In the Project Management (PM) literature Benefits Management (BM) has been highlighted as the real purpose for the implementation of projects both in the public and private sectors. PM literature has been discussing project success since the 80s but since 2000, the focus of project success debates has turned to benefits realization. Benefits realization takes the project success debate from outputs to outcomes, inviting the senior management to shift their focus from project delivery on time and cost, to outcomes and benefits to bring real value to the organization. But the current literature on benefits management, is mainly normative and aspirational, therefore most of the debates in PM literature, are about what should be done, rather than what is happening in practice on benefits management. To fill this gap, recently, a doctorate study research was conducted 45 interviews in six public sector organizations of the Commonwealth government. The emerging research findings highlight a gap between dreams and realities, aspirations and practices in benefits management in the Australian public sector. This research found several factors behind poor benefits realization such as a lack of accountability for benefits, mandatory requirements to report on benefits realization, focus on delivery on time and budget and poor governance and leadership by the senior executives. This article briefly compares what the aspirations of BM literature and the current BM practices in the public sector organizations.
|Number of pages||10|
|Journal||Project Governance and Controls Annual Review (PGCAR)|
|Publication status||Published - 25 Nov 2020|