<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The CHAOS Report 2009 on IT Project Failure</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pmhut.com/the-chaos-report-2009-on-it-project-failure/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pmhut.com/the-chaos-report-2009-on-it-project-failure</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:47:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Joe Barwell</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/the-chaos-report-2009-on-it-project-failure/comment-page-1#comment-55485</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Barwell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 03:29:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=3342#comment-55485</guid>
		<description>It appears that you have transposed many of your Challenged and Failed rows of figures above, i.e. compare them with those published in Eveleen &amp; Verhof's article in IEEE Software, here: http://www.few.vu.nl/~x/chaos/chaos.pdf Years 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2006 all differ; only 2004 &amp; 2009 are the same as yours. Or are their figures wrong?
Where did you get your figures for 2002, which Eveleen &amp; Verhof do not include?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It appears that you have transposed many of your Challenged and Failed rows of figures above, i.e. compare them with those published in Eveleen &amp; Verhof&#8217;s article in IEEE Software, here: <a href="http://www.few.vu.nl/~x/chaos/chaos.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.few.vu.nl/~x/chaos/chaos.pdf</a> Years 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2006 all differ; only 2004 &amp; 2009 are the same as yours. Or are their figures wrong?<br />
Where did you get your figures for 2002, which Eveleen &amp; Verhof do not include?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Project Estimation Using &#8220;Use Cases&#8221; - PM Hut</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/the-chaos-report-2009-on-it-project-failure/comment-page-1#comment-22527</link>
		<dc:creator>Project Estimation Using &#8220;Use Cases&#8221; - PM Hut</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2010 14:28:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=3342#comment-22527</guid>
		<description>[...] I am disappointed at the high rate of project failures in the software industry. According to the 2009 report from the Standish Group, almost 68% of the projects were canceled, delivered late, did not meet product specifications or [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I am disappointed at the high rate of project failures in the software industry. According to the 2009 report from the Standish Group, almost 68% of the projects were canceled, delivered late, did not meet product specifications or [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Can Technology Solve the Project Execution Problem? - PM Hut</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/the-chaos-report-2009-on-it-project-failure/comment-page-1#comment-21901</link>
		<dc:creator>Can Technology Solve the Project Execution Problem? - PM Hut</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:59:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=3342#comment-21901</guid>
		<description>[...] of project execution must be basically solved, right? Wrong. The Standish Group has found that 68% of technology projects failed in 2009. Does this mean that project management solutions are just a waste of [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of project execution must be basically solved, right? Wrong. The Standish Group has found that 68% of technology projects failed in 2009. Does this mean that project management solutions are just a waste of [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Kelly</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/the-chaos-report-2009-on-it-project-failure/comment-page-1#comment-20734</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 17:08:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=3342#comment-20734</guid>
		<description>Great post Jorge!  I recently started blogging and incorporated a link to this blog in a recent post of mine.  

I am thinking about an upcoming post where I would like to discuss executive commitment to project management best practices and its effect on the success of projects.  I have seen many organizations implementing a watered down version of PM or PMO's...some project templates and a task tracker.  Until we have executives viewing PMs as business leaders and not just consultants providing project status, we will continue to see watered down success rates.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post Jorge!  I recently started blogging and incorporated a link to this blog in a recent post of mine.  </p>
<p>I am thinking about an upcoming post where I would like to discuss executive commitment to project management best practices and its effect on the success of projects.  I have seen many organizations implementing a watered down version of PM or PMO&#8217;s&#8230;some project templates and a task tracker.  Until we have executives viewing PMs as business leaders and not just consultants providing project status, we will continue to see watered down success rates.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil Simon</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/the-chaos-report-2009-on-it-project-failure/comment-page-1#comment-15089</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil Simon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:43:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=3342#comment-15089</guid>
		<description>Interesting statistics. You'd think that we'd be better at implementing IT projects at this point.  I'd love to see Waterfall vs. Agile breakdowns of these statistics, if they're available.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting statistics. You&#8217;d think that we&#8217;d be better at implementing IT projects at this point.  I&#8217;d love to see Waterfall vs. Agile breakdowns of these statistics, if they&#8217;re available.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

