Project and performance management has moved from being an art to a science with well understood disciplines.  Performance management tools, techniques and methodologies such as PRINCE2, Balanced Scorecard, Earned Value Management, Risk and Opportunity Management, Theory of Constraints, Partnering and Alliance Contracting are well documented and widely practiced.  The elements of the performance management discipline are embedded as accepted practice in most project management bodies of knowledge.

The advent of the PC and the subsequent growth of the LAN and the Internet have led to the development of sophisticated software to support project control.  The ability now exists for enterprises to readily capture and present accurate and timely data to managers.  With this level of understanding and support, the control of projects should be comparatively trouble free and performance management should be second nature.  But despite these 'technological' advances, projects are still likely, more often as not, to fail to deliver against their intended business benefit, scope, schedule and/or budget.  What then, has prevented performance management successfully permeating enterprises more fully?

With the widespread availability of 'technology' throughout the 1900s, it is easy to conceive that a technological mindset developed.  Performance management systems were developed that centered on software tools and processes; but project performance still continued to be unpredictable.  As a result, new performance management frameworks have emerged which identify the need for leadership and cultural change, as well as tools and processes. EPM 2004 will examine how.