Chapter 6: Discussion of Results
6.4 Hypothesises
6.4.1 Hypothesis 1
The null hypothesis was "There is no statistically significant positive relationship between time management and project management satisfaction (as project success) (H10)." and the alternative hypothesis was “There is a statistically significant positive relationship between time management and project management satisfaction (as project success) (H1A)”.
According to section 5.8.1.1, the Pearson correlation coefficient (+0.361) indicated a positive correlation between time management and project management satisfaction (as construct of project success). Then, based on section 5.8.2.1, the time management predicted approximately 13% of the variance in project management satisfaction (F =
20.501, p <0.05 at 95% confidence level). As mentioned in the section 5.8.3.1, the regression coefficient was statistically significant at 95% confidence level (Beta = 0.519, p
< 0.05) and VIF (1.000) was less than ten indicating that the model was a good fit. The equation showed at section 5.8.3.1.
According to it, the null hypothesis rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted at the 95% confidence level. It means that statistically significant positive relationship existed between time management and project management satisfaction (as a success of the project). The results of this research is in consistency with the outcomes of other studies (Grissom et al., 2015).
As mentioned the time management predicted nearly 13% of the outcome, which means that the majority of the predictive of project management satisfaction was explained by different independent variables. Based on other literatures in project management (Papke- Shields & Boyer-Wright, 2017; Pehlivan, 2013), the different predictors of project management satisfaction are interrelated, for example quality management, cost management, and risk management.
6.4.2 Hypothesis 2
The null hypothesis was "There is n statistically significant positive relationship between cost management and project management satisfaction (as project success) (H20)." and the alternative hypothesis was “There is a statistically significant positive relationship between cost management and project management satisfaction (as project success) (H2A)”.
According to section 5.8.1.2, the Pearson correlation coefficient (+0.346) indicated a positive correlation between cost management and project management satisfaction (as construct of project success). Then, based on section 5.8.2.2, the time management predicted approximately 12% of the variance in project management satisfaction (F = 18.597, p <0.05 at 95% confidence level). As mentioned in the section 5.8.3.2, the regression coefficient was statistically significant at 95% confidence level (Beta = 0.510, p
< 0.05) and VIF (1.000) was less than ten indicating that, the model was a good fit. The equation showed at section 5.8.3.2.
According to it, the null hypothesis rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted at the 95% confidence level. It means that statistically significant positive relationship existed between cost management and project management satisfaction (as a success of the
project) The results of this research is in consistency with the outcomes of other studies (Chen, 2015; Smith, 2014)
As mentioned, the time management predicted nearly 12% of the outcome, which means that the majority of the predictive of project management satisfaction was explained by different independent variables. Based on other literatures in project management (Khodakarami & Abdi, 2014; Smith, 2014, 2016) the different predictors of project management satisfaction are interrelated, for example, knowledge management, innovation management, strategy management, time management, risk management, and quality management.
6.4.3 Hypothesis 3
The null hypothesis was "There is no positive statistical relationship between Planning and success of project. (H30). and the alternative hypothesis was “There is a positive statistical relationship between planning and success of project. (H3A)”.
At this research, the time management and cost management were the constructs of planning and project management satisfaction was the construct for project success.
According to section 5.8.1, the positive relationship between them was indicating a positive correlation between planning and project success. With more attention to planning by the project management, they have more satisfaction with project success.
Then, based on section 5.8.2.3, the planning predicted approximately 16.2% of the variance in project management satisfaction (F = 13.184, p <0.05 at 95% confidence level).
As mentioned in the section 5.8.3.3, the regression coefficient was statistically significant at 95% confidence level (Beta = 0.354, p < 0.05) and VIF (1.410) was less than ten indicating the model was a good fit.
According to it, the null hypothesis rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted at the 95% confidence level. It means that, statistically significant positive relationship existed between time management and project management satisfaction (as a success of the project) that result of this research is consisting with the outcomes of other studies (Sanchez et al., 2017).
Based on the literature reviewed at chapter two, the satisfaction of stockholders is equal to project success (Fonseca et al., 2016; Harrison & Wicks, 2013; Heravi et al., 2015;
Schnackenberg & Tomlinson, 2016), and based on the stockholder theory the project management is one of the stockholders of the project (Freeman, 1994, 2004; Miles, 2017);
therefore, the project management satisfaction is a construct of project success. Then based on literature reviewed, project management success is equal with project management satisfaction (Ofori, 2013; Radujkovic & Sjekavica, 2017); and according to project success framework (Todorovic et al., 2015), the success of project management is related to the tools, the same as the time management and cost management, that based on the literature reviewed, they are the constructs of planning.
The equation 3 at section 5.8.3.3 presented the time management as construct of planning has a more effectiveness on project success in compare with cost management, but both have the positive relation with project management satisfaction as construct of project success. This consisted of the outcomes of existed researches.