlining the activities
necessary for achieving the planned benefits. It identifies a timeline and the
tools and resources necessary to ensure the benefits are fully realized over time.
The benefits realization roadmap, which is a visual illustration that shows when
and how benefits are expected to be enabled for the business owner to then
utilize for benefits realization.
Below are few examples of best practices extracted from the framework:
Identifying benefits
● Using tools. Utilizing the appropriate tools such as a benefits register, benefits
realizations roadmap, and benefits breakdown structures.
● Developing KPI’s. Developing meaningful metrics and key performance
indicators (KPI’s) to measure the actual delivery of benefits versus the planned
benefits.
● Monitoring controls. Establishing processes for monitoring and controlling
progress against the benefits realization plan.
9
● Reporting to stakeholders. Including a communication plan in the benefits
realizations plan that includes the steps necessary to report benefits progress to
stakeholders.
● Approval of stakeholders. Key stakeholders, sponsors, and customers shall review
and approve the benefits realization roadmap.
Execute benefits management
● Aligned with strategic objectives. At the execution phase it is ensured that the
project or program remains aligned with the organization's strategic objectives.
● Risk assessment and measurement. Risks and KPI’s related to financials,
compliance, quality safety and stakeholder satisfaction are evaluated, as they
might impact the delivery of benefits.
● Reporting. Recording process and reporting to key stakeholders as directed in the
communications plan.
Sustain benefits
● Benefits assessment. Develop a benefits assessment, which includes formally
verifying that the benefits have been delivered and are being realized.
● Monitor results going forward. Monitoring the continued suitability of the new
capability or other change factors and monitoring actual benefit results against
targets and managing for variance.
● Continuous improvement. Facilitating continuous improvement through ongoing
knowledge sharing/knowledge transfer, including lessons learned. Developing
business cases and potential initiation of new projects to respond to operational
issues (Project Management Institute, 2016b).
10
3. METHOD
3.1 Research approach
Right at the beginning it was clear that BRM is not used widely in Iceland so
interviewing people would give the best information about the state of BRM in Iceland.
The research approach was a qualitative research through interviews.
The purpose of qualitative research is to gather data and information regarding how
people interpret their surroundings and status. This can be done by observing people in
their own environment and to do semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured
interviews are interviews where the interviewer does not use standard template, nor that
the answers are structured. People are asked to describe their experience on the subject
at hand and their feelings. The results cannot be interpreted through statistical analysis,
instead themes or concepts are subtracted from the answers where commonalities are
found in the interviewees responses (Halldórsdóttir, 2016). Usually small samples are
used and aimed to get detailed information from the interviews. Interviews are
particularly good at producing data which deal with topics in depth and in detail.
Subjects can be probed, issues pursued and lines of investigation followed over a
relatively lengthy period. (Denscombe, 2010, p. 192)
3.2 Choosing the participants
To shed lights on the use of BRM in Iceland eight companies, known as project
management leaders in the field in Iceland were approached for an interview.
Invitations were sent via email to specialists within the Project management office of
each company. Five persons in four companies ended up being interviewed, three from
companies in manufacturing, one from a transportation company and one from a
company that provides diversified data services.
The five participants who took part in this research:
A) Director of Global Program Management Office, MPM, worked within the
company for 7 years but as a project manager for 15 years.
11
B) Senior Manager Business Process Management, M.Sc. in Strategy and
Management, worked for the company for 7 years but in the sector for over 20
years.
C) Lean management specialist, B.S. in Psychology and Industrial Engineering,
worked for little over 2 years at the company.
D) Process Manager, M.Sc. in Mechanical Engineering, worked for 5 years at that
company.
E) Head of Product- and Project Management, MPM. Only worked for few months
but as a project manager for 15 years.
3.3 Execution
All of the participants got an invitation to participate by email where the topic was
described shortly, the process and the execution itself. Then the participants had given
its consent to participate the interview was scheduled. The interviews were taken in
March-April 2018. All of the interviewees agreed to be recorded.
Each interview lasted about 45 minutes and were recorded and transcribed for data
analysis. In all of the interviews a semi-structured method was used, that is when the
interviewer has a clear list of issues to be addressed and questions to be answered.
However, the interviewer is prepared to be flexible in terms of the order in which the
topics are considered and let the interviewee develop ideas and speak more widely on
the issues raised by the researcher. The participants were asked about how projects or
programs were identified and selected, which key metrics were used, how benefits were
determined etc.
The data from the interviews were analyzed and then categorized into four sections
which describes the opinion and experience of the interviewee.
There is no absolute way of verifying what someone tells you about their thoughts and
feeling but when taking an interview in research such as this on where the “key players”
are picked out precisely because they are specialists, experts or highly experienced,
their testimony carries with it a high degree of credibility (Denscombe, 2010).
12
4. RESULTS
When asked, only one of the respondents actually recognized the phrase Benefit
Realization Management but when the concept was described further most respondents
admitted they were developing tools and adapting methods aiming for higher maturity
in BRM.
The main results of these interviews are summarized in the following sections.
4.1 Project approval process
In all companies the process for selecting and executing projects is described in a
similar way. However, the level of detail during the planning phase varies. All
employees can provide ideas for new projects. The ideas is then developed further
within each division or department before been taken to the next phase. For an idea to
become a project it needs to cut through layers of decisions making and planning. Once
a desirable project has been identified, it is in most cases, outlined in a detailed business
case, and presented to divisional managers or chief executive officers for approval.
“There is always a guidance or some references for decision making, but I would not define it as business case.” C4
“People are taking more notice of good business cases since it makes decision making more easier and they want more of that. “Can’t you prepare it the same way as I saw the other day, that was excellent work?” this creates demand for better defined business cases. The more convincing the business case is the more likely it is to be approved.” C4
4.2 Aligning projects with strategic goals
All interviewees mentioned that big and important projects are selected with reference
to the company's strategic goals and targets. However, some projects, with a lot of affect
on the strategic goals, are top-down, results of executive decisions at the upper
management level so they are not selected through the project management process.
There are also other projects that are initiated due to compliance issues. The new
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) on is an example of such project. Project
development in those cases needs to be swift and efficient. In addition, all interviewees
13
mentioned that small projects are usually not subject to the common project
management process, since they are identified and executed at the divisional level.
“We only process projects related to operations into the project management process, i.e. if there is a need for transferring a branch, that would not be processed through the PMO.” C2
In two instances of the four companies in question, soft factors, such as reducing carbon
emissions, are usually not taken into consideration when benefits are defined and
measured even though the company’s strategy includes carbon reduction. For the other
two companies environmental factors are considered in all projects as a result of the
company’s strategy. In one of the companies, there is one employee that has the
responsibility of calculating the carbon emissions of each project. However, he is not a
member of the PMO.
4.3 Metrics
At two of the four companies, projects are not executed until benefits are clear and
measurable. For the other two benefits are identified shortly after the project has
commenced. The three most commonly mentioned being profit, reduced waste and
reduced cost. Usually there is one main metric used throughout all projects. Defined
benefits often need to be measured by non-financial metrics, or soft metrics. However,
soft metrics are usually not relied upon and not desirable as KPI’s by management. All
companies emphasize that benefits can be measured statistically (numbers or kronas),
either being soft or hard metrics.
“Yes, on the template we use there are commonly used metrics. We give each metric proportional weight but if there are non-financial metrics there then that’s kind of …(indicates ignored)“ C2
“Do you always use more than one metric? We always use hard metrics, such as expected revenues or cost reduction, but sometimes we also identify project benefits that are beneficial to the company or something that has been in demand from our customers.” C3 “Usually there is at least metric being used in the business case, some financial metrics” C1
4.4 Tools and methods
Most interviewees mentioned that there were too many tools being used for each project
at the planning phase and during the project life span. As an effort to decrease that, two
14
companies are developing their own information system to record the process of each
project throughout the cycle, were all executive officers and individuals involved would
have access. Such a system would reduce working hours and make information sharing
more accessible and efficient. It would help the Project Management Office and
management manage resources in more efficient way, i.e. it would display when
resources might become available. By implementing such as system the business case
and project plan for each project will be in the same format, making the decision making
process for executive management more effective
4.5 Summary
The process for identifying and selecting desirable projects for execution is similar for
the four companies in question. The PMOs used different sets of tools for evaluating
projects but in all four cases ideas needed to meet certain conditions before being
presented to executive management for approval. Benefits are defined for each project,
where financial metrics are mostly used.
It seems to be a part of the project approval process to align projects with the company’s
strategic goals. However, when benefits are defined there seem to be a lack of harmony
with strategic goals for soft factors such as for environmental strategies.
It varies between companies whether projects are initiated as a result of requirement or
a compliance issue, or whether they are initiated as a part of product development or
desired change. It is common that projects are executed without benefits being
identified, but they are identified at the early stage of the project life. All companies
take notice of soft metrics and only one of the four has it as its mission to make soft
metrics measurable so they become a part of the evaluation process. Benefits are
recorded throughout the project, or as soon as they become measurable
,,We start to measure the benefits at early stage, and start tracking them and reporting them to stakeholders as soon as we can. Benefits usually become realized as the change is being implemented or as soon as it has been implemented.” C4
Project life does not end until either the desired goals have been reached or it is decided
to terminate the project. Unfortunately, the lack of clear definition of the business owner
15
leads to lack of sustainability for project benefits. Usually project benefits are
monitored for no longer than 3-6 months after the project has been implemented.
,,BRM emphasizes the measure of benefits after the project
commences. That’s what we do and we emphasize that should be done, but in reality we are not good at it. New projects come along, meaning that old projects become old news. I have always emphasized this to my staff but I would not say that is something that we are good at, far from it.” C2
Finally it was common theme that interviewees believed there was endless of good
projects but to little resources to implement them.
16
5. CONCLUSION
Benefit realisation management is clearly not used widely in Iceland. Only one of eight
companies that were first approached had heard about it, surprising given that this
literature and topic has been around for the last 30-40 years. In 2009 the British
Association for Project Management (APM) founded a special division around BRM
and it seem to be getting attention. When explained in more detail, most companies
acknowledged they had done some work towards that method and were trying to mature
this capability.
According to the interviews it is clear that the companies are using a lot of the structure
of BRM, even though not familiar with the topic. Some aspects of BRM is well
executed by the companies but almost none of them is actively looking at soft benefits,
or other non-financial KPI’s.
The conclusion is that the process of setting up a project, valuating it, developing the
business case, choosing projects to execute can be described as mature, organized and
effective. However, when benefits are defined they are not looking at non-financial
metrics. They are aware of these benefits, but as often is the case, you want to make
money fast. Since there is no magic solution for measuring soft benefits it is hard
representing those benefits.
5.1 Comparing the sample to best practices
When comparing the results of the interviews with the best practice guidelines
described in chapter 2.3, a view of the state of BRM in Iceland can be extracted.
Each of the 11 best practice examples is used as metric describing how well each
company is performing in the subject at hand. The performance is measured in 5 grades,
non-existing, poor, average, good and very good. The measurement is based on
qualitative factors from the interviews.
The table below show how the sample of Icelandic companies are performing against
each of the 11 best practice metrics, based on the results of the interviews:
17
Figure 5: Icelandic companies performance against each of the 11 “best practice” PMI.
The results can be summarized by average score for each of the best practice metrics.
Figure 6: Average performance.
When comparing average score for each of the best practice metrics, the practices for
sustaining benefits has the lowest score. It was clear from the interviews that none of
the companies were implementing processes or programs to monitor the benefits of the
projects after they had been executed and implemented. Benefits are only measured for
3-6 months after the project is completed. Therefore, the companies did not use the
opportunity to continuously make improvements in the new processes or systems
implemented. Benefits assessment after a project has been executed was also lacking.
Identifying benefits had the second lowest score on average. The companies are not
using the necessary documents for projects. However, developing KPI´s encouraged
companies to measure the actual delivery of benefits versus the planned benefits. In my
opinion it's crucial for companies to track benefits from finished project to see the real
Best practice metric Company A Company B Company C Company D
Using tools 3 3 3 4 3,25 Very Good 5Developing KPI's 3 2 1 2 2 Good 4Monitoring controls 2 1 1 2 1,5 Average 3Reporting to stakeholders 2 1 1 2 1,5 Poor 2Approval of stakeholder 2 1 1 3 1,75 Non-existing 1
0Aligned with stratetic objectives 4 4 3 5 4Risk assessment and measurement 3 3 2 3 2,75Reporting 3 2 1 3 2,25
0Benefits assessment 2 2 1 2 1,75Monitor results going forward 2 1 1 2 1,5Continous improvement 2 2 1 2 1,75
RatingId
en
tify
ing
ben
efit
sE
xec
ute
Su
stain
Best practice metric Average
Using tools 3,25 Very Good 5Developing KPI's 2 Good 4Monitoring controls 1,5 Average 3Reporting to stakeholders 1,5 Poor 2Approval of stakeholder 1,75 Non-existing 1
Aligned with stratetic objectives 4,25Risk assessment and measurement 2,75Reporting 2,25
Benefits assessment 1,75Monitor results going forward 1,5Continous improvement 1,75
Iden
tify
ing
ben
efit
sE
xec
ute
Su
sta
in
Rating
18
value. By doing that, it's easier for companies to learn from it, monitor it and add on
continuous improvement. To do this projects need to have an assigned benefit owner.
That person is responsible for measuring benefits, during, after and long after and
makes sure that things don't go back to the way they were.
The highest score was how companies are aligning there projects with strategic
objectives. All of the participants agreed on that this is highly important and in fact
execute this relatively well.
5.2 How to move BRM forward in Iceland?
The research results suggest that for Icelandic companies to move forward to a more
mature BRM environment they should have three areas of focus, 1) sustaining benefits
through more advanced benefits assessment and monitoring benefits going forward, 2)
identifying benefits based on BRM and portfolio project management theory and 3) aim
to develop experience and knowledge in using soft metrics when measuring benefits.
The first item on the agenda should be sustaining benefits more clearly. For the purpose
of doing so companies could enhance the role of the benefit owner. The Benefit owner
is someone with clear monitoring responsibilities for measuring benefits, not only as
the project is being executed but also after is has been completed. The benefit owner
insures sustainability of the benefits derived from the change.
Secondly, there seem to be a trend of short-term thinking instead of project management
being a part of the bigger picture in general. Projects should be defined for the purpose
of achieving long-term strategic goals and vision, and realizing which benefits the
company actually wants? Where do we as an organization want to be in so many years’
time and then we should work back to determine the required changes that is needed in
order to go down that path. As organizations go down that path they want to be able to
measure the changes being delivered and the benefit being realized over time. A key
part of the process is not only having identified measures to track for each project, but
also for value of the whole chain of projects identified to drive change. It could also
service part of the justification process that is generally required to release funding.
19
Icelandic companies face a lot of challenges due to economical volatility and small-
business environment. As such management needs to be adaptive to change and have
clear vision for the future. BRM creates biggest value in shaping and scoping the
business if applied as a long-term strategic tool for portfolio of projects all initiated for
driving the desired change. As such BRM could be the ultimate tool for success for
Icelandic companies.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank all my interviewers for their participation in this research and for
giving me the time to help me relishing the state of BRM in Iceland, their work and
experience.
I would also like to thank my supervisor, Hera Grímsdottir, for the great faith in me,
good help and great encouragement.
Special thanks to my husband for his endless believe in me, encouragement, patience
and a lot of help over the last two years, my family and friends for support, help and
motivation when things looked undoable.
20
REFERENCES
Association for Project Management. (2009). Benefit Management - A strategic
business skill for all seasons. Retrieved April 11, 2018 from
https://www.apm.org.uk/sites/default/files/2016/apm_benefitsmanagement_0.
Badewi, A. (2016). The impact of project management (PM) and benefits
management (BM) practices on project success: Towards developing a project
benefits governance framework. International Journal of Project
Management, 34(4), 761–778.
Bradley, G. (2010). Benefit realisation management: a practical guide to achieving
benefits through change. (2nd ed.). Farnham, Surrey, England ;Burlington,
Vt.: Gower Pub.
Bradley, G. (interviewee) (2015, October 11) Benefit Realisation Management with
Gerald Bradley (Llewellyn R., reporter) [video file]. Retrieved March 28,
2018 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp4jl6uG2Rc
Buttrick, R. (2000). The project workout: a tool kit for reaping the rewards from all
your business projects. (2nd ed.). Harlow: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Denscombe, M. (2010). The Good Research Guide for small-scale social research
projects (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Halldórsdóttir, S. (2016). Handbók í aðferðafræði rannsókna. Reykjavík: Ásprent
Stíll ehf.
Jenner, S. (2010). Transforming Government and Public Services: Realising Benefits
Through Project Portfolio Management. Gower Publishing, Ltd.
Larson, E. W. & Gray, C. F. (2014). Project management: the managerial process
(6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
21
Levine, H. A. (2005). Project portfolio management: a practical guide to selecting
projects, managing portfolios, and maximizing benefits. (1st ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Project Management Institute. (2016a). Delivering Value: Focus on benefits during
project execution. Retrieved April 11 2018 from https://www.pmi.org/-
/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/learning/thought-leadership/pulse/benefits-
focus-during-project-execution.pdf?sc_lang_temp=en.
Project Management Institute. (2016b). Benefits Realization Management
Framework. Retrieved January 29, 2018 from
https://www.pmi.org/learning/thought-leadership/series/benefits-
realization/benefits-realization-management-framework
Serra, C. E. M. & Kunc, M. (2015). Benefits Realisation Management and its
influence on project success and on the execution of business strategies.
International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), 53–66.
Yu, A. G., Flett, P. D. & Bowers, J. A. (2005). Developing a value-centred proposal
for assessing project success. International Journal of Project Management,
23(6), 428–436.
Zwikael, O. & Smyrk, J. (2011). Project Management for the Creation of
Organisational Value. London: Springer-Verlag.
