1
Chapter 1. Introduction
Overview
Configuration management (CM) is a discipline that arises from the need to
reduce cost, minimize risks, and prevent delays in development and operations
within Department of Defense (DoD) projects (DoD, 2001). It is designed to
bridge the gap between project management activities and those with design,
manufacturing, and product support (Burgess, Byrne, & Kidd, 2003). Despite the
requirement to implement configuration management within the DoD, project
managers still experience costly setbacks and fail to meet their objectives due to the
inability to properly manage enormous amounts of product data (Meier, 2013).
When properly implemented, configuration management reduces the
complexity within projects by ensuring the integrity of the information, limiting the
redesign of solutions, and providing clarification of products designs (Muller,
2013). DoD project managers can significantly decrease the issues associated with
controlling massive amounts of data with a rigorous configuration management
process. However, configuration management is often implemented haphazardly
and does not add value where necessary; which makes it necessary to explore the
underlying issues (Ali & Kidd, 2012; 2013). The level of maturity of configuration
management activities is not solely dependent on its defined processes but rather
other crucial factors such as management involvement and information technology
2
(Niknam & Ovtcharova, 2013). Exploring the factors that impact the overall
process of configuration management in DoD projects may facilitate its effective
implementation within DoD projects.
Background
DoD Projects
DoD projects have been described as having one of the world’s most
complicated processes (Sutterfield, Friday-Stroud, & Shivers-Blackwell, 2006).
They are not the same as commercial projects because of a larger interdisciplinary
design and increased technological risks (Tishler, Dvir, Shenhar, & Lipovetsky,
1996). DoD projects involve designing, building, and delivery of technology that is
intended to meet the needs of the warfighter (Meier, 2013). Often the projects
within the defense industry are developmental and have no other comparison
available when estimating cost, schedule, and performance (Cantwell, Sarkani, &
Mazzuchi, 2013).
Project managers in the DoD are responsible for overseeing the
development of mission-critical technologies and capabilities consisting of
enormous amounts of data (Meier, 2013). They rely on data from the project to
make decisions in a timely manner while adhering to stringent cost, schedule, and
quality guidelines (Meier, 2013). Within the defense industry, aircraft must adhere
to airworthiness regulations and be certified by a regulatory authority to operate
3
(De Florio, 2016). Criteria for obtaining certification includes mandatory
registration, monitoring, and assurance that products possess “traceability, their
components, and any software and documents (e.g. technical specifications,
drawings, technical standards, material specifications, manufacturing procedures,
operation and support manuals)” (Vieira & Pereira, 2016, p. 440). Monitoring and
traceability are achieved through the configuration management process because
configuration management focuses on managing the changes to a product
throughout its life cycle and is therefore critical to the management of the projects
in the DoD (Vieira & Pereira, 2016).
Successful DoD Projects
Completion of successful projects within the DoD is challenging because
they are difficult to manage (Clowney, Dever, & Stuban, 2016). Even under the
best of circumstances there are various structural, behavioral, and environmental
complexities (Sutterfield et al., 2006). Project success is defined by the completion
of the project scope within the time, cost, and quality constraints of that project
(Rodriguez-Segura, Ortiz-Marcos, Romero, & Tafur-Segura, 2016). Known as the
“iron triangle” or “golden triangle,” time, cost, and quality are used to define
project success (de Carvalho, Patah, & de Souza Bido, 2015). Allen, Alleyne,
Farmer, McRae, and Turner (2014) emphasized the importance of project managers
understanding the scope, schedule, and budget when it comes to project success.
The scope of a project is the ultimate objective of the project through which it is
4
achieved from various project activities (Quigley & Robertson, 2015). The tasks
needed to achieve the objective are generated and then monitored. When project
managers do not effectively manage the scope of the project and allow frequent
changes to go unmonitored, risks are introduced. However, when changes to the
scope are properly controlled through a change management system, the risk is
significantly reduced (Quigley & Robertson, 2015). The purpose of a project
schedule is to ensure the activities required to meet the scope are linked to their
tasks and objectives, then incorporated into an integrated master schedule (Quigley
& Robertson, 2015). This master schedule allows a comparison of the current status
of the project to the forecasted schedule at the beginning of the project and is used
to identify any variations and potential risks or opportunities (Allen et al., 2014).
After project managers have successfully defined their scope and established a
schedule, they can then budget for the execution of the project (Allen et al., 2014).
Project managers must be knowledgeable of these aspects of the project because
numerous projects must adjust to changing customer requirements, adhere to their
schedules, and not exceed their allocate budget limits, weakening their chances to
have a successful project (Allen et al., 2014).
DoD Project Failures
The majority of project failures can be categorized into one or more of the
following groups: (1) failure to meet time, (2) failure to achieve cost, and (3) failure
to meet quality (Whitney & Daniels, 2013). According to Hameri (1997, p. 151),
5
large-scale projects (such as those found in DoD organizations) have fundamental
problems can lead to failure including:
• Project teams are unaware of what other teams are doing on the
project
• Nonexistence design change control
• Varying views on what are the aims of the project are
• Too firm project planning and scheduling routines
• Negative response times to rapid changes in the project environment
• Unanticipated technological glitches
Murray (2003) identified the following project factors that inhibited
success:
• Unrealistic project scope regarding the resources
• Continuously expanding the project and not properly managing
expectations
• Technological advances essential to the project have never been
developed
• Issues within the organization are not understood
• Customization of work is required for the organization to implement
business activities
6
Based on empirical observations of global one-of-a kind projects, Hameri
(1997) recommended configuration management, among other solutions, to reduce
project costs while maintaining a schedule and quality requirements.
The Role of Configuration Management in DoD Projects
Benefits of Configuration Management
Configuration management ensures the correct, most recent configuration of
defense assets and the associated relationships of those assets are properly
managed. When successfully implemented, the configuration management process
manages changes and ensures that any impacts to operations and support are
accounted for (DoD, 2001). The benefits of configuration management to the
projects within DoD are summarized in MIL-HDBK (DoD, 2001, p. 1-7), as
follows:
• Provides measurable performance parameters
• Decisions are based on correct, current information
• Production repeatability is enhanced
• The applicable data (such as for procurement, design or servicing
the product) is accessible, avoiding guesswork and trial and error
• Downstream surprises are avoided, and cost and schedule savings
are realized
• Costly errors of ad hoc, erratic change management are avoided
7
• Timely, accurate information avoids costly delays and product
downtime, ensures proper replacement and repair, and decreased
maintenance costs
• A high level of confidence in the product information is established
According to EIA 649 and Military Handbook 61, the following five
functions of are used for configuration management:
1. Configuration management and planning
2. Configuration identification
3. Configuration control
4. Configuration status accounting
5. Configuration verification and audits
Configuration Management and Planning
The establishment of a comprehensive configuration management plan
identifies the processes for implementation to ensure consistency, identifies
documents and key terms, deliverables, milestones, and schedules (Brouse, 2008).
In addition, a detailed plan identifies the roles and responsibilities of configuration
personnel to ensure each are properly trained and understand their inter-
organizational interfaces (Dart, 1991).
8
Configuration and Identification
Configuration identification is used to initiate all the configuration
management functions (Whyte, Stasis, & Lindkvist, 2016). This function
establishes the configuration items (CIs) that will be used throughout the lifecycle.
Brouse (2008) defines CIs as the unique identification of components used for the
establishment of the product, inclusive of the internal and external interfaces and
their supporting documentation within the product. For all the of the CIs products
that are identified, configuration management support staff, the project manager,
engineering, and other pertinent team members will coordinate to determine the
product structure to be used in the official repository for all CIs produced (Hass,
2003; Watts, 2015).
Configuration Control
Configuration control is the formal process of managing changes to the
project baselined CIs (Boycan et al., 2005). It is focused on identifying changes to
the baseline’s configuration and managing the way that proposed changes are
processed from initiation through disposition to closure (Boycan et al., 2005).
Changes are segregated into either major or minor types of classes in accordance
with EIA-649 (DoD, 2001). Major changes alter the form, fit, function, or
interface, or significantly impact the requirements in the program. In contrast,
minor changes do not directly impact the functionality of the end user.
9
Configuration Status and Accounting
Configuration status accounting provides visibility of changes incorporated
to the CIs as well as the release of these changes as new baselines (Burgess et al.,
2003). It primarily records the status of proposed and approved changes to the
baseline, thus affording mangers the ability to determine whether decisions of the
Configuration Control Boards are being implemented as directed. Although this
function may seem minor, it provides the program the ability to measure the quality
of CIs and can uncover potential problems early on (Gonzalez, 2002).
Configuration Verification Auditing
Configuration audits verifies that the product is built in accordance to the
requirements and/or standards (Boycan et al., 2005). There are two types of
configuration audits: the Functional Configuration Audit (FCA) and the Physical
Configuration Audit (PCA) (Brouse, 2008). The FCA is a formal inspection, prior
to customer acceptance, which ensures the CI has been developed in accordance
with the requirements (Brannin, Meling, Snider, Dzik, & Johnson, 1996). The PCA
is a physical inspection of the product against its supporting technical
documentation (Brannin et al., 1996).
10
Definitions of Terms
It is important to clarify the meaning of the words and terms used. The
definitions of terms are supported by research and provide reference for the use of
terms within this study.
Academic Qualification refers to the highest level of education such as no degree,
Associate degree, Bachelor’s degree, Master’s degree, or Doctoral degree (Ali,
2014).
Baselines is a central part to effective configuration management, as they provide a
starting point used to plan, approve, and implement a change in the configuration
(DoD, 2001).
Configuration Management is a management process for establishing and
maintaining consistency of a product’s performance, functional, and physical
attributes with its requirements, and design and operation information throughout
its life (DoD, 2001, p. 3-5).
Configuration Management Professional is the person responsible for ensuring
the configuration management process is successfully executed and all operating
forces are provided with correctly “configured” hardware, software, and the
information necessary to operate and maintain them effectively (DoD, 2001, p. 4-
1).
11
Configuration Item (CI) is any hardware, software, or combination of both that
satisfies an end use function and is designated for separate configuration
management (DoD, 2001, p. 3-5).
Criticality is defined as a state of being vital or essential (Raiskums, 2008, p. 19)
Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) details the proposed change and the
supporting documenting that provides a through description of the change (Brouse,
2008).
Department of Defense (DoD) is an executive branch department of the federal
government of the United States charged with coordinating and supervising all
agencies and functions of the government concerned directly with national security
and United States Armed Forces (Becker, 2004).
Product includes various processes like design, engineering and manufacturing in
a combined structure. This includes manufacturing and design details that are used
at all the stages of the life cycle of a product (Xu, Malisetty, & Round, 2013, p.
184).
Project is used to define a series of activities which result in the availability of a
product, or the simultaneous availability of a number of products working as an
integrated and co-functioning whole (TechAmerica, 2011).
Relevant means bearing upon or connected with the matter in hand.
12
Statement of the Problem
Challenges have been associated with DoD projects for a while and the
trend is getting worse instead of improving (GAO, 2011). The United States
Congress has expressed the need to improve management of projects within the
DoD (Ferrara, 1996). According to the United States Government Accountability
Office (GAO), half of the major defense acquisition programs exceed budget goals,
with 80% having increased unit costs (GAO, 2011). From 2008 to 2010, over 90
major defense projects exceeded their budget by 9% (GAO, 2011). Such challenges
have become the norm among DoD projects and are getting worse not improving
(GAO, 2011). There is a clear need for the improvement of configuration
management strategies and implementation to break this pattern of project failure.
Projects that have issues are directly related to the lack of proper
configuration management which is reflected in the inability to control changes to
the design and inefficiencies within the flow of information to the engineering team
(Hameri, 1997). Often considered cutting edge and consisting of unproven
capabilities, DoD projects have no basis for comparison and lead to incorrect
forecasting of initial cost, schedule, and performance that require constant updating
(Cantwell et al., 2013; Meier, 2013). DoD project failure is often a result of
constant changes (Cantwell et al., 2013). Wiegers (2000) found that 12% of
challenges in projects come from changes that are not properly vetted. Wiegers
recommends that projects managers plan for changes and ensure changes are
13
properly managed. These changes can be collected, tracked, and communicated
effectively when configuration management is implemented correctly.
Configuration management is one of the building blocks that is essential to projects
but is still relatively misunderstood and not given appropriate attention by senior
management (Ali & Kidd, 2013).
When the configuration management process is not successfully
implemented and principles are not applied to DoD organization projects, there will
be negative outcomes. The lack of configuration management to the projects within
the DoD are summarized in Military Handbook 61 (DoD, 2001), they may include:
• Equipment failures due to incorrect part installation or replacement;
• Schedule delays and increased cost due to unanticipated changes;
• Operational delays due to mismatches with support assets;
• Maintenance problems, downtime, and increased maintenance cost
due to inconsistencies between equipment and its maintenance
instructions; and,
• Numerous other circumstances which decrease operational
effectiveness; and added cost.
• The most detrimental result would be a catastrophic loss of costly
equipment or human life (p. 1-7).
14
Purpose of the Study
Configuration management has become more important than ever to
managers of DoD projects. The recent technological advancements within the DoD
and the increased use of virtual management systems to store project information
contribute to the intensification of the “expectations and requirements” of
configuration management within organizations (Muller, 2013, p. 187).
Configuration Management ensures that the contents of products are identified,
changes authorized, and supporting documentation properly controlled throughout
the life of the project (Burgess et al., 2003).
The purpose of this study was to explore the factors that impact the success
of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. Understanding
the relevancy and criticality of these identified factors will allow identification of
an approach to improve the configuration management process in DoD projects.
Questions That Guided the Research
Although the many benefits of a successful configuration management
process such as consistency and accuracy of product knowledge throughout its
lifecycle has been realized, there is still no research identifying which factors
directly influence the success of the overall configuration management process in
DoD projects. Thus, the research questions and hypotheses that guided this research
were:
15
1. Which factors are perceived to be relevant facilitating factors and obstructing
factors to the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects?
H1: All facilitating factors in Appendix A are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
H2: All obstructing factors in Appendix B are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
Appendix A: Facilitating Factors
• Vision and policies for configuration management process
• Effective control of configuration management process at vendor
premises
• Flexibility in configuration management practices
• Management support
• Competent configuration management practitioners
• Effective leadership
• Previous configuration management experience
• Configuration management planning
• Continuous improvement in configuration management practices
• Professional development
• Adequate resources allocation
• User-friendly software (tool) for configuration management tool
• Effective support from stakeholder
• Organizational culture
• Teamwork
• Recognition of configuration management employees’ efforts
• Equal career opportunities for configuration management staff
• Politics free projects environment
• Effective communication
• Established configuration management organization
• Committed and creative employees
16
Appendix B: Obstructing Factors
• Lack of recognition
• Lack of career progression for configuration management professionals
• Implementation cost outweigh configuration management benefits
• Lack of authority to implement configuration principles/policies
• Lack of top management support
• Lack of centralized body for the governance of configuration management
• Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration management practices
across projects
• Poorly defined configuration management requirements and process
• Lack of current configuration management plans
• Lack of flexibility in configuration management process
• Outdated configuration management process
• Lack of resources
• Lack of effective configuration management tools
• Extreme project pressures
• Lack of support from stakeholders
• Lack of configuration management support in customer world
• Lack of effective communication
2. Is there a correlation between a configuration management professionals’
academic qualification and years of work experience and the perception of the
criticality of the factors?
H3: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ academic qualifications and the criticality
rating of the factors.
H4: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ years of experience as configuration
management supporting DoD projects and criticality of the factors.
17
Significance of the Study
It is significant to explore the factors that facilitate and obstruct the success
of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects because this
information provides project managers the ability to uncover their gaps and focus
on future improvements. Having valid insight into these factors can be used to
manage knowledge more effectively throughout the product lifecycle and prevent
DoD project failures.
The configuration management process directly impacts the entire product
life cycle in DoD projects. However, projects are not utilizing configuration
management to its full potential (Burgess et al., 2003). When a configuration
management process is in place but not used correctly, either directly or indirectly,
issues can arise that impact the cost, schedule, and quality of DoD projects (DoD,
2001). Having a well-defined configuration management process alone doesn’t
guarantee a successful configuration management process (Niknam & Ovtcharova,
2013).
Current academic literature is rare with no formal study to date focusing on
the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. Most
research in the DoD focuses on understanding quality management, project
management, and business process management to decrease the failure of DoD
projects (Cantwell et al., 2013). Configuration management has mostly been
18
covered comprehensively within these subject areas but not distinctively examined
in academic literature.
Configuration management professionals are responsible for ensuring the
configuration management process is successfully executed in DoD projects (DoD,
2001, p. 4-1). Thus, the perception of configuration management professionals
were used to determine the relevancy of the facilitating and obstructing factors that
influence the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects. Emphasis was made to determine any significant correlation between the
criticality of factors based on the academic qualification of configuration
management professionals and their years of experience supporting DoD projects.
Experienced configuration management professionals were involved to ensure the
worthiness and effectiveness of the study.
19
Chapter 2
Literature Review
Overview
The purpose of this quantitative study was to analyze the factors that
influence the success of the configuration management process in DoD projects.
This analysis requires an understanding of concepts and ideas regarding
configuration management. In this literature review, the researcher examined the
current body of literature concerning the practices of configuration management.
Further, the researcher examined formative works to better understand the research
that currently exists in this area. To obtain a better understanding of configuration
management within the DoD, it must be viewed as impacting the entire business
process (Quigley & Robertson, 2015).
Questions That Guided the Research
This study aligned with the following research questions:
1. Which factors are perceived to be relevant facilitating factors and
obstructing factors to the success of the overall configuration management process
in DoD projects?
2. Is there a correlation between a configuration management
professionals’ academic qualification and years of work experience and the
perception of the criticality of the factors?
20
To avoid the omission of key considerations, the researcher conducted a
comprehensive literature review and identified related industries that provide data
sources which can contribute to the known factors that affect configuration
management. By analyzing a selection of significant contributions from the study
of configuration management, the researcher mitigated the risk of omitting key
considerations. In this section, the researcher will identify factors that were cited in
existing literature and are of relevance to the current study.
History of Configuration Management
The United States Department of Defense (DoD) introduced configuration
management as a technical management discipline to establish the regulation of
data and to address problems with change control (Samaras, 1998). During the
1950s missiles race, several prototypes were developed with minimal
documentation or no documentation at all. Because of the lack of proper controls,
several items were unnecessarily included or duplicated, resulting in extreme
spending costs (Brouse, 2008). The DoD led the effort to mandate configuration
management for hardware by issuing Bulletin No. 390 and 390A (1953) for the
Army, Navy, Air Force (ANA), which describes the engineering change proposal
(ECP) (Brouse, 2008). The ECP details the proposed change and the supporting
documentation that provides an in-depth description of the change. By 1956,
Bulletin No. 390 and 390A included electronics and manufacturing of ground
21
support equipment. In 1963, ANA Bulletin No. 445 provided a standardized
method for ECP submissions to the Government for approval and included
maintainability and reliability that extended to all military product types (Lager,
2002).
In 1964, the United States Air Force developed manuals and polices known
as the 375 Series to manage change and provide consistency in the management
processes and documentation that support the acquisition of weapons systems
(Cleland, 2004). In support of effective change management, the AFSCM375-1
(Air Force Systems Command Manual for Configuration Management) was issued
and based on best practices from the Government and industry. The AFSCM375-1
manual included basic functions of configuration management: configuration
identification, configuration control, configuration status accounting, and
configuration audit (Lager, 2002). It was also the first of several manuals that
organized Program Management and Integrated Logistics Support and was used as
the foundational framework for the NASA Configuration Management Manual
during the Apollo program in 1965 (Lager, 2002).
During the late 1960s, all non-DoD standards for configuration
management, including NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and ISO
(International Organization for Standardization), used a series of military standards
called the “480” series that were derived AFSCM 375-1 (Lager, 2002). Of all the
military standards, MIL-STD 483, “Configuration Management Practices for
22
Systems Equipment, Munitions, and Computer Programs,” provided the most
comprehensive view of configuration management (Anway, 1976).
The remaining standards only focused on one specific area of configuration
management. For example, MIL-STD 480, “Configuration Control-Engineering
Changes, Deviations” focused on configuration control, MIL-STD 482,
“Configuration Status Accounting Data Elements and Related Features,” aimed at
providing guidance for the configuration management status accounting, and MIL-
STD 490, “Specification Practices” focused only on the configuration identification
function of configuration management. The maintenance of several of these
standards would prove too difficult and became a daunting task.
Between 1989 and 1992, the DoD and Configuration Management
Advisory Group (CMAG) combined the configuration management standards into
one standard called MIL-STD-973, “Military Standard: Configuration
Management” (Lager, 2002). While developing MIL-STD-973, the CMAG
determined that a configuration management data phrasebook was warranted, and it
soon became a placeholder until work could begin on 973A. However, the 1994
reform of military acquisition resulted in a change of direction and all the
information that was planned for MIL-STD-973A was designated to the new DoD
standard, MIL-STD-2549, “Configuration Management Data Interface.” MIL-STD-
2459 defined data elements, definitions, and relations necessary for the delivery of
and access to electronic management data (Burkett, 2001, p. 496).
23
In later years, the DoD made a conscience effort to standardize
configuration management by utilizing more industry standards compared to
military standards. The DoD standardization for configuration management
cancelled MIL-STDs 973 and 2549 and adopted the national industry standard for
configuration management known as American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) /EIA-649. The Electronics Industries Alliance (EIA), through its
Government Electronics and Information Technology Association (GEIA),
developed EIA-649 to be the document providing the basic philosophies of
configuration management. DoD has also been very influential in the contiguous
effort of EIA-836, “Consensus Standard for CM Data Exchange and
Interoperability,” which it will assume when it is published as a web-based tool by
EIA (DoD, 2001).
Currently, MIL-HDBK-61 Revision A, dated 7 February 2001, is the most
current guidance for the effective application of configuration management. MIL-
HDBK-61, Military Handbook: Configuration Management Guidance, provides
guidance for government personnel for their responsibilities and what the
government requires the contractor to do (Quigley & Robertson, 2015). The
foreword of MIL-HDBK-61 (DoD, 2001) describes its intent as being “for
managers within the DoD assigned the responsibility for configuration management
to use for guidance on how to warrant the application of product and data
configuration management to defense material items, in each phase of their life
24
cycle.” This military handbook is designed to provide support for DoD acquisition
managers, logistic mangers, and additional personnel responsible for configuration
management actions and processes throughout the life cycle of defense systems
(DoD, 2001). MIL-HDBK-61 is closely associated with the above-mentioned
standards, ANSI/EIA- 649 and EIA-836. The handbook is also related to
ANSI/EIA-632, Processes for Engineering a System, which describes the Systems
Engineering process of which configuration management is essential.
Configuration Management in the Project Lifecycle
In project management, the use of a lifecycle to manage and control the
progress of a project is considered best practice (Rendon & Snider, 2008; Snider &
Rendon, 2008). To successfully manage information, project managers must be
aware of information throughout the lifecycle but also be knowledgeable of risks
(Bobrowski, 1989). The project life cycle ensures projects are managed in phases
which are controlled gateways and decision points (Rendon & Snider, 2008). The
project lifecycle is common to all projects and involves continuous activity through
several phases with a unity of processes that is unique to each project (Bobrowski,
1989). However, the number of phases of each project vary depending on size,
schedule, and customer requirements (Bobrowski, 1989). The life cycle phases
“are developed to suit the product type, the development method, the company
doing the developing, and the industry, and they operate quite successfully despite
25
modifications” (Morris & Pinto, 2010, p. 116). Field and Keller (1998) explicitly
state ‘there is not a single life cycle that applies to every project.’
According to the traditional project management body of knowledge, the
project lifecycle consists of project initiation followed by a sequence of activities
that are used to control planning, executing, monitoring, and ending with project
closure (Darrin, Stadter, & Taylor, 2017). According to Quigley and Robertson
(2015), the product development life cycle consists of these phases:
Development – Generate ideas for the product
Introduction – Learn more about the product
Growth – Requirements and concepts of operations should start
Maturity – Production and distribution process are ongoing
Decline- Close out procedures begin
Regardless, of the project lifecycle used, configuration management is
considered a major factor of design, development, and production of products and
often a major requirement of projects (Morris & Pinto, 2010, p. 116). Each project
manager should tailor the configuration management process to successfully
control change (Sage & Rouse, 2009). Within the system development life cycle
there are several configuration management activities that occur (Sage & Rouse,
2009).
The following sections detail the configuration management processes
associated with the life-cycle phase. Many of the terms used to detail the
26
configuration management process are used in the literature and by configuration
management professionals.
Configuration Management Functions
Configuration management is a collaboration of processes, activities, tools,
and methods that are used to manage various items during the project lifecycle
(PMI, 2007). Configuration management is used to foster communication and
provide guidance to successfully complete the project (PMI, 2007). The process
activities muse be clear, reliable, and able to be implemented to protect against any
issues.
The five functions of the configuration management process include:
1. Configuration Management and Panning
2. Configuration Identification
3. Configuration Control
4. Configuration Status Accounting
5. Configuration Verification and Audits
Configuration Management and Planning
Configuration management and planning throughout the life cycle is a
critical function because it focuses on establishing operational, dependable, and
repeatable processes (TechAmerica, 2011). The primary concern when managing
and planning activities is to tailor processes to meet the needs of the project and the
27
customer (Darrin et al., 2017). The goal of effective configuration management and
planning is to meet the cost of the product while ensuring quality standards are met
(PMI, 2007). When planning a configuration management effort, the following
should be considered “what has to be done, how should it be done, who should do
it, when should it be done, and what resources are required” (Leonard & Defense
Systems Management College, 1999, p. 81).
EIA-649 (TechAmerica, 2011) identifies the purpose and benefits of
configuration management planning and management which include:
• Guaranteeing that the configuration management processes and
activities are functional
• Identifying the configuration management activities throughout the
organization
• Establishing the necessary resources and amenities
• Providing a foundation for on-going improvement
• Sustaining the growth of the enterprise processes
Configuration Identification
Configuration identification is an essential function used as a catalyst for
the other configuration management functions (DoD, 2001). It is a key function in
the configuration management process, serving as the foundation from which the
configuration of products are defined and verified (Morris & Pinto, 2010). A
28
product can vary depending on its complexity and purpose and it consists of one or
more sub-products (Hass, 2003). A configuration is both the functional and
physical characteristics that are required to be built and the information (plans and
specifications) (DoD, 2001). The specifications used to define what is going to be
built and the supporting documentations are continuously modified throughout the
product’s lifecycle, which constitutes a change in the configuration (Williams,
2009). Configuration items are the “aggregation of work products that is
designated for configuration management and treated as a single entity in the
configuration management process;” which “may vary widely in complexity, size
and type, ranging from an entire system including all hardware, software and
documentation, to a single module or a minor hardware component” (IEEE
Standards Association 2012, p.2). If configuration items and their supporting
documentation are not properly identified early in the lifecycle, change control will
be lost, supporting documentation will not be correct, and records and reports will
not clearly depict the product, resulting in the probability for defects to occur and
the incorrect product developed (Whyte et al., 2016).
Configuration Control
Configuration control is the formal process of proposing, justifying,
prioritizing, evaluating, and coordinating, acceptance or rejections of all changes in
the configuration of a system/CI after establishment of a baseline (Leonard &
Defense Systems Management College, 1999). Configuration management
29
baselines are used to control and maintain the required status of the design during
any point of the life cycle (TechAmerica, 2011). Configuration control uses
baselines, control documents, and a change control process to effectively manage
changes. Each of these are detailed below.
Configuration Baselines
Baselines are a central part of effective configuration management as they
provide a starting point used to plan, approve, and implement a change in the
configuration (DoD, 2001). The configuration baseline provides a snapshot of any
given CIs under configuration control, a description of each, and all of the
approvals during its development. The major configuration baselines are
functional, allocated, and product (DoD, 2013; Gonzalez, 2002).
Documents Used for Control DoD Baselines
In the DoD the configuration control function consists mostly of a change
process that utilizes documentation and structure for approval of changes (Leonard
& Defense Systems Management College, 1999). The types of change documents
used to control baselines within DoD projects are Engineering Change Proposals
(ECPs), Request for Deviation, and Request for Waivers (Darrin et al., 2017; DOD,
2013).
Change Control Process
The formal change process is done through the use of the Change Control
Board (CCB) (Leonard & Defense Systems Management College, 1999). The
30
purpose of the CCB is to assess the cost versus benefit and evaluate any risks that
might impact the product based on the proposed change (Xu et al., 2013). The CCB
consists of stakeholders, customers, and team members (Xu et al., 2013). The
configuration management professional is responsible for facilitating the CCB
meetings whether they are convened physically or electronically with the project
manager and the other participating CCB members (Dart, 1991).
Configuration Status Accounting
Configuration status accounting is used to record and report the information
that is used to effectively manage the configuration (Burgess et al., 2003).
Configuration status accounting provides visibility of changes incorporated to the
CIs as well as the release of these changes as new baselines (Burgess et al., 2003).
Although this function may seem minor, it provides the program manager the
ability to measure the quality of CIs and has the ability to uncover potential
problems early on (Gonzalez, 2002).
Configuration Verification and Audits
Configuration verification and audits are performed at two levels (Morris &
Pinto, 2010). First, the configuration management process performs functional and
physical audits of the product throughout the lifecycle (Xu et al., 2013). These
audits assure that requirements are met and verify performance and functional
characteristics are achieved (Xu et al., 2013). Second, the configuration
31
management process itself undergoes an audit to assess its effectiveness (Xu et al.,
2013). The purpose and benefits of the verification and audits function include
validating the integrity of the control configuration data and supporting
documentation, establishing confidence in the established baselines, and providing
a basis for operation, maintenance, and support documentation (Morris & Pinto,
2010).
DoD Factors
The DoD Configuration Management Process Model depicts the factors
associated with the configuration management process. From the Military
Handbook 61 (DoD, 2001), the DoD Configuration Management Process Model
(Figure 1) identifies the inputs, outputs, constraints, and mechanisms/facilitators
used to perform the major functions of configuration management over the program
life cycle.
32
Figure 1. DoD Configuration Management Process Model - Overview
• Inputs - Information needed to initiate and perform the process
• Constraints - Factors or information that inhibits or puts limitations on
the process
• Mechanisms/Facilitators - Information, tools, methods, and technologies
which enable or enhance the process
• Outputs - Results that derive from the process or information that is
provided by the process (DoD, 2001, p. 1-3)
Mission Need
Mission needs “reflect a desire to exploit an opportunity or to improve
operational effectiveness of an existing system” (Simpson & Simpson, 2001 p.
33
585). A mission need is derived from a continued or current effort in support of the
United States government defense initiatives (Simpson & Simpson, 2001). The
mission needs of a DoD project provide justification for the degree to which to
identify and trace various configuration items during the duration of the project
(Phelan et al., 2017). Identification of the procedures used in the configuration
management process vary depending upon the mission needs of the project it
supports (Dart, 1992). The configuration management process in the DoD
environment is initiated when a new need is identified and analysis of the mission
occurs (Quigley & Robertson, 2015).
Project Initiation
Project initiation is the formal beginning of the DoD acquisition process
(DoD, 2001). It includes the early phase activities that seek to establish a vision,
define high-level goals, and assign key personnel and resources for the project
(Lehtonen & Martinsuo, 2008). During project initiation, the knowledge required
for successful completion of strategic issues is identified and the core competences
and processes that contribute to the operative activities are analyzed to respond
better to goals or issues (Martinsuo & Lehtonen, 2007). The necessary information
for planning processes, tasks required, and associated policies and procedures are
identified during the early stages of the project (Dart, 2002). Because configuration
management is about managing everything that defines the product through the life
cycle (Morris & Pinto, 2010), the information obtained during the early stages of
34
the project provide an important foundation for the configuration management
process.
Systems Engineering
Systems engineering affords project managers the ability to plan their entire
integrated product process and then simulate each step. This planning allows
project managers to make better decisions during the product’s creation (Xu et al.,
2013). This discipline focuses on solving complex problems to ensure customer
needs are being met by management of customer requirements (Simpson &
Simpson, 2001). Requirements can be traced throughout the design effort of the
project, providing control and traceability to ensure customer needs are being met
(Buede & Miller, 2016).
Systems engineering typically utilizes requirements analysis, functional
analysis and allocation, and synthesis in an integrated product team environment
(Buede & Miller, 2016). Military Handbook 61 A (DoD, 2001) describes each:
Requirements analysis - determines system technical requirements
and identifies the top-level requirements required for the
product
Functional analysis and allocation - increases the understanding of
high-level system requirements to the detailed set
Synthesis - defines the physical architecture or specifications and
baselines
35
Collectively, the requirements analysis, functional analysis and allocation, and
design synthesis affords the systems engineers the ability to evaluate whether the
development of the product aligns with the requirements (Buede & Miller, 2016).
As the project progresses, requirements and support documentation, i.e. drawings
and technical manuals, will be established, documented, and approved (DoD,
2001). The configuration management process will be used to ensure the
modifications are properly vetted, approved, and reflected in the product tools and
documents (Sorrentino, 2016). Configuration management ensures everyone has
access to the most recent set of requirements and current product models so that
users from engineering can work collaboratively on the project (Xu et al., 2013).
Logistics and Maintenance Plans
Logistics is defined as “the flow of supplies through the organization and its
operation to the customer” (Kain & Verma, 2018, p. 3812). It aims to ensure that
the developed products are accessible at the correct location and time. Logistics
activities include “procurement, production, distribution, after-sales support,
disposal, green technologies, global, and domestic activities as well as product
warranties that pass through from component and subsystem providers” (Quigley
& Robertson, 2015, p. 232). The configuration management process maintains the
configuration identification of each item associated with the product to facilitate
effective logistics support (Quigley & Robertson, 2015).
36
Maintenance Plans
The maintenance plan is generated by the Logistics function. It includes
requirements for personnel, training, facilities, support equipment, supply support
and training, facilities, support equipment, training devices, and influences the
information elements necessary to fully detail any configuration change (DoD,
2001, p. 4-6). The management of the information associated with each of these
activities is detailed in the configuration management plan and used through life of
the project and changes are managed using the configuration management process
(Brouse, 2008).
Performance Measurements
Performance measurements are used to monitor processes and support
improvement efforts (Denewiler & Tjersland, 2017; Quigley & Robertson, 2015).
Gathering data about the processes, graphing/charting them, and reporting them are
beneficial to identifying the causes and solutions to issues within the lifecycle
(Watts, 2009). Organizations measure their overall performance using performance
measurements, such as Return on Investment (ROI), as indicators to determine the
overall performance of the organization (Minzenmay, Zeiss, Niknam, &
Ovtcharova, 2014). Configuration management processes must be well defined
and documented to accurately measure their benefit to organization (Watts, 2009).
Management can gather metrics found in the configuration management processes
to determine areas of risk and provide the status of the project to stakeholders
37
(Watts, 2009). This process should not be used in lieu of the quality process,
however, metrics found in the configuration verification and audit process can be
used to verify product documentation (Bendix, Magnusson, & Pendleton, 2012;
Asklund & Bendix, 2002). Monitoring of project planning activities increases the
productivity and aids project managers in the evaluation in their management
approach (Khraiwesh, 2013).
Communication
According to Military Handbook 61 “it all starts and ends with
communication” (DoD, 2001, 4-9). Regular and effective communication is a
prerequisite for project teams (Tavčar, Žavbi, Verlinden, & Duhovnik, 2005).
According to Watts (2009), communication is the “single most important” activity
performed by configuration management. Since configuration management
provides support throughout the lifecycle of the product, it is inevitable that a
configuration management system will streamline communication and ease the
management of the product (Dart, 1991). When communication is made a priority
within the project, unnecessary changes are avoided and the likelihood of incorrect
changes being applied correctly are decreased (Jarratt, Eckert, Caldwell, &
Clarkson, 2011). The Military Handbook 61 explains that the configuration
management process uses communication to define clear goals and objectives,
ensuring that everyone on the project understands the changes, provides feedback,
38
provides the status of information, and provides status for any issues that occur
(DoD, 2001).
Effective communication. Effective communication supports the
configuration management process by enabling stakeholders to be made aware of
the project status (Ali & Kidd, 2013). Open lines of communication minimizes
risks throughout the project and allows upper management and stakeholders the
ability to stay informed of the status (Martinelli, Rahschulte, & Waddell, 2010).
Configuration management processes are designed to effectively communicate the
status of the configuration items throughout the entire product lifecycle. Groups
must define and share each meaningful concept associated with the product and
these must be easily understood by the entire group to effectively communicate
(Bendix et al., 2012; Schamp & Owens, 1997).
Lack of effective communication. The inability to effectively
communicate is a major problem within configuration management and has shown
to impede the configuration management process (Ali & Kidd, 2014; Huang &
Mak, 1999; Safdar, Malik, & Anjum, 2015). In fact, when effective
communication is not used, research has found about a 40% increase in time used
for the implementation of configuration management changes (Tavčar &
Duhovnik, 2005). Two-thirds of technical changes could be eliminated with the
establishment of better communication (Clark & Fujimoto,1991). To decrease the
amount of time to implement changes, configuration management tools can provide
39
easily accessible technical documentation and establish workflows between team
members (Tavčar & Duhovnik, 2005). Communication failures cause many
unnecessary changes and result in an increase of old data being used by decision-
making groups (Jarratt et al., 2011).
Timing
Time is an important commodity to projects because it greatly impacts the
order in which tasks are accomplished, milestones are reached, and resources are
allocated (Farrell, 2017). During the life cycle of the product, the goal is to ensure
that the as-designed configuration at any point in time meets the needs and
requirements of the customer and that the final product completely meets these
needs (Shiau, 2011) Thus, making the responsibilities of configuration management
very important throughout DoD acquisition projects. It is not unusual for products
to have long life cycles, sometimes resulting in a long period before the actual
product is introduced (Morris & Pinto, 2010). The speed at which product changes
are applied and their availability of the information related to changes can greatly
impact the project schedule (Simpson & Simpson, 2001). Timing can directly
influence the rate at which a change is required to be processed and alter the project
team ability to meet schedule demands (Whyte et al., 2016). The need to meet the
schedule needs of the project directly impacts the configuration management
process (Whyte et al., 2016).
40
Resources
It is recommended that resources be dedicated to configuration management
to support project objectives (Gonzalez, 2002). Making sure that enough resources
are available such as computers, finances, and project staff is paramount to
achieving the goals of the project and supporting the configuration management
process (Ali & Kidd, 2013; Khraiwesh, 2013). Project managers must decide
upfront how much they are willing to allocate to configuration management
resources (Gonzalez, 2002). Ideally, configuration management practices are
deeply-rooted at the beginning and end of the development of the product,
however, large projects that have many configuration items and several change
proposals require at least a full-time person dedicated to configuration management
(Gonzalez, 2002).
Lack of resources. Configuration management activities are rated less
significant than quality and project management activities, resulting in minimal
resources being allocated to properly implement the configuration management
process (Morris & Pinto, 2010). It has an “image problem” that is considered
“nothing more than a glorified change control or version management - a costly
exercise in form filling, with little or no technical content” (Morris & Pinto, 2010,
p. 108). When configuration management is not seen as an essential part of the
overall project management role, changes are not properly controlled and support
documentation not updated (Morris & Pinto, 2010; Safdar et al., 2015).
41
Inadequate Planning and Preparation
Not effectively planning or properly preparing will limit the implementation
of the configuration management process (Brouse, 2008). Failure to properly plan
and prepare for the required configuration management process will result in the
engineering team not having clearly defined customer requirements to design a
product, and communication within the team will not exist (Vieira & Pereira,
2016). Brouse (2008) details some of the activities required to adequately plan and
prepare for the configuration management activities on the project:
• Identifying products to be properly managed and the
configuration management tool to use
• Identifying procedures and processes to follow and the cost and
effort needed to perform these activities
• Assignment of tasks and schedules for defining each product
baseline and management of changes (Brouse, 2008)
Not detailing any of abovementioned activities could result in added cost,
extended schedule, and hinder the development of quality products (Brouse, 2008).
Management Support
Management support is critical to the establishment the configuration
management process and is described as an essential business activity (Ali & Kidd,
2015). It can improve the implementation of the configuration management
process throughout the project (Dart, 1992). More specifically, top management
42
support is essential to the configuration management process (Ali & Kidd, 2013).
When top management is involved the project team has a higher morale, overall
loyalty, and increased retention rate (Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). To meet technical
requirements and reach project goals, top management establishes open
communication channels with project teams and stakeholders, which serves as the
liaison between the executive levels of the organization and project managers in
projects (Cragg, Mills, & Suraweera, 2013; Manfreda & Stemberger, 2014; Too &
Weaver, 2014). Therefore, top management support is critical to project success or
failure (Ahmed & bin Mohamad, 2016; Li, Chen, Lee, & Rao, 2013).
The lack of top management support. The lack of top management
support directly impacts the configuration management process (Ali & Kidd, 2015;
Safdar et al., 2015). Top management provides support to the project, streamlines
system changes and identifies needs and responsibilities of project stakeholders
(Boonstra, 2013). When top management support is not present, the configuration
management process suffers greatly from the lack of financial, material, and human
support and is unable to provide enough support to the project (Ahmed & bin
Mohamad, 2016; Kuratko, Hornsby, & Covin, 2014).
Effective Working Relationship Among Government and Contractor
Configuration Management, Systems Engineering, Logistics & Quality
In the defense acquisition environment, the United States Government
places a lot of configuration control authority and responsibility on contractors, but
43
both are involved in the configuration management process (DoD, 2001).
Contractors are responsible for ensuring they adhere to guidance handbooks and
standards for how to carry out their configuration management process (DoD,
2001). An effective configuration management process spans across government
and contracting functional areas including engineering, logistics, contracts, and
manufacturing (Xu et al., 2013).
Facilities
The United States government often mandates that government contractors
use certain configuration management facilities to acquire a contract (Dart, 1992).
Such facilities must adhere to engineering practices, manufacturing requirements,
and standards to ensure control and quality of procurement (Dart, 1992).
According to Lester (2014), each configuration process must consider the facilities
and arrangements in which the configuration activities will be taking place.
Training
Training can also improve the ability to perform all the configuration
management processes. Professionals with a configuration management
certification and training are knowledgeable about the limitations of each process
and are better prepared to effectively implement each process (Ali & Kidd, 2015).
A major requirement for career recognition within the discipline of configuration
management derives from education and training (Morris & Pinto, 2010).
44
Professional development. Professional development affords individuals
the ability to develop new knowledge and skillsets that will improve their
performance in the workplace (Mizell, 2010). Project managers’ main focus is to
complete the project, but they must also recognize the importance of career
development for staff within the project (Darrin et al., 2017). Demonstrating a
vested interest in the professional development of configuration management
professionals demonstrates commitment to the employees (Darrin et al., 2017).
Project managers can work with human resource managers to identify and create
training and developmental programs to address the needs of project staff and assist
in the management of change (Darrin et al., 2017).
Despite the benefits of professional development, there is a lack of clear
career progression and training strategies currently dedicated to configuration
management (Burgess, McKee, & Kidd, 2005). This also results in the lack of
knowledgeable candidates to hire and defines the need for adequate training
programs to ensure the competencies are made available throughout the project (Ali
& Kidd, 2013).
Lack of configuration management training. A lack of development of
configuration management professionals can also limit the entire configuration
management process. According to Ali and Kidd (2015), “professional
development is the core issue for any business management process” (p.324).
When organizations do not have professional development as part of their
45
fundamental training programs, they lack the ability to provide awareness for
configuration management methodologies and associated process (Ali & Kidd,
2015). The lack of professional development, education, and training available to
configuration management professionals can contribute to poorly implemented
processes (Morris & Pinto, 2010).
Guidance Handbooks & Standards
Configuration management obtained a great deal of recognition after being
acknowledged in important handbooks and standards (Ali & Kidd, 2013; Niknam,
Bonnal, & Ovtcharova, 2013).
Handbooks. Currently, MIL-HDBK-61 revision A, dated 7 February 2001,
is the most current guidance for the effective application of configuration
management. MIL-HDBK-61, Military Handbook: Configuration Management
Guidance, provides guidance for government personnel for their responsibilities
and details the expectations of the government for contractors (Quigley &
Robertson, 2015). It’s intent is “for managers within the DoD assigned the
responsibility for configuration management to use for guidance on how to warrant
the application of product and data configuration management to defense material
items, in each phase of their life cycle” (DoD, 2001). It is designed to provide
support for DoD acquisition managers, logistic managers, and additional personnel
responsible for configuration management actions and processes throughout the life
cycle of defense systems (DoD, 2001).
46
Standards. ISO/IEC 12207 focuses on the importance of having a defined
configuration management strategy and policy that includes general guidelines for
its planning and execution. It provides rationale maintaining configuration items to
guarantee changes to the baselines are accounted for (ISO, 2008).
Standard ISO 1007:2003 provides a robust understanding of the
configuration management discipline and briefly details the roles and
responsibilities associated with the process. This standard details the five stages of
the process as planning, identification, change control, status accounting, and
auditing (ISO, 2003).
EIA-649-B is the United States military standard that provides a
comprehensive overview of the configuration management principles and practices
(TechAmerica, 2011). The primary focus of this standard is to reinforce the need
for projects to use the planning and management aspects of configuration
management throughout the product lifecycle (Niknam et al., 2013).
Other Industry Factors
There are an additional set of factors that affect the configuration
management process within other industries. These factors have been collected
from a detailed literature review about industries outside DoD projects.
47
Competent Configuration Management Professionals
There is no formal academic degree that specializes in configuration management.
Most entering the profession of configuration management have no specialized
academic training in it and must rely on the standards which were merely
developed as guideposts and their work experience (Quigley & Robertson, 2015).
A “good configuration management professional must not only be a visionary who
is familiar with the requirements that pertain to the product throughout its life cycle
and the development of the product itself, but also should be capable of
recognizing and orchestrating the complexities of the data associated with the
product” (Quigley & Robertson, 2015, p. 211). Competent configuration
management practitioners are proficient in understanding how the project operates
so they can better facilitate changes and understand their impact to the overall
product (Quigley & Robertson, 2015). These competencies are often obtained
through work experience and provide the configuration management professional
with the ability to manage changes in accordance with the vision and mission of the
project (Leon, 2015). There is currently no formal research that examines the
influence of the academic qualification of and years of experience of configuration
management professionals within DoD projects.
Effective Leadership
Leadership differs from management because a formal managerial rank
does not equal being able to lead effectively and the ability to influence others
48
extends beyond the hierarchy of management (Zhao, Hwang, & Lee, 2016). The
influence of an effective leader correlates to project success and increases
relationships among team members (Yang et al., 2011). An effective leader of
configuration management on a project will reach for best-in-class processes and
continuous improvement by swaying both top management and stakeholders to
support the identified process (Watts, 2015). Configuration management
professionals are not just responsible for managing products across the full life
cycle but also must obtain the support of management (Morris & Pinto, 2010).
Previous Management Experience
According to Sorrentino (2016) the “ideal configuration manager should
have a thorough background in new and old techniques, with a diverse knowledge
and wisdom base (p. 2).” Credibility is built by having knowledge about the tasks
and the external environment facing the team (Whetten & Cameron, 2016, p.508).
When configuration management professionals have previous management
experience, they are able to they serve as champions for effective implementation
of the process (Ali & Kidd, 2015). Without the proper career exposure,
configuration management professionals are unable to adequately decide the scope
required of configuration management, review contractual obligations, understand
milestones, and properly forecast audit dates (Lester, 2014).
49
Vision and Policies for Configuration Management Processes
Vision clarifies where an effective configuration management process is
headed; mission justifies the existence of the process; and policies seek to identify
‘in what way’ to implement the process (Ali & Kidd, 2013). Collectively, these
assist all parties responsible with a better understanding of the guidelines associated
with the process while seeking to reach the goals of the project. By identifying the
key roles and responsibilities, templates, tools, and specific processes to be used
within a project, a clear path for communication can be established and any
miscommunication weakened (Darrin et al., 2017). The likelihood of projects
meeting their criteria is enhanced when procedures are in place and resources are
allocated fairly (Unterhitzenberger & Bryde, 2019). Xu et al. (2013) described the
following three practices that defense organizations implement to ensure effective
configuration management process:
• Standardization of the processes
• Extending the configuration management with advanced capabilities
• Enabling configuration management (p. 184).
50
Effective Control of Configuration Management Processes of Vendors
Configuration processes of vendors must not be overlooked but thoroughly
monitored (EIA-649, 2011). Management must ensure that vendors production
processes adhere to the identified configuration management process (Vieira &
Pereira, 2016). By keeping an eye on the subcontractors and suppliers, one can
ensure the quality of products being delivered (Ali & Kidd, 2013; Quigley &
Robertson, 2015). Each project must have configuration management professionals
that are a step ahead of subcontractors and vendors to ensure they are in control and
leading the process (Sorrentino, 2016).
Flexibility in Configuration Management Practices
The configuration management process should be flexible to assist its users
in execution (Gonzalez & Zaalouk, 1997). Management determines how change is
managed (Jarratt et al., 2011), thus, the configuration management process
managers should seek to match the level of product development, i.e. a space
shuttle having a more stringent process than the development of a ball point pen
(Ali & Kidd, 2013). A configuration management process should be flexible and
support the stakeholders and project requirements (Morris & Pinto, 2010).
Lack of Flexibility in Configuration Management Processes
The process of configuration management should not impede product
development due to rigidness (Gonzalez & Zaalouk, 1997). It must be flexible to
51
support the long periods of undercity and frequent changes found in complex
projects such as those in the DoD (Darrin et al., 2017). Complex projects cannot be
managed by rigid processes than hinder the ability to quickly change to meet ever-
changing customer requirements (Darrin et al., 2017).
Configuration Management Planning
The planning of configuration management processes is critical to any
project and often used to determine the effectiveness of process improvements
(Brouse, 2008; Sachs, 2009). It ensures the correlation between the product
definition, the product’s configuration, and supporting product documentation is
established (EIA-649, 2011).
Configuration management planning is the foundation to the overall process
(Lyon, 2008). The configuration management plan is essential to the success of the
project and vital to reaching predefined goals (Ruiz-Martin & Poza, 2015). It
identifies the processes used throughout the lifecycle, specifies support documents,
key terms, contract deliverables, milestones, and schedules (Lyon, 2008). In
addition, it describes the roles and responsibilities of configuration management
personnel and will be used as guidance for all subcontractors (Vieira & Pereira,
2016).
Lack of configuration management plans. Despite their importance,
configuration management plans are often not generated, not properly developed,
and not consistently updated through the project; hindering the overall process of
52
configuration management (Ali & Kidd, 2014). Burgess et al. (2003) found that
only 72% of companies have configuration management plans and only 41% used
them as reference. Failure to plan and prepare greatly hinders the joint development
of the product and impedes communication throughout the organization (Vieira &
Pereira, 2016).
Continuous Improvement in Configuration Management Practices
Continuous improvements allow project managers to apply corrective
action where needed in the midst of an ever-changing environment (Guess, 2006).
The process of configuration management on a project never ends and continuous
improvement should be constantly applied (Hancock, 1993). With automation of
processes increasing, implementation of new tools and methods add to continuous
improvement within the process of configuration management (Ali & Kidd, 2013).
Tools for Configuration Management
Configuration management tools automate, standardize, and modularize the
administrative tasks of configuration management (Hintsch, Görling, & Turowski,
2016). They are also used to increase the amount of product control and
organizational support from the initial stages of a project throughout the
manufacturing (Phelan et al., 2017; Renu, 2013). Tools also aid in management of
the proposed configuration changes while providing real-time status of the product
during the lifecycle (Bartusevics & Novickis, 2015; Phelan et al., 2017).
53
Configuration management tools enable all parties the ability to work in a
collaborative environment that notifies users when changes occur (Phelan et al.,
2017).
User-friendly software tools. Rickabaugh (1994) observed when the
configuration management process was not done well in a manual system, it
became dreadful in an automated system. Therefore, software tools must be user
friendly and meet the needs of the desired configuration management process to be
effective and add value to the project (Ali & Kidd, 2013). User-friendly tools
improve the configuration management process by providing a non-technical
service with the ease of a mouse click (Hintsch et al., 2016). Simple tools
effortlessly integrate into the project environment and easily co-exist with all other
tools (Dart, 1991). As a result, effective configuration management tools can
reduce cost, minimize risks, and provide real-time status of product development
(Delaet, Joosen, & Van Brabant, 2010).
Lack of effective configuration management tools. The lack of
configuration management tools can hinder the proper control of assets and related
information required for operation and delivery of the product (Ali & Kidd, 2014;
Cantamessa, Montagna, & Neirotti, 2012; Guess, 2006; Safdar et al., 2015).
Without effective configuration management tools, deployment of pertinent
information throughout the project is hindered and the ability to efficiently manage
changes to the product is decreased (Fischer et al., 2014). However, project
54
managers can seek to implement a robust configuration management tool by
ensuring the following needs are met when selecting a tool:
• The ability to easily understand the interconnections between
configuration items
• Ability to scan for errors and highlight the source of problems
throughout system landscapes
• Ability to understand the impact of potential changes and the affect
it may have on existing configuration items (Phelan et al., 2017).
Stakeholders
Stakeholders are identified as certain groups of individuals that influence
the successful delivery of the outcomes of the project through management of
finances, support, or resources (Bourne, 2015). They can be internal or external to
the project and provide inputs such as required products and services, funding,
approvals, and resources (DeCarlo, 2004). Frequent communication and support
from stakeholders is essential for project success (Darrin & Stadter, 2017). When
stakeholders perceive that their needs are understood they are more likely to be
engaged in project success (Bourne, 2015). Managing the expectations of
stakeholders can close the gap of expectations and lead to the support of the
configuration management process (Ali & Kidd, 2013).
55
Lack of support from stakeholders. Inability to manage communication
with the stakeholder can result in unclear inputs and direction of project goals and
delays in approvals for decision on policies, procedures, equipment, and people
(DeCarlo, 2004). Project documentation obtained from configuration management
activities can be used by stakeholders to determine the status of the project
(Bourne, 2015). However, if stakeholders are not provided with adequate
information, then the project can be seen with a negative viewpoint despite working
efficiently (Frinsdorf, Zuo, & Xia, 2014). Lack of support from stakeholders can
result in failure to obtain necessary sign-offs and approvals of requested changes
often found throughout the configuration management process and can add 50%
more time to the schedule, resulting in unplanned delays and added costs (DeCarlo,
2004).
Effective support from stakeholders. To obtain stakeholder support,
Kivilä, Martinsuo, and Vuorinen (2017) suggest placing a high emphasis on getting
to know each stakeholder and their expectations through stakeholder engagement.
Support from stakeholders throughout the project can reduce the level of
uncertainty and is preferable to having stakeholders being disappointed by the
unexpected outcome of the project (Atkinson & Ward, 2006). The support of
stakeholders impacts the overall configuration management process by establishing
the ability to plan, set milestones, and coordinate change control procedures and
processes (Atkinson & Ward, 2006).
56
Organization Culture
Organization culture is a set of shared values and norms that informs
employees how they should feel, perceive, think, and behave in relation to the
problems of the organization (Hartnell, 2016). It is a source of social control that
influences what followers do and how they go about doing it (Klimoski, 2013).
Organizational culture aids in the employees understanding of their environments
and directs them to a desired behavior (Hartnell, 2016). It heightens the awareness
of the configuration management role and promotes a more integrative and
effective processes (Morris & Pinto, 2010).
Teamwork
Teamwork is important to the project because it helps define roles,
encourages a group of diverse people to work towards accomplishing a common
goal, and collectively rectifies tactical problems (Matthews & McLees, 2015).
Teamwork also fosters the opportunity to learn individual talents, background
experiences, and team members’ preferences while improving job satisfaction
(Martinelli et al., 2010). Project teams must naturally progress through various
stages of development, often managing conflict and unproductive tensions before
finding a common ground and experiencing the benefits of teamwork (Matthews &
McLees, 2015). The role of a configuration management professional includes
being able to coordinate changing activities and aid in resolving conflicts among
57
the team (Hormozi, McMinn, & Nzeogwu, 2000). The configuration management
process requires involvement from the entire project team (Darrin & Stadter, 2017).
Recognition
Recognition can be a monetary incentive, receiving an award for a
meaningful task, or even simply a positive interaction from leadership
demonstrating appreciation (Kosfeld, Neckermann, & Yang, 2017). It positively
influences motivation and leads to increased commitment while adding meaning to
tasks performed on the project (Ashraf, Bandiera, & Lee, 2014). The configuration
management process benefits from the recognition of employee’s efforts (Ali &
Kidd, 2013).
Lack of recognition. In contrast, lack of recognition results in decreased
performance and demotivates (Bradler, Dur, Neckermann, & Non, 2016). Lack of
recognition affects the configuration management process because professionals
feel undervalued and not appreciated, leading them to underperform and explore
other career paths (Burgess et al., 2005). Configuration management is perceived
to be a required evil and of no importance except when something doesn’t go as
planned (Ali & Kidd, 2014).
Lack of Career Progression for Configuration Management Professionals
Researchers posit the lack of recognition with a lack of career progression
for configuration management professionals (Ali & Kidd, 2014). The absence of
58
dedicated career planning and the scarcity of senior leaders with responsibility for
the process do little to provide incentives to or retain configuration management
professionals (Ali & Kidd, 2014). Researchers even found that enforced
implementation of best practices in configuration management did not improve the
career progression or development of these professionals (De Oliveira,Valle, &
Mahler, 2010).
Politics-Free Project Environment
The configuration management process is used throughout the project and
works best in a politics-free environment among project members that have a
willingness to contribute (Watts, 2010). Failure to appreciate differences and poor
cooperation is a main hurdle in configuration management process (Jarratt et al.,
2011). The process can suffer greatly from negative influences received from
project team members or stakeholders not wanting to comply (Watts, 2010).
Committed and Creative Employees
Creativity is critical to innovation, successful completion of objectives, and
long-term performance in the workplace (Hoff & Öberg, 2015). Committed and
creative employees are considered a competitive advantage over competitors
because the implementation of their ideas benefits the entire effort (Ali & Kidd,
2013; Hoff & Öberg, 2015). Their creative ideas lead to enhanced extensions of
existing products, services, or processes (Hoff & Öberg, 2015). When
59
configuration management professionals are committed to the project, they are
more likely to be able to articulate the processes that supports the existence of a
proper configuration management organization (Sachs, 2010).
Proper Configuration Management Organization
The configuration management organizational structure is critical to its
process (Metreweli, 2008). Factors that influence the organizational structure
include size of the project, product type, and the multisite development or
geographical location (Kaariainen, 2007).
Size of the project. Despite the size of the project configuration
management is a necessity (Leon, 2000; Metreweli, 2008). In a small project, a
single person can oversee the configuration management process or even the
project manager can be responsible for the process (Whitgift, 1991). However, in a
moderately large project consisting of hundreds of people, there will need to be a
team dedicated to the entire configuration management process (Kaariainen, 2007).
Product type. The configuration management process used is also
influenced by the product type (Stevens & Wright, 1991). According to Jonassen
Hass (2003), the required formality and level of automation varies depending on
the safety criticality and complexity of each product. For example, in a safety
critical product that has the potential to cause bodily harm to people, a more
detailed level of configuration management processes will need to be applied
(Stevens & Wright, 1991).
60
Multisite development. Multisite development is defined as the
development work that is spread across several geographically distributed sites
(Kaariainen, 2007). Multisite development means that information needs to be
automated, responsibility for items identified, and any difference in processes
between sites made clear (Hass, 2003). Thus, it is very difficult to maintain a
configuration management process in a distributed environment (Battin, Crocker,
Kreidler, & Subramanian, 2001). Some of the potential problems are related to
security, communication, and infrastructure (Rahikkzla, 2000). However, these
challenges can be reduced by maximizing the use of support tools and enforcement
of rigorously configuration management processes (Ebert & De Neve, 2001).
Implementation Costs Outweigh Configuration Management Benefits
A robust configuration management process can reduce costs and delays
associated with the unnecessary reworking of activities (Fournier, 1999; Kerzner &
Kerzner, 2017). Inability to control changes results in a chaotic environment and
continuous interruptions to project schedule (Fournier, 1999). Configuration
management systems are not free; in addition to initial purchase of support tools,
costs are acquired due to required maintenance and ongoing updates (Gonzalez,
2002). Configuration management tools are essential in automating system
configurations and managing the effective deployment of pertinent information to
all team members (Fischer et al., 2014). However, if project managers decide not to
61
employ configuration management systems, the following costs will still be
incurred and limit the configuration management process (Gonzalez, 2002):
• Manually deciding what system components must change due to
requirement changes
• All parties will not be made aware the requirement changes
• Implementation and re-work must occur to properly implement the
changes
• Loss of productivity due when a new version of a component is
incorrectly replaced and rework must occur to revert back to the
latter revision
• Replacement of the wrong component because it was not clearly
apparent which component needed replacing
Lack of Authority to Implement Configuration Principles/Polices
Projects managers can differ with subordinates about how to reach
objectives and criteria (Laslo-Roth, Hadad, Keren, & Laslo, 2018). Project
managers can rely on their authority to implement change control methods that do
not align with best practices of the configuration management process (PMI, 2007).
Although the configuration management professionals govern the process, project
managers have the final say on what configuration management principles and
polices they will adhere too (Ali & Kid, 2014).
62
Lack of Centralized Body for the Governance of Configuration
Management
Chaos exists when there is a lack centralized configuration management
policies, practices, and processes such as a guide (Safdar et al., 2015; Watts, 2015).
Burgess et al. (2005) examined how the discipline of configuration management is
practiced in the European Aerospace industry. They concluded that the role of
configuration management is disjointed throughout the European Aerospace
industry and its influence is underestimated. Burgess et al. (2005) suggested future
research to examine how configuration management is carried out in aerospace and
other risk-critical industries. They also concluded that achieving effective
configuration management is not simple and future research should be conducted.
Lack of Maintaining Consistency in Configuration Management
Practices Across Projects
Fowler (1996) examined the configuration management related perceptions
of management in the shipbuilding industry. The case study found that despite the
principles being identified and accessible, it is a challenging endeavor to implement
configuration management into the organization. He found that the existence of a
range of varying concepts of configuration management led to the acceptance of
inconsistent accountability practices. He also found that the core attributes of
configuration management need to be dispersed to lower level senior management
personnel throughout the organization.
63
Burgess et al. (2003) examined how configuration status accounting is
carried out in the European aerospace industry where it is considered essential due
to the safety-critical products being developed. It was found that configuration
status accounting is not properly used during the early stages of product
development, increasing the potential for errors to occur during the release phase.
According to Burgess et al. (2003) the configuration status accounting function is
costly and time-consuming, therefore it is only executed when affordable. The
conclusion was that since configuration management is mandated within the
European aerospace industry, it is not valued and its importance to the accuracy of
data is not substantial.
Poorly Defined Configuration Management Requirements and Process
Poorly defined configuration management requirements and processes
limits project managers’ ability to execute the plans of the project (Pinto, 2013).
Configuration management must be a disciplined approach to ensure changes are
done in an orderly manner (Wateridge, 1999). Collectively, the processes,
procedures, and users of the configuration management system are fundamental to
ensure the integrity of the data throughout the lifecycle (Whyte et al., 2016).
However, when users fail to follow these processes, problems occur to the product
information and productivity (Hameri 1997; Hameri & Nitter, 2002).
In support of configuration management, Hameri’s study (1997) found
several motivations for effective implementation. These include:
64
• Control of specification changes: The need to reduce the mistakes
made from incorrect processing of specification change in project-
oriented environments. The essence of configuration management is
to control these changes so that the functionality is maintained, and
the customer needs are met (Hameri, 1997).
• Common understanding of the configuration status: The project
manager must have a clear understanding of the principles of design.
To meet this objective, configuration management can provide an
accessible mean to access information that provides key parameters,
measures and standards, and quality requirements of the system
configuration.
• Documentation of specification change history: The changes made
throughout the history of the project are essential to long term
projects. Configuration management can provide traceability of any
changes which might be used during the commissioning, operation,
and maintenance.
Outdated Configuration Management Process
The meaning of configuration management has evolved greatly since its
origins in the mid-20th century (Whyte et al., 2016). No longer is the norm a slow
65
paper-based process, but rather a faster automated approach that extends the entire
lifecycle (Whyte et al., 2016).
Extreme Project Pressure
Extreme project pressure can derive from high change, high speed, the
expectation to continuously adjust to competitor threats, new technologies, new
updates to government regulations, or last-minute changes from the customer
(DeCarlo, 2004). Project managers must also adhere to strict deadlines that can
regulate the work and interim goals of projects which can ultimately lead to high
levels of stress (Nordqvist, Hovmark, & Zika-Viktorsson, 2004). In addition, many
projects have geographically dispersed teams that place strains on communication
and loyalty (DeCarlo, 2004). Despite these pressures, the success and failure of
projects is ultimately determined by how they reach and manage their goals
(Lehtonen & Martinsuo, 2006). Project goals are achieved through efficient project
control that relies on an effective configuration management process (Darrin &
Stadter, 2017; Kivilä et al., 2017).
Project managers often have the misconception that the configuration
management process is complicated, time consuming, and expensive, and seek to
bypass its implementation (Darrin & Stadter, 2017). To achieve short-term
objectives and meet the immediate need of customers, project managers often
dismiss the need to utilize a configuration management process (Ali & Kidd, 2013).
Project managers fail to understand, that when faced with extreme project pressure,
66
configuration management can increase the levels of product assembly, timeliness,
and quality, thus reducing overall costs (Darrin & Stadter, 2017).
Lack of Configuration Management Support in the Customer World
Lack of configuration management support by customers prohibits accurate
reporting of project requirements throughout the product lifecycle and threatens the
development of a quality product (Ali & Kidd, 2014). Effective configuration
control satisfies both the customer and project with benefits including enhancement
of communication among project team members, streamlining communication with
the customer, heightening of technical intelligence, reducing confusion over
changes, elimination of unnecessary changes, and providing documentation of all
changes throughout the lifecycle (Kivilä et al., 2017). Configuration management
requires the support of the entire project team and especially its customers (Darrin
& Stadter, 2017). Often, the acceptance of configuration management depends on
marketing its benefits and proper planning of its implementation (Schamp &
Owens, 1997). When projects use the phased approach to introduce the
configuration capabilities, wider acceptance is achieved (Schamp & Owens, 1997).
Kerzner and Kerzner (2017) detailed the overall benefits when the customer was
pleased with the configuration management process:
• Better communication between the project staff and customer
• Enhancement of technical intellect
67
• Reduction in unknown reasoning for changes
• Proper review of changes
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework for the researcher was human capital theory
based on an in-depth review of the current literature and its application to the
research topic. Prior to the twenty-first century, tangible assets were a rationale for
increased productivity and project success (McCracken, McIvor, Treacy, & Wall
2017). However, these physical resources can easily be purchased or sold
(Rothaermel, 2015). According to Becker (2009) physical resources only explain a
relatively small part of the growth. Managers today realize that intangible assets,
such as the abilities and skills of the workers are essential to the effectiveness of the
project (McCracken et al., 2017). Human capital is essential in generating and
developing creative ideas and knowledge through the sharing of knowledge (Han,
Han, & Brass, 2014). This theory suggests that individuals who have academic
qualifications and work experience will have more skills and abilities than those
who do not (McCracken et al., 2017).
In 1961, Schultz developed the human capital theory while exploring the
cost of education as an investment (Pijalovic, 2013). It refers to “the knowledge,
skills, and abilities of the people employed in an organization” (Schultz, 1961, p.
140). Schultz included the importance of ‘investment’ in the description of human
68
capital stating “all human abilities to be either innate or acquired.
Attributes…which are valuable and can be augmented by appropriate investment
will be human capital” (Schultz, 1961, p. 21).
Becker (1993, p. 3) would later include ‘health’ defining human capital as
“knowledge, information, ideas, skills, and health of individuals.” Bontis, Bart,
and Serenko (1999) expounded the concept of human capital by emphasizing the
importance of ‘innovation, change and creativity’ while highlighting the role of
motivation. Bontis et al. states:
“Human capital is the human factor in the organization, the combined
intelligence, skills and expertise that gives the organization its distinctive
character. The human elements of the organization are those that are
capable of learning, changing, innovating and providing the creative thrust
which if properly motivated can ensure the long-term survival of the
organization” (p. 391).
According to McCracken et al. (2017) the ‘long-term survival of the organization’
is suggestive of the business being able to sustain itself with human capital.
Thomas, Smith, and Diez (2013) defines human capital as “the people, their
performance and their potential in the organization” (p. 3). The term ‘potential’
alludes to the ability of employees being able to enhance their skill sets and
capabilities (McCracken et al., 2017). Dess and Picken (1999) also felt that
employees can learn abilities that would improve their fundamental knowledge.
69
According to Dess and Picken human capital describes “the individual capabilities,
knowledge, skills and experience of the company’s employees and managers, as
they are relevant to the task at hand, as well as the capacity to add to this reservoir
of knowledge, skills, and experience through individual learning” (p. 8). Finally,
Frank and Bernanke (2007) and Acemoglu and Autor (2009) placed great value on
the ‘productivity’ of the worker in their definitions.
Overall these definitions of human capital focus on the capabilities of the
individual workers. The academic qualification and work experiences embedded in
the notion of human capital are the drivers of strategy and performance within the
project (Crook, Todd, Combs, Woehr, & Ketchen, 2011). These individual traits
can be enhanced or diluted by various factors, thus impacting the very business
practice they are there to support (Turner, 2016). According to Brown, Adams, and
Amjad (2007), there is great importance in examining the academic qualification
and work experience that individuals possess and the factors that impact their
ability to complete tasks. The human capital theory posits a positive correlation
between academic qualification and work experience with an increase in skills and
productivity (Becker, 1993). For the purpose of this study, academic qualification
refers to the level of education one has obtained, i.e. doctoral degree, master’s
degree, bachelor’s degree and associate degree (Ali, 2014).
The use of human capital principles in evaluating the factors that impact the
success of the overall configuration management process is not currently found in
70
literature. There are three reasons to use the theoretical lens of human capital
principles in this study. First, configuration management is a discipline that is
dependent upon several other interrelated management skills (DoD, 2001). These
include human skill, conceptual skill, and technical skills (DoD, 2001). In addition,
to the responsibilities of managing people, effective configuration management
professionals must possess knowledge of business operations, and knowledge of
how to use project tools to store knowledge (Quigley & Robertson, 2015). Thus,
successful configuration management processes depend greatly on human capital
that stems from the configuration management professional (Morris & Pinto,
2010).
Second, the configuration management process in DoD project exists to
identify and assess changes to the product baseline, coordinate these changes across
various functional areas, oversee the authorization of these changes, and notify
stakeholders (Crawford, 2014). It directly influences the bottom line of the project
and the configuration management professionals’ personal experiences impact the
sound decisions made in the management of changes to the product (Quigley &
Robertson, 2015).
Third, the configuration management process is viewed as a service
orientated activity (Niknam et al., 2013). The primary output of configuration
management is not a product or a physical output (Quigley & Robertson, 2015).
Researchers observed that service-based functions have a strong dependence on the
71
knowledge and experience embodied by their personnel (Laursen, Mahnke, &
Vejrup-Hansen, 2005; Pennings, Lee, & Witteloostuijn, 1998). Configuration
management professionals depend almost exclusively on the knowledge and
experience to assist in the evaluation of change requests and must consider the
impact the change has on the entire project and stakeholders’ expectations (Niknam
et al., 2013). Collectively, these three points all suggest that the capabilities of
configuration management professionals’ activities can be considered very reliant
upon the principles of human capital represented in the configuration management
professional and/or the entire team.
According to human capital theory, an individual’s academic qualification
plays an important role in both the employee and project performance (Becker
1993; Schultz, 1961). Most research finds a positive link between individual
academic qualification and that of project performance (Becker, 2011). Benson,
Finegold, and Mohrman’s (2004) research concluded that when individuals earned
their graduate degrees, as opposed to bachelor’s degrees, they were more likely to
seek employment elsewhere. Koster, De Grip, and Fouarge (2011) found that when
the employer invested in degrees for their workforce there was a decrease in
turnover. Bapna, Langer, Mehra, Gopal, and Gupta (2013) found that investment in
academic qualifications had a greater impact on individual performance. With other
researchers stating that academic qualification course results in a 2.14% increase of
performance for an employee (McCracken et al., 2017).
72
The human capital theory also states that work experience is beneficial in
providing individuals with valuable skills that benefit the project (Brown et al.,
2007, p. 77). Most entering the profession of configuration management have no
specialized academic training in configuration management and must rely on the
standards and their work experience, which were merely developed as guideposts
(Quigley & Robertson, 2015). Understanding the configuration management
process is often gained through work experience and that knowledge provides the
configuration management professional with the ability to manage changes in
accordance with the vision and mission of the project (Leon, 2015). Configuration
management professionals that have previous work experience often serve as
champions for effective implementation of the overall process (Ali & Kidd, 2015).
The configuration management process in DoD projects is human-centric.
Due to the mission of DoD projects, there is pressure to secure adequate
configuration management professionals to ensure project information is properly
managed (DoD, 2001). Increasing knowledge through academic qualifications and
work experience should provide configuration management professionals with a
greater knowledge base to successfully carry out tasks (Becker, 1993). Within DoD
projects, the overall configuration management process is not implemented
correctly despite various standards and regulations governing its existence (Ali &
Kidd, 2014). Significance is found in the configuration management professional’s
perceptions of the relevant factors that facilitate or obstruct the process they
73
directly oversee. This study sought to explore the relevancy of these factors from
the perception of configuration management professionals. Emphasis was made to
determine any significant correlation between the criticality of factors based on the
academic qualifications and years of experience of configuration management
professionals supporting DoD projects.
There is now a growing interest of how human capital directly impacts the
best practices they support (McCracken et al., 2017). According to Bontis and
Serenko (2009) it is important to evaluate the impact of academic qualification and
work experience to ensure that the required effect is achieved and identify anything
that prevents human capital from thriving. Based on a review of the literature, the
researcher predicted a positive correlation between the criticality of factors based
on the academic qualifications and years of experience of configuration
management professionals supporting DoD projects. Bontis and Serenko (2009)
state that characteristics of a successful projects are obtained through academic
qualification and work experience. Academic qualification can increase job-
relevant skills, while work experience can improve personnel relations within the
project (Bontis & Serenko, 2009). Project team members bring their own value-
adding capital that form part of the project’s capital base (Turner, 2016). This
human capital that each project team member brings derives from academic
qualification and work experience (Turner, 2016).
74
Synthesis
The purpose of this study was to explore the factors that influence the
success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. The
perceptions of the configuration management professionals were used to obtain
information about the factors that facilitate and obstruct the success of the overall
configuration management process. This study was significant because there is a
paucity of quantitative research on the perceptions of configuration management
professionals supporting DoD projects. This study explored the relevancy of these
factors from the perception of configuration management professionals. Emphasis
was made to determine any significant correlation between the criticality of factors
based on the academic qualification and years of experience as a configuration
management professional supporting DoD projects. The researcher used human
capital theory as the framework to guide this study because of the importance it has
on to the overall configuration management process.
The next chapter will discuss the methodology that the researcher used to
collect data and analyze the results from research participants. The literature review
indicates several factors that influence the success of the overall configuration
management process in other industries. Despite the requirement to implement
configuration management within DoD projects, project managers still experience
costly setbacks and fail to meet their objectives due to the inability to properly
manage enormous amounts of product data (Meier, 2013). The literature review
75
highlights an absence of quantitative research that examines the relevancy of the
factors that influence the success of the overall configuration management process
in DoD projects. The literature review also highlights no formal research that
examines the correlation between the configuration management professionals
supporting DoD projects and the selection of the criticality of factors based on the
academic qualification or years of experience.
For years to come, the role of configuration management will be critical to
DoD projects based on the advancement of technology and the rise in
geographically disbursed projects (Muller, 2013). Projects in the DoD rely heavily
on the proper control of product data when making decisions that impact cost,
schedule, and quality. Understanding the factors that facilitate and obstruct the
success of the overall configuration management process will assist in the
identification of an approach to improve configuration management in DoD
projects.
76
Chapter 3
Methodology
Overview
This chapter will describe the quantitative method and process of the study.
The review of literature covered in Chapter 2 provided a framework for the factors
that impact the configuration management process. Furthermore, it has shown
paucity in the studies that have examined the factors that influence the success of
the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. This study sought
to explore the relevancy of these factors from the perception of configuration
management professionals. It also examined the correlation between the
configuration management professional’s academic qualification and years of
experiences and the perception of the critically of each factor. The researcher used
the results of this study to close gaps in the literature found in Chapter 2. Topics
addressed in Chapter 3 include quantitative instrumentation, worldview, research
questions, research design, research approach, population and sample, selection of
participants, instrumentation, procedures, data collections and analysis, ethical
considerations, and the reliability and validity of the study. References of the
scholarly literature which support the research method and data collection method
will also be used in this chapter.
77
Worldview
The social constructivist worldview was used for this study. “Social
constructionist inquiry is principally concerned with explicating the processes by
which people come to describe, explain, or otherwise account for the world
(including themselves) in which they live” (Gergen 1985, p. 266). According to
Creswell (2013), in the social constructivist worldview, persons seek to understand
the world in which they live and work. The goal of this study was to “rely as much
as possible on the participants’ views of the situation” (Creswell, 2013, p. 24-25).
Use of the constructivist worldview allows for participants to share their stories
from their experiences (Power & Gendren, 2015). Drawing from this approach to
research, the researcher sought to explore the experiences of configuration
management professionals that currently support a DoD project.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
The purpose of the research study was to determine the relevancy of the
facilitating and obstructing factors to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. In addition, the intent was to determine the
correlation between the academic qualification and years of experience as a
configuration management professional supporting DoD projects and the criticality
of each factor.
78
Current literature does not account for the factors that impact the overall
configuration management process in DoD projects. In addition, there is paucity of
literature detailing the perceptions of configuration management professionals
supporting DoD projects. The researcher wanted to fill the gaps by examining
different factors that influence the success of the overall configuration management
process in DoD projects utilizing both facilitating and obstructing factors from
other industries identified from an in-depth review of the literature. These factors
are detailed in appendixes A and B.
The research questions and hypotheses that were used to guide the study were:
1. Which factors are perceived to be relevant facilitating factors and obstructing
factors to the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects?
H1: All facilitating factors in Appendix A are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
H2: All obstructing factors in Appendix B are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
2. Is there a correlation between a configuration management professionals’
academic qualification and year of work experience and the perception of the
criticality of the factors?
H3: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ academic qualifications and the criticality
rating of the factors.
79
H4: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ years of experience supporting DoD
projects and criticality of the factors.
Research Method and Design Appropriateness
This study used a nonexperimental, descriptive research design to explore
the relevancy of the facilitating and obstructing factors on the success of the overall
configuration management process in DoD projects. Also, this study used a cross-
sectional survey methodology to determine the correlation between the criticality of
factors and the academic qualification and the years of experience of the
configuration management professional. The instrument for this study was a survey
(see appendix D). Links to the survey were provided to configuration management
professionals that self-identify as currently supporting DoD projects. The
researcher intended to examine descriptive information regarding study variables
and relationships among study variables without making inferences regarding
causality.
This study was divided into two analyses. The first was to identify the
relevancy of the factors using a descriptive research method. The second was a
correlation analysis between the academic qualification and years of experience as
a configuration management professional and the criticality of each factor. The
Spearman Correlation Coefficient (Spearman rho) was used as an index of the
correlation between variables. A correlational design is used to determine whether
80
an independent variable influences the dependent variable (Leedy & Ormrod,
2001). In the current study, the independent variables were the academic
qualification and years of experience as a configuration management professional.
The dependent variable was criticality of the facilitating and obstructing factors.
Kerlinger (1986) stated that “non-experimental research was research with
the purpose of discovering, classifying, and measuring phenomena and the factors
behind such phenomena” (Kerlinger, 1986, p. 26). In a quantitative research study,
a research problem is identified, literature is reviewed, research methodology is
applied, measurements are taken, data is collected and analyzed, and a sample is
reported (Neuman, 2005).
Population and Sample
Population is the group that the researcher will use to gather data for the
study (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006). The accessible population is a population that the
researcher can use to generalize the research, compared to the target population
where the researcher is not able to generalize (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006). The
target population for this study consisted of individuals who self-identified as
configuration management professionals supporting DoD projects for at least one
year and are at least 18 years old.
Configuration management professional’s responsibilities within DoD
projects include ‘ensuring that the operating forces are provided with correctly
“configured” hardware, software, and the information necessary to operate and
81
maintain them effectively’ (DoD, 2001, pg. 3-5). By identifying attributes and
controlling information and changes, configuration management professionals
facilitate the achievements of reliability and maintainability of the product while
supporting the desired cost and schedule requirements of DoD projects
(TechAmerica, 2011). Configuration management principles and functions can be
tailored for each configuration management process to achieve success of the DoD
project (TechAmerica, 2011). The role of the configuration management
professional requires balancing the consistent application of all the configuration
management functions with the appropriate combination of configuration
management tasks and activities throughout the product life (TechAmerica, 2011).
To conduct this study, the researcher used purposeful sampling, ensuring
participants were configuration management professionals supporting DoD projects
(Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2003). Initially the researcher reached out to five
major DoD contracting firms requesting permission to distribute the survey to their
configuration management professionals. The researcher contacted the human
resource department to request permission to include their company configuration
management professionals in this study. The researcher solicited participants from
the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Certification program which
sponsors a configuration management professional certification examination
recognized throughout the defense industry. At last, professional networking
relationships of the researcher were used to obtain contact with configuration
82
management professionals supporting DoD projects because of accessibility to
participants. The goal of the researcher was to obtain 100 configuration
management professionals currently supporting DoD projects.
Selection of Participants
The screening criteria required participants to be current configuration
management professionals supporting a DoD project, have at least one year of
experience in this role, and be at least 18 years of age. The population who self-
identified as meeting the criteria within SurveyMonkey were provided access to the
remaining portions of the online survey.
Instrumentation
The instrument for this study is found in Appendix D. It is divided in three
parts: demographic questions, and relevancy and criticality of facilitating and
obstructing factors questions. The first part, demographic questions, has three
questions in a multiple choice format. The second part to determine the relevancy
of the facilitating and obstructing factors has 39 questions with the responses
corresponding to numerical values on a 5-point continuous scale. The response
choices range from 1 for not at all relevant up to 5 for extremely relevant. The third
part is to determine the criticality of the facilitating and obstructing factors has 39
questions with the responses corresponding to numerical values on a 5-point
continuous scale. The response choices range from 1 for not at all critical up to 5
83
for extremely critical. The instrument was developed based on an in-depth review
of the literature on the configuration management process in other industries.
Following approval of the Institutional Review Board (IRB), a pilot test was
performed to validate the instrument. The results of the pilot study was
incorporated into the final instrument.
The study was conducted via a web-based secure survey that will allow the
researcher the ability to collect information for purposes that were highlighted by
the research questions (Oishi, 2003). The survey instrument was made accessible to
configuration management professionals supporting DoD projects by utilizing
SurveyMonkey. The researcher ensured the survey questions will be meaningful to
the respondents and biased words and phrases will not be used (Fink, 2009). The
survey questions consisted of questions formulated from the review of existing
literature and research related to the problem under investigation.
Data Collection
Data collection steps were performed when conducting the research for this
study as specified by Creswell (2008) and Merriam (2009), these include:
a. locating the participants and/or site
b. obtaining access and building a relationship
c. purposeful sampling
d. collection of data
e. capturing the information
84
f. resolving any field issues that might occur
g. storing data
Following approval from the Florida Institute of Technology’s IRB, the
survey instrument was privately posted to SurveyMonkey. Participants were
emailed the link to the SurveyMonkey website to enable the collection of data. The
SurveyMonkey website was pilot tested prior to the formal release of the actual
instrument to the target population of configuration management professionals who
currently support DoD projects in the SurveyMonkey database. This pilot test
helped illustrate whether the study procedure ran smoothly, provided an estimate of
the time it will take participants to complete the survey, and determined whether
any additional edits are needed (e.g., clarification of instructions).
To collect the quantitative data, the link to the SurveyMonkey website was
sent directly to the configuration management professionals that support DoD
projects. A cover letter accompanied the survey and stated the purpose of the study
(See Appendix C). As a part of the survey preface, Permission and Informed
Consent was included and participants were provided the ability to opt out of the
survey. The expectation was that each participant will complete the 15-20-minute
survey electronically in one session. No personally identifiable data was recorded.
SurveyMonkey was suitable for this study because it can tabulate and track
responses from participants. This web-based survey was able to collect data from a
mix of question types to include nominal dichotomous or internal type questions.
85
Data Analysis
A data file containing all participant responses was downloaded from
SurveyMonkey and used to upload data into Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) for data analysis. SPSS descriptive statistics was used to display
the results of the survey instrument. The hypotheses were examined using
descriptive information (frequencies) and correlations. This study was divided into
two analyses. The first was to identify the relevancy using a descriptive research
method. The second was a correlation analysis between the academic qualification
and the criticality of factors, and the years of experience as a configuration
management professional and the criticality of the factors. This method is most
often used to compare variables that are ordinal and to measure the linear
relationship between sets of ranked data (Altman, 1990). The Spearman Correlation
Coefficient (Spearman rho) was used as an index of the correlation between
variables. The Spearman correlation coefficient is a nonparametric procedure
and measures the strength of the relationship between variables (Pallant, 2010). A
Spearman correlation coefficient was utilized to determine the correlation between
the independent variables and each dependent variable (Pallant, 2010). It provides a
coefficient between -1 and +1 to specify a range of negative to positive correlation.
The correlation approach in SPSS was utilized to determine the strength and
direction (negative or positive) of the relationship between the independent variable
and the dependent variable (Chok, 2010). The independent variables were academic
86
qualification and years of experience as a configuration management professional.
The dependent variable was the criticality of the facilitators and obstructing factors.
The Spearman rho design method was appropriate for this study to discover the
correlation between academic qualification and years of experience as a
configuration management professional and the perception of the criticality of the
factors that influence success of the overall configuration management process.
Ethical Considerations. An IRB application was completed for this study.
Each of the following items were accomplished as stipulated in the IRB
application: participant privacy, confidentiality, benefits and risks, vulnerable
population’s considerations, and data security. The following specifies how each of
these areas were addressed. Participants’ privacy was assured because the survey
instrument did not collect any personally identifiable information. No participant
names were gathered and only personal background information was collected to
ensure confidentiality and privacy.
Survey results were maintained on a password-protected computer system
to eliminate any risks. The findings of the study did not cause any psychological or
emotional harm. The study sought to benefit the current body of knowledge in the
practice of configuration management. Even if negative findings were identified,
they were used to provide constructive feedback not harm.
There are no vulnerable populations and considerations in this study. All
participants were at least 18 years of age and have at least one year of configuration
87
management experience supporting DoD projects. No harm was caused to any
individuals or employers through the survey responses because no personally
identifiable information was gathered.
Data security was provided through the private collection of each individual
survey response for the purposes of statistical analysis. During the collection of
data, the SurveyMonkey platform stored data collected by participants. Following
the completion of collection of data, all information was downloaded to a
password-protected secured computer for analysis. Following publication of the
dissertation report, all analyses were checked by an impartial 3rd party and
transferred to an external hard drive where it will reside until destroyed, five years
later.
Research Positionality. The researcher is currently a senior configuration
management analyst with over ten years of support for DoD projects. The
researcher sought to identify which, if any, factors impact the configuration
management process to improve the DoD projects she supports. Ultimately, each
DoD project serves to meet the need of an overarching mission that will be used in
ensuring the United States of America remains safe. By exploring the configuration
management process in DoD projects, the researcher sought to streamline the
methods used to manage these projects and reduce failure that negatively impacts
cost, schedule, and performance.
88
Validity and Trustworthiness
Validity is defined as “the best available approximation to the truth or
falsity of a given inference, proposition, or conclusion” (Cook & Campbell, 1979,
p. 154). The researcher took steps to provide evidence of validity throughout the
study and to ensure the findings reported were supported by the results of the study.
According to Glesne (2016), validity should be addressed in the design of the
research and during data collection. Peer reviews were used to augment
trustworthiness and as an exterior input into one’s work (Glense, 2006). The
researcher utilized the suggestions of peers from Florida Institute of Technology
during the entire dissertation process.
After receiving the Florida Institute of Technology IRB approval to use a
test pilot study, items were reviewed by subject matter experts (academic
researchers and configuration management professionals) to help determine how
well the survey items represented the constructs of interest. This provided evidence
of content validity. The pilot participants provided their feedback and any
necessary changes to clarify terms or content were made to the survey. This pilot
study was important because it ensured the survey questions were comprehendible
by the participants and render the most accurate conclusions from the questions
being asked (Creswell, 2008).
An additional method to ensure trustworthiness was through clarification of
researcher bias, which defined by Creswell (2013) as ongoing reflection of the
89
researcher to limit personal attitudes, opinions, and perceptions. Trustworthiness
within research relies on the researcher interpreting the meanings of the
participants’ experiences without bias or stereotypes (Chenail, 2012). The
researcher applied evidence that derives from content as a “judgement on the
degree to which the evidence suggests that the items, tasks, or questions” reflected
the study topic (Johnson & Christensen, 2008).
90
Chapter 4
Findings
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relevancy of the facilitating
and obstructing factors to the success of the overall configuration management
process in DoD projects. In addition, the intent was to examine the correlation
between years of experience and academic qualification as well as configuration
management professionals supporting DoD projects and the criticality of each
factor. Configuration management professionals are responsible for ensuring the
configuration management process is successfully executed in DoD projects (DoD,
2001, p. 4-1). Thus, participants of this study were required to be current
configuration management professionals supporting a DoD project, with at least
one year of experience in this role, and be at least 18 years of age. The respondents
with less than a year of experience had access to the demographic questions and
after that they were not allowed to continue the survey. Those persons who self-
identified as meeting the criteria within SurveyMonkey were provided access to the
remaining portions of the online survey. A total of 101 configuration management
professionals accessed the survey, but only 85 complied with the requirements to
participate in the study.
This chapter presents the findings of the study, including a descriptive
statistic of the sample, and the statistical analysis of the results related to the two
91
research questions. The questions that guided this study and which findings are
presented in this chapter are:
Q1. Which factors are perceived to be relevant facilitating factors and
obstructing factors to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects?
Q2. Is there a correlation between a configuration management
professionals’ academic qualification and years of work experience as a
configuration management and the perception of the criticality of the
factors?
Demographic Data
Demographic data collected from study participants included years of
experience as a configuration management professional supporting a DoD project
and academic qualifications. The total years worked as configuration management
professional is demonstrated in Table 1. Most respondents had at least 10 years
(52.8%) of experience as a configuration management professional. Respondents
with 1 to 3 years (19.1%) of experience were slightly larger than those working 4 to
6 years (14.6%). The least number of respondents worked 7 to 9 years (9.0%).
92
Table 1. Demographics: Characteristics of Participants Years Worked
Characteristic
N
%
1 to 3 years
17
19.1
4 to 6 years
13
14.6
7 to 9 years
8
9.0
10 to 12 years
14
15.7
13 to 15 years
16
18.0
16 or more years
17
19.1
The academic qualifications of the participants are shown in Table 2. Most
of the configuration management professional participants had some level of
college (91.5%) ranging between associate to doctoral degree. Almost half of the
participants reported that they had at least a bachelor’s degree (47.2%). Some
participants also reported having a master’s degree (36.0%) and one percent had a
doctoral degree. The remaining (5.6%) had no college degree.
Table 2. Demographics: Characteristics of Participants Academic Qualifications
Characteristic
N
%
No degree
5
5.6
Associate degree
5
5.6
Bachelor’s degree
42
47.2
Master’s degree
32
36.0
Doctoral degree
1
1.1
Research Question Analysis
The research question analyses performed on the data collected from study
participants were guided by the focus of the research questions on the perception of
93
configuration management professionals that support DoD projects. Two types of
statistical analysis were implemented: frequency and correlation. The frequency
was applied to determine the relevancy of the factors. A correlation analysis was
performed to identify the correlation between the academic qualification and years
of experience as a configuration management professional and the criticality of
each facilitating and obstructing factor.
Research Question 1 Analysis
The first research question sought to identify the perceived relevant
facilitating factors and obstructing factors to the success of the overall
configuration management process in DoD projects. The first research question
was: Which factors are perceived to be relevant facilitating factors and obstructing
factors to the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects? To address the first research question, the following two hypotheses were
tested:
H1: All facilitating factors in Appendix A are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
H2: All obstructing factors in Appendix B are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
94
Facilitating Factors
Table 3 displays the somewhat relevant and the extremely relevant scores
combined of the facilitating factors to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. This was done by calculating the frequency
of participants who chose somewhat relevant and the extremely relevant on the
scale score then combining those frequencies. Based on results obtained, all
facilitating factors in Table 3 are relevant to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. Of the 21 factors, 13 were considered at least
90% relevant to the facilitation of the overall configuration management process in
DoD projects. Effective communication had the highest percentage of endorsement
when combing frequencies of somewhat relevant and extremely relevant scale
options (98.6 %). The factors with the next highest percentages for the combined
scale options are vision and policies for configuration management, management
support, and configuration management planning with a score of 97.2% each. Of
the 21 factors used on the questionnaire, all but two scored lower than 80 % which
were recognition of configuration management employees’ efforts (75.8%) and
politics free projects environment (67.1%).
95
Table 3. Frequency of Relevancy of Facilitating Factors’ Relevancy Percentages
Combined
Vision and policies for configuration management process
97.2
Effective control of configuration management process at vendor
premises
95.7
Flexibility in configuration management practices
84.2
Management support
97.2
Competent configuration management practitioners
95.7
Effective leadership
94.3
Previous configuration management experience
80.0
Configuration management planning
97.2
Continuous improvement in configuration management practices
95.7
Professional development
85.7
Adequate resources allocation
91.5
User-friendly software (tool) for configuration management tool
94.3
Effective support from stakeholder
94.3
Organizational culture
94.3
Teamwork
91.4
Recognition of configuration management employees’ efforts
75.8
Equal career opportunities for configuration management staff
84.3
Politics free projects environment
67.1
Established Configuration Management organization
87.2
Committed and Creative Employees
88.6
Effective Communication
98.6
Since combining the somewhat relevant and extremely relevant
classifications revealed all of the facilitating factors are relevant to the success of
the overall configuration management process in DoD projects, it is important to
analyze those factors considering only the extremely relevant scores to remove the
impact of somewhat and really consider the top relevant factors. Table 4 lists the
facilitating factors in order based solely on extreme relevance from the higher to
96
the lower scores. The facilitating factors with the highest extremely relevant
endorsements are vision and polices for configuration management process
(84.3%), management support (82.9%), effective communication (78.6%),
competent configuration management practitioners (74.3%) and teamwork (71.4%).
The extremely relevant facilitating factors with the lowest percentages on
extremely relevant are established configuration management organization
(34.3%), recognition of configuration management employees’ efforts (32.9%),
politics free projects environment (31.4%), professional development (24.3%), and
previous configuration management experience (18.6%)
Table 4. Frequencies of Facilitating Factors’ Relevancy in Percentages for
Extremely Relevant Scale Option
Extremely
Relevant
Vision and policies for configuration management process
84.3
Management support
82.9
Effective Communication
78.6
Competent configuration management practitioners
74.3
Teamwork
71.4
Effective control of configuration management process at vendor
premises
70.0
Effective leadership
70.0
Configuration management planning
64.3
Effective support from stakeholder
62.9
Organizational culture
61.4
User-friendly software (tool) for configuration management tool
60.0
Continuous improvement in configuration management practices
58.6
Adequate resources allocation
58.6
Committed and Creative Employees
54.3
97
Equal career opportunities for configuration management staff
44.3
Flexibility in configuration management practices
37.1
Established Configuration Management organization
34.3
Recognition of configuration management employees’ efforts
32.9
Politics free projects environment
31.4
Professional development
24.3
Previous configuration management experience
18.6
Hypothesis 1 testing concluded that all facilitating factors in Table 3 are relevant to
the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
Obstructing Factors
Table 5 displays the somewhat relevant and the extremely relevant scores
combined of the obstructing factors to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. This was done by calculating the frequency
of participants who chose somewhat relevant and the extremely relevant on the
scale score then combining those frequencies. Based on results obtained, all
obstructive factors are relevant to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. Poorly defined configuration management
requirements and processes (97.1%) and lack of resources (97.1%) had the highest
frequencies for relevancy of obstructing factors followed by lack of configuration
management tools (94.2%), lack of effective communication (94.2%), and lack of
98
maintaining consistency in configuration management practices across projects
(94.2%). Lack of recognition had the lowest frequencies for relevancy (62.6%).
Table 5. Frequencies of Obstructing Factors’ Relevancy in Percentages
Combined
Lack of recognition
62.6
Lack of career progression for configuration management
professionals
85.5
Implementation cost outweigh configuration management
benefits
81.1
Lack of authority to implement configuration
principles/policies
92.7
Lack of top management support
92.7
Lack of centralized body for the governance of
configuration management
88.4
Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration
management practices across projects
94.2
Poorly defined configuration management requirements and
process
97.1
Lack of current configuration management plans
91.3
Lack of flexibility in configuration management process
85.5
Outdated configuration management process
88.4
Lack of resources
97.1
Lack of effective configuration management tools
94.2
Extreme project pressures
87.0
Lack of support from stakeholders
89.8
Lack of configuration management support in customer
world
88.4
Lack of effective communication
94.2
Since the combining of the somewhat relevant and extremely relevant
classifications revealed all obstructive factors are relevant to the success of the
99
overall configuration management process in DoD projects, it is important to
analyze those factors considering only extremely relevant to remove the impact of
somewhat and really consider the top relevant factors. Exploring these factors
provides an in-depth examination into factors primarily considered extremely
relevant. Table 6 lists all obstructive factors based on their score of the extremely
relevant. Poorly defined configuration management requirements and process
(76.8%), lack of top management support (73.9%), lack of effective communication
(72.5%), lack of authority to implement configuration principles/polices (68.1%),
and lack of maintaining consistency in configuration management practices across
projects (62.3%) had the highest endorsements for extremely relevant of the
obstructive factors selected by the participants. The extremely obstructing factors
with the lowest percentages on extremely relevant are lack of configuration
management support in customer world (40.6%), implementation cost outweighs
configuration management benefits (36.2%), lack of career progression for
configuration management professionals (31.9%), lack of flexibility in
configuration management process (31.9%), and lack of recognition (20.3%).
Table 6. Frequencies of Obstructing Factors’ Relevancy in Percentages for
Extremely Relevant Scale Option
Extremely
Relevant
Poorly defined configuration management requirements and process
76.8
Lack of top management support
73.9
100
Lack of effective communication
72.5
Lack of authority to implement configuration principles/policies
68.1
Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration management
practices across projects
62.3
Lack of current configuration management plans
60.9
Lack of resources
58.0
Outdated configuration management process
56.5
Lack of support from stakeholders
56.5
Lack of centralized body for the governance of configuration
management
46.4
Extreme project pressures
46.4
Lack of effective configuration management tools
43.5
Lack of configuration management support in customer world
40.6
Implementation cost outweigh configuration management benefits
36.2
Lack of career progression for configuration management
professionals
31.9
Lack of flexibility in configuration management process
31.9
Lack of recognition
20.3
The study determined that all obstructive factors in Table 5 are relevant to
the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects as
stated in Hypothesis 2.
Research Question 2 Analysis
A correlation analysis was done to determine if there is a positive
correlation relationship between academic qualification and years of work
experience as a configuration management in DoD projects. However, a frequency
analysis was also performed to determine the critically of the factors before
performing the correlation. Those findings brought detailed information of which
101
factors are more critical from the point of view of the configuration management
professionals.
Critical Facilitating Factors
Table 7 provides a listing of the factors determined to be critical to the
facilitation of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
Facilitating factors that impact the success of the overall configuration management
process are determined by calculating the frequency of participants who chose
somewhat critical and the extremely critical on the scale score then combining
those frequencies. All facilitating factors in Table 7 are critical to the success of
the overall configuration management process in DoD projects from the perspective
of the configuration management professionals. The facilitating factor with the
highest endorsement when combining frequencies of somewhat critical and
extremely critical was competent configuration management practitioners at 100%.
The factors with the next highest percentages for the combined scale options are
vision and policies for configuration management process (98.5%), configuration
management planning (98.5%), teamwork (98.5%), and management support
(97.1%). All but three facilitating factors reported 80% or more critical. These three
were previous configuration management experience (75%), recognition of
configuration management employees’ efforts (73.6%), and politics free projects
environment (73.6%).
102
Table 7. Frequencies of Facilitating Factors’ Criticality in
Percentages
Combined
Vision and policies for configuration management process
98.5
Effective control of configuration management process at vendor
premises
95.6
Flexibility in configuration management practices
80.9
Management support
97.1
Competent configuration management practitioners
100
Effective leadership
92.6
Previous configuration management experience
75.0
Configuration management planning
98.5
Continuous improvement in configuration management practices
95.6
Professional development
82.4
Adequate resources allocation
95.6
User-friendly software (tool) for configuration management tool
94.1
Effective support from stakeholder
92.6
Organizational culture
91.2
Teamwork
98.5
Recognition of configuration management employees’ efforts
73.6
Equal career opportunities for configuration management staff
80.9
Politics free projects environment
73.6
Established Configuration Management organization
91.2
Committed and Creative Employees
92.6
Effective Communication
94.1
The analysis of somewhat critical and extremely critical classification
revealed every facilitating factor is critical to the success of the overall
configuration management process in DoD projects. Therefore, it is considered
beneficial to analyze those factors considered extremely critical to determine those
factors most critical. Table 8 lists the facilitating factors based solely on extreme
103
criticality. The facilitating factors with the highest endorsements of extremely
critical are vision and policies for configuration management process (79.4%),
effective communication (76.5%), management support (75%), effective leadership
(69.1%), and configuration management planning (69.1%). The extremely critical
factors with the lowest percentages are politics free projects environment (36.8%),
flexibility in configuration management practices (33.8%), recognition of
configuration management employees’ efforts (32.4%), professional development
(30.9%), and previous configuration management experience (23.5%).
Table 8. Frequencies of Facilitating Factors’ Criticality in Percentages for
Extremely Critical Scale Option
Extremely
Critical
Vision and policies for configuration management process
79.4
Effective Communication
76.5
Management support
75.0
Effective leadership
69.1
Configuration management planning
69.1
Teamwork
64.7
Competent configuration management practitioners
61.8
Effective support from stakeholder
58.8
Effective control of configuration management process at vendor
premises
57.4
Adequate resources allocation
51.5
Organizational culture
51.5
Committed and Creative Employees
50.0
Continuous improvement in configuration management practices
48.5
User-friendly software (tool) for configuration management tool
45.6
Equal career opportunities for configuration management staff
45.6
104
Established Configuration Management organization
39.7
Politics free projects environment
36.8
Flexibility in configuration management practices
33.8
Recognition of configuration management employees’ efforts
32.4
Professional development
30.9
Previous configuration management experience
23.5
Critical Obstructing Factors
Table 9 displays the factors determined to be critical to the obstruction of
the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
Obstructive factors that impact the success of the overall configuration
management process are determined by calculating the frequency of participants
who chose somewhat critical and the extremely critical on the scale score then
combining those frequencies. Based on results obtained, all obstructive factors are
critical to the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects. The study results concluded that all obstructive factors are critical to the
success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. Poorly
defined configuration management requirements and process had the highest
percentages of endorsements when combining frequencies of somewhat critical and
extremely critical scale options (100%). The next factors with the next highest
percentages for the combines scale options are lack of authority to implement
configuration principles/policies and lack of effective configuration management
tools with a score of 98.5% each. The next factors are lack of maintaining
105
consistency in configuration management practices across projects (97%) and lack
of resources (96.9%). In fact, all factors were reported as being at least 80% critical
or more but one, lack of recognition (67.7%).
Table 9. Frequencies of Obstructing Factors’ Criticality in Percentages
Combined
Lack of recognition
67.7
Lack of career progression for configuration management
professionals
81.5
Implementation cost outweigh configuration management
benefits
89.3
Lack of authority to implement configuration
principles/policies
98.5
Lack of top management support
95.4
Lack of centralized body for the governance of configuration
management
86.1
Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration
management practices across projects
97.0
Poorly defined configuration management requirements and
process
100
Lack of current configuration management plans
93.8
Lack of flexibility in configuration management process
87.7
Outdated configuration management process
92.3
Lack of resources
96.9
Lack of effective configuration management tools
98.5
Extreme project pressures
87.7
Lack of support from stakeholders
92.3
Lack of configuration management support in customer world
92.4
Lack of effective communication
95.9
106
The combining of the somewhat critical and extremely critical classification
revealed all obstructive factors are critical to the success of the overall
configuration management process in DoD projects. The researcher thought it
important to analyze those factors considered extremely critical. Table 10 lists all
obstructive factors based on level of extreme criticality. The extremely critical
factors with the highest endorsements are lack of top management support (75.4%),
lack of effective communication (70.6%), poorly defined configuration
management requirements and process (66.2%), lack of authority to implement
configuration principles/policies (63.1%) and lack of current configuration
management plans (60%). The extremely critical factors with the lowest
percentages on extremely critical are implementation cost outweigh configuration
management benefits (38.5%), lack of career progression for configuration
management professionals (32.3%), lack of flexibility in configuration
management process (32.3%), extreme project pressures (27.7%), and lack of
recognition (26.2%).
Table 10. Frequencies of Obstructing Factors’ Criticality in Percentages for
Extremely Critical Scale Option
Extremely
Critical
Lack of top management support
75.4
Lack of effective communication
70.6
Poorly defined configuration management requirements and
process
66.2
Lack of authority to implement configuration principles/policies
63.1
107
Lack of current configuration management plans
60.0
Lack of support from stakeholders
60.0
Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration management
practices across projects
58.5
Lack of resources
49.2
Outdated configuration management process
47.7
Lack of effective configuration management tools
47.7
Lack of configuration management support in customer world
46.2
Lack of centralized body for the governance of configuration
management
44.6
Implementation cost outweigh configuration management benefits
38.5
Lack of career progression for configuration management
professionals
32.3
Lack of flexibility in configuration management process
32.3
Extreme project pressures
27.7
Lack of recognition
26.2
The second research question sought to determine the correlation between
the criticality of factors and the academic qualification of configuration
management professionals and their years of experience supporting DoD projects.
The second question was: Is there a correlation between a configuration
management professionals’ academic qualification and years of work experience
and the perception of the criticality of the factors? To address the second research
question, the following two hypotheses were tested:
H3: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ academic qualifications and the criticality
rating of the factors.
108
H4: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ years of experience as configuration
management supporting DoD projects and criticality of the factors.
Academic Qualifications
A Spearman’s correlation was conducted to determine the direction of the
correlation between academic qualification and the perception of the facilitating
factors that influence success of the overall configuration management process in
DoD projects (Table 11). Although the significant correlation that was derived
between academic qualification and effective support from stakeholder (rs=-0.26,
p=0.04), the relationship was not in the predicted direction. As there was a negative
correlation between academic qualification and the perception of the criticality of
effective support from stakeholders. Thus, this result illustrates that as the level of
academic qualification increases, configuration management professionals are less
likely to consider effective support from stakeholders a critical facilitating factor.
Table 11. Spearman Rho Correlations Between Configuration Management
Professional’s Academic Qualifications and Critical Facilitating Factors
Coefficient
Well defined vision, mission, and policies for
configuration management process
-0.08
Effective control of configuration management
process at vendor premises
-0.01
Flexibility in configuration management practices
0.05
Management Support
-0.04
109
Competent configuration management
practitioners
0.11
Effective leadership
-0.08
Previous configuration management experience
-0.15
Configuration management planning
0.00
Continuous improvement in configuration
management practices
0.02
Professional development
-0.02
Adequate resources allocation
0.11
User-friendly software (tool) for configuration
management
0.06
Effective support from stakeholder
-0.26*
Organizational culture support
-0.10
Teamwork
-0.02
Recognition of configuration management
employees’ efforts
-0.15
Equal career opportunities for configuration
management staff
-0.16
Politics free project environment
-0.13
Established configuration management
organization
0.01
Committed and creative employees
0.06
Effective communication of configuration
management with stakeholder
0.03
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
In Table 12, a Spearman’s correlation was run to determine the direction of
the correlation between academic qualification and the perception of the
obstructing factors that influence success of the overall configuration management
process in DoD projects. Despite the significant correlation that was derived
(p=0.01), the correlation between academic qualification and the lack of support
from stakeholders is negative (rs =-.31) and, therefore, in an unexpected direction.
Specifically, there is a negative correlation between academic qualification and the
110
perception of the criticality of lack of support from stakeholders, which illustrates
that as the level of academic qualification increases, configuration management
professionals are less likely to consider lack of support from stakeholders a critical
obstructing factor.
Table 12. Spearman Rho Correlations Between Configuration Management
Professional’s Academic Qualifications and Critical Obstructing Factors
Coefficient
Lack of recognition
-0.20
Lack of career progression for configuration
management professionals
-0.12
Implementation cost outweigh configuration
management benefits
-0.13
Lack of authority to implement configuration
principles/policies
0.04
Lack of top management support
-0.11
Lack of centralized body for the governance of
configuration management
-0.10
Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration
management practices across projects
-0.12
Poorly defined configuration management requirements
and process
0.04
Lack of current configuration management plans
-0.14
Lack of flexibility in configuration management process
-0.05
Outdated configuration management processes
-0.05
Lack of resources
-0.13
Lack of effective configuration management tools
-0.09
Extreme project pressures
-0.13
Lack of support from stakeholders
-0.31*
Lack of configuration management support in customer
world
-0.13
Lack of effective communication
-0.16
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
111
For Hypothesis 3, one significant relationship was found between academic
qualification and the criticality of facilitating factors, for the factor “Effective
support from stakeholders” (r = -0.26, p = .04) (see Table 11). For Hypothesis 3,
one significant relationship was found between academic qualification and the
criticality of obstructing factors, for the factor “Lack of support from stakeholders”
(r = -.31, p = .01) (see Table 12). Both relationships were negative, which is in the
unexpected direction; therefore, Hypothesis 3 was not supported.
Years of Experience as Configuration Management Professional
A Spearman’s correlation was run to determine the direction of the
correlation between years of experience as configuration management professional
and the critically scores of the facilitating factors that influence success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects (Table 13). Spearman
testing indicated four significant relationships that were positive for the factors
“Management support” (rs =.32, p <.01), “Previous management configuration
management experience” (rs =.24, p<.05), “Professional development” (rs =.27, p
<.05), and “Effective support from stakeholder” (rs =.30, p <.05).
Table 13. Spearman Rho Correlations Between Years of Experience as
Configuration Management Professional and Critical Facilitating Factors
Coefficient
Well defined vision, mission, and policies for configuration
management process
0.07
Effective control of configuration management process at
vendor premises
0.20
112
Flexibility in configuration management practices
-0.10
Management Support
0.32**
Competent configuration management practitioners
0.03
Effective leadership
0.17
Previous configuration management experience
0.24*
Configuration management planning
0.04
Continuous improvement in configuration management
practices
-0.01
Professional development
0.27*
Adequate resources allocation
0.19
User-friendly software (tool) for configuration management
0.07
Effective support from stakeholder
0.30*
Organizational culture support
0.19
Teamwork
0.17
Recognition of configuration management employees’
efforts
0.17
Equal career opportunities for configuration management
staff
0.04
Politics free project environment
0.11
Established configuration management organization
0.16
Committed and creative employees
-0.13
Effective communication of configuration management with
stakeholder
0.14
**Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 14 summarizes the Spearman’s correlation coefficient between years
of experience as configuration management professional and the obstructing factors
that influence the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects. There is no significant correlation found between years of experience as
configuration management professional and obstructing factors.
Table 14. Spearman Rho Correlations Between Years of Experience as
Configuration Management Professional and Critical Obstructing Factor
113
Coefficient
Lack of recognition
0.14
Lack of career progression for configuration management
professionals
0.09
Implementation cost outweigh configuration management
benefits
0.11
Lack of authority to implement configuration
principles/policies
0.21
Lack of top management support
0.22
Lack of centralized body for the governance of
configuration management
-0.01
Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration
management practices across projects
-0.02
Poorly defined configuration management requirements
and process
0.00
Lack of current configuration management plans
0.08
Lack of flexibility in configuration management process
-0.04
Outdated configuration management processes
0.14
Lack of resources
-0.10
Lack of effective configuration management tools
-0.09
Extreme project pressures
0.20
Lack of support from stakeholders
0.22
Lack of configuration management support in customer
world
0.18
Lack of effective communication
0.14
For Hypothesis 4, four significant relationships were found between years
of experience and the criticality of facilitating factors, for the factors “Management
support” (rs =.32, p <.01), “Previous configuration management experience” (rs
=.24, p<.05), “Professional development” (rs =.27, p <.05), and “Effective support
from stakeholders” (rs =.30, p <.05) (See Table 13). These relationships were
positive, which is in the expected direction. For Hypothesis 4, no significant
114
relationships were found between years of experience and the criticality of
obstructing factors (See Table 14). Therefore, Hypothesis 4 was partially
supported.
Two open-ended questions were provided for participants to list any
additional facilitating or obstructing factors, not listed in the online survey, but
perceived to be critical to the success of the overall configuration management
process in a DoD project. The first open-ended question was: Based on your own
experience, can you list below any additional facilitating factors which were not
listed that are critical to the success of the overall configuration management
process in a DoD project? The second open-ended question was: Based on your
own experience, can you list below any additional obstructing factors which were
not listed, that are critical to the success of the overall configuration management
process in a DoD project?
The researcher reviewed the participant responses of each open-ended
question for themes or related categories. Reading through the responses the
researcher coded key words or phrases. The goal of the researcher was to reveal
any critical facilitating or obstructing factors not listed in the survey or identified in
the literature review.
The first open-ended question asked participants: Based on your own
experience, can you list below any additional facilitating factors which were not
listed that are critical to the success of the overall configuration management
115
process in a DoD project? A total of 21 responses were reported from the first
open-ended survey question. The following seven categories emerged from
grouping key words and phrases from the responses: Established configuration
management organization, user-friendly software (tool) for configuration
management tool, competent configuration management practitioners, continuous
improvement in configuration management practices, teamwork, effective
communication, and adequate resources allocation. Each of these factors are
currently identified in the survey and no new facilitating factor was revealed to be
critical to the success of the overall configuration management process in a DoD
project.
The second open-ended question asked: Based on your own experience, can
you list below any additional obstructing factors which were not listed, that are
critical to the success of the overall configuration management process in a DoD
project? A total of 17 responses were obtained for the second open-ended question.
The following seven categories emerged from grouping key words and phrases
from the responses: Lack of effective configuration management tools, lack of
centralized body for the governance of configuration, extreme project pressures,
outdated configuration management process, lack of maintaining consistency in
configuration management practices across projects, lack of top management
support, and lack of resources. Each of these factors are currently identified in the
116
survey and no new obstructing factor was revealed to be critical to the success of
the overall configuration management process in a DoD project.
Summary
Presented in Chapter 4 were the results of descriptive and correlational
analyses. The demographic data revealed that most respondents had at least 10
years of experience as a configuration management professional and majority had
some level of college. The results of the hypothesis testing indicated that both
facilitating and obstructing factors are relevant to the success of the overall
configuration management process in DoD projects. Hypothesis testing did not
indicate a positive correlation between the configuration management
professionals’ academic qualifications and the criticality rating of the factors.
Hypothesis testing indicated four significant positive correlations with years of
experience as configuration management and the criticality of these facilitating
factors: management support, previous configuration management experience,
professional development and effective support from stakeholders. Chapter 5
presents the conclusions, limitations, and recommendations for future research.
117
Chapter 5
Conclusions and Recommendations
The basis of this research was to explore the factors that impact the success
of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. The
configuration management process directly impacts the entire product life cycle in
DoD projects. However, projects are not utilizing configuration management to its
full potential (Burgess et al., 2003). Having a well-defined configuration
management process alone doesn’t guarantee a successful configuration
management process (Masoud et al., 2013). When a configuration management
process is in place but not used correctly, either directly or indirectly, issues can
arise that impact the cost, schedule, and quality of DoD projects (DoD, 2001).
Current academic literature is rare with no formal study to date focusing on
the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. Most
research in the DoD focuses on understanding quality management, project
management, and business process management to decrease the failure of DoD
projects (Cantwell et al., 2013). Configuration management has mostly been
covered comprehensively within these subject areas but not distinctively examined
in academic literature. Furthermore, configuration management professionals are
responsible for ensuring the configuration management process is successfully
118
executed in DoD projects (DoD, 2001, p. 4-1). However, there is a paucity of
research focused on the perceptions of the configuration management professionals
currently supporting DoD projects. These make it difficult to understand the factors
that influence the configuration management process in DoD projects and represent
a gap in the literature. It is significant to explore the factors that facilitate and
obstruct the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects because this information may provide project managers the ability focus on
improvements. The current study analyzed the factors that influence the overall
success of the configuration management process in DoD projects. Understanding
the relevance and criticality of these identified factors will assist in identifying an
approach to enhance success of the overall configuration management process in
DoD projects. Appendixes A and B present the facilitating and obstructing factors
considered in this study.
The focus of this study was configuration management professionals’
perceptions of the factors that influence the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. The study sought to evaluate the relevancy
of the facilitating and obstructing factors to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. In addition, the intent was to examine the
correlation between years of experience and academic qualification as well as
configuration management professionals supporting DoD projects and the
119
criticality of each factor. Specifically, findings from this study addressed these
research questions:
1. Which factors are perceived to be relevant facilitating factors and obstructing
factors to the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects?
2. Is there a correlation between a configuration management professionals’
academic qualification and year of work experience and the perception of the
criticality of the factors?
Data Interpretation and Theoretical Relevance
The following discussion summarizes the findings according to each of the
two research questions and explores the significance of these results with respect to
the theoretical framework used in the study.
Discussion of Results: Research Questions
The first research question sought to identify the relevancy of the
facilitating and obstructing factors. The first research question was: Which factors
are perceived to be relevant facilitating factors and obstructing factors to the
success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects? To
address the first research question, two hypotheses were tested. Each hypothesis
was examined using descriptive analysis. The hypotheses were:
120
H1: All facilitating factors in Appendix A are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
H2: All obstructing factors in Appendix B are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
Hypothesis 1 testing concluded that all facilitating factors presented in the
questionnaire (Appendix A) are relevant to the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects. Hypothesis 2 testing determined that all
obstructive factors presented in the questionnaire (Appendix B) are relevant to the
success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
Relevant Facilitating Factors
Effective communication had the highest percentage of endorsement when
combining frequencies of somewhat relevant and extremely relevant facilitating
factor scale options. This supports Watts (2009) who described communication as
the single most important activity performed by configuration management
professionals. The configuration management process in DoD projects uses
communication to ensure that everyone understands the changes and their impact.
Unnecessary changes are prevented, and incorrect changes are avoided when
communication is made a priority within the project (Jarratt et al., 2011).
Although effective communication had the highest combined frequencies, a
review of the study findings revealed configuration management professionals also
consider vision and policies for configuration management, management support,
121
and configuration management planning to be the next highest percentages for the
combined scale options which aligns with the position of Darrin (2017), Ali and
Kidd (2013), Ali and Kidd (2015), Cragg et al. (2013), Lyon (2008), and Ruiz-
Martin and Poza (2015). According to Darrin (2017), a clear path for
communication can be established and any miscommunication weakened, by the
identification of vision and policies for configuration management within a project
(Darrin, 2017). Vision provides clarification and polices identify how to
implement the configuration management process (Ali & Kidd, 2013).
Management support establishes open communication channels with project teams
(Cragg et al., 2013; Manfreda & Stemberger, 2014; Too & Weaver, 2014).
According to Ali and Kidd (2013), management support is support is essential to
the configuration management process. Configuration management planning is the
foundation to the overall process (Lyon, 2008). It is essential to the success of the
project and vital to reaching predefined goals (Ruiz-Martin & Poza, 2015).
Relevant Obstructing Factors
Poorly defined configuration management requirements and processes and
lack of resources had the highest frequencies for relevancy of obstructing factors
which align with Whyte et al. (2016), Gonzalez (2002), and Pinto (2013). Followed
by lack of maintaining consistency in configuration management practices across
projects, lack of effective communication, and lack of configuration management
tools which supports Clark and Fujimoto (1991), Fischer et al. (2014), Fowler
122
(1996), and Tavcar and Duhovnik (2005). The processes, procedures, and users of
the configuration management system are fundamental to ensure the integrity of the
data throughout the lifecycle (Whyte et al., 2016). Project managers must decide
upfront how much they are willing to allocate to configuration management
resources (Gonzalez, 2002). Poorly defined configuration management
requirements and processes limits project managers’ ability to execute the plans of
the project (Pinto, 2013). Lack of maintaining consistency in configuration
management practices across projects can also obstruct the configuration
management process. Fowler (1996) found that despite having configuration
management principles identified and accessible, it is a challenging endeavor to
implement it throughout the organization. When effective communication is not
used, research has found a greater than 35% increase in time used for the
implementation of configuration management changes (Tavcar & Duhovnik, 2005).
Two-thirds of technical changes could be eliminated with the establishment of
better communication (Clark & Fujimoto,1991). To decrease the amount of time to
implement changes, configuration management tools can provide easily accessible
technical documentation and establish workflows between team members (Tavcar
& Duhovnik, 2005). Without effective configuration management tools,
deployment of pertinent information throughout the project is hindered and the
ability to efficiently manage changes to the product is decreased (Fischer et al.,
2014). An in-depth examination into the obstructing factors determined that poorly
123
defined configuration management requirements and processes, lack of top
management support, lack of effective communication, lack of authority to
implement configuration principles/polices, and the lack of maintaining consistency
in configuration management practices across projects were the obstructing factors
with the highest endorsements of extremely relevant.
Correlation of Factors
The second research question sought to determine the correlation between
the academic qualification of configuration management professionals and years of
experience and the perception of the criticality of factors. The second research
question was: Is there a correlation between a configuration management
professionals’ academic qualification and years of work experience as a
configuration management professional and the perception of the criticality of the
factors? To address the second research question, two hypotheses were tested.
Each hypothesis was examined using the Spearman’s correlation. Spearman’s rho
analysis sought to determine the correlation between the independent variables
(academic qualification and years of experience as a configuration management
professional) and the dependent variable (perception of the criticality of the factors)
that influence success of the overall configuration management process. The
hypotheses were:
124
H3: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ academic qualifications and the criticality
rating of the factors.
H4: There is a significant positive correlation between the configuration
management professionals’ years of experience supporting DoD
projects and criticality of the factors.
Academic Qualifications
The results of the analysis between academic qualifications and the
perception of the criticality of facilitating and obstructing factors concluded no
significant positive correlations, denoting the findings of the study did not support
the hypothesis. The hypothesis sought to identify a positive correlation between the
configuration management professionals’ academic qualification and the perception
of the criticality rating of the factors. Nonetheless, research findings did result in
two significant negative correlations between academic qualification and the
perception of the criticality of effective support from stakeholders (as a facilitating
factor) and lack of support from stakeholders (as an obstructing factor). These
negative correlations indicate as the level of academic qualification increases;
configuration management professionals’ perception of the criticality of
stakeholder support decreases. Although these negative relationships were not
expected, they may be logical in this context. For instance, the support of
stakeholders is expected to positively impact the overall configuration management
125
process in several ways (e.g., by establishing the ability to plan, set milestones, and
coordinate change control procedures and processes, (Atkinson & Ward, 2006);
however, the configuration management professionals that have higher academic
qualifications may have confidence in their knowledge and capabilities to properly
implement a successful configuration management process without any support
from stakeholders. Indeed, according to Becker (1993), higher academic
qualification provides configuration management professionals with a greater
knowledge base to successfully carry out project tasks. Further, academic
qualification provides configuration management professionals with more skills
and abilities than those who do not have any academic qualification (McCracken et
al., 2017) and impacts individual performance (Bapna et al., 2013; Becker, 2011;
Bontis & Serenko, 2009). Thus, stakeholder support may seem less critical to
project success. Alternatively, stakeholders might also recognize the value that
increased academic qualification has on individual performance and not feel the
need to provide support to those configuration management professionals that have
increased academic qualification. Education made available to configuration
management professionals contributes to adequately implemented configuration
management processes (Morris & Pinto, 2010). Perhaps as the level of academic
qualification increases, configuration management professionals are accustomed to
not having any stakeholder support and therefore do not perceive it as being critical
to the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD projects.
126
Years of Work Experience
Findings of the study partially supported the hypothesis which sought to
identify a positive correlation between the configuration management
professionals’ years of experience supporting DoD projects and the perception of
the criticality of the factors. Although no correlation was reported between years of
experience and the perception of the criticality of obstructing factors, four
significant relationships were found between years of experience and the perception
of the criticality of the facilitating factors.
The study found significant positive correlations between years of work
experience and the perception of the criticality of these facilitating factors:
Management support, effective support from stakeholder, previous configuration
management experience, professional development, and which aligns with Ali and
Kidd (2015), Ahmed and bin Mohamad (2016), Atkinson and Ward (2006), Cragg
et al. (2013), Dart (1992), Kivilä et al. (2017), Kuratko et al. (2014), Lester (2014),
Manfreda and Stemberger (2014), Mizell (2010), Morris and Pinto (2010), Too and
Weaver (2014), and Watts (2015). Management support is critical to the
establishment the configuration management process and is described as an
essential business activity (Ali & Kidd, 2015). It can improve the implementation
of the configuration management process throughout the project (Dart, 1992).
Configuration management professionals are not just responsible for managing
products across the full life cycle but also must obtain the support of management
127
(Morris & Pinto, 2010). The support of management establishes open
communication channels with project teams and stakeholders (Cragg et al., 2013;
Manfreda & Stemberger, 2014; Too & Weaver, 2014). An effective configuration
management professional on a project will reach for best-in-class processes and
continuous improvement by swaying both top management and stakeholders to
support the identified process (Watts, 2015). The support of stakeholders impacts
the overall configuration management process by establishing the ability to plan,
set milestones, and coordinate change control procedures and processes (Atkinson
& Ward, 2006). Kivilä et al. (2017) suggests placing a high emphasis on getting to
know each stakeholder and their expectations through stakeholder engagement. A
configuration management process should be flexible and support the stakeholders
and project requirements (Morris & Pinto, 2010). When configuration management
professionals have previous management experience, they can serve as champions
for effective implementation of the process (Ali & Kidd, 2015). Without the proper
career exposure, configuration management professionals are unable to adequately
decide the scope required of configuration management, review contractual
obligations, understand milestones, and properly forecast audit dates (Lester, 2014).
Professional development affords configuration management professionals the
ability to develop new knowledge and skillsets that will improve their performance
in the workplace (Mizell, 2010). Professional development can greatly impact how
the configuration management process is implemented (Morris & Pinto, 2010).
128
According to Ali and Kidd (2015), “professional development is the core issue for
any business management process” (p. 324). When organizations offer professional
development as part of their fundamental training programs, they possess the
ability to provide awareness for configuration management methodologies and
associated processes (Ali & Kidd, 2015).
The objective of Hypothesis 4 was to identify a positive correlation between
the configuration management professionals’ years of experience as configuration
management professional supporting DoD projects and the perception of the
criticality of the factors. Spearman testing indicated Hypothesis 4 was partially
supported. Four significant positive relationships were found between years of
experience and the perception of the criticality of facilitating factors, for the factors,
management support, previous configuration management experience, professional
development, and effective support from stakeholders. Yet, no significant
relationships were found between years of experience and the perception of the
criticality of obstructing factors.
Discussion of Results: Theoretical Framework
The researcher used human capital theory as the theoretical framework to
guide this study because of the importance it has on to the overall configuration
management process. Human capital refers to “the knowledge, skills, and abilities
of the people employed in an organization” (Schultz, 1961, p. 140). Human capital
focuses on the capabilities of the individual workers. There is now a growing
129
interest of how human capital directly impacts the best practices they support
(McCracken et al., 2017). Turner (2016) implied that various factors can enhance
or dilute human capital, thus impacting the very business practices they are to
support. The configuration management process in DoD projects is human-centric.
The overall configuration management process is not implemented correctly
despite various standards and regulations governing its existence (Ali & Kidd,
2014). The researcher sought to explore the factors that influence the ability of
configuration management professionals to successfully implement the overall
configuration management process in DoD project, thereby improving their ability
to drive value on the project.
The current study identified the factors that are relevant to the success of the
overall configuration management process based on the perception of configuration
management professionals who support DoD projects. Prior to the twenty-first
century, tangible assets were a rationale for increased productivity and project
success (McCracken et al., 2017). However, these physical resources can easily be
purchased or sold (Rothaermel, 2015). Managers today realize that intangible
assets, such as the abilities and skills of the workers, are essential to the
effectiveness of the project (McCracken et al., 2017). According to Bontis and
Serenko (2009) it is important to identify anything that prevents human capital
from thriving. Identification of the factors that are relevant to the facilitation and
obstruction of the success of the overall configuration management process
130
supports the current literature on human capital theory. Recognition of these
factors can assist project managers and configuration management professionals in
the uncovering of anything that prevents human capital from thriving within DoD
projects.
The human capital theory states that an individual’s academic qualification
plays an important role in both the employee and project performance (Becker
1993; Schultz, 1961). Bapna et al. (2013) found that investment in academic
qualification had a greater impact on individual performance. With other
researchers stating that academic qualification increases the performance of an
employee by 2.14% (McCracken et al., 2017). Despite majority of the
configuration management professional participants having some level of college
ranging between associate and doctoral degree, the current study found no
significant positive correlation between academic qualification and the overall
configuration management process. The study findings indicate as the level of
academic qualification increases; configuration management professionals are less
likely to perceive support from stakeholders as critical to the overall success of the
configuration management process.
The human capital theory also states that work experience is beneficial in
providing individuals with valuable skills that benefit the project (Brown et al.,
2007, p. 77). Configuration management professionals supporting DoD projects
must depend on personal knowledge and experience to guide them on how to lead
131
change in a continuously changing project environment (Morris & Pinto, 2010).
Most respondents of this study have been employed as a configuration management
professional supporting DoD projects for at least 10 years. With no specialized
academic focus available for configuration management professionals, it is
understandable that a positive correlation was only found with years of work
experience. Understanding of the configuration management process is often
obtained through work experience and provide the configuration management
professional with the ability to manage changes in accordance with the vision and
mission of the project (Leon, 2015).
Implications
The intent of this study was to add to the body of knowledge related to the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects. Despite the
requirement to implement configuration management within DoD projects, project
managers still experience costly setbacks and fail to meet their objectives due to the
inability to properly manage enormous amounts of product data (Meier, 2013).
There is a clear need for the improvement of configuration management strategies
and implementation to break this pattern of project failure. Military Handbook 61
provides guidance for managers within the DoD on the effective application of
configuration management. It includes the DoD Configuration Management
Process model (Figure 1) that identifies the facilitators and constraints used to
132
perform the major functions of configuration management over the DoD project
life cycle. Current academic literature does not account for the factors that impact
the overall configuration management process in DoD projects. In addition, there is
paucity of literature detailing the perceptions of configuration management
professionals supporting DoD projects. The researcher addressed these gaps by
examining different factors that influence the success of the overall configuration
management process in DoD projects utilizing both facilitating and obstructing
factors from other industries identified from an in-depth review of the literature.
The researcher examined the relevancy and criticality of these factors from the
perception of configuration management professionals. The researcher also
examined the correlation between the configuration management professional’s
academic qualification and years of experiences and the perception of the critically
of each factor.
Based on the findings of this study, the researcher suggests the current DoD
Configuration Management Process model consider including the facilitating and
obstructing factors identified by configuration management professionals
supporting DoD projects. First, the researcher recommends the inclusion of the
following facilitating factors identified by configuration management professionals
supporting DoD projects: effective communication, vision and policies for
configuration management process, configuration management planning,
competent configuration management practitioners, teamwork, previous
133
configuration management experience, and effective support from stakeholders.
The DoD Configuration Management Process Model describes facilitators (or
mechanisms) as “information, tools, methods, and technologies which enable or
enhance the process” (DoD, 2001, p. 1-3).Communication is currently listed on the
DoD Configuration Management Process Model as an input. Input is described as
“information needed to initiate and perform the process” (DoD, 2001, p. 1-3). The
configuration management process uses communication to define clear goals and
objectives (DoD, 2001). Since effective communication had the highest percentage
of endorsement when combing frequencies of somewhat relevant and extremely
relevant scale options, the researcher recommends effective communication be
included on the DoD Configuration Management Process Model as a facilitator (or
enhancement). Effective communication goes beyond the initial stages of a project
and provides various methods of relaying information to ensure all team members
are aware of pertinent information and each meaningful concept associated with the
product can be easily understood throughout the lifecycle of the entire project
(Bendix et al., 2012; Ali & Kidd, 2013). Watts (2009) describes effective
communication as the single most important activity performed by configuration
management professionals (Watts, 2009). Vision and policies for the configuration
management process also had very high endorsements on each of the facilitating
factors tables. A clear path for communication can be established by the
identification of vision and policies for configuration management within a project
134
(Darrin, 2017). The high endorsements received on the extremely relevant and
extremely critical scale options conclude that configuration management planning
should also be added to the current DoD model. Configuration management
planning is the foundation to the overall process (Lyon, 2008) and vital to reaching
predefined goals (Ruiz-Martin & Poza, 2015). Competent configuration
management practitioners had the highest endorsement when combining
frequencies of somewhat critical and extremely critical of all the facilitating factors
at 100%. According to Quigley and Robertson (2015), a competent configuration
management professional is proficient in understanding how the project operates so
they can better facilitate changes and understand their impact. Teamwork was
another facilitating factor with high endorsements when combining frequencies of
somewhat critical and extremely critical. The role of a configuration management
professional includes being able to coordinate changing activities and aid in
resolving conflicts among the team (Hormozi et al., 2000). Previous configuration
management experience and effective support from stakeholders each had
significant relationships found between years of experience and the criticality of
facilitating factors but were not currently identified on DoD Configuration
Management Process model. Those that possess previous configuration
management experience are advocates for effective implementation of the
configuration management process (Ali & Kidd, 2015). The support of
135
stakeholders impacts the overall configuration management process (Atkinson &
Ward, 2006).
In addition, the researcher recommends updating the DoD Configuration
Management Process model with the following obstructing factors identified by
configuration management professionals supporting DoD projects: lack of
configuration management tools, lack of effective communication, lack of
maintaining consistency in configuration management practices across projects,
and lack of management support. The DoD Configuration Management Process
Model describes factors that are constraining or obstructive as limiting to the
overall process (DoD, 2001). Lack of effective configuration management tools,
lack of effective communication, and lack of maintaining consistency in
configuration management practices across projects each had high percentages of
endorsements when combining frequencies of relevant and critical scale options.
Without effective configuration management tools, deployment of pertinent
information throughout the project is hindered and the ability to efficiently manage
changes to the product is decreased (Fischer et al., 2014). According to Tavčar and
Duhovnik (2005), the lack of effective communication results in a 40% increase in
the time it takes to implement configuration management changes. The lack of
maintaining consistency in configuration management practices results in an array
of the varying accountability practices that increases the potential for errors
136
(Fowler, 1996). Finally, lack of management support had very high endorsements
of obstructive factors based on level of extreme relevance and extreme criticality.
The current DoD Configuration Management Process model (Figure 1)
identifies the facilitators and constraints used to perform the major functions of
configuration management over the DoD project life cycle. Figure 2 is adapted
from the current DoD Configuration Management Process model and depicts the
researcher’s suggested updates to the current DoD Configuration Management
Process model. The researcher’s suggested obstructing and facilitating factors are
presented in bold.
137
Figure 2. Adapted from the DoD Configuration Management Process Model
• Timing
• Resources
• Inadequate planning and
preparation
• Lack of configuration
management tools
• Lack of effective communication
• Lack of maintaining consistency
in configuration management
practices across projects
• Lack of management support
• Mission need
• Program
Initiation
• Syst Eng.
Regmts, Funct
Analysis, Alloc
& Synthesis
• Logistics &
Maintenance
Plans
• Performance
Measurements
• Communication
• Management support
• Effective working relationship among
Govt & Contractor CM, Program
management, Systems engineering,
Logistics & quality
• Facilities
• Resources
• Training
• Guidance handbooks & Standards
• Effective communication
• Vision and policies for configuration
management process
• Configuration management planning
• Competent configuration
management practitioners
• Teamwork
• Previous configuration management
experience
• Effective support from stakeholders
Configuration
Management
Process
• Documented CM
process consistent with
planning
• Consistent &
appropriate:
o RFP & Contract
CM/DM
o Acquisition of data;
EDI
o Items identified
o Performance
attributes identified
and achieved
o Supported items
documented
o Identification and
marking sufficient for
support
• Proposed changes
dispositioned
expeditiously
• Verified changes
incorporated in all
affected items,
documents
• Status accounting
database appropriate to
each phase
• CM process
performance measured
& continuously
improved
• Lesson learned
• Program image
enhanced
Inputs
Mechanisms/Facilitators
Outputs/Results
Mechanisms/Facilitators
Constraints
138
Understanding the factors that influence the success of the overall
configuration management process is important to the DoD project managers,
configuration management professionals, and academia. Publication of these
research results can generate discussion among practitioners regarding how various
factors interrelate in the success of current and past DoD projects. The
dissemination of these results to academic journals, professional management
journals, and practitioners may also be important to projects that have configuration
management processes.
Limitations
There are several limitations in this study. The first limitation is small
sample size, likely due to the criteria for participation in the study. The participants
for the research were 100 configuration management professionals currently
supporting a DoD project and had to have at least one year of experience in this
role, and be at least 18 years of age. The criteria was intended to narrow the
participants to those that had adequate knowledge regarding the factors that
influence the success of the overall configuration management process in DoD
projects. Although a total of 101 configuration management professionals
participated in the study, only 85 participants complied with the requirements to
participate in the study. The remaining 16 participants did not have a least one-year
experience and were not provided access to the remaining portions of the online
139
survey. Perspectives from former configuration management professionals that no
longer support DoD projects in the role of configuration management were not
considered because a means of accessing them was not available. Also, the
researcher questioned whether their lapse in time performing configuration
management duties in a DoD project would have hindered their abilities to
accurately recollect events accurately or thoroughly. Therefore, the sample size was
smaller than desired. However, there was still adequate power to examine simple
correlations and therefore this limitation likely did not have a substantive impact on
the outcomes of this study. The researcher also had limited variance in the
predictors. This lack of variance can attenuate correlations and limit the possibility
of finding significant results.
The DoD does not readily disclose information regarding their projects
because of classification levels. These domain-based limitations impact the ability
to explore varying branches of services. This research was conducted using the
aggregate level of the DoD. The research does not explore the differences between
all branches of the services and DoD configuration management professionals. The
study participants represented all branches of the DoD, thus perspectives from the
different services were not considered. For example, configuration management
professionals supporting Army projects may have varying perceptions from
configuration management professionals supporting Navy projects. Although the
140
services have very similar requirements on how they implement configuration
management, the nuances of these differences are worth exploring.
A limitation of the research for consideration is the self-reporting of the
participants. Although the survey was based on expert judgement from experienced
configuration management professionals, biases could have existed among
participants. These biases could have been introduced from the personal
assessments of these experts. A lapsed in time could skew the memories and
experiences of the configuration management professionals.
Suggestions for Future Research
In a similar vein to the study limitations, there are several recommendations
for future research. First, the experiences of those who once held the role of
configuration management professional within a DoD project are also valuable and
it may be interesting to know if their perception is different from the current
configuration management professionals. Future research could also examine the
perceptions of configuration management professionals based on their current
positions. For example, research could examine configuration management
professionals occupying such roles as analyst, managers, or directors to see if their
positions impact the selection of relevant or critical factors that influence the
success of overall configuration management process in DoD projects. Also, a
longitudinal study could examine the configuration management process during
141
varying times of the project lifecycle, within a certain timeframe, to determine the
influence of factors.
Currently, the research on the configuration management process is very
limited, especially within the DoD. The researcher encourages scholars to further
explore the lived experiences of configuration management professionals that
support DoD projects through a qualitative approach. One-on-one interviews that
are based on the perceptions of configuration management professionals that
support DoD projects could produce an entire new set of factors for consideration
or analysis, which is unique to DoD projects. Future research should also examine
communication across the entire DoD project and its effectiveness on the
configuration management department.
Future research could also determine the degree to which each factor
influences the overall configuration management process. Analysis of the degree
of frequency for each facilitating and obstructing factors could lead to plausible
solutions and corrective actions to address the influence of these factors on DoD
projects . The researcher chose to first focus on identifying the relevancy and
criticality of the facilitating and obstructing factors that influence the success of the
overall configuration management process in DoD projects. Also, the researcher
thought that significance was found in examining the correlation between years of
experience and academic qualification and the criticality of each factor. The
research recommends that future studies focus on the degree of each frequency in
142
an effort to develop clear roadmaps for improvement practices of configuration
management process in DoD projects.
Future studies could seek to determine the relevancy of the facilitating and
obstructing factors to the success of each of the five functions of configuration
management instead of the overall configuration management process. In addition,
examination of the relevancy and criticality of the facilitating and obstructing
factors that influence the success of the overall configuration management process
can be examined from the perspective of other functional areas such as project
managers and engineers that support DoD projects.
Future research could also examine the influence that academic
qualifications has on the competence of current configuration management
professionals within DoD projects. There is currently no formal research that
examines the influence of academic qualifications on the competence of
configuration management professionals within DoD projects. Perhaps knowledge
gained from obtaining a specific academic degree can contribute to configuration
management professionals’ understanding of how the project operates providing
them with the ability to better manage changes and understand their impact. For
example, does a degree in business management versus computer science
contribute to a better understanding of implementing configuration management
processes? A configuration management professional who possesses a degree in
business might focus more on the strategic aspects of implementing configuration
143
management compared to a configuration management professional that has a
degree in computer science might focus more the technical aspects of configuration
management processes. Future research should also compare the competence level
of configuration management professionals that have a degree compared to those
that do not have a degree.
In addition, future research should examine whether some employers should
even require academic qualifications, or should they rely on years of experience
instead. Competent configuration management practitioners are proficient in
understanding how the project operates so they can better facilitate changes and
understand their impact to the overall product (Quigley & Robertson, 2015). Since
configuration management competencies are often obtained through work
experience, should employers even consider academic qualifications when
selecting configuration management professionals.
Future research should examine the software tools used for configuration
management process. Special emphasis should be made to examine the
configuration management professional’s perception of the software tool used for
the configuration management process. Future research should also consider the
significance between the years of experience of the configuration management
professional and their perception of the software tool used for configuration
management process. Software tools must be user friendly and meet the needs of
the desired configuration management process to be effective and add value to the
144
project (Ali & Kidd, 2013). Effective configuration management tools can reduce
cost, minimize risks, and provide real-time status of product development (Delaet
et al., 2010). The software tool used for the configuration management process is
important as well as the configuration management professional’s perception of the
software tool.
The researcher also suggests future research examine why lack of
recognition was not considered important by configuration management
professionals. According to Burgess et al. (2005), lack of recognition affects the
configuration management process because professionals feel undervalued and not
appreciated. Yet, lack of recognition had the lowest endorsement of each relevant
and critical obstructing factors. Understanding why configuration management
professionals do not consider lack of recognition as relevant or critical could
provide valuable insight into their performance and motivation which directly
impacts the success of the overall configuration management process.
