See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271455172

Theory of the triple constraint — A conceptual review

Conference Paper · December 2012

DOI: 10.1109/IEEM.2012.6838095

CITATIONS READS

26 22,770

3 authors:

C. Jurie Van Wyngaard Jan-Harm C Pretorius

University of Johannesburg University of Johannesburg
6 PUBLICATIONS   51 CITATIONS    210 PUBLICATIONS   753 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Leon Pretorius
University of Pretoria
217 PUBLICATIONS   829 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

PhD research View project

Research on all renewable energy sources, especially their impact on quality of power. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jan-Harm C Pretorius on 18 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Theory of the Triple Constraint – a Conceptual Review

C. J. Van Wyngaard1, J. H. C. Pretorius2, L. Pretorius3

1
Graduate Universities of Johannesburg and Pretoria, Employee Saab Electronic Defence Systems, South Africa
2
Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
3
Graduate School of Technology Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
(jurie.vanwyngaard@gmail.com)

Abstract – Projects are generally undertaken because that project scope, time and cost comprise the three key
they are part of the plans to meet business needs and charter triple constraint variables [1], [3], [4], [6], [10], [11], [12].
organizations to new levels of performance. Projects are Project time addresses the scheduling and duration of the
however constrained by conflicting demands and competing project, cost addresses the budget and resources of the
priorities within the project environment. Neglecting to project, and scope addresses the requirements and work of
manage these constraints accurately and effectively may be
the project. A time-constrained project is bounded by the
sufficient to condemn a project even if all other project
management activities are performed to a high standard of completion agenda, whereas a cost-constrained project is
excellence. The aim of this paper is to improve the bounded by the scheduling of expenditure. Scope-
interpretation of the triple constraint and its dynamics and constrained projects are bounded by the performance
indicate how this may advance the delivery of project criteria of the deliverables. Project quality constitutes an
success. An integrated model is proposed to facilitate the integral dimension of project management and is
strategic management of the triple constraint trade-offs as a supported by the triple constraint [3], [4], [6], [7], [10],
function of the project higher purpose. [11], [13], [14].
The project management triangle (Fig. 1) is a useful
Keywords - Project management, triple constraint,
model to illustrate the consequences of change on the
trade-offs, scope, time, cost
triple constraint to key project stakeholders. The triangle
reflects the fact that the three constraints are interrelated
I. INTRODUCTION
and involve trade-offs – one side of the triangle cannot be
changed without impacting the others. Project quality
Products and solutions need to be constructed faster,
takes root in all three variables of the triple constraint and
cheaper and better. Around the world mission-critical
is affected by balancing the three factors [4], [10].
projects are being launched all the time involving
It may easily be argued that triple constraint affairs
significant capital investments and high-risk ventures.
reside at the kernel of the most essential determinations
Projects are becoming the way of the working world.
surrounding projects.
What makes project delivery successful is however a topic
of much academic debate, and depends by whom and
B. Introducing the research rationale
against which value system the project is being evaluated.
It is generally agreed that to be considered successful, a
According to research by the Gartner Group, only
project must be fit for purpose (add strategic value) and it
16% of information technology (IT) projects are
must have achieved its delivery targets [1], [2].
completed within the desired time frame and budget and
In reality it is not always considered practical to
achieve the desired results. More than 30% of projects are
deliver all the project targets exactly as planned. Trade-
cancelled and over 50% of projects will experience cost
offs need to be considered and priorities must be set in
overruns. Less than 30% of the projects companies
order to realize strategic decisions. The project
employ to change their businesses are successful [1].
management body of knowledge (PMBOK®) endorses
The current literature in the project management
that every project is governed by the triple constraint,
domain suggests that there exists a lack of appropriate
which reflects a framework for evaluating these
(and consistent) scholarship on the triple constraint and its
competing demands [3], [4], [5].
dynamics [7]. The term ‘triple constraint’ did not even
appear in the initial issues of the PMBOK® Guide
A. Introducing the triple constraint
glossary or index.
The triple constraint is a critical project management
concept that originates from the basis for undertaking a
project and provides direction for framing the project. The
Cost Scope
triple constraint constitutes one of the primary building
blocks of the project plan and is paramount to the Quality
monitoring and controlling process group [3], [4], [6], [7],
[8], [9].
Although the triple constraint theme has various Time
interpretations, the literature shows a general agreement Fig. 1. Project management triangle.

978-1-4673-2945-3/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE 1991

 Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE IEEM

This knowledge gap results in project managers not The type of study associated with this paper is
being able to effectively prioritize and exploit the triple primarily non-empirical defined through an extensive
constraint trade-offs. It is proposed that a thorough literature study, conceptual analysis and construction of an
comprehension of the triple constraint dynamics is integrated model using secondary data. Theory building in
paramount to effective project management. the research occurred through retroductive and deductive
Another problem is that project managers often create strategies. Conceptual explication was used to derive the
an illusion of tangible progress by relying heavily upon model through analysis and integration of concepts
traditional on-time, on-budget and on-target measures – discovered through the literature study.
yet this tactic fails to address the strategy ambiguity or The research undertook basic case study analysis as a
establish appropriate project goals [15]. mechanism to demonstrate that the derived model is valid
It has also become commonplace in many projects to and useful, which also introduced an empirical element
view the triple constraint trade-offs as organizational into the research design. The results from the case study
problems that have a definitive solution (‘either/or’ analysis have been generalized to refer back to the project
choices) – yet this tactic fails to effectively negotiate the management body of knowledge in terms of applicability.
triple constraint and leads to destructive conflict. Collins The integrated model presented in this paper is highly
& Porras discovered that instead of being oppressed by the conceptual. The emphasis in the study was on qualitative
‘Tyranny of the Or’, highly visionary companies liberate reasoning both in definition, explanation and application,
themselves with the ‘Genius of the And’ – the ability to rather than an emphasis on empirical and other
embrace both extremes of a number of dimensions at the quantitative techniques. The findings of the research study
same time [16]. This conjecture is supported by the should thus be considered as preliminary rather than
Polarity ManagementTM philosophy [17]. conclusive, pending further research.
Without the effective management of the triple
constraint as an interrelated system, projects run the risk
of becoming separated from purpose. A mechanism is III. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
needed on how to manage this seemingly contradictory
task when it comes to constraint trade-offs. The premise is A substantial range of literature has been considered
that if these constraints are managed properly, in the study with reference to more than 100 sources
organizations will be successful in delivering projects and representing authoritative knowledge across the fields of
meeting organizational goals. project management [7]. This section provides an
This paper examines the notion behind the project overview of some of the key concepts surrounding the
management triangle and power structure of its triple constraint, and concludes with a consolidated triple
constraints. An integrated model is proposed for managing constraint model.
relative flexibility within the triple constraint towards a
beneficial outcome in terms of project success. A. Dynamics of the triple constraint

The triple constraint continuously faces conflicting

II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY demands and competing priorities within the project
milieu. For example, if the project is working to a fixed
The basic structure of the research process used in the level of scope then the cost of the project will largely be
study is presented in Fig. 2. dependent upon schedule availability. Similarly, when the
project time is fixed, the scope of the end product will
Statement of the research depend on the budget or resources available.
problem and hypothesis
Project management researchers and authors widely
recognize that the inherent trade-off dynamics of the triple
Design the research
methodology to investigate constraint can be described by the following three key
the problem and to test the
hypothesis
relationships [3], [9], [12], [18]:
S↑ α T↑ C↑ (1)
Qualitative review of theories T↓ α S↓ C↑ (2)
and literature related to the
research problem C↓ α S↓ T↑, (3)
Research process

Derive key attributes to where the up-arrow (↑) implies an increase, the down-
formulate an integrated model
through conceptual analysis
arrow (↓) implies a decrease, and S, T, and C refers to
and synthesis scope, time and cost respectively.
Relationships (1), (2) and (3) denote that any triple
Evaluate the integrated model
through case study exploration constraint variable can be delivered at the expense of one
or both of the remaining two variables. Further analysis
Conclude on the signifies that when there is pressure on the triple
appropriateness of the
developed model
constraint, at least one of the variables needs to be flexible
in order to validate a quality balance [7], [11].
Fig. 2. Research process.

1992
 Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE IEEM

The dynamics of these relationships can be illustrated Better

in a variety of ways through manipulation of the project
management triangle. For example, if both the schedule
and budget of the project are negatively affected as a
result of an increase in project scope, the relationship may
be graphically illustrated as shown in Fig. 3. Cost Scope

r
Fig. 3 is only one of many possible ways of how to

pe
ea
illustrate these dynamic relationships. The illustrations

Ch
also depend on which factors are fixed and which are Faster
flexible. It should be highlighted that the changes are not Time
always symmetric, i.e. if two variables need to increase, Fig. 4. Better, faster, cheaper – is this really possible?
one may increase proportionally more than the other – for
example, more resources may need to be added in order The following analogy may be drawn between the
not to exceed the deadline by too much. ‘good, fast or cheap - pick two’ permutations and the key
The important consideration is that a connected triple constraint relationships [7]:
triangle must be maintained at all times. Fig. 4 illustrates 1) Relationship 1, S↑ α T↑ C↑, implies that the
that it is not possible to maintain the triple constraint as a effect of increasing scope (S↑), or effort (pressure) to
triangle when all three variables are pursued achieve scope, necessitates an increase in time (T↑) and/or
simultaneously [9]. cost (C↑). If cost remains unchanged, then the project can
be delivered good (because S↑) and cheap (because C
B. Good, fast, or cheap? Pick two fixed as planned) but not fast (because T↑);
2) Relationship 2, T↓ α S↓ C↑, implies that the
Within the project management and consulting
effect of reducing time (T↓), or effort (pressure) to
environment, the adage ‘good, fast or cheap - pick two’ is
achieve time, necessitates a reduction of scope (S↓) and/or
commonly encountered. Good, fast and cheap respectively
refer to the three key elements of the triple constraint an increase in cost (C↑). If scope remains unchanged, then
namely the extent of work (scope), the schedule (time) the project can be delivered fast (because T↓) and good
and the budget (cost). The notion is that projects are (because S fixed as planned) but not cheap (because C↑);
generally constrained to choose two of the three elements 3) Relationship 3, C↓ α S↓ T↑, implies that the
and sacrifice the other in order to gain the chosen two. effect of reducing cost (C↓), or effort (pressure) to
The ‘good, fast or cheap - pick two’ impression is a achieve cost, necessitates a reduction of scope (S↓) and/or
manifestation of the ‘Tyranny of the Or’ – the rational an increase in time (T↑). If time remains unchanged, then
view that cannot easily accept paradox, that cannot live the project can be delivered cheap (because C↓) and fast
with two seemingly contradictory forces or ideas at the (because T fixed as planned) but not good (because S↓).
same time [16]. This concept pushes people to believe that
things must be either A or B, but not both. That is to say, C. Supporting factors of the triple constraint
in terms of the triple constraint, one can choose either
good-and-fast, or good-and-cheap, or fast-and-cheap; but Within the context of this paper the three prime
critically not all three (Fig. 4). elements of scope, time and cost are considered central to
The ’good, fast or cheap - pick two’ trade-off can be the triple constraint. Project management literature,
demonstrated with an adaptation of Barker & Cole’s however, sporadically indicates quality and performance
seesaw model as illustrated in Fig. 5. If pressure is put on as an adjunct to or substitute for scope, and occasionally
timescales (fast) then costs can be expected to go up; designates customer satisfaction and project risk as
alternatively, if pressure is put on costs (cheap) then ancillary constraints [7].
timescales can be expected to go up. From the seesaw Project scope encapsulates capability and grade
example it is clear that, with the scope of work (good) attributes. Quality and grade are not the same. Grade
remaining pivotal, the project cannot be delivered refers to the set of attributes on which the quality of a
simultaneously fast and cheap as well; one of the elements product will be judged [19]. Quality constitutes an
has to be flexible [5], [7]. uncompromising and inherent objective of the project
specification that takes root in all three properties of the
triple constraint.
t Time
Cos
Cost
ter) (Che
(Fas aper
Sc

Sc

e
st

st

T im )
Co

Co
op

op
e

Good Good
Time
versus
Time
Fig. 3. The triple constraint relationship S↑ α T↑ C↑. Fig. 5. Good-and-fast vs. good-and cheap.

1993
 Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE IEEM

A lower-grade material, for example, is not 1) Effective projects bring form and function to
necessarily a lower-quality material, as long as the grade ideas or needs, and yield beneficial change or added value.
of material is appropriate for its intended use. 2) The higher purpose of a project is fundamentally
Performance is an operational assessment metric for the the driver of the project.
triple constraint in terms of project accomplishment, 3) The triple constraint constitutes a balance of the
which should be continuously monitored and controlled three interdependent project elements of scope, time and
throughout the project. Performance and quality are hence cost as a function of the project higher purpose.
not substitutes for scope [4], [9], [14], [19]. 4) The concepts of quality, customer satisfaction,
Customer satisfaction is fulfillment of the consumer performance and risk have an impact on the triple
requirements, expectations and needs, and constitutes a constraint, but do not inherently constrain the project.
performance measure in terms of quality or excellence. 5) The cause and effect of new or changing triple
Risk impacts the performance of the triple constraint, constraint requirements are constantly negotiated during
which may precipitate change in terms of the triple all phases of a project.
constraint trade-off dynamics [6], [10], [11], [20]. 6) Change within the triple constraint is
This paper presents a classic interpretation of the compensated through proportional trade-offs.
triple constraint, focusing on the ‘big three’ of scope, time 7) Failure to deliver all three triple constraint
and cost without adding or subdividing. variables on target does not necessarily imply project
failure.
D. Power structure of the triple constraint 8) Flexibility is an indispensable triple constraint
requirement in order to accommodate shifts in project
One of the challenges project managers face is the emphasis, and to ensure a beneficial project outcome.
iterative and infringing requirements of the customer. A 9) The three key triple constraint relationships
good starting point is thus to understand the customer’s signify that at least one of the triple constraint variables
priorities in order to identify the most important aspect of must be constrained (otherwise there is no baseline for
the project and obtain an optimum balance between the planning), and at least one of the variables must have
constraints [5], [9]. capacity for exploitation (otherwise quality may be
Dobson’s theory on the Hierarchy of Constraints affected).
defines a project by listing the triple constraint variables in 10) The triple constraint can be prioritized into a
order of flexibility [6]. Dobson proposes that exploitation power structure by ranking the variables into a hierarchy
of flexibility in the weaker (more flexible) constraints can of flexibility (capacity for exploitation).
be used as a tool to meet the absolute requirement of the 11) The power structure derives from the project
driver (least flexible) constraint in order for the project to objectives and higher purpose and may be influenced by
succeed. The driver constraint is derived from the raison environmental change.
d’être of the project and is the constraint that has to be 12) Capitalizing on the pliability of the two more
met otherwise the project fails. There can only be one flexible constraints can be used as a mechanism to achieve
project driver at any given time. The weak constraint has the essential demands of the primary triple constraint
the greatest flexibility, but is not necessarily the least variable (the driver).
important. The middle constraint normally has a small
amount of flexibility and can either be very close to the F. Consolidated triple constraint model
driver in importance to the project mission, or may
sometimes have flexibility more akin to the weak The integrated model was realized through conceptual
constraint. synthesis of the key derived triple constraint attributes
It is important to note that flexibility, and not discussed in the previous section. The matured model is
importance, serves as the ranking criterion. Importance is presented in Fig. 6. The consolidated model has been
the relative merit of the constraints considering the long- dubbed the TRIJECT model (an acronym created from the
term value of the project. Flexibility is the extent to which titles ‘TRIple constraint’ and ‘proJECT management’).
the project manager can manipulate the constraints in The project management triangle, which constitutes
order to successfully deliver the project [6]. the heart of the TRIJECT model, is supported by the two
It is presupposed that the effective management of the more flexible constraints (time and cost in this instance)
triple constraint power structure and its dynamics is and forms the foundation of the triangle. The primary
central to project success. Details pertaining to trade-off triple constraint variable (scope in this instance) aligns the
strategies and exploitation considerations are documented triangle with the project higher purpose. The triangle
in [7]. projection is dynamic and can pivot about its axis to
accommodate change within its power structure. The
E. Key attributes of the triple constraint triple constraint hierarchy may be influenced by the
project environment, which impacts the higher purpose
The following fundamental characteristics were and objectives of the project. The model embodies three
consolidated in support of the physiology of the dimensions, in which each facet of the triple constraint
consolidated triple constraint model [7]: may drive the project.

1994
 Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE IEEM

Project
Higher Purpose
A key part of the Smithsonian’s ability to get
congressional funding unlocked for the project involved
the national focus on the upcoming Bicentennial
Driver Constraint
celebrations. National attention would be focused on
Washington, D.C., and the National Mall during the
Scope festivities, and the President of the United States would be
Project on hand to cut the ribbon. The consequences of missing
Environment the Bicentennial would have been hugely humiliating for
the Smithsonian and for the NASM team. The time
Time Cost constraint has therefore been assigned in the lead position
Flexible Flexible
Constraint Constraint as the driver for this project. Before settling on the
primary triple constraint variable, the critical question of
why this project is being undertaken needs to be reviewed.
Project Objectives
The term ‘world-class’ may constitute a variety of
Fig. 6. TRIJECT model. potential meanings, each with different consequences for
time and cost. For example, how many air and spacecraft
The central presence of quality is signified by the should hang in the new building, or how complicated
outline shape of the TRIJECT model, which, using some should the audiovisual exhibits be. The distinction
imagination, resembles a capital letter ‘Q’. between the work of the NASM and the project of the
The rationale of the TRIJECT model is based on the NASM needs to be considered. The project ends, but the
achievement of the primary triple constraint variable work is ongoing. What must be done to meet the demands
through the exploitation of the two more flexible of opening day is only a prelude to the indefinite lifespan
constraints and alignment with the project higher purpose. of the open museum. It can therefore be argued that the
The continuous cycle implied by the model represents scope constraint, although probably the most important, is
the ongoing and interrelated nature of this process as also the most flexible (weak) constraint for this project.
change is introduced into the system. Monitoring and The USD 40 million federal appropriation is a definite
controlling hence manifest a requisite part of this cycle. number, but not an exact one. Major construction projects
The model also accounts for the ancillary issues such as often have a contingency reserve of up to 10% of the
‘the why’ of the project and change within the project budget for change orders and other problems. Considering
environment as well as quality and control. flexibility and following the process of elimination, cost
In practice the TRIJECT model is expected to overlap may thus be identified as the middle constraint for this
and interact dynamically with the project management project.
process groups. Details pertaining to the proposed
protocol and application of the consolidated triple B. Case investigation and system analysis
constraint model are documented in [7].
The triple constraint compromise to manage was
identified as the trade-off between the exploitation of the
IV. CASE STUDY ANALYSIS USD 40 million budget (the cost constraint), and the
requirements / features that constitute a world-class
Evaluation of the TRIJECT model was limited to the museum (the scope constraint). The success of this project
exploratory review of the theoretical model and protocol was driven by the deadline (the time constraint) to open
against a simplified case in order to facilitate a conceptual the museum on the nation’s Bicentennial celebration July
understanding of the integrated model in practice. The 4, 1976 in order to attain national focus (the higher
observed case was the building project of the Smithsonian purpose). With the project mission and triple constraint
Institution, National Air and Space Museum (NASM) [6], power structure defined, the TRIJECT model for the
[7]. There is no claim that this case is representative of the NASM project can be delineated as shown in Fig. 7.
general project management milieu. Exploitation of the project budget (C↑) alleviates the
pressure to rollback on the museum’s scope requirements,
A. Case paraphrases and system definition and supplements the effort to ensure that the deadline for
opening the museum is met (more money and resources
The NASM project mission, essentially, was to build can be spent to get the same or more work accomplished
a world-class aviation and space museum for a budget of within a limited period of time). The cost constraint
approximately USD 40 million and open it on July 4, includes both cash and non-cash resources. Exploitation of
1976. The project mission statement satisfies the triple the project scope (S↓), on the other hand, alleviates the
constraint, which is defined as follows: pressure to add additional cost and resources to the
1) Time constraint = July 4, 1976 museum budget, but also supplements the effort to ensure
2) Cost constraint = USD 40 million that the deadline for opening the museum is met.
3) Scope constraint = World-class museum. Exploiting flexibility in the scope constraint should
however not compromise quality, i.e. the museum’s

1995
 Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE IEEM

world-class criteria, which Congress values. One L+

Explo
R+
it Bu
mechanism for exploiting the scope of the museum DEA dget
building program is to downsize selected objectives and D LINE Exp
ACH loit S
c
quality metrics that do not add customer value. IEVE ope
D
Because it was simpler to exploit the ‘world-class’
scope requirements than it was to exploit the
L- R-
congressional budget, the system was initially located in
the right half of Fig. 8, i.e. the flexibility of project scope Schedule
outweighed the flexibility of project cost. The kinetics of Fig. 8. System diagnosis of the NASM case [17].
Fig. 8 constitute a reverse congruency with respect to Fig.
5, focusing on exploitation causality rather than on The following considerations have been identified for
constraints. The risk for the NASM case is that excessive obtaining and sustaining the positive results of the L+
manipulation of the scope requirements may eventually quadrant of the NASM case: Find out what degree of
result in the benefits of this effort to disperse as the system budget overrun will be acceptable; Find out if contingency
moves into its downside (R-). This may put the project at funds are available; Investigate if additional staff and
risk to not deliver a world-class aviation and space equipment can be borrowed; Determine which costs will
museum, with inadequate artifacts and exhibits. As these not be charged to the project; Establish how political
disadvantages are being experienced, an increasing influence can be achieved in order to pursue budget
awareness may develop towards the advantages of budget flexibility; Examine the consequences that the various
exploitation (L+). This awareness may shift the focus of interpretations of the ‘world-class’ requirement may have
manipulation by sliding the exploitation weight up the on the project; Identify the air and spacecraft which posses
seesaw from R- to L+. Accordingly, excessive overwhelming historical significance; Discern how time
manipulation of the budget requirements may again and cost of artifact restorations can be optimized;
transition the system into its downside (L-). The Determine the appropriate requirement and level of
consequent risk is that the project may be completed complexity for the museum’s audiovisual exhibits; Take
substantially over budget, and the project schedule may the law of diminishing returns into consideration.
also be expected to slip due to the restoration of additional Retrospectively, the considerations to obtain and
artifacts and the incorporation of complex exhibits. What sustain the positive results of the R+ quadrant include:
is called for is a dynamic mechanism that may equilibrate Establish effective and proven practices to efficiently
the system as exploitation weight shifts and trade-offs are manage and control the project budget; Identify those
compromised during the project. aspects of the project scope requirements that are not
quality related; Target areas for exploitation where scope
C. Case discussion and system guidelines creep is detected; Reach a common understanding with
the stakeholders on the importance they place on the
In order to effectively manage the exploitation trade- delivery of each scope requirement, and ascertain the
off, the project manager needs to consider each of the could-have’s and would-have’s; Ensure that the ‘world-
benefits in the upper quadrants and define how to gain or class’ criterion is not dismissed due to excessive artifact
maintain these advantages. A risk strategy is also required. and exhibit cutbacks; Investigate where initial objectives
The flexibility in the weaker constraints is not unlimited may be downsized, for example lowering the planned
since there is always a minimum that must be achieved. number of air and spacecraft for opening day; Determine
The project manager needs to consider each of the quality metrics that do not add customer value, for
disadvantages in the lower quadrants and define indicators example trimming back on complicated audiovisual
that will alert the project team when the project dips into exhibits.
the red zone of over focusing the exploitation effort. The following red zone indicators (early warnings)
National
have been identified for when the project falls in the L-
Focus quadrant of the NASM case: Resistance from Congress
regarding the increased project cost; Spending additional
money and resources have reached the point where it no
Deadline Achieved
longer adds value to the project schedule, i.e. recognizing
Time the law of diminishing returns; Artifact restorations and
T↓
Project audiovisual exhibits fall behind schedule. The red zone
Environment
indicators for when the project falls in the R- quadrant
Cost Scope include: The ‘world-class’ requirement of the museum
C↑ S↓
Exploit
Budget
Exploit
Scope
comes into question; Criticism regarding the
appropriateness of artifacts and degree of exhibits.
The project team needs to monitor these dynamics
Bicentennial
Celebrations within the triple constraint power structure throughout the
project life cycle. The timely identification of divergences
Fig. 7. TRIJECT model for the NASM case.

1996
 Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE IEEM

from the project higher purpose followed by the REFERENCES

appropriate corrective actions is crucial.
The NASM project might have benefited more by [1] G. M. Campbell, S. Baker, Project management. 4th ed.
sustaining the positive results of both upper quadrants New York, NY: Alpha, 2007.
(green zone) and minimizing the time spent in the lower [2] P. W. Morris, G. H. Hough, The anatomy of major projects.
quadrants (red zone) – thus, delivering the project fast as New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1987.
[3] J. T. Marchewka, Information technology project
well as relatively good and cheap (Fig. 9). A possible management: Providing measurable organizational value.
solution that effectively addresses this challenge is 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2006.
proposed in [17]. [4] Project Management Institute, A guide to the project
management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). 3rd ed.
V. CONCLUSION Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute, 2004.
[5] S. Barker, R. Cole, Brilliant project management: What the
The study of the triple constraint is believed to be one best project managers know, say and do. Harlow, UK:
of the most overlooked fundamentals of project Pearson Prentice Hall Business, 2007.
management. As a result of the various perspectives and [6] M. S. Dobson, H. Feickert, The six dimensions of project
management: Turning constraints into resources. Vienna,
interpretations across literature that surround the project VA: Management Concepts Inc., 2007.
management triangle and triple constraint, the need for a [7] C. J. Van Wyngaard, “Effective management of the triple
unified model has been identified. The TRIJECT model constraint in project management through polarity
supports an understanding of finite resources and management techniques - a refreshed perspective,” M.Eng.
facilitates a mechanism for managing the competing triple dissertation, Eng. Mgmt. Program, Univ. of Johannesburg,
constraint requirements. The model encourages the South Africa, 2011.
creative exploitation of the triple constraint to improve [8] J. Kuster et al., “Project management handbook” (in
project performance by considering the relative flexibility German), Handbuch Projektmanagement. 2nd ed. Berlin,
between the key elements. The goal of the model is to DE: Springer, 2008.
[9] J. Mihalic, “Fundamentals of project management,” course
maintain the focus of the triple constraint power structure presentation, Professional Development Institute (PDI),
on the project higher purpose. Booz Allen Hamilton, American Society of Military
The case study presented has demonstrated that the Comptrollers (ASMC), 2007, unpublished.
integrated model may furnish the instruments that enable [10] M. W. Newell, M. N. Grashina, The project management
project teams to manage their work in line with the question and answer book. New York, NY: Amacom, 2003.
absolute requirements for project success. It should be [11] J. A. Ward, “The key project constraints: Relationships and
taken in consideration that every project will experience tradeoffs,” in Proc. 13th International Conference on
its own unique limitations to exploitation capacity, which Software Quality, Dallas, 2003.
needs to be assessed through appropriate ‘cost’ vs. value [12] C. Chatfield, T. Johnson, “A short course in project
management,” Microsoft Corporation, 2008, unpublished.
impact analyses. Projects should however aim to always [13] R. Burke, Project management techniques. Oxford, UK:
deliver to a much greater extent in terms of value than the Burke Publishing, 2007.
sacrifice of the exploitation effort. [14] P. Flett, “The role of quality in the management of
An integrated framework is suggested in [17], which projects,” Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Stirling, United Kingdom,
evolves the strategic management of the TRIJECT model 2001.
using Polarity ManagementTM techniques. Supporting [15] J. L. Norrie, D. H. T. Walker, 2004, “A balanced scorecard
quantitative studies may be justified to conclude the real approach to project management leadership,” Project
world pertinence of these conceptual models. Management Journal, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 47-56, Dec. 2004.
[16] J. C. Collins, J. I. Porras, Built to last: Successful habits of
visionary companies. New York, NY: HarperCollins
Publishers, 1994.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT [17] C. J. Van Wyngaard, J. H. C. Pretorius, L. Pretorius,
“Strategic management of the triple constraint trade-off
The support for research collaboration by the National dynamics - a polarity management approach,” in Proc.
Research Foundation (NRF) in South Africa is IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering
acknowledged. and Engineering Management (IEEM), Singapore, pp. 824-
828, Dec. 2011.
L+ R+ [18] S. E. E. Elmaghraby, W. S. Herroelen, R. Leus, 2002,
Explo ope
it B it Sc “Notes on the paper ‘Resource-constrained project
D udget
EAD Explo ED
management using enhanced theory of constraint’ by Wei et
LINE IEV
ACH al.,” International Journal of Project Management, no. 21,
pp. 301-305, 2003.
[19] A. S. Koch, “We cannot trade quality for schedule or
L- R-
budget,” Global Knowledge Training LLC, Expert
Reference Series of White Papers, 2006, unpublished.
Schedule [20] J. R. Meridith, J. S. Mantel, Project Management: A
managerial approach. 4th ed. New York, NY: John Wiley &
Fig. 9. Effective management of the NASM case [17]. Sons, Inc., 2000.

1997
View publication stats