Mutual Monitoring of Resources in an Enterprise Systems Program
significant with b 5 20.224 (t 5 3.537).
Finally, task coordination was positively
associated with the enterprise systems
program implementation efficiency (b 5
0.390, t 5 4.787), as expected.
Discussion and Implications
Resource competition among projects
results in negative program consequences as individual projects inevitably focus on self-interest and fail to
Construct Items Loadings AVE CR
Project Goal Understanding Gs1 Specific goals for each project were explained to the project managers in the
0.912** 0.8573 0.963
Gs2 A set of specifically assigned goals for each project was fully understood by
project managers in the organization.
Gs3 Project managers understand the exact level of the assigned performance goals
for each project.
Gs4 Assigned goals are clear to the project managers. 0.951**
Project Goal Interdependence GI1 The goals of each project are structured as win–win situations. 0.897** 0.6016 0.814
GI2 Accomplishing the enterprise systems program goal affected whether or not the
other project managers achieved their own goals.
GI3 All the projects within the enterprise systems program are collectively held
accountable for program performance.
Mutual Resource Monitoring RM1 Project managers successfully tracked other projects’ resources (such as
personnel, equipment, and others) that are allocated within the enterprise
0.871** 0.8113 0.928
RM2 Project managers successfully tracked the resources status relevant to the
enterprise systems program.
RM3 Project managers successfully tracked the resources used for the tasks taken by
other project teams.
Task Coordination CO1 There were clear and fully comprehended subtasks within our enterprise
0.893** 0.717 0.883
CO2 The subtasks within our enterprise systems program were well accepted by all
CO3 There were no conflicting interests within our enterprise systems program
Enterprise Systems Program
PE1 The enterprise systems program effectively utilized available resources to
deliver the specified program scope.
0.892** 0.7908 0.938
PE2 The specified scope of the enterprise systems program was delivered on time
and within budget.
PE3 It is easy to say that this enterprise systems program was efficiently
PE4 General speaking, we are satisfied with the operation efficiency of this
enterprise systems program implementation.
*P , 0.05 **P , 0.01
Table 4: Measurement items, loadings, and construct reliability.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
1. Project Goal Interdependence 0.776
2. Project Goal Understanding 0.048 0.926
3. Enterprise Systems Program
0.132 0.492** 0.889
4.TaskCoordination 0.133 0.648** 0.430* 0.847
5. Mutual Resource Monitoring 0.194 0.195* 0.274** 0.221* 0.901
Square root of AVE is in bold on the diagonal *P , 0.05, **P , 0.01
Table 5: Discriminant validity.