Projektna mreža Slovenije              September 2009 4
1. Introduction
The relevant research has shown (The Standish Group Reports) that a large number of organizations do not achieve the set goals in the execution of their 
projects, among them, the completion of the project in the 
predicted time period, within the budget and the agreed 
quality; on the other hand, a more serious  problem seems 
that many of them fail to achieve business goals, while it is 
a commonplace that the desired results fail to be achieved 
in either group. The majority of organizations strive to 
improve the execution of their projects in a traditional 
way, e.g., through the employees’ education, the work 
process improvement, introducing software support, etc. 
The focus upon these elements only results in a limitation 
as to how much the effectiveness and the efficiency of the 
project execution can be improved, especially from the 
aspect of the organization’s achieving its goals. In order 
that a higher competitive advantage be achieved, the real 
improvements have to be closely linked to the strategic 
aspect of project management.
The development of the project management concept 
is today directed to the strategic aspects, hence project 
management now is approached in a way different 
from that in the past. This new attitude is related to the 
understanding of project management as part of the 
company’s strategic activities (Williams & Parr, 2004). The 
relation between the project and the strategic managements 
is a logic one, however, the dilemmas and problems as to 
how they should be related are still present. This calls for 
a development of appropriate guides on the methods in 
which the organizations can harmonize the projects with 
strategies, as well as make the project managers and the 
project teams responsible not only for bringing a project 
to an end, but for ensuring that the project should achieve 
the organizational objectives for the purpose of which it 
was started.
How to Achieve Organizational Goals by Strategic Project Management
Dejan Petrović, Marko Mihić, Vladimir Obradović
Faculty of Organizational Sciences, Jove Ilića 154, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
e-mail: dejanp@fon.bg.ac.yu; mihicm@fon.rs; obradovicv@fon.rs
Abstract
The paper considers specificities of linking strategic management and project management. Project portfolio management, 
program management and project management are shown separately. Project portfolio management has aim to implement 
company strategy successfully through realization of different programs and projects on efficient and effective way. It 
comprises processes of selection, priority definition and resource allocation for implementation of business strategy. Project 
and program management are shown through new concept – strategic project/program management, and at the end of the 
paper, measurement of strategic project success is considered.
Key words: strategic portfolio management, strategic project management, project strategy, project success
Znanstveni Prispevek
2. Strategic management and project 
management
Generally, strategy is defined as a means to achieve 
individual or organizational goals (Grant, 2007). In this 
definition, means is defined as a plan or policy determining 
concrete actions. Ansoff (2007) finds that, regardless of 
the complexity of the managerial problem, it is possible to 
identify a number of strategic variables that will determine 
the solution to this problem. According to him, strategy 
means a set of decision rules as well as guide to achieve 
organizational goals in the future (Ansoff, 1987). On the 
other hand, Porter (1996) maintains that the essence of 
the strategy is a clever selection of varied sets of activities 
that will ensure a unique combination of values for the 
organization. In other words, the basis of the strategy is 
a difference in comparison to the competitors. Chandler 
(1962) defines strategy as a process of determining the 
long-term goals of the company, defining the direction of 
activities and allocating resources necessary in achieving 
these goals. The definition is supported by Grant’s (1991) 
attitude that strategy is the choice the organization makes 
between the resources and competence on one hand and 
opportunities and differences in the environment, on the 
other.
Globalization, the technological development and the 
geopolitical changes in this century call for the change in 
the organization’s strategic orientation as well. Growth in 
profits, as one of the basic goals, is being exchanged for the 
growth in value for the shareholders, for the respect for the 
business ethics and for the establishment of the socially 
responsible business (Smith, 2003). The turbulent and 
unpredictable development of technology has also had an 
impact upon a fierce competition in certain markets, such 
as e-trade, where the winner captures the entire or a major 
share of the market (e.g. eBay in the Internet auctions).
In answer to these challenges it is necessary that such 
Projektna mreža Slovenije              September 2009 5
Znanstveni Prispevek
a management system in the organization be defined that 
will pool the needs for change in the form of a different 
number and size of projects and programs to be realized 
as well as the strategy these projects are comprised in. By 
applying the concept of the project-oriented organization 
as a frame for such a management system, if it is supported 
by an appropriate organization, team work and project 
culture, it is possible to achieve a substantial improvement 
in the business results.
According to Loo (1996), project management is a new 
management approach since the projects:
■ are focused upon results,
■ require efficient leadership,
■ are a meeting point of different stakeholders in the 
company,
■ serve as a synergy factor uniting multidisciplinary 
teams towards a defined goal, with definite time and 
resource limitations,
■ are the basis for individual development within the 
team,
■ serve as a team membership enhancing factor.
On the other hand, in their detailed research on PM 
processes, technologies and skills that in which they 
explored over 3,500 articles, journals and reports, 
Kloppenborg and Opfer (2002) defined the following 
trends related to the project management evolution:
■ standardization of processes and tools, 
■ broader use of Web-based technologies for corporate 
communication and collaboration,
■ implementation of generally accepted PM practices 
and methodologies,
■ clear „outsourcing“ in the execution of the projects of 
the largest companies,
■ larger share in the non-profit sector projects,
■ evolution of project manager’s role into a leader’s role,
■ adjusting the project scope to the demands of business 
and measurable benefits,
■ increasing importance of project selection and 
prioritization,
■ stress on formal PM trainings and accreditation,
■ increasing focus upon risk management, 
communications management and stakeholder 
management, especially in the planning phase.
Webster (1999) states that in the conditions of temporary 
organizational structures and an ever present scarcity 
of resources, today’s organizations recognize project 
management as a method to achieve an adequate 
system flexibility and the desired business results. This 
attitude is supported by Hebert (2002), who views 
project management as a flexible, efficient and strategic 
management system to achieve planned results in the 
traditional management structures. Similarly, he maintains 
that the present role of project managers is primarily 
strategic (50%), then managerial (40%) and in the least 
technical (10%). These views are shared by Cicmil (1997), 
who thinks that project managers should reposition the role 
of project management from the medium and operative 
management discipline into a business philosophy whose 
task is to support strategic organizational change in the 
company.
Project management is therefore no longer viewed as 
an approach to planning and monitoring a project, but 
rather as a way to achieve the company’s strategic goals in 
a new business environment. This means implementation 
of modern PM disciplines that stress the strategic aspect 
of project management. The company in which project 
management is pronounced to be strategically important 
is defined as project-oriented company.
The project-oriented company can be defined as a 
business entity that conducts its activities on the principle 
of the project organization of work, implementing 
contemporary achievements of project management, 
i.e., using program management or project management 
(Mihić & Petrović, 2004). The organization and processes 
executed by the project-oriented company (POC) are 
characterized by a complex structure, by the dynamics 
reflected in constant changes in the number and size of 
the programs and projects, by flexibility, as well as by a 
large number of permanently or temporarily employed 
participants.
The basic features of the project-oriented organization 
may be listed as follows (Gareis, 2003):
■ takes project management as its strategy;
■ uses temporary organization to perform complex 
processes and activities;
■ has a separate permanent organization that functions 
as integrator;
■ manages a project portfolio consisting of different 
types of projects;
■ implements a new management paradigm;
■ is characterized a specific project culture;
■ considers itself as project-oriented. 
The boundaries and contents of a project-oriented 
company are changing in character (Gareis, 2003). This is 
reflected, on one hand, in constant changes in the number 
and size of projects, in the engagement of temporary or 
permanent resources and in the use of virtual teams for 
the tasks of coordination and management. On the other 
hand, relations are established with various strategic 
partners, so that the projects and programs are realized in 
the conditions of different social environments to which 
the company has to adapt. In order to adequately respond 
to challenge that takes on the character of project-oriented 
enterprise, it is necessary that a unique identity of the 
company be defined, however, it should be flexible enough 
not to endanger the company’s dynamic character.
When analyzing the project-oriented organization 
strategy, we must by all means take into consideration 
the Hamel and Prahalad’s (1989) research, in which they 
challenge the conventional approach to adjusting the 
company’s capacity to the demands of the environment. 
According to the research, less successful companies try 
to realize their strategic intentions within the resources 
available. They support the attitude that the strategic 
balance and sustainable competitive advantage are achieved 
by implementing one of the available generic strategies. 
Such an approach results in repetition and imitation. 
On the other hand, the most successful companies focus 
upon using key competences in a new and innovative 
way, in order to achieve the goals that at first sight seem 
unattainable. The resources are used in a creative way, 
         Projektna mreža Slovenije              September 2009 6
Znanstveni Prispevek
different demands are put to the environment, while the 
company continually improves key competences and 
undertakes organizational change. It is these features that 
make the strategic basis of the project-oriented company. 
Its key project management competences are functional in 
the realization of strategic intentions.
Creating the project portfolio, which is the first step 
towards taking action is considered to be a most important 
element of the project-oriented organization strategy. The 
aim of linking the strategy to the project portfolio is to 
bring into accord the project and the priorities with the 
defined strategy and strategic priorities (Killen, Hunt, 
& Kleinschmidt, 2008). This is primarily important in 
adjusting the portfolio size to the company’s capacity and 
presenting the projects in the portfolio as key events in the 
process of achieving a desired future state.
In the context of the project-oriented company, the 
project portfolio is viewed as a set of projects a company 
executes in a given period of time (Jovanović, Mihić, & 
Petrović, 2007). To this group belong research projects, 
development projects, work processes improvement 
projects, IT projects, cost reduction projects, product 
and services improvement projects, projects for ordering 
parties, etc.
The portfolio management is critical for the success of 
the project-oriented company. It covers areas such as project 
selection, project prioritization, resources allocation and 
the company’s business strategy implementation. Thus it 
has to answer the following questions (Cooper, Edgett, & 
Kleinschmidt, 1998):
■ Which projects should be realized?
■ How should projects be most efficiently organized as 
regards achieving desired goals?
■ Which is the right relationship between projects?
■ Which project mix can give best results?
■ Which projects are of highest priority?
■ How should resources be distributed among different 
projects?
The project portfolio forming process is necessary in 
order that the right projects should have a chance to be 
realized (Mikkola, 2001). The company must first identify 
the possibilities, estimate its organizational adjustment, 
analyze costs, benefits and risk, and finally, develop and 
select the portfolio. Every company must undergo this 
process if it seeks to create an appropriate project mix. 
The methods and techniques used may differ according 
to the maturity of the company, project types and the 
experience in forming the project mix. The project 
portfolio management is an important factor of a long-
term strategic success of project-oriented companies.
3. The relationship between the 
strategic and the project managements 
in the organization
The relationship between the strategic and the project 
managements can be presented by way of a management 
pyramid (Figure 1.) that is especially present in the project 
oriented organizations. Looking from the top down, 
the top of the pyramid provides for the directions of an 
aggregate project and program management – the strategic 
management. It is on this level that the organization 
defines the comprehensive bases of its existence and 
business activities. Here the vision, the mission, the 
principles, the organizational goals and the strategic plan 
are defined. Through strategic planning the company 
and the individual business units define their path of 
action and identify the key objectives to be achieved. The 
strategic direction of a company is a basis for the selection 
of projects, such as the research projects, the new products 
and services development, the information technologies 
implementation projects, the business operations 
improvement projects, etc.
Figure 1: The relationship between the strategic and the project
managements in the organization (Williams & Parr, 2004; 
modified)
The strategic portfolio management allows for the 
translation of organizational strategic goals into the 
programs and projects. On defining the strategic direction, 
it is necessary that the programs and the projects be 
selected and that the resources be allocated. The project 
and program selection includes the identification of 
opportunities, the estimate of organizational fitting, the 
cost analysis, the risk and benefit analysis, the portfolio 
forming and selection. The success of the project portfolio 
depends on the organizational readiness and support in 
the strategic portfolio management.
The majority of portfolio decisions are burdened by 
a time horizon, by a serious uncertainty and by a large 
number of variables that affect any program and any project. 
The most commonly used tools in the development of the 
business model to predict the potential value of the project 
are the impact diagram, the sensitivity analysis or the 
decision tree. A well defined decision process is the basis 
for developing an effective portfolio strategy. Defining a 
quality decision to be implemented in, e.g., research and 
development, where the result will not be fully known in 
years, is no easy task.
On passing the portfolio selection processes each 
program and project is appointed an appropriate 
significance in relation to the organization as well as in 
relation to other programs and projects. The problem 
in the portfolio management, however, arises when the 
projects selected do not show a clear connection or a 
Projektna mreža Slovenije              September 2009 7
Znanstveni Prispevek
relation with the company’s strategy. Generally, all the 
projects to be executed should be in accord with the 
strategy and philosophy of the organizational work and 
business activities. It is often that certain projects that 
are under way in the organization are not subjected to 
the portfolio selection process, but represent a group of 
projects that are realized independently of the portfolio, 
but still consume the limited resources of the company.
The project linking should be operationalized at the 
strategic management level. The links on this level, although 
rather complicated sometimes, are the key to a successful 
multiproject management in the organization. Each new 
project in the domain of processes, products or services 
should be interlinked with the previous programs and 
projects, or the programs and projects that are currently 
under way. Regardless of the extent to which the projects 
are autonomous as regards one another, on the company 
level they are not independent. Their interrelation is 
evident in the disposal of the limited organizational 
resources, to the mutual aims, to the activities such as 
supplies that are generally carried out for a number of 
projects. The projects that are conducted independently 
of the project portfolios are generally smaller projects with 
daily planning and priority identification. They are started 
as a response to certain urgent organizational needs, the 
reason being most commonly in relation to a certain risk 
and its consequences or to taking a certain opportunity.
The program and project management occupy the 
lowest levels. In the modern perception of the project 
oriented organization, we are dealing with strategic 
program management and strategic project management. 
The strategic program and project management are 
defined on the basis of the realization, by the stages and 
the activities related to the multiproject management in 
the organization.
All the elements of the pyramid must be synchronized 
towards a successful implementation of a multiproject 
management in the organization. The organization 
has to establish an unbiased mechanism in monitoring 
the programs and projects: measurement of returns on 
investments of an individual project/program, measuring 
a number of projects/programs within a project portfolio 
and a continual adjusting to the overall objectives of the 
organization. It is of great importance that there is a prior 
agreement as to an unbiased priority identifying. It is 
only after the company has defined its overall objectives 
and the project investment strategy that an optimal 
group of projects or a project mix can be created for the 
implementation of the company’s strategy and achievement 
of organizational goals.
The strategic portfolio management, the strategic 
program management and strategic project management 
are shown to represent different levels of management in 
an organization. These forms of management vary in size 
and in the contents of management; however, they make a 
whole of the multiproject management in the organization. 
The program architecture comprises the establishment 
of mechanisms which serve to provide the program and 
project teams with a support throughout the procedures, 
methods and techniques necessary for them to be efficient 
in work. The change architecture focuses upon the human 
factor the change brings. It can be defined as a process of 
change strategy creation and implementation.
4. Strategic project management 
The previous research that connected the strategic 
management and the program/project management 
was directed towards the elaboration of portfolio 
management. The research comprised the aspects of 
portfolio management such as the project selection, 
priority identification, harmonizing the projects within 
the portfolio, adjusting the project to the project strategy, 
strategic resource management and improving the strategic 
management of the functional areas and projects of the 
organization (Cooper, Edgett and Kleinschmidt, 1998; 
Dinsmore, 1999; Dye and Pennypacker, 1999; Petrović, 
2003). The latest research, however, relates to adjusting the 
strategy on the project and the program levels of activities 
and creating an integrated adapted approach of program 
and project management to a business strategy (Cleland, 
1999; Morris and Jamison, 2004; Shenhar, Milošević, Dvir 
and Thamhain, 2007).
The strategic project management is a new approach in 
project management, focused upon creating competitive 
advantage for the organization in the project execution. 
This approach is especially relevant for strategic projects 
initiated in order to create the company’s future, all kinds 
of research and development projects among them. 
However, it is not related to this group of projects only. 
The organizations of today can no longer leave the 
strategy in the care of the top managers, and leave the 
operational realization to be carried out by project 
managers. The projects will increasingly have to be 
managed as strategic activities. To realize these changes, 
the project managers and the project teams must have a 
formal planning and execution framework in accordance 
with the strategic approach. Table 1 presents the difference 
between the classic project management and the strategic 
project management.
Table 1: Project management and strategic project 
management (Shenhar, Milošević, Dvir, & Thamhain, 
2007, modified)
Project 
management
Strategic project 
management
Basic 
Paradigm
Projects are a collection 
of activities that need 
to be executed on 
time, budget, and 
requirements
Projects are strategic 
organizational processes 
that are initiated to 
achieve business goals
Focus Efficiency Effectiveness andefficiency
Perspective Operational Strategic and operational
Manager’s 
Role
Getting the job done 
– on time, within 
budget, according to 
specifications
Getting the business 
results Winning in the 
market place
Project 
Management 
style
One size fits all Adjustment approach
Project 
definition
Project scope, what 
needs to be done?
Product, competitive 
advantage, strategy, scope
         Projektna mreža Slovenije              September 2009 8
Znanstveni Prispevek
Project 
management
Strategic project 
management
Planning Activities, schedule, budget
End results, success 
dimensions, activities
Project 
Reviews
Progress, status, mile-
stones, budget
Customer needs, strategy, 
success dimensions, status
Human Side Teams, conflict resolu-tion Meaning, motivation
5. Project strategy
The basic organizational goal is the added value creation 
for its stakeholders. The most important stakeholders are 
its owners, then people who work in the organization, 
and finally the clients and the customers who purchase 
the goods or the services from a certain organization. A 
successful organization creates value for each of the groups. 
The value creation for each of the groups of stakeholders 
is also a means of value creation for other groups that find 
their interest in the business operations.
The strategy is the basic guide of the overall value 
creation that is central to the organizational existence. 
The most important function of the strategy as part of 
the planned process is to develop a collective mind and 
transfer knowledge to managers that will be responsible 
for the strategy implementation. The project managers 
have to introduce the strategic project management in 
order to reproduce the strategic process within their 
projects and ensure that the project results be in accord 
with the strategy. The business strategy should provide 
for the key orientation of the project and is a foundation 
for the decision making in the course of the program and 
project realization.
The understanding of strategy as a management 
process and the role of the project manager in the process 
is related to the understanding of the difference between 
the business strategy or a strategic direction/path and the 
strategy that is executed or the obligatory strategy. The 
defined strategy means the attitude of the top management 
as to what an organization should do and what it will be 
doing. The strategy that is being executed is the one the 
organization really implements. They differ in that the 
middle level managers and the project managers have 
to translate the defined strategy into action. In this way 
certain elements are lost, however, others are gained in 
the process itself. There is always a gap between a defined 
strategy and the strategy that is executed, however, when 
the strategy process functions well, both strategies will 
help the company follow a consistent and successful path.
Bringing the strategic management and the project 
management into accord is a two-way process, where 
the adopted organizational business strategy affects the 
selection, preparation and execution of the project. On the 
other hand, the project execution has a feedback impact 
upon the organizational strategy. Every project may have 
its own specific strategy and that is the strategy that is 
being implemented. The project strategy is the method in 
which the project is planned to achieve the set objectives 
and business results.
The project strategy should have the following defined 
elements (Shenhar, et al., 2007, modified):
■ Business perspective/background – The business 
perspective defines the reasons and the motivation 
for the project realization. Here, it is necessary that 
the product/service users, their needs and demands 
be defined, as well as the method the project to solve 
them. 
■ Objective – Here, it is necessary that the end goal of 
the project be defined, that is, the business goal and 
the long-term benefit to be achieved by the project 
completion.
■ Product/service definition – The product/service 
definition comprises the description of the product or 
the service, their functional or technical characteristics, 
implementation and application costs, reliability, 
maintenance, compatibility, etc.
■ Competitive advantage/value – The reasons are 
described as to why one will be willing to pay for 
the product or the service, why the product/service 
is superior to the alternative products/services, etc. 
On the other hand, it is necessary that the value be 
defined from the part of the organization – the long-
term benefits the organization will enjoy and the way 
the product/service adapt to the long-term strategic 
objectives.
■ Success and failure criteria – The criteria on the basis 
of which the project will be assessed should be defined, 
but the project limitations and the main anticipated 
risks, too.
■ Project definition – This section defines what is 
necessary to be done on the project, but also what 
should not be done. The project type may also be 
defined according to certain characteristics (novelty, 
complexity, technology, uncertainty), which in turn 
defines the approach to project management. The 
project definition includes the appointing of the project 
team and the project manager that will execute the 
project, the execution time horizon and the necessary 
resources.
■ Strategic focus – This is the last section defined in 
the project strategy, nevertheless, it is its main part. It 
defines the manner in which the project is planned to 
achieve the set goals and achieve business results. The 
strategic focus will include the guide that will highlight 
to the project participants the activities and the 
approach by which the desired objective will be made 
a reality. The strategic focus comprises such elements 
as the position to be attained by the project execution, 
the guide to behavior and decision making, the work 
policy and the development of the processes that will 
lead to the planned results.
6. The project strategic success 
measurement
The project strategic success measurement is one step 
above the classic project success measurement. On the 
basis of the research conducted by Shenhar, Dvir, Levy 
and Maltz (2001) four dimensions of project success are 
proposed:
Projektna mreža Slovenije              September 2009 9
Znanstveni Prispevek
■ Project efficiency – According to the authors of the 
research, this is a short-term value that measures the 
project efficiency as regards the time, budged and the 
project requirements. The results for this dimension 
of the project are readily obtainable, the measuring 
and getting the result being possible at any moment 
along the project execution. Although success in this 
project dimension may give good results and show 
that the project is well conducted and that the work 
on the project was efficient, this does not mean that 
the project will yield good long-term results and bring 
benefits for the organization.
■ Benefit to the customer – The second dimension of 
the project success is related to the customer. This 
dimension stresses the customer’s requirements and 
the manner in which their set demand is met. It also 
measures the customer satisfaction with the product 
or service through the customer’s readiness to return 
for some other project or some future services.
■ Benefit for the organization – The benefit for the 
organization that carried out the project is reflected 
through the profit, through the amount of sales 
realized or services given, through the market share 
and through similar business results. The benefits 
for the organization can, however, vary as regards 
the type of the project carried out. In case of internal 
projects, such as improvement of the organization or 
of the work process, the benefit can be reflected in the 
shortening of working hours, in the improved quality 
of procedures or other direct benefits. In addition to the 
direct benefits, it is necessary that the indirect benefits 
for the organization should be measured. These are not 
easy to measure, however, they may be very important, 
therefore they should not be neglected.
■ Preparing the future – The fourth dimension refers to 
measuring the project contribution to the arrangements 
for the organizations and technology infrastructure for 
the future. Here we measure the development of new 
markets, ideas, innovation, products, services, skills, 
technologies, the attained organizational flexibility, 
that is, anything that can bring competitive advantage 
in the future.
The results of the first dimension of the project success can 
be obtained during the project execution or immediately 
upon the completion of the project. The second dimension 
gives results in a short-time period after the results of 
the project are delivered to the customers and a short 
time during which the product is used (e.g., a number of 
months from the moment the product is first used). The 
third dimension can most commonly be measured after a 
period of time when the service is given or the product is 
sold has elapsed (e.g., one to two years), while the fourth 
dimension of the project strategic success is possible to 
measure only upon a longer period of time (e.g., upon two 
or five years).
7. Conclusion
Although the majority of project managers and project 
teams recognize the importance of the relation between the 
harmonization of the organizational strategy and achieving 
organizational goals, these elements are, unfortunately, 
taken into consideration only at the beginning, while later, 
in the course of the project execution, the focus in on the 
operative approach. It is for this reason that a strategic 
harmonization of the project should be carried out, and 
this can be achieved by implementing the hierarchal form 
of management, including the management levels such as 
strategic management, strategic portfolio management, 
strategic program management and strategic project 
management. A new concept in this hierarchal framework 
is the strategic program and project management, where 
the stress is on its strategic focus. In accordance with the 
strategic framework of project management the method of 
measuring the project success is defined. This is no longer 
one-dimensional, but comprises several dimensions of 
project success that have to be taken into consideration.
The prevailing way of thinking in project execution 
focuses mainly upon the operational aspect as well as upon 
achieving efficiency in the project realization. The project 
success is typically regarded through such categories as 
the completion of the project in the defined time, within 
the projected budget and the project requirements. This 
is how the project managers take their job, so they do not 
think they should be engaged in dealing with the project 
effectiveness, nor with achieving business results. On the 
other hand, however, the truth is that projects are started 
for the very purpose of achieving certain business results. 
The most important objective in the project execution 
is, from the point of view of the organization, to achieve 
business results. Therefore, both the project manager and 
the project management in general have to focus upon this 
and try to find the ways to ensure that the business results 
of the organization are achieved.
References
Cleland, D., (1999): “Project Management – Strategic 
Design and Implementation”, McGraw-Hill, New York
Cooper, R. G., Edgett, S.J., Kleinschmidt, E.J., (1998 ): 
“Best Practices for Managing R&D Portfolios”, Research 
Technology Management. 41(4), 20-33.
Dinsmore, P. C., (1999): “Winning in Business with 
Enterprise Project Management”, Amacom, USA.
Dye, L. D., Pennypacker, J. S., (1999): “An Introduction 
to Project Portfolio Management”, Project Portfolio 
Management, Center for business Practices, USA.
Morris, P. W. G ., Jamieson, H. A., (2004): “Translating 
corporate strategy into project strategy”, Project Management 
Institute, Newtown Square, PA, USA.
Petrović D., (2003): “Concept of multiproject 
management in the organization”, Doctoral thesis, Faculty of 
Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade, Belgrade.
Shenhar, J. A., et al., (2007): “Project Strategy: The 
Missing Link, Linking Project Management to Business 
Strategy”, Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, 
PA, USA.
Shenhar, J. A., Dvir, D., Levy, O., Maltz, C. A., (2001): 
“Project Success: A Multidimensional Strategic Concept”, 
         Projektna mreža Slovenije              September 2009 10
Long Range Planning, Elsevier, Vol. 34, No. 6.
Shenhar, J. A., Milošević, D., Dvir, D., Thamhain, H., 
(2007): “Linking Project Management to Business Strategy”, 
Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA, USA.
The Standish Group Reports, www.standishgroup.com.
Williams, D., Parr, T., (2004): “Enterprise Programme 
Management – Delivering Value”, Palgrave Macmillan, 
Hampshire.
Ansoff, I., (1987): “Corporate Strategy”, Penguin Books, 
London.
Ansoff, I., (2007): “Strategic Management”, Classic 
edition, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Chandler, A. D., (1962): “Strategy and Structure”, MIT 
Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Cicmil, S. J. K., (1997): “Critical factors of effective 
project management”, The TQM Magazine, 9(6), 390-6.
Gareis, R., (2003): “Competencies in the Project-oriented 
organization”, IPMA World Congress, Moscow, Russia.
Grant, R., (1991): “The Resource-Based Theory 
of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy 
Formulation”, California Management Review, 33(3), 114-
135.
Grant, R., (2007): “Contemporary Strategy Analysis”, VI 
edition, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K., (1989): “Strategic Intent”, 
Harvard Business Review, 67(3), 63-78.
Hebert, B., (2002): “Tracking Progress”, New Zealand 
Management, 49(1), 24-27. 
Jovanović, P., Mihić, M., & Petrović, D., (2007): “Social 
Implications of Managing Project Stakeholders”, In Feng 
Li (Ed.), Social Implications and Challenges of e-Business 
(pp. 130-144), Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA, 
USA.
Killen, C., Hunt, R., & Kleinschmidt. E., (2008): 
“Project portfolio management for product innovation”, 
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 
25(1), 24-38.
Kloppenborg, T., & Opfer, W., (2002): “The current state 
of project management research: Trends, interpretations and 
predictions”, Project Management Journal, 33(2), 5-18.
Loo, R., (1996): “Training in Project Management 
a powerful tool for improving individual and team 
performance”, Team Performance Management: An 
International Journal, 2(3), 6-14. 
Mihić, M., Petrović, D., (2004): “Project-oriented 
managers – results of the new approach to managers’ 
education”, In proceedings of International Scientific Days, 
European Integration: Challenge for Slovakia (pp. 720-725), 
Slovak Agricultural University, Nitra, Slovakia.
Mikkola, H., (2001): “Portfolio management of R&D 
projects: implications for innovation management”, 
Technovation, 21(4), 23-35.
Porter M., (1996): “What Is Strategy?”, Harvard Business 
Review, 74(60), 61-78.
Smith C., (2003): “Corporate Social Responsibility: 
Whether or How?”, California Management Review, 45(4), 
52-76.
Webster, G., (1999): “Project definition – The missing 
link”, Industrial and Commercial Training, 31(6), 240-244.
Znanstveni Prispevek
Dejan Petrović is an Associate Professor of Management and Chair of the Department of Management and Specialized 
Management Disciplines at the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade (Serbia) and visiting professor 
at several universities in the country and abroad. His research interests include project management, strategic 
management, project appraisal and change management. He is a general secretary of Serbian Project Management 
Association, member of Council of Delegates of International Project Management Association and member of editorial 
board of international journal Management. He has been a consultant for wide variety of public and private organizations 
and he has published books and articles in refereed journals.
Marko Mihić is an assistant professor at the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade. He is member of 
board of Serbian Project Management Association. He received his PhD from University of Belgrade. His current research 
interests include project management, e-project management, corporate strategy and change management. He has 
published over 60 papers on various management topics and took part on a few research projects for Ministry of Science, 
Republic of Serbia. As an expert consultant, he has worked extensively for the Government of Serbia, as well as for 
several leading national and multinational companies and investors in Serbia.
Vladimir Obradović is a teaching assistant and A.B.D. at University of Belgrade, Faculty of Organizational Sciences. He 
is member of several international scientific organizations. In YUPMA - Serbian Project Management Association he holds
a position of Certification manager and he is also a member of IPMA Award Management Board. Primary research area
is focused on project management, strategic management and change management. He has published over 40 papers 
on various management topics and took part on several research projects. Besides academic work, Vladimir works as a 
consultant for Government of Serbia, local government, NGOs, and numerous national and international organizations.