Influence of Project Management on the
socioeconomic variables
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
© Victor Lerga., 2012
1ª Edition
ISBN:-----------------
Impreso en España / Printed in Spain
Printed by Victor Lerga
INDICE GENERAL
CAPÍTULO PAG
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 5
2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT ,ORGANTIZATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS .......................................................... 6
2.1. PMI® (PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUT) ............................................................................................ 6
2.2. IPMA® (INTERNATIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT ASSOSIATION) ....................................................... 7
2.3. PRINCE2® ............................................................................................................................................... 8
2.4. ISO 21500. .............................................................................................................................................. 9
3. MEASUREMENT OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SKILLS ............................................................................... 10
4. CORRELATION STUDY .............................................................................................................................. 15
4.1. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INNOVATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT. ............................................. 16
4.2. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMPETITIVENESS AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT ..................................... 20
4.3. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT ........................................... 24
4.4. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT .................................. 28
5. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 31
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 33
ILLUSTRATIONS INDEX
ILLUSTRATION PAG
Illustration 1 - IPM Index formula. source: own .................................................................................................... 10
Illustration 2 - Histogram of IPM index by country. Source: own ......................................................................... 14
Illustration 3 - Scatter-plot IPM vs Innovation Index Source: own ....................................................................... 16
Illustration 4 - Quadrant Innovation and Project Management ........................................................................... 17
Illustration 5 - Scatter plot of Innovation and Project Management in TOP50 countries ..................................... 18
Illustration 6 - Scatter plot Competitiveness vs Project Management Focus countries ....................................... 20
Illustration 7 -Quadrant of competitiveness vs Project Management .................................................................. 21
Illustration 8 - Scatter plot Competitiveness versus Project Management in TOP50 countries .......................... 22
Illustration 9 - Scatter plot of GDP per capita in Focus countries and Project Management ............................... 24
Illustration 10 -GDP per capita vs. Project Management in Focus countries without Norway and Luxembourg . 25
Illustration 11 - Scatter plot of GDP per capita and Project Management in TOP50-limited countries ............... 26
Illustration 12 -Quadrant de GPD per capita vs Project Management ................................................................. 27
Illustration 13 - Scatter plots Entrepreneurship and Project Management Focus countries................................ 30
Illustration 14 - Scatter plot Entrepreneurship and Project Management. Focus countries without Scandinavian
countries ...................................................................................................................................................... 30
TABLE INDEX
TABLAS PAG
Table 1 - Weighting factor certifications. Source: own .......................................................................................... 10
Table 2 - List of countries focus of the study. ........................................................................................................ 11
Table 3 -List of 50 countries extended study. Source: own ................................................................................... 13
Table 4 - Project Management Track vs. Innovation in Spain. Source; own calculations ..................................... 18
Table 5 - List of IPM values and Innovation Index ............................................................................................... 19
Table 6 - Situation of Project Management vs Competitiveness in Spain. Source : own ...................................... 21
Table 7 - List of IPM values and Competitiveness index ........................................................................................ 23
Table 8 - Situation of Project Management vs GDP/per capita in Spain. Source own ........................................... 27
Table 9 - List of IPM index and GDP per capita...................................................................................................... 28
Table 10 - List of IPM and Entrepreneurship Perceived Opportunities ................................................................ 29
Table 11 - Conclusion correlation study. Source: own .......................................................................................... 31
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 5
1. INTRODUCTION
In the past 50 years, the number of projects in the world has grown exponentially. Today we
live in a society in flux, which promotes embarking on new projects. Project management is
a growing discipline, although worldwide standards did not appear until the second half of
the twentieth century. If projects have such a presence in society, it seems obvious that
excellence in the management of these processes, plays a key role in society, and therefore
defines their social and economic situation key variables.
From the most influential gurus, to politicians, everyone promotes a new economic model,
which should rely on innovation, competitiveness, productivity and entrepreneurship. But
what moves and leads to obtain high levels in these variables?, Will Project Management
influence on the social and economic situation?
Ed Naughton and Dr. Donnacha Kavanagh,[1] in his article "Innovation & Project
Management" related "Innovation" and "Project Management (PM)" variables by country.
They showed that these variables have a positive relationship, so countries with greater
capabilities in Project Management in Innovation performed better. However, after reaching
a certain tipping point, the relationship was no longer efficient. This study used data from
2008.
Following those conclusions, an study of project management skills has been updated to
date 2011. It has expanded the study frame to include other socioeconomic variables such as
competitiveness or productivity, and innovation. The measurement method of skills in
project management has also been updated to include the most reputable worldwide
certifications. This study focuses in European countries and USA in order to analyze the
situation in Spain and de number of certificated needed to obtain a acceptable
socioeconomic position.
First, the article will summarize the main organizations and certifications on the discipline of
project management, from which measurements quantify this variable.
Subsequently, we present the results of the study, to finally expose the most significant
conclusions.
Influence of Project Management
6 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT ,ORGANTIZATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS
Although project management is now a standardized discipline, there are no regulated
university qualifications. The skills and competencies are acquired either through experience
or specific postgraduate training as master type. There are several professional associations
and standards worldwide, issuing certifications in Project Management.
Thus, it is not possible to make an accurate measurement of skills in project management,
because of the difficulty of estimating the number of professionals dedicated to the subject,
and their level of qualification. It has been estimated in this study that measuring country-
level certified professionals can be a valid criteria to establish a comparative global scale.
Below the main organizations and standards worldwide representing knowledge and skills in
project management are summarized ([8] and [9]).
2.1. PMI® (PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUT)
The Project Management Institute (PMI® ) is an international non-profit professional
association related to Project Management. It was formed in 1969 and its first meeting
gathered 80 people. The premise of PMI® is that the tools and techniques of project
management are common, for widespread application in projects, from software to the
construction industry. At the date of this article, it is the world's largest institution of Project
Management with over 450,000 licenses in about 170 countries.
PMBOK® Guide ( A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)
- Fourth Edition
The PMBOK® Guide is a standard in the Project Management developed by the (PMI®). It
comprises two main sections, the first on the processes and contexts of a project, the second
on specific knowledge areas of project management.
In 1987, PMI® published the first edition of the PMBOK® , as an attempt to document and
standardize information and generally accepted practices in project management. The
current edition, the fourth, provides basic references for anyone interested in project
management. PMBOK® version 5 is expected by the in late 2012. This version will consider
convergence with the ISO 21500 and will be in line with the norm.
PMI® CERTIFICATIONS
The PMI® certifies professional skills in project management with a certification system
based on standardized placement tests. The certificates issued by the PMI® are known
worldwide and today most requested in international tenders.
The certificates are issued with a validity period of three years. More than 40,000 PMP®
certifications expire and are annually renewed .
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 7
In addition, PMI® certifies a basic level of Project Management (CAPM®) and the PgMP®
Program Director. Currently the Project Management Institute offers five types of
certification:
CAPM® Certification (Associate Certificate in Project Management): One that has
shown a common base of knowledge and terms in the field of project management.
It takes 1,500 hours of work in a project team or 23 hours of formal education in
project management to achieve this certification, plus a 150-question exam.
Project Management Professional (PMP® ): This certification is oriented to
professionals that can demonstrate specific education and experience requirements.
To obtain the certification, it’s necessary to be agreed to a code of professional
conduct and to pass an examination designed to objectively assess and measure your
project management knowledge. It takes 4,500 hours of work in a project team and a
knowledge test of 200 questions. Additionally, a PMP® must meet certification
requirements continuous, otherwise the certification.
Program Management Professional (PgMP® ): Obtaining this certifications requires
that has undergone specific education and has extensive experience in project and
program management, has also agreed to adhere to the code of ethics and
professional conduct of PMI® . Requires 8 years of experience working in project
teams, knowledge test and interviews by staff of PMI®. Credentials CAPM® or PMP®
are not prerequisites for the PgMP® certification.
Besides these three certifications Integrated project management, there are two specific
aspects (PMI® in Programming Professional (PMI-SP®) recognizes demonstrated knowledge
and advanced experience in the specialized area of developing and maintaining the project
schedule and PMI® Professional risk Management (PMI-RMP®). The PMI-RMP® recognizes
demonstrated knowledge and expertise in the specialized area of assessing and identifying
project risks.
Once it is in possession of any of these certifications, credentials will be renewed every three
years. Professional must obtain the PDU's (Professional Development Units) required by the
every certifications. After obtaining the PDU's required, the certification will be renewed
automatically.
2.2. IPMA® (INTERNATIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT ASSOSIATION)
The IPMA®, was founded in Europe in 1967 and registered in Switzerland and it is a
nonprofit organization whose purpose is to promote Project Management International. It is
constituted as a federation of over 50 national associations and in 2011 had more than
140.00 certified worldwide
ICB (IPMA® Competence Baseline)
The IPMA® established baseline proficiency IPMA® (ICB), as common framework document
that all IPMA® member associations and certification bodies should follow to ensure
Influence of Project Management
8 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
consistent and harmonized standards compliance. Most of its content focuses on the
description of the elements of competition. It covers the technical competence to project
management (20 items), the behavior of personnel in project management (15 elements)
and relations with the context of projects, programs and portfolios (11 elements).
IPMA® CERTIFICATIONS
IPMA® has 4 certifiable competition IPMA® levels A, B, C, and D.
The certification program is conducted by the National Associations. AEIPRO, founded in
1992, is the Member Association of IPMA® in Spain.
The IPMA® certification is divided into four categories:
IPMA Level A®: Programs Director
IPMA Level B®: Projects Directors.
IPMA Level C®: Professional Project Management.
IPMA Level D®: Technical Project Management.
The certification process is incremental, , the knowledge acquired in the lower level is
applied at each level. To access any level, you need to submit an application, resume and a
self-assessment of the areas of responsibility of the Project Management.
The validity period of certification is five years, regardless of the level of accreditation is
held. After this period of time, you will need to renew this certification, analyzing the tasks
performed and the continued professional development.
2.3. PRINCE2®
The UK Government, through OGC (Office of Government Commerce) has created standards for UK in various aspects of Information Systems (IT).
PRINCE2® (PRojects IN Controlled Environments)
PRINCE2® was released in 1996 by the CCTA (Central Computer and Telecommunications
Agency) UK government (now the OGC), as a method of generic project management. It is a
process-based method for effective project management. It is widely used by the
Government of the United Kingdom . There are two levels of certification as a basic level the
Foundation and Practitioner. The level Foundation, requires renewal.
CERTIFICACIONES PRINCE2®
The accreditations are administered by the APM Group, but it does not act as a professional
association. APMG is specialized in the accreditation and certification of organizations,
processes and people. The main number of certifications is in the UK.
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 9
There are two PRINCE2® qualification levels: PRINCE2® Foundation and PRINCE2®
Practitioner:
PRINCE2® foundation is aimed at people who need to learn the basics and
terminology of PRINCE2®. Its purpose is to explain the roles and responsibilities,
terminology and components of PRINCE2®. This qualification is the first of the two
PRINCE2® qualifications necessary to become a Practitioner PRINCE2®. In order to
measure the training and certifying people, should conduct a review of one hour,
consisting in seventy-five multiple choice questions, which must be answered
correctly at least thirty-eight them.
PRINCE2® Practitioner is the highest level qualification and is suitable for those who
want to manage projects within a PRINCE2® environment. To obtain them, you must
have previously PRINCE2® Foundation certification besides being recommended prior
experience in project management. For this qualification, you must perform an
examination of three hours duration consisting of 9 objective type questions test
case studies. Each of the questions will have a review of forty points, being necessary
to obtain certification, obtain at least one hundred eighty three hundred sixty total
points. The review is allowed to use PRINCE2® manual and is based on the resolution
of cases studies.
Once these two tests, you get the certification and recognition worldwide. Currently, there
are over 600,000 people certified. After a period of time between three and five years, you
must pass a recertification. To do this, interested parties must submit to an examination of
one hour in which they ask three questions, each valued at twelve points. To recertify, the
score in the examination shall be at least twenty points of the thirty-six possible.
2.4. ISO 21500.
All the above organizations are also participating in the development of a standard ISO
international standard. The first completed version of ISO 21500 "Guidance on project
management", is scheduled for August 2012.
It is expected that ISO 21500 will become the common reference standard for the
community of professionals and stakeholders in project management and facilitate transfer
of knowledge and harmonization of the principles, vocabulary and processes in rules and
best practices. It is still unknown whether this rule will be certifiable.
_______________________________
NOTA: PMI®, PMBOK®, PMP®, PgMP®, CAPM®, PMI-SP®, PMI-RMP®, PRINCE2®, IPMA®, IPMA-ICB®, IPMA Level
D®, IPMA Level C®, IPMA Level B®, IPMA Level A®, are trademarks. In order to get a better reading
comprehension the trade mark reference will be erased "®" in the following text..
Influence of Project Management
10 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
3. MEASUREMENT OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SKILLS
Establishing a measurement of competencies and skills on Project Management (PM) is not
an easy task, since you cannot evaluate the tacit knowledge of people, acquired by
experience or development methodologies. It must be noted, that there is no global
standardized a university degree (such as engineering, medicine or other). There isn’t a
global standard ISO 21500 as expected to homogenize and frameworks certifications in
Project Management either . Currently, there are professional associations such as PMI or
IPMA or as APMG PRINCE2 institutions that certify the skills on this discipline.
Based on the method provided by Ed Naughton and Dr. Donnacha Kavanagh [1], and
assuming that the number of certified professionals in a country, is a valid assessment scale,
has established an index to measure the level in-country Project Management discipline. It
has generated a synthetic index called IPM for measuring the level of skills in Project
Management. This index corresponds to the formula:
𝐼𝑃𝑀 =𝐺𝑃𝑀
𝑝𝑜𝑝=
𝐾𝑛 ∗ Nº certificates 𝑛𝑖=1
population (millions)
Illustration 1 - IPM Index formula. source: own
IPM index is obtained by dividing the Global Project Management (GPM) for the population
of the country (in millions).
For the GPM is weighted by a coefficient (K) each type of certification, trying to give more
weight in the index to those certifications that require the certificate to have more skills to
obtain it.
The types of certifications referred to in this study, are the main recognized worldwide,
which have already been explained in previous chapters.
The weighting table each certification is:
IPMA D IPMA C IPMA B IPMA A PgMP PMP CAPM PRINCE2 P PRINCE2 F
Coef. K 1,2 1 0,9 0,6 1,2 1 0,8 1 0,5
Table 1 - Weighting factor certifications. Source: own
IPMA Certifications: four certifications of the level C applies the coefficient K = 1
PMI Certifications: PMP Certification has K = 1
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 11
PRINCE2 Certifications; Practitioner certification is considered with K = 1. It has the
incidence of underweight Foundation accreditation and which are not supported by a
specific professional association, and does not require renewal, also note that the
calculation has been performed with accredited Practitioner between 2005 and 2011
and there is no data number of professionals currently re-accredited and
professionally active
The study is focusing on the countries of the European and the U.S.. The list of countries
based on the study described in the following table:
FOCUS Countries (EUROPE & USA)
Germany Ireland
Austria Iceland
Belgium Italy
Czech Republic Luxembourg
Croatia Norway
Denmark Poland
Spain Portugal
Finland Romania
France Russian Federation
Greece Serbia
Netherlands Sweden
Hungary Switzerland
United Kingdom United States of America
Table 2 - List of countries focus of the study.
As a way of checking the results, it has also made an extension to include 50 countries
(TOP50) more significant compared to IPM index.
The following table shows the index by country and IPM certification standard. We present
the results for the 50 countries of the TOP50, and its weight percentage in the country.
Influence of Project Management
12 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
Country TOP 50
POPULATION (Millions inhab.)
IPM (IPMA)
IPM (PMI)
IPM (PRINCE2)
IPM %
IPMA %
PMI %
PRINCE2
United Kingdom 61,9 365,8 103,2 4.422,00 4.891,00 7,50% 2,10% 90,40%
Netherlands 16,7 293 72,9 3.079,30 3.445,20 8,50% 2,10% 89,40%
Denmark 5,5 701 118,6 1.342,70 2.162,30 32,40% 5,50% 62,10%
Iceland 0,3 1.705,70 3,3 121,7 1.830,70 93,20% 0,20% 6,60%
Australia 21,5 111,8 266,3 1.397,10 1.775,20 6,30% 15,00% 78,70%
Singapore 4,8 - 1.516,80 182,1 1.698,90 0,00% 89,30% 10,70%
Ireland 4,6 336,7 352,4 620,1 1.309,20 25,70% 26,90% 47,40%
Austria 8,4 1.030,70 81,8 89,6 1.202,10 85,70% 6,80% 7,50%
Switzerland 7,6 657 329 212,8 1.198,80 54,80% 27,40% 17,80%
Luxembourg 0,5 - 166,4 996 1.162,40 0,00% 14,30% 85,70%
Canada 33,9 - 983,4 42,2 1.025,60 0,00% 95,90% 4,10%
United Arab Emirates 4,7 - 845 156 1.001,00 0,00% 84,40% 15,60%
Hong Kong 7,1 - 596,6 108,9 705,5 0,00% 84,60% 15,40%
Belgium 10,7 - 112,6 591,1 703,7 0,00% 16,00% 84,00%
USA 317,6 - 691,2 8,9 700,1 0,00% 98,70% 1,30%
Finland 5,3 545,2 76,8 57,1 679,1 80,30% 11,30% 8,40%
Qatar 1,5 - 598,9 79 677,9 0,00% 88,30% 11,70%
Germany 82,1 207,8 110,9 113,8 432,5 48,00% 25,60% 26,30%
Sweden 9,3 171,9 163 71,7 406,6 42,30% 40,10% 17,60%
Poland 38 51,5 41,2 253,8 346,5 14,90% 11,90% 73,20%
Norway 4,9 - 184,1 133 317,1 0,00% 58,10% 41,90%
Japan 127 - 238,9 1,3 240,2 0,00% 99,50% 0,50%
Korea, REP 48,5 - 202 4,2 206,2 0,00% 98,00% 2,00%
Czech Republic 10,4 - 27,8 162,3 190,1 0,00% 14,60% 85,40%
South Africa 50,5 - 44,6 116,9 161,5 0,00% 27,60% 72,40%
Oman 2,9 - 69,2 88,3 157,5 0,00% 43,90% 56,10%
Croatia 4,4 80,7 46,9 17,2 144,8 55,70% 32,40% 11,90%
Slovenia 2 69,4 28,9 35,3 133,6 51,90% 21,60% 26,40%
Slovak Republic 5,4 - 23,9 108,7 132,6 0,00% 18,00% 82,00%
France 62,6 22,6 53,9 54 130,5 17,30% 41,30% 41,40%
Portugal 10,7 8,5 87,2 3 98,7 8,60% 88,30% 3,00%
Saudi Arabia 26,2 - 93,6 5,1 98,7 0,00% 94,80% 5,20%
Spain 45,3 7,7 64,7 23,7 96,1 8,00% 67,30% 24,70%
Italy 60,1 - 62,4 21,3 83,7 0,00% 74,60% 25,40%
Israel 7,3 - 75,8 5,6 81,4 0,00% 93,10% 6,90%
Brazil 195,4 - 60,3 1 61,3 0,00% 98,40% 1,60%
Romania 21,2 5,3 29,3 20,3 54,9 9,70% 53,40% 37,00%
Hungary 10 - 33 14,8 47,8 0,00% 69,00% 31,00%
Greece 11,2 - 35,7 11,1 46,8 0,00% 76,30% 23,70%
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 13
Country TOP 50
POPULATION (Millions inhab.)
IPM (IPMA)
IPM (PMI)
IPM (PRINCE2)
IPM %
IPMA %
PMI %
PRINCE2
China 1.354,10 13,8 31,1 0,7 45,6 30,30% 68,20% 1,50%
Peru 29,5 - 39,7 2,3 42 0,00% 94,50% 5,50%
Colombia 46,3 - 40,2 0,3 40,5 0,00% 99,30% 0,70%
Bulgaria 7,5 - 19,8 18,7 38,5 0,00% 51,40% 48,60%
India 1.214,50 1,7 22,5 3,9 28,1 6,00% 80,10% 13,90%
Mexico 110,6 - 24,6 0,8 25,4 0,00% 96,90% 3,10%
Argentina 40,7 - 23,9 - 23,9 0,00% 100,00% 0,00%
Chile 17,1 - 22,3 0,1 22,4 0,00% 99,60% 0,40%
Turkey 75,7 - 14,8 1,7 16,5 0,00% 89,70% 10,30%
Russian Federation 140,4 7,3 6,7 1,4 15,4 47,40% 43,50% 9,10%
Bosnia & Herzegovina 3,8 - 3,4 10,1 13,5 0,00% 25,20% 74,80%
Table 3 -List of 50 countries extended study. Source: own
All certification data, collected over 90% of the statistical records of each of the associations.
The following graph shows the relationship and importance of IPM by country and type of
certification:
Notably head clearly in three countries. UK and the Netherlands, with a high rate of PRINCE2
certified occupy the highest ranking. Iceland ranks third, especially given the high
penetration rate in a small population IPMA.
Influence of Project Management
14 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
Illustration 2 - Histogram of IPM index by country. Source: own
-
500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
3.500
4.000
4.500
5.000
IPM (PRINCE2)
IPM (PM
I)
IPM (IPM
A)
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 15
4. CORRELATION STUDY
The IPM index has been associated with different variables to study the influence of project
management in the socio-economic situation of a country. For this purpose, each one has
associated variables, with the index IPM through a scatter plot. On this graph, it has
reflected the trend line and its root mean square (R2) that provides reliable information on
the extent of the trend. In all cases they found a correlation between the different variables
and the index IPM, the trend has been Potential-logarithmic. We consider an R2 value above
0.6 as an acceptable correlation between the two variables.
We present the results of studying the relationship of the index variables measuring IPM
Innovation, Competitiveness, Productivity and Entrepreneurship at country level. With all
these variables, found a clear link.
Other variables analyzed, such as economic growth or the level of exports, have little or no
relation to the Project Management. This is not to suggest that project management is a
negative influence, but not a decisive variable for example, economic grow or increase
export of goods. The latest findings correlate these variables are not presented in this study.
Influence of Project Management
16 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
4.1. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INNOVATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT.
Innovation is process successfully exploit new ideas. The implementation of a "project" is the
link between idea and market. If the fundamental unity of the innovation process is the
project, it is clear that project management skills should be correlated with the results of
innovation. Below we present the results of a study, which reveals that obtaining a level of
innovation is directly related to the skills and abilities to manage projects.
To assess the rate of innovation of a country, we have used the INSEAD report "The Global
Innovation Index 2011" [2] and the rates of innovation resulting from this study. Each
country studied yields a numerical index from the aggregation of different socio-economic
variables of the country, generating a ranking of countries with respect to innovation. Since
2007, INSEAD evaluates 125 countries to establish this ranking.
The results of this study show a high correlation with potential trend R2 = 0.6405. That is,
there is a positive trend, but with a damping effect to significantly increase the rate IPM,
especially in the first 3 ranking countries. The graph in the main European countries,
including USA is as follows:
Illustration 3 - Scatter-plot IPM vs Innovation Index Source: own
You can notably note that United Kingdom (UK) is shifted right (high index IPM), due to its
large number of certificates in PRINCE2. To sort and graphically display the status of each
country in respect to these two variables, the data have been entered into a quadrant,
which is presented below:
Germany
Austria
Belgium
Czech Republic
Croatia
Denmark
Spain
Finland
France
Greece
Netherlands
Hungary
IrelandIceland
Italy
LuxembourgNorway
Poland
Portugal
RomaniaRussian Federation
Serbia
Sweden
Switzerland
United KingdomUnited States of America
R² = 0,6405
30
40
50
60
70
Inn
ova
tio
n in
dex
Project Management Index
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 17
Illustration 4 - Quadrant Innovation and Project Management
Each quadrant is identified with a name. It has also reflected a trend line we call the "straight
efficiency", ie the most effective way to obtain an adequate level to quadrant "leaders".
Watching the chart, we can find the following conclusions:
Countries 'Leaders' are those with high-level Innovation, and with high ability in
Project Management. They are a large group, but some of them, below the
theoretical efficiency (especially Austria, Netherlands, y).
A group of "Efficient" countries achieve a high level of innovation with efficient ratio
of PM. So they reach more inovationwithless certified project managers
In the "Followers" group, several countries (especially Poland and Croatia) whose
expertise in PM do not currently generate visible results in innovation. However, the
Czech Republic and Hungary achieve a high level of efficiency.
The last quadrant is empty. This implies that high ability in PM always achieve
acceptable levels of innovation.
Let's consider now the situation in Spain, to find your its current location
SerbiaRussian Federation
Czech Republic
Romania
Hungary
Greece
Croatia
Italy
Spain
Portugal
France
Luxembourg
Poland
Norway
Belgium
Germany
Sweden
United States of America
Ireland
FinlandDenmark
Switzerland
Netherlands
Austria
United KingdomIceland
Followers
Efficients Leaders
Project Management Index
Inn
ova
tio
n in
de
x
Influence of Project Management
18 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
IPM PMP (equivalent in Spain population) PMP needed
Spain 2011 96 4.352
Innovation European average 704 31.877 27.524
Efficient line cross Efficient quadrant 500 22.650 18.298
Table 4 - Project Management Track vs. Innovation in Spain. Source; own calculations
The IPM index for Spain is 96, or the equivalent 4352 level certified PMP (K = 1) in a
population of 45.3 million inhabitants. While it is slightly above the line efficiency (above
Innovation management skills PM), its level is well below the European average. Analyzing
neighbor countries, close to the limit of the efficiency, the IPM index should be around
704, to obtain European average about innovation (similar to Belgium). If we analyze the
shortest path to "efficiency", we would get the best position with an index close to 500 IPM.
According to both benchmarks, Spain will need between 18,000 and 27,000 new certified
Project Managers (PMP equivalent level) to be average innovative countries.
When we extend the results to the TOP50 list of countries, we find that the correlation index
R2 is at 0.6301, with a positive potential trend.
Illustration 5 - Scatter plot of Innovation and Project Management in TOP50 countries
R² = 0,6301
30
40
50
60
70
TOP 50 Project Management Index
Project Management Index
Inn
ova
tio
n in
de
x
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 19
Thus, it is confirmed that globally speaking, project management skills are related to
innovation. It seems unlikely that a higher level of innovation causes an increase in teh
number ofcertificates in a country. So we can conclude that Project Management skills are
asuccessful innovation generator.
Finally, we list the values of both the IPM generated in this study and the values of
innovation ranking obtained from INSEAD report 2011 [2].
TOP 50 Country IPM INNOV Score TOP 50 Country IPM INNOV Score
1 United Kingdom 4.891,00 56 26 Oman 157,5 35,5
2 Netherlands 3.445,30 56,3 27 Croatia 144,7 38
3 Denmark 2.162,40 57 28 Slovenia 133,6 45,1
4 Iceland 1.830,70 55,1 29 Slovak Republic 132,6 39,1
5 Australia 1.775,20 49,9 30 France 130,5 49,3
6 Singapore 1.698,90 59,6 31 Portugal 98,7 42,4
7 Ireland 1.309,20 54,1 32 Saudi Arabia 98,7 36,4
8 Austria 1.202,00 50,8 33 Spain 96,1 43,8
9 Switzerland 1.198,80 63,8 34 Italy 83,7 40,7
10 Luxembourg 1.162,40 52,7 35 Israel 81,4 54
11 Canada 1.025,60 56,3 36 Brazil 61,3 37,8
12 United Arab Emirates 1.000,90 42 37 Romania 54,8 36,8
13 Hong Kong 705,5 58,8 38 Hungary 47,7 48,1
14 Belgium 703,7 49,1 39 Greece 46,8 34,2
15 USA 700,1 56,6 40 China 45,6 46,4
16 Finland 679 57,5 41 Peru 42 30,3
17 Qatar 677,9 47,7 42 Colombia 40,4 32,3
18 Germany 432,5 54,9 43 Bulgaria 38,4 38,4
19 Sweden 406,5 62,1 44 India 28,1 34,5
20 Poland 346,5 38 45 Mexico 25,4 30,5
21 Norway 317 52,6 46 Argentina 23,9 35,4
22 Japan 240,2 50,3 47 Chile 22,4 38,8
23 Korea, REP 206,3 53,7 48 Turkey 16,5 34,1
24 Czech Republic 190 47,3 49 Russian Federation 15,4 35,9
25 South Africa 161,5 35,2 50 Bosnia & Herzego. 13,6 30,8
Table 5 - List of IPM values and Innovation Index
Influence of Project Management
20 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
4.2. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMPETITIVENESS AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Competitiveness is the ability of a company or country to get profitability in the market in
realtion to its competitors. Competitiveness depends on the relationship between the value
and quantity of the offered product and the needed inputs to obtain it, in free concurrency
with other participants in teh market. The concept of competitiveness can be applied to
both a company or a country.
This study has used as a measure of competitiveness, the index established in "The Global
Competitiveness Report 2011-2012." [3] at country level. This report generates a composite
index based on the different variables of situation, to establish a ranking of competitiveness
in 142 countries .
As is the case of innovation, competitiveness reflects the ability to produce efficiently.
Project Management as a tool for standardization, should have a positive influence on this
variable.
The scatter plot presented below, reflects a potential trend between the index and the index
IPM Competitiveness. Reliability between the two variables is R2 = 0.6222.
Illustration 6 - Scatter plot Competitiveness vs Project Management Focus countries
Germany
AustriaBelgium
Czech Republic
Croatia
Denmark
Spain
Finland
France
Greece
Netherlands
Hungary
Ireland Iceland
Italy
Luxembourg
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russian Federation
Serbia
Sweden
Switzerland
United KingdomUnited States of America
R² = 0,622
3,5
4,0
4,5
5,0
5,5
6,0
Project Management Index
Glo
bal
co
mp
eti
tive
ne
ss I
nd
ex
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 21
The chart highlights the separation of the trend in several countries, both positively
(Switzerland and Sweden) and negatively (Ireland and Iceland).
If we place results in a quadrant again, , Spain is in the quadrant of the followers, below the
European average. It is imnportant to note thatIceland and Ireland appear displaced in the
fourth quadrant . One might think that the two countries have been displaced below the
average in the short term, since both have been punished during the present crisis decreases
in their socioeconomic variables (including competitiveness).
Illustration 7 -Quadrant of competitiveness vs Project Management
Reviewing the situation in Spain in the quadrant, we obtain the following table:
IPM PMP (equivalent for Spain population) PMP needed
Spain 2011 96 4.352
Belgium 704 31.877 27.524
Germany 433 19.593 15.241
Efficient line cross Efficient quadrant 490 22.197 17.845
Table 6 - Situation of Project Management vs Competitiveness in Spain. Source : own
Serbia
Russian Federation
Czech Republic
Romania
Hungary
Greece
Croatia
Italy
Spain
Portugal
France
Luxembourg
Poland
NorwayBelgium
Germany
Sweden
United States of America
Ireland
Finland
Denmark
Switzerland
Netherlands
Austria
United Kingdom
Iceland
Followers
Efficients Leaders
Project Management Index
Glo
bal
co
mp
eti
tive
ne
ss I
nd
ex
Influence of Project Management
22 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
The IPM index for Spain is 96, or the equivalent 4352 level certified PMP (K = 1). Its current
position is slightly above the line of Efficiency (Competitiveness above PM management
skills), but its level is reallyl below the European average.
The comparative with neighboring countries is complicated because there is no country near
the line efficiency and in the limit of the quadrant of "efficient". Germany would mark the
"vertical", in the IPM index, but its high level of efficiency on Competitiveness makes it
difficult to achieve this goal. Following the line of efficiency, it is more affordable to reach
average levels requiredby achieving an IPM similar to Belgium or Austria. If we analyze the
shortest path of evolution, (the blue line), we would cut quadrant line with a rate close to
490 IPM. In view of these comparisons, Spain will need between 17,000 and 27,000 certified
new Project Managers PMP equivalent level, to be in the average of the most competitive
countries.
Extended the study to the countries named as Top 50, the trend correlation decreases
slightly to R2 = 0.5907. We conclude again that there is a very significant relationship
between Project Management and Competitiveness,. As with innovation index, we can
deduce that Project Management is a driver for competitiveness.
Illustration 8 - Scatter plot Competitiveness versus Project Management in TOP50 countries
The following table lists the IPM index values and the values obtained from Competitiveness
ranking report "Global Competitiveness Report" [3].
R² = 0,5907
3,5
4,0
4,5
5,0
5,5
6,0
TOP 50 Project Management Index
Project Management Index
Glo
bal
co
mp
etit
iven
ess
Ind
ex
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 23
TOP 50
Country IPM Global
Competitiv. TOP 50
Country IPM Global
Competitiv.
1 United Kingdom 4.891,00 5,4 26 Oman 157,5 4,6
2 Netherlands 3.445,30 5,4 27 Croatia 144,7 4,1
3 Denmark 2.162,40 5,4 28 Slovenia 133,6 4,3
4 Iceland 1.830,70 4,8 29 Slovak Republic 132,6 4,2
5 Australia 1.775,20 5,1 30 France 130,5 5,1
6 Singapore 1.698,90 5,6 31 Portugal 98,7 4,4
7 Ireland 1.309,20 4,8 32 Saudi Arabia 98,7 5,2
8 Austria 1.202,00 5,1 33 Spain 96,1 4,5
9 Switzerland 1.198,80 5,7 34 Italy 83,7 4,4
10 Luxembourg 1.162,40 5 35 Israel 81,4 5,1
11 Canada 1.025,60 5,3 36 Brazil 61,3 4,3
12 United Arab Emirates 1.000,90 4,9 37 Romania 54,8 4,1
13 Hong Kong 705,5 5,4 38 Hungary 47,7 4,4
14 Belgium 703,7 5,2 39 Greece 46,8 3,9
15 USA 700,1 5,4 40 China 45,6 4,9
16 Finland 679 5,5 41 Peru 42 4,2
17 Qatar 677,9 5,2 42 Colombia 40,4 4,2
18 Germany 432,5 5,4 43 Bulgaria 38,4 4,2
19 Sweden 406,5 5,6 44 India 28,1 4,3
20 Poland 346,5 4,5 45 Mexico 25,4 4,3
21 Norway 317 5,2 46 Argentina 23,9 4
22 Japan 240,2 5,4 47 Chile 22,4 4,7
23 Korea, REP 206,3 5 48 Turkey 16,5 4,3
24 Czech Republic 190 4,5 49 Russian Federation 15,4 4,2
25 South Africa 161,5 4,3 50 Bosnia & Herzegovina 13,6 3,8
Table 7 - List of IPM values and Competitiveness index
Influence of Project Management
24 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
4.3. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Productivity is the relationship between the quantity of products obtained by a production
system and the resources used for this production. Actually productivity should be defined
as the performance indicator that relates the amount of resources used to the amount of
output obtained. [Wikipedia]
The GDP per capita is strongly correlated with productivity. This study used the variable GDP
per capita to relate it to the IPM index. We used data from the World Bank [4], taking the
indicator named in their databases as GDP per capita, PPP (current international $).
These data are graphically expressed as follows.
Illustration 9 - Scatter plot of GDP per capita in Focus countries and Project Management
It is detected, that although the potential trend line is maintained, the correlation index is
very low ,0.03727. Two countries are displaced from the trend with peculiarities in their
economy: Luxembourg with a structure of 28% GDP in the financial sector and Norway
whose economy is highly dependent on oil exports. So, certain sectors such as finance and
oil have low dependence on project management, or at least their turnovers are far superior
to other sectors such as industrial or technological.
If we remove these two countries the study of productivity, is:
Germany AustriaBelgium
Czech Republic
Croatia
Denmark
Spain FinlandFrance
Greece
Netherlands
Hungary
Ireland
Iceland
Italy
Luxembourg
Norway
Poland
Portugal
RomaniaRussian Federation
Serbia
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
United States of America
R² = 0,3727
0
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
80.000
90.000
GD
P p
er
cap
ita,
PP
P (
curr
en
t in
tern
atio
nal
$)
Project Management Index
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 25
Illustration 10 -GDP per capita vs. Project Management in Focus countries without Norway and
Luxembourg
The positive trend is maintained, increasing the rate to 0.6068 square. We can conclude that
GDP per capita is highly correlated with the PM, but depends on the productive nature of
the country's economic model.
Performing an extension of the study to the TOP50, also we can detect that several countries
are displaced from the trend. UAE and Qatar, (plus Luxembourg and Norway) raise
significantly GDP per capita, causing a significantly shifting of the trend. After removingthe 4
countries (Luxembourg and Norway in Europe and UAE and Qatar in addition), the type of
trend is similar but the reliability increases significantly to R2 = 0.6982. This confirms that
there is a strong relationship between Productivity and Project Management.
The following chart shows the results of the study:
Germany AustriaBelgium
Czech Republic
Croatia
Denmark
SpainFinland
France
Greece
Netherlands
Hungary
Ireland
Iceland
Italy
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russian Federation
Serbia
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
United States of AmericaR² = 0,6068
0
5.000
10.000
15.000
20.000
25.000
30.000
35.000
40.000
45.000
50.000
GD
P p
er
cap
ita,
PP
P (
curr
en
t in
tern
atio
nal
$)
Project Management Index
Influence of Project Management
26 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
Illustration 11 - Scatter plot of GDP per capita and Project Management in TOP50-limited countries
Thus, we can conclude that the production (GDP) per capita has a high dependence on
project management, except in cases where the economy has a depends on highly profitable
services (financial) or in very scarce and valued resources (oil). In producing economies
(technological, industrial and / or agricultural) the correlation is proved.
Placing European data in a quadrant, we note again that there are no countries in the 4th
quadrant. Excluding Luxembourg and Norway, Spain would go to "efficient"quadrant,
because despite its low level in PM, its GDP per capita is within the european average. Even
without removing these two countries, the GDP per capita of Spain ($ 32,544.8) is very close
to the average of the entire study ($ 34,155.7), So it is very close to that "Efficient"
quadrant.
R² = 0,6982
0
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
TOP 50 Project Management IndexG
DP
pe
rca
pit
a P
PP
cu
rre
nt
$
Project Management Index
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 27
Illustration 12 -Quadrant de GPD per capita vs Project Management
Reviewing the situation of Spain in the quadrant, we obtain the following table:
IPM
PMP( equivalent to Spanish population)
PMP needed
Spain 2011 96 4.352
France 130 5.911 1.559
Table 8 - Situation of Project Management vs GDP/per capita in Spain. Source own
The level of Spain in the quadrant of efficient countries, indicates that it doesn't require a
greater number of certificates. In any case, comparing ourselves with France,. we would
require about 1,500 new certificates at PMP level. However, one can conclude that to
achieve higher levels of GDP per capita, it will be neccesary to increaselevels of certification,
because Analyzing the countries in our environment, higher turnovers require higher level of
management.
The following table lists the values of IPM index and the GDP per capita values obtained
from the databases of the World Bank [4].
Serbia
Russia
Czech Republic
Romania
Hungary
Greece
Croatia
ItalySpain
Portugal
France
Poland
BelgiumGermany
Sweden
USA
Ireland
FinlandDenmark
Switzerland
Netherlands
Austria
United Kingdom
Iceland
Followers
Efficients Leaders
Project Management Index
Influence of Project Management
28 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
TOP 50
Country IPM GDP per capita, PPP (current $)
TOP 50
Country IPM GDP per capita, PPP (current $)
1 United Kingdom 4.891,00 36.495,80 26 Oman 157,5 25.462,10
2 Netherlands 3.445,30 40.714,70 27 Croatia 144,7 19.805,40
3 Denmark 2.162,40 36.761,70 28 Slovenia 133,6 27.004,40
4 Iceland 1.830,70 37.595,10 29 Slovak Republic 132,6 22.356,30
5 Australia 1.775,20 39.230,70 30 France 130,5 33.655,50
6 Singapore 1.698,90 50.632,80 31 Portugal 98,7 24.569,40
7 Ireland 1.309,20 41.278,20 32 Saudi Arabia 98,7 23.395,40
8 Austria 1.202,00 38.363,10 33 Spain 96,1 32.544,80
9 Switzerland 1.198,80 45.116,90 34 Italy 83,7 31.908,60
10 Luxembourg 1.162,40 83.758,80 35 Israel 81,4 27.759,20
11 Canada 1.025,60 37.945,60 36 Brazil 61,3 10.412,10
12 United Arab Emirates 1.000,90 57.743,70 37 Romania 54,8 14.278,00
13 Hong Kong (SAR), China 705,5 44.303,80 38 Hungary 47,7 19.764,30
14 Belgium 703,7 36.249,00 39 Greece 46,8 29.663,40
15 United States of America 700,1 45.989,20 40 China 45,6 6.828,00
16 Finland 679 34.719,70 41 Peru 42 8.629,50
17 Qatar 677,9 91.378,70 42 Colombia 40,4 8.959,20
18 Germany 432,5 36.267,40 43 Bulgaria 38,4 13.332,70
19 Sweden 406,5 37.904,60 44 India 28,1 3.270,10
20 Poland 346,5 19.058,70 45 Mexico 25,4 14.335,10
21 Norway 317 55.672,10 46 Argentina 23,9 14.538,30
22 Japan 240,2 32.452,80 47 Chile 22,4 14.330,70
23 Korea, REP 206,3 27.168,50 48 Turkey 16,5 13.885,00
24 Czech Republic 190 25.232,00 49 Russia 15,4 18.962,60
25 South Africa 161,5 10.227,80 50 Bosnia 13,6 8.490,60
Table 9 - List of IPM index and GDP per capita
4.4. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT
One of the most pressing concerns in this time of crisis is the ability of a country's
entrepreneurship. Creating a new enterprise has to do with developing a proyect but the
two concepts (enterprise and proyect) have different connotations (business vs.
development). However, there may be some relationship between both, as starting a
business requires management skills and project management has a high management
component.
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 29
Measuring the level of entrepreneurship in a country is a difficult task and there is no global
and differential indicator on this concept. For this study we used the report "Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor 2011 EXTENDED REPORT: Entrepreneurs And Entrepreneurial
Employees Across the Globe" of Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA).
The report makes a ranking for countries in three different scales and in different variables.
We have chosen the group of countries called "innovative economies" where Spain is
located and the ranking variable "Perceived Opportunities" has been analyzed This variable
has to do withe the perception of opportunities in the country.
The following table shows the data used in the study regarding the IPM and obtained the
report "Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2011 [5]:
Innovative economies IPM Entrepreneurship
Perceived Opportunities
USA 700,10 36,00
United Kingdom 4.890,96 33,00
Switzerland 1.198,83 47,00
Sweden 406,49 71,00
Spain 96,08 14,00
Slovenia 133,55 18,00
Portugal 98,70 17,00
Norway 317,04 67,00
Netherlands 3.445,27 48,00
Ireland 1.309,20 26,00
Greece 46,77 11,00
Germany 432,52 35,00
France 130,49 35,00
Finland 679,04 61,00
Denmark 2.162,36 47,00
Czech Republic 190,03 24,00
Belgium 703,68 43,00
Australia 1.775,19 48,00
Table 10 - List of IPM and Entrepreneurship Perceived Opportunities
It is Clearl that there is a positive trend in relation to the management of projects, but since
the measurement bases do not follow the same guidelines for all countries, we cannot
conclude that there is a causal relationship between high PM and Entrepreneurship
The results of the scatter plot are as follows:
Influence of Project Management
30 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
Illustration 13 - Scatter plots Entrepreneurship and Project Management Focus countries
A positive potential trend is reflected, but with a low correlation (0.3952). Scandinavian
countries are perceived as high-potential countries for entrepreneurship, and are far apart
from the main trend. If we remove these countries from the graph, it remains with a R2 =
0.6519.
Illustration 14 - Scatter plot Entrepreneurship and Project Management. Focus countries without
Scandinavian countries
USA
United Kingdom
Switzerland
Sweden
Spain
SloveniaPortugal
Norway
Netherlands
Ireland
Greece
GermanyFrance
Finland
Denmark
Czech Republic
Belgium
AustraliaR² = 0,395
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80 En
tre
pre
ne
urs
hip
Pe
rce
ive
d
Op
po
rtu
nit
ies
Project Management Index
USA
United Kingdom
Switzerland
Spain
SloveniaPortugal
Netherlands
Ireland
Greece
GermanyFrance
Denmark
Czech Republic
Belgium
AustraliaR² = 0,651
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Entr
ep
ren
eu
rsh
ip P
erc
eiv
ed
O
pp
ort
un
itie
s
Project Management Index
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 31
5. CONCLUSIONS
The Project Management disciplines have taken a great importance in recent decades, and
global standardization makes them a new and influential social and economic driver. The
following table shows the summary of the study.
Variable Trend vs Project
Management Trend &
Reliability R
2 Data Source
Innovation Potential-log HIGH 0,64 INSEAD
"The global innovation Index 2012"
Competitiviness Potential-log HIGH 0,62
World Economic Forum The Global
Competitiveness Report 2011-2012
Productivity Potential-log MEDIUM-
HIGH 0,60
World Bank GDP per capita PPP
current USD
Enterpreneuship Potential-log LOW 0,40/0,65
Global Entrepreneurship Research Association
(GERA) GLOBAL
ENTREPRENEURSHIP MONITOR 2011
EXTENDED REPORT Perceived Opportunities
Economic growing No trend NULL -- World Bank
GDP Growing 5 years.
Exports No Trend NULL -- World Bank
Export tech & exports of goods and services
Table 11 - Conclusion correlation study. Source: own
The table reflects di8fferent situations. First, the Competitiveness and Innovation are clearly
related to project management. In fact, even skills in Project Management, acti as a
"driver", ie they are engines that promote high levels of innovation and competitiveness.
In relation to Productivity, the correlation may be considered "Medium-High" and therefore
there is also a high component as "engine" for this variable. But while productivity is directly
related to project management, other factors in the production model may have a more
significant influence (eg dependence on oil production).
The relationship with the Entrepreneurship has also a positive trend, but with a low level of
correlation.
Influence of Project Management
32 Víctor Lerga Bezunartea
In today's society, define the causes that affect any variable wiht a cyclical move is a
complex task. The social and cultural interaction and immediacy of reaction worldwide,
made the definition of casue-effect relationships an almost unapproachable challenge. You
cannot act on a single dimension to generate the desired response, it is necessary to work in
a multidisciplinary and coordinated way to achieve results., It is necessary to work in
different areas, combining efforts from the government and civil society to maintain the
growing path
Anyway throughout this study , it is shown how a single tool like Project Management is a
driver that can positively act on Innovation, Competitiveness, Productivity and
Entrepreneurship.
This discipline should be encouraged in education to obtain these skills. We should not
forget that education is another engine of social improvement.
Summarizing, improving skills in project management, we will be more efficient, more
competitive and the train of the economy and growth will be kept..
Influence of Project management
Víctor Lerga Bezunartea 33
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES
- *1+ Naughton, Ed y Kavanagh , Donnacha. "Innovation & project management" “.PM
World Today. April 2009.
- *2+ Soumitra Dutta, INSEAD; “The Global Innovation Index 2011,Accelerating Growth and Development”; ISBN: 978-2-9522210-1-6
- [3] Professor Xavier Sala-i-Martin, Columbia University Chief Advisor. Centre for Global
Competitiveness and Performance. “The Global Competitiveness Report 2011–2012.
“ISBN-13: 978-92-95044-74-6
- [4] Data bases of World Bank http://datos.bancomundial.org. indicators:
http://datos.bancomundial.org/indicador/all?display=default
- [5] Niels Bosma, Sander Wennekers and José Ernesto Amorós and Global
Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA). “GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP MONITOR
2011 EXTENDED REPORT: Entrepreneurs And Entrepreneurial Employees Across the
Globe”.
- [6+ Grant, Robert M.;”Dirección estratégica, Conceptos, técnicas y aplicaciones”, Ed.
Thomsom Civitas. ISBN 84-470-2658-2
- [7+ CIDEM; “Guia de Gestió de Proyectes de innovació”, Generalitat de Catalunya
- [8] Valledor, Luis V. 1 y de la Fuente, David ; ”Certificaciones a la gestión de proyectos.
IPMA, PMI, ISPI Y APM GROUP” Septembre 2010; Department of Business
Administration. Oviedo University
- [9+ Demos Group; “Project Management Certification” Juanary 2010.
- [10+ “Guía de los fundamentos para la dirección de proyectos (guía del PMBOK®) fourth
edition”. Project Management Institute , 2008. ISBN: 978-1-9ANT90-72-2.
- [11+ “Dirección y gestión de proyectos”. Jaime Peñara Brand, 1991. ISBN: 84-87189-78-4
Top Related