EXAMINED FACTOR | EMPLOYEE | REVIEWERS | CONSULTANTS | TOTAL | ||||
F = Frequency of occurrence W = Impact weighting | F | W | F | W | F | W | F | W |
Incomprehensible documentation | 2.1 | 4.6 | 3.5 | 4.3 |
|
| 2.8 | 4.4 |
Lack of commitment by the management of the LGOs | 3.3 | 4.6 | 3.8 | 4.8 | 3.0 | 4.6 | 3.4 | 4.7 |
Incompatibilities with the work practice | 2.9 | 3.6 | 2.8 | 4.8 |
|
| 2.9 | 4.2 |
Insufficient academic/professional qualifications of the employees in relation with project management | 3.0 | 3.4 | 3.8 | 4.8 | 3.8 | 3.6 | 3.5 | 3.9 |
Deficient coordination of the involved departments | 3.0 | 2.7 | 3.2 | 3.5 | 4.2 | 4.4 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
Cautious attitude by the employees |
|
| 3.8 | 3.0 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 3.8 | 3.1 |
Inability to implement special requirements of a PMCM | 2.1 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 2.4 | 2.7 | 2.9 |
Problems related to the outsourcing of the PMCM development process | 2.4 | 3.0 | 3.8 | 4.0 | 3.4 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 3.6 |
Gap between the daily practice and the documented processes | 3.6 | 3.7 | 2.5 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.7 | 2.6 |
Impedance of LGOs for reengineering and changing their work practices | 2.9 | 3.6 | 2.8 | 2.5 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 3.0 | 3.1 |
Insufficient support by the Central Government | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 2.4 |
Inappropriate PM standards | 1.7 | 1.4 | 1.8 | 3.5 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 1.9 | 2.4 |