Summary of Findings

Following are the questions which studied complicated project’s categorization (number of questions is the same in this section as well):

In your team, how many individuals work?

In your project, how many subprojects are there?

In which industrial field is your project placed?

In dollars, what the net value of your project?

How would your project size be categorized?

Which of the given complication enablers influences your project?

How would your project be ranked in accordance with the complication?

In your project, list the processes which are vulnerable to the complication (PMI standard).

        The study was carried out for showing the frequency of answers of participants. And a special relation between the sub-projects in the project and the members was identified. And classification of categories including complication level and project size was possible. First of all, the complication level and question about the categorization of the project are evaluated, offering important information about the available resources. Then questions regarding project value, most sensitive processes to the complication, complication enablers, and industrial field are checked.

        Only ten team members are included in most of the projects and the average number for sub-projects in different projects is three. It is also important to note that most of the projects of participants have no such sub-projects. A specific group formation is provided for different projects with 2-5 sub-projects. Actually, it could be measured that with twenty-eight individuals included in a project, it is possible for 4 sub-projects to exist. It seems to imply that if the number of individuals in a certain project rises, then sub-projects also increase.

           The complicated projects are categorized into four categories of different fields of matrix including project value in dollar, the appearance of top 10 complication enablers, most vulnerable processes for a complication, and field of industry. The analysis of most vulnerable processes for complication and complication enablers was accomplished earlier. Somehow, specific field industry analysis presented that all field of industry is not given names specifically related to the fields. Here the key focus was on information (communication) industry and finance. The project did not raise any problem related to the categorization. Later on, all samples or participants were targeted for selection from their relevant fields.   

            Projects faced problems during the evaluation and measurement of the overall value of the project.  Top four project values presented a huge variance. In addition, the highly valued projects were placed in other fields of industries excluding the cost-intensive industries. As a result of this, the research question was declared as an invalid question. The results earned from this question were not taken into account.

            Any unexpected noticeable problems were not found in some fields including complication enabler's field, processes most vulnerable for a complication, and specific field of industry. Project level (low, medium level, and high level) and project categorization (small project, medium project, a large project and major project) are also mentioned by the project managers. Enablers concerning the project can support in further proceeding the interview. Vulnerable complication process related questions were also asked in the interview.

        Regarding this project, the value matrix has no guarantee for the surety of accurate working. Project value related correct project categorization was proved later as invalid for dollars. Somehow, it may support the reorganization process in the complicated project by providing directions to the other factors.

        Three participants were selected in the specific field of industry to provide answers for the research questions in the interview. Here, the completeness claim is not existing. A number of projects were related to information and communication.