Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Universidade do Minh...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Universidade do Minho: RepositoriUM
Other ORP type . 2022
License: CC BY
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Sustentabilidade na gestão de projetos: PM² vs PRiSM

Sustainability in project management: PM² vs PRiSM
Authors: Marques, Patrícia Marlene Machado;

Sustentabilidade na gestão de projetos: PM² vs PRiSM

Abstract

A sustentabilidade tem-se tornado numa preocupação crescente, sendo necessário aplicar esforços para a sua consideração. No entanto, as metodologias de gestão de projetos existentes são, ainda, pouco desenvolvidas relativamente a este assunto. Este estudo teve como objetivo analisar a presença da sustentabilidade em guias tradicionais de gestão de projetos e em publicações científicas sobre gestão de projetos. Outro objetivo deste estudo consistiu em estudar duas metodologias de gestão de projetos relativamente recentes, PM² e PRiSM, comparando as suas vantagens e desvantagens presentes na literatura. Para atingir os objetivos, recorreu-se à revisão de literatura e a entrevistas qualitativas. A metodologia PM² pretende atender as necessidades das instituições e projetos da União Europeia. Porém, a presença da sustentabilidade no seu guia é praticamente inexistente, talvez por pretender ser genérica. A metodologia PRiSM pretende tornar o processo de gestão de projetos mais sustentável e baseia-se na norma P5, uma norma que pretende alinhar portfólios, programas e projetos com a estratégia da organização para a sustentabilidade. A grande diferença entre as duas metodologias reside nos objetivos principais que cada uma das metodologias apresenta. Na metodologia PRiSM, a Avaliação de Impacto P5 e o Plano de Gestão de Sustentabilidade são os principais entregáveis diferenciadores em relação a outras abordagens, incluindo a PM². Ambas as metodologias possuem o Caso de Negócio e o Documento de Requisitos. A maioria dos restantes entregáveis parecem semelhantes em termos de âmbito. As Fases de Encerramento são semelhantes nas duas metodologias e os critérios de sucesso encontram-se mais desenvolvidos na metodologia PRiSM. A característica mais mencionada pelos autores sobre a PM² foi incluir as melhores práticas de outros corpos de conhecimento, e na PRiSM e norma P5, foi ser uma extensão do Triple Bottom Line, uma vez que engloba também o produto e o processo. Segundo o entrevistado, a PM² pretende ser uma metodologia genérica utilizável em qualquer projeto, assim, um foco na sustentabilidade retiraria "elasticidade" à metodologia. Todavia, os utilizadores que queiram utilizar a metodologia PM² e considerar a sustentabilidade podem incluí-la nos objetivos adicionais, e utilizar, por exemplo, a Avaliação de Impacto P5 e o Plano de Gestão de Sustentabilidade.

Sustainability has become a growing concern, and it is necessary to apply efforts for its consideration. However, existing project management methodologies are still underdeveloped regarding this issue. This study aimed to analyse the presence of sustainability in traditional project management guides and in scientific publications on project management. Another objective of this study was to compare two relatively recent project management methodologies, PM² and PRiSM, comparing their advantages and disadvantages present in the literature. To achieve the objectives, literature review and qualitative interviews were used. PM² methodology aims to answer the needs of the European Union institutions and projects. However, the presence of sustainability in its guide is practically non-existent, perhaps because it intends to be generic. The PRiSM methodology seeks to make the project management process more sustainable and is based on the P5 standard, a standard that intends to align portfolios, programs and projects with the organization's strategy for sustainability. The major difference between the two methodologies is related to the main objectives presented by each one. In the PRiSM methodology, the P5 Impact Analysis and the Sustainability Management Plan are the main deliverables that are different compared to other approaches, including PM². Both methodologies have the Business Case and the Requirements Document. Most of the remaining deliverables seem similar in scope. The Closure Phases are similar in both methodologies and the success criteria are more developed in the PRiSM methodology. The most mentioned feature by the authors about PM² was to include best practices from other bodies of knowledge, and in PRiSM and P5 standard, it was to be an extension of the Triple Bottom Line, because it also includes the product and the process. According to the interviewee, PM² aims to be a generic methodology that can be used in any project, so a focus on sustainability would remove the methodology "elasticity". However, users who want to apply the PM² methodology and consider sustainability can include it in the additional objectives, and use, for example, the P5 Impact Analysis and the Sustainability Management Plan.

Dissertação de mestrado em Engenharia Industrial

Country
Portugal
Related Organizations
Keywords

Sustainability, PRiSM, Project management, Engenharia e Tecnologia::Outras Engenharias e Tecnologias, PM², Sustentabilidade, P5, Gestão de projetos

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 76
    download downloads 30
  • 76
    views
    30
    downloads
    Data sourceViewsDownloads
    Universidade do Minho: RepositoriUM7630
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
76
30
Green