Energy 158 (2018) 944e956

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Efficiency and effectiveness of factors affecting renewable energy

projects; an empirical perspective
Rashid Maqbool
School of Economics and Management, Beijing Jiaotong University, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Successful renewable energy projects are crucial to bring the cleaner and sustainable environment of this
Received 21 December 2017 universe. Owed to this, world's countries and policymakers are trying hard to double the current share of
Received in revised form renewable energy consumptions (18.3%) by 2030, which has been resulting in the construction of
19 May 2018
multiple renewable energy projects. This study identifies multiple critical success factors (CSFs) and their
Accepted 3 June 2018
influences mechanisms, required for renewable-energy projects. Using a sample of 272 firms working on
Available online 5 June 2018
renewable energy projects in Pakistan, a quantitative and causal study was undertaken to identify the
efficiency (short-run success) and effectiveness (long-run success) mechanisms of critical success factors
Keywords:
Critical success factors
in renewable energy projects. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was applied to test and verify hy-
Renewable energy projects pothesis. The results show that though the efficiency and effectiveness of critical success factors in
Project efficiency renewable energy projects are equally important, the effectiveness (long-run success) in renewable
Effectiveness energy projects is mainly depends upon the efficiency (short-run success) of the critical success factors
Project success (CSFs) involved in such kind of projects. The study expected to contribute towards and widen up the
existing knowledge base for the renewable energy projects by adding on the findings regarding the
influences mechanisms of critical success factors.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Project management is amongst the oldest practices of
mankind. From Egyptian Pyramids to Chinese Great Wall man has
always initiated complex projects and took them all the way to
completion. Projects make up to 50% of the organizational work
carried out and has become a vehicle for organizational progress
and growth [1]. Managing projects have grown up to enclose
multiple disciplines from construction to telecom and software
projects. Construction of renewable energy projects are focused in
the proceeding study with special emphasis upon success factors.
Today it has become of more importance as projects of various
nature, sizes and disciplines are initiated. That is why a need for
research has arisen to produce a model that can facilitate project
managers to deal with complex issues. Modern Project Manage-
ment techniques are developed to reduce the fear of disappoint-
ment and focus to ensure success of projects [2]. However, still
most tools and techniques presented seems to be insufficient to
answer many questions facing project managers by the sponsors
E-mail address: rashid@bjtu.edu.cn.
[3].
The current study is an effort of the researchers to measure the
effect of critical success factors (CSFs) in the construction of
renewable energy projects of Pakistan. Construction of renewable
energy projects continuously gaining momentum as part of the
resolution to energy independence, as the requirement for energy
is raising over the world, and with the dwindling reserve of fossil
fuels. These projects offer numerous ecofriendly benefits besides
providing electricity. Various projections indicate that renewable
energy resources are currently the fastest sources of energy in the
world, and these are expected to have enormous influence in the
future [4,5]. Pakistan is among the energy deficient countries,
which is trying to increase its indigenous energy supplies to deal
with severe energy crises at present. Due to electricity shortage in
Pakistan, the industrial sector has been severely affected and ex-
ports of the country have been declined particularly. Import of
fossil fuel especially oil has put a lot of burden on economy of the
country. In order to cope with energy crises and to meet the eco-
nomic growth, Pakistan requires massive energy, mainly electricity.
It is critical to secure affordable and ecofriendly sustainable energy
for its more than 200 million people [6]. Consequently, an
increasing number of power plants will be constructed in order to

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.015
0360-5442/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956
meet the increasing electricity demand. In order to deliver effective
institutional support for the development and deployment of
renewable energy projects, government of Pakistan has launched
two key departments i.e. Alternate Energy Development Board
(AEDB) and Pakistan Council of Renewable Energy Technologies
(PCRET). AEDB offers formal support, develops renewable energy
policies and facilitates deployment of renewable energy projects in
the country whereas PCRET conducts the research and develop-
ment activities, develops pilot projects for demonstration purposes
and train human resource so that they can work effectively and
sustain renewable energy-based projects.
Pakistan has abundance of renewable energy resources, but
these resources have not been exploited properly. The country's
first policy for renewable energy publicized in 2006; mid-term and
long-term targets were settled including generation of 9700 MW of
electricity from renewable energy resources by the year 2030, and
electrification of 7874 off-grid and remote villages [7,8]. However,
in spite of these ambitious targets, there is not much development
made for the utilization of emerging renewable energy technolo-
gies in the country. The renewable energy sources like solar energy,
wind energy, ocean energy, biomass energy, fuel cell technology,
and geothermal energy can be utilized to overcome energy deficit
in Pakistan [6]. A lot of renewable energy projects aim to fulfill
energy gap in Pakistan are under construction including, Quaid-e-
Azam, Tricon Boston Corporation and Sany group wind projects;
Quaid-e-Azam Park, Scatec, AJ Power, Access Electric, and Bukhsh
solar projects; Eatihad Power Generation, RYK Energy, Indus En-
ergy, Layyah Sugar Mills, Almoiz Industries, and Hamza Sugar Mills
bagasse power projects; Biomass thermal power projects at Faisa-
labad, Islamabad and Karachi; and waste heat recovery power
projects at Lucky Cement Ltd etc. Despite the need and importance,
these projects also face many hurdles and challenges to complete
including; political, technical, economical, environmental and so-
cial aspects. Thus, the current study is an effort of the researchers to
find success factors in the renewable energy projects of Pakistan.
Although there are a number of publications on critical success
factors of projects [9e25], none of these studies focus compre-
hensively on this aspect of renewable energy projects, particularly
in Pakistan's renewable power projects. The main emphasis of
present research is placed on the identification of success factors
and then prioritization of most critical factors contributing towards
the success of renewable energy projects. The potential of renew-
able energy resources in Pakistan has been estimated by a number
of researchers [26e40]. However, their assessments were restricted
to potentials and prospects of energy extraction from the renew-
able sources and their possible consumption. Very few studies
focused on the possible challenges and barriers to the successful
construction of renewable energy projects. Sahir & Qureshi [41]; for
example, identify the barriers to the significant utilization of new
and renewable energy resources potentials. Mirza et al. [42] iden-
tified and discussed the major challenges to the development of
renewable energy projects. The study of Chaudhry et al. [43];
addressed the important factors for the sustainable development of
renewable energy projects in Pakistan, however these factors were
limited to theoretical recommendations. None of these studies have
described the significant success factors for the construction of
renewable energy projects. Moreover, the critical success factors for
these projects were also not identified. This study aims to fill the
gap of renewable energy resources of Pakistan by identifying the
significant success factors and deciding about most critical success
factors for constructing the successful renewable energy projects.
Considering the rising emphasis on the development of renewable
energy from the Pakistani government and the international
community, this study provides a valuable reference to formulate
the effective strategies to gain maximum output from the
945
renewable power industry.
2. Literature review
Project management is becoming global each day due to
instantaneous market entry and abridged culturally diversified [44]
and skilled labor [45]. Project managers need to have a detailed
understanding of critical success factors' implications; as these
factors later affect the processes and functionalities in managing
projects [46]. Organizations focusing on demands and behavior of
customer were able to concentrate on requirements and hence
improve the probability of project success and enjoyed the benefits
of competitive edge [47,48]. Research on this subject has gained
much attention due to the reason of more than 50% failure because
of cost overrun, out of scope, and schedule problems [49].
2.1. Project success
In project management, project success is among the few topics
that has been discussed frequently; however, rarely agreed upon.
Though much inscribed in project management literature, a vibrant
description of project success still remains elusive [50]. Reasons are
very obvious. First, the variety of perspectives for assessing the
project outcomes i.e., application of own standards by each stake-
holder group, for judging the success; resultantly, the project may
be declared as successful or failure depending upon the perspec-
tive/lens through which it was assessed by a particular stakeholder
group [51]. Second, the vagueness over project successfulness; i.e.,
the projects which were considered failures when launched, later
proved successful and vice-versa.
A project is said to have performed well if it has satisfied its
scope while keeping within the scheduled timeframe and budgeted
cost, and meeting desired quality and stakeholders' satisfaction.
Generally speaking, success can be mapped with two elements:
effectiveness and efficiency. Efficiency relates to “Doing the things
right” to attain maximum output, while effectiveness is related to
“doing the right things” by carrying out required action for the
attainment of project's goals [52]. Within project management,
“efficiency” may be related to the assessment of success through
iron triangle; i.e., time, cost and quality. However, these three
criteria may not guarantee the success. Sydney Opera House Project
(considered icon of Australia) is a case in point, which is considered
as a successful project, despite the fact that it experienced time
delay of ten years against four years finish time and overshot the
budget by 14 times against the original cost estimate of $ 7 million.
The second element “Effectiveness” is a subjective matter. To
address it, researchers have included the measure of satisfaction,
including that of client, stakeholders and product users. Towards
this, Collins & Baccarini [53] suggested to include the criterion of
meeting project owner's needs alongside the iron triangle to
measure the project success [53]. Most cited work on project suc-
cess include that of Pinto & Slevin [54]; Hoegl & Gemuenden [55];
Shenhar et al. [56]; Collins & Baccarini [53]; Muller & Turner [57]
and Maqbool et al. [58].
2.2. Critical success factors in construction projects
Chua et al. [59] demonstrate that fate of a construction project is
decided by four elements that is: characteristics of the project, its
formal obligations, contributors, and its interactive processes.
Project characteristics comprise of external (e.g., economical and
political uncertainties, influence on the public productiveness of
technical approval bodies, the sufficiency of financial support, and
location and site limitation) and internal characteristics (e.g., con-
structability, project size, and pioneering status). Project
946 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956
characteristics determine specific project discrepancies, including
monetary risks and schedule interruptions [60]. The formal obli-
gations maintain type and project delivery process, and risk dis-
tribution. Impartial risk distribution commands both the type and
content of the contract [60,61]. Traits of project contributors
measured as interorganizational discords in a construction project
will have negatively influence on project success [62]. Interactive
processes pertain to the communication, monitoring and control,
planning, and project arrangement to enable efficient synchroni-
zation end-to-end project lifespan. Project success can be well
guaranteed if stakeholders act collectively as a team with sub-
stantiated mutual intents and established measures for collective
problem solving [63].
2.3. Critical success factors in construction of renewable energy
projects
This part of the study examines a detailed analysis of previous
empirical researches on critical success factors (CSFs) domain
which assist the present study theoretically to infer the success
factors for the renewable energy projects. Earlier empirical re-
searches on critical success factors (CSFs) for instance; Baccarini
and Collins [64]; Ika et al. [65]; Standish [49]; Xu et al. [66] and
Zhao et al. [67] are considered.
CHAOS report by Standish [49] suggests the five critical success
factors for construction projects which are; top management
backing, client involvement, well-defined obligations, realistic ex-
pectations and sensible planning. Baccarini & Collins [64] have
conducted an empirical research based on a survey of 150 members
of Australian Project Management Institute working in different
project fields such as construction, telecommunications, informa-
tion technology, defense, education etc. A total of 45.3% of the
survey contributors were from the construction industry and they
have identified 15 critical success factors necessary for project
success. Among these critical success factors project understand-
ing, and competent project team were identified as predominant
factors for project success. The important point observed in this
research is no substantial abnormalities are noted in the responses
collected from contrasting industries.
Zhao et al. [67] have conducted a research for finding the critical
success factors (CSFs) in BOT electrical power projects in China. This
is the only empirical research in the field of renewable energy
projects, assessing the critical success factors for thermal and wind
power projects. Based on the survey results, five categories for
critical success factors were identified including; project feasibility,
project environment, project company, project contractor and
project suppliers. Ika et al. [65] have done their research on the
critical success factors for world bank projects, which involve 2.7%
of energy projects. The study was based on empirical findings of
147 different project fields, identified five clusters of critical success
factors including; monitoring, coordination, design, training and
institutional environment. Xu et al. [66] have developed a set of
critical success factors (CSFs) of energy performance contracting
(EPC) for sustainable building energy efficiency retrofit (BEER) of
hotel buildings in China. They have used semi-structured in-
terviews and a questionnaire survey with practitioners and other
professionals working on construction projects. The findings lead to
21 success factors under 6 clusters of critical success factors. These
categories are (1) project organization process, (2) EPC project
financing for hotel retrofit, (3) knowledge and innovation of EPC,
sustainable development (SD), and M&V, (4) implementation of
sustainable development strategy, (5) contractual arrangement,
and (6) external economic environment.
A number of significant factors combine to decide the success or
failure of constructing the renewable energy project in terms of its
objectives (i.e., time, cost, and scope). The identification of the
critical success factors for these objectives will lead to effective
resources distribution. The CSFs can be determined based either on
expert opinions or on quantitative measures [59].
A systematic process has been used in this research to deter-
mine critical success factors (CSFs) for the construction of renew-
able energy projects. First, a literature review is administrated to
identify critical success factors (CSFs) as detected in prior re-
searches either from the construction of infrastructure or the
renewable energy projects perspective. Second, case studies of
different infrastructure and renewable energy construction pro-
jects have been reviewed in a view to draw experiences from suc-
cessful projects and lessons learned from failing onesethese
projects belong to both developed and developing countries. Third,
communication have been done with some construction and en-
ergy projects' experts and practitioners during the pilot study, in
which they are asked to demonstrate a list of factors that they
believed are most critical and then to explain the significance of
these factors. Fourth, the CSFs recognized in the prior steps are
clustered into five key categories, each comprise of numerous sig-
nificant success factors (SSFs). Fifth, a questionnaire survey has
been conducted to seek expert opinions on the importance of the
critical success factors (CSFs) and significant success factors (SSFs).
The findings of the present research are given in this paper.
Researchers have identified different factors to add value to
project success; these areas include project manager, team mem-
bers, organization, and external environment [68]. Other factors are
user participation, team skills [69]; top management support,
clarity of project mission, availability of technical resources [70];
project objectives, resources, and managerial support [71]. After
extensive literature reviews following factor categories were
identified as success factors for construction of renewable energy
projects:

Communication factors

Team factors

Technical factors

Organizational factors

Environmental factors
2.3.1. Communication factors and its linkage to project success
Communication is a crucial part of our everyday life, and the
whole world spins around it. Lasswell's Maxim defines communi-
cation as “who says what to whom in what channel with what
effect” (Lasswell, 1948; p. 216). In this way, there are many de-
scriptions and impressions of communication in current period of
time. But, how imperative is this communication for project suc-
cess, we can say that this is “ProjectdLife Blood” as whole project
aspects are depended on how efficiently we accomplish this.
Communication is a critical instrument in the area of project
management [72]. It is getting importance with the passage of time
and is the core of all the project processes soon. Project success
mainly relies on the effectiveness of its communication channels. It
starts operating from the beginning and lasts during the whole life-
span of the project. It delivers updated reports about the position of
the project besides its performance capacity. But unexpectedly, it
has been seen that many number of projects face a failure in
communications.
Communication is an important component of a well adminis-
trated project. Generally, project manager requires to maintain
concrete and productive communication with two types of people,
one the stakeholders and the other project team members. Each
project will be funded by a business purpose with a stake in the
result. All the stakeholders will require to be keep informed, and it
 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956 947

is essential that communication with them is steady, concrete and Ansari et al. [81].
comprehensive.
Furthermore, projects generally comprise the requirement for
2.3.5. Environmental factors and its linkage to project success
the project manager to coordinate the task of a big group of in-
This last CSFs category comprises of factors which are external
dividuals employed on different parts of the project (stated as work
to the project organization nevertheless still have an influence on
streams). The project manager is needed to confirm that every
success or failure of the project. Several environmental factors, for
person is clear about what he/she necessarily achieve, and he/she
instance political situation, economic condition, and social
also requires giving regular progress report to the project panel
behavior, besides factors associated with the advances in technol-
and/or project guarantors. There are several occasions for things to
ogy or alike factors associated with nature change project perfor-
turn severely incorrect if a productive communication is not
mance, whichever positively or negatively. Maximum number of
confirmed and sustained. The linkage between the communication
the environmental factors influence on projects in their planning
factors and success of renewable energy projects has been well
phase [97]. Still a few of the environmental factors influence all
addressed in the earlier literature [22,66,67,73e83].
stages of the project life-cycle, for instance meteorological condi-
tions and social settings. Sometimes environmental factors are so
2.3.2. Team factors and its linkage to project success
significant that they cause a project to be shut-down at the
Renewable energy project development is turning to be uni-
execution phase. It is important to note that if a client/user is from
versal in nature due to lack of capable employees in a particular
outside the project organization, he should also be regarded as an
country and the urgency to enter market [84]. Since, the con-
exterior factor affecting the project success [98]. For projects of
struction of renewable project is an entrepreneurial activity,
functional type of organizations, though, clients/users are mostly
accordingly a lot of countries are relying on the expertise of other
part of the project organization, such as organization's top man-
countries for renewable energy project development in their own
agement. In those cases, factors correlated to the client/user can be
countries. When organizations go for universal project develop-
clustered as the factors associated to the organization. There might
ment, they often underrate the influence of internationally scat-
be further environmental factors influencing project success, for
tered project development teams and they necessitate
instance competitors or sub-contractors. They must also be added
collaboration of culturally diversified project teams (Freedman and
in this group. Any factor in this CSFs category might affect the
Katz, 2007). According to Freedman and Katz (2007), accomplish-
accessibility of project resources and consequently the project
ing universal projects with diverse legal, political, cultural, social
manager's workability on the project. Client/user consultation and
and infrastructural settings are extra complicated comparatively
agreement/approval are also affected by the external factors.
completing projects in the domestic environment. The importance
Competitors, let's say, might influence on the marketing of the
of team factors for renewable energy projects have been also
project to the client/user. Likewise, the client might be lead for
addressed by earlier researchers such as; Zhao & Chen. [73]; Liang
unproductive consultation, which possibly will reason to project
et al. [85]; Xu et al. [66]; Young & Brans [74]; Zhao et al. [67]; Lin &
failure.
Moubarak [86]; Ansari et al. [81]; and Zhao et al. [83].
Moreover, the social acceptance of the renewable energy is also
important part of external environmental factor. It is important to
2.3.3. Technical factors and its linkage to project success
address the society before starting such projects. The impact of
Baker et al. [87] define of technical factors of a project as: If the
environmental factors in renewable energy projects have been also
project fulfills the technical stipulations and/or mission to be
discussed in earlier literature [22,66,67,73e83,85,86,88e91,96].
completed, and if there is a great acceptability regarding the project
outputs between significant individuals in the parent organization,
significant individuals in the client organization, significant in- 3. Hypotheses and causal model development
dividuals on the project team, and significant users or customers of
the project exertion, the project is measured an inclusive success. The given literature demonstrated five important categories as
After project success criteria have been made clear and approved by the success factors for renewable energy projects which includes;
the major parties participated in a project, that is, the user/client, communication factors, team factors, technical factors, organiza-
the parent, and the project team, then it is crucial to allow the tional factors and environmental factors. Thus, we may draw
project team members to carry on with a view to centralized ac- following hypotheses from literature to be tested here;
cords. The influences of technical factors in renewable energy
H1. Communication factors affect project success.
projects have been also discussed in earlier literature
[22,66,67,73,75e83,[85],88e91]. H2. Team factors affect project success.
H3. Technical factors affect project success.
2.3.4. Organizational factors and its linkage to project success
Organizations anticipate projects to be accomplished within H4. Organizational factors affect project success.
budget, time, and with consumption of least resources. That is why
H5. Environmental factors affect project success.
they fail to spot the right track and prioritize projects in an inap-
propriate method [92]. An organization must possess best process, In renewable energy projects, efficiency and effectiveness both
method, or a technique that they defined as a methodology, more are crucial to ensure a guaranteed project success. Efficiency is
efficient and much effective, in running towards bigger goals. A best short-term success criteria, while effectiveness is long-term suc-
methodology involves good leadership that conveys clear and cess criteria [99]. Efficiency is considered as an internal process
concise message to all stakeholders [93], nurture within organiza- rating, whereas effectiveness is seen as a key-stakeholders’ satis-
tional culture [94] and results into competitive advancement for faction rating. The relationship between project efficiency and
project management [95]. Some of the earlier researches have project success is well discussed in previous literature [99e103].
discussed the importance of organizational factors for renewable Accordingly;
energy projects such as; Liang et al. [85]; Xu et al. [66]; Young &
H6. Project efficiency is positively associated with project success.
Brans [74]; Zhao et al. [67]; Pantaleo et al. [76]; Zhao et al. [77];
Dong et al. [96]; Wu et al. [78]; Lam et al. [79]; He et al. [91]; and Since the project organizations work to ensure internal success
948 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956
at first to gain external success, we may argue that project effi-
ciency comes first to project success. Thus, here diffusion innova-
tion theory [104] leads us to hypothesize the mediating effect of
project efficiency in between critical success factors and project
success. The mediation role of project efficiency in between project
success and other project factors have been already proved in the
earlier studies [102,103]. The diffusion innovation theory analyzes
how the project leaders adopt different ideas and how they made
the decision towards it. The diffusion innovation theory assists the
innovation and entrepreneurship, mainly depends on human cap-
ital. Since the construction of renewable energy project is an
entrepreneurial activity, accordingly the development of a con-
ceptual model determining CSFs for renewable energy projects is
heavily depends on diffusion innovation theory. According to the
theory, innovations should be widely adopted in order to attain
development and sustainability. On the bases of literature review
and theories following hypotheses and causal model in Fig. 1 is
drawn to be tested in this study;
H6a. Project efficiency mediates the relationship between
communication factors and project success.
H6b. Project efficiency mediates the relationship between team
factors and project success.
H6c. Project efficiency mediates the relationship between tech-
nical factors and project success.
H6d. Project efficiency mediates the relationship between orga-
nizational factors and project success.
H6e. Project efficiency mediates the relationship between envi-
ronmental factors and project success.
4. Research methodology
The research is based on five steps. In the first step, the purpose
is to identify from the literature review the significant success
factors that are most important to the renewable energy projects.
The second step includes the categorization of significant success
Communication
factors
Team factors
Technical factors
Organizational
factors
Environmental
factors
Fig. 1. Research model. Y ¼ CSFs / Project efficiency / Project success ¼ b0 þ b1 to 5 X þ b6a to 6e M þ V.
into five pertinent critical success factors on the bases of their
particular characteristics. The third step develops a selection of
construction and engineering firms working on renewable energy
projects for the survey purpose and collect all required information.
The fourth step consists of two analyses by bivariate correlation
analysis to understand the significant correlation values between
variables and multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to
determine the influences of critical success factors on the project
success. The fifth and final step analyzes the results and provides
recommendations for project management practices in the
renewable energy project development field.
4.1. Questionnaire development
In current study, six variables are being studied which includes 1
mediation variable i.e., project efficiency, one dependent variable
i.e., project success and 5 independent variables; namely, 1)
communication factors, 2) team factors, 3) technical factors, and 4)
organizational factors, and 5) environmental factors. All the items
for CSFs (independent and mediating variables) constructs were
identified by previous studies whereas researchers gave them
definitions according to the literature available. In the later phase,
project success was measured through Muller & Turner [57] defi-
nition of project success by utilizing the scale used by Maqbool
et al. [58]. The questionnaire was based on a five points Likert Scale,
in which 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree”.
The instrument used was prior checked for reliability with the help
of a pilot survey. A nomenclature of 60 questions was standardized
and final version of the questionnaire was distributed for initial
data collection.
4.2. Variables and their measure
The study was comprised of seven variables. One mediation
variable i.e., project efficiency, five independent variables i.e.,
communication factors, team factors, technical factors, organiza-
tional factors, and environmental factors alongside project success
considering as the one dependent variable.
Project efficiency Project
Success
 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956 949

4.2.1. Measure of communication factors
For communication factors, the undertaken scales were from
the studies of Li [105]; Prabhakar [68]; and Sudhakar [106].
Communication factors has four dimensions; namely 1) commu-
nication, 2) leadership, 3) relationship between client and project
leadership, 4) reduce ambiguity, 5) maximize stability, 6) cooper-
ation and 7) balance flexibility and rigidity. These construct di-
mensions were measured through 11 items on five points Likert
Scale that ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
4.2.2. Measure of team factors
For team factors, seven dimensions include; 1) team capability/
competence, 2) teamwork, 3) select right project team, 4) project
team coordination, 5) task orientation, 6) team commitment, 7)
team empowerment [68]; and [106]. These construct dimensions
were measured through 8 items on five points Likert Scale that
ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
4.2.3. Measure of technical factors
Technical factors was measured using Prabhakar [68] and Sud-
hakar [106] scales that comprised of eight dimensions; 1) technical
tasks, 2) troubleshooting, 3) technical uncertainty, 4) technical
implementations problems, 5) integration of tasks, 6) technology
support, 7) quality testing and 8) removing legacy systems. These
were measured by 9 items on five points Likert Scale that ranged
from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
4.3. Population, sample and sampling technique
This is a quantitative, causal and cross-sectional study and was
intended to identify the vital and pertinent success categories for a
renewable energy project. As a whole five success categories were
studied, and their interdependencies and causality were intended
to recognize. The project team members including project man-
agers of various construction firms working on renewable energy
projects in Pakistan were the “unit of analysis” for this study. These
respondents did not have experience of a single project rather
every individual responded with respect to his/her own project
experience.
For pilot testing 20 responses were chosen. [110]; p. 245) sug-
gested that for reliable results Cronbach's alpha should be main-
tained at least 0.7 for each construct. Initially, Cronbach's alpha for
the organizational factors was calculated to be 0.59 which later on
rose to 0.733 with the exclusion of item No. 12, 31 and 35 that
reduced total items of the questionnaire to 54 for further data
collection. Roughly 450 individuals were contacted through per-
sonal visits to construction organizations and at project sites to
contribute in the study. Overall of 277 respondents submitted their
views out of which 5 were identified as void (incomplete) and were
neglected. Remaining 272 responses were selected as a sample size
that made a total response rate of 60.44%. Demographic details of
the survey respondents are presented in Table 1.

4.2.4. Measure of organizational factors 5. Results and discussion

For measuring the organizational factors, developed scales of
Sudhakar [106] were adopted that are 1) top management support, 5.1. Data analysis techniques
2) realistic expectations, 3) organizational politics, 4) financial
support, 5) power, 6) market intelligence, 7) personal recruitment, Data analysis involved the data compilation, it's screening,
8) business process re-engineering, 9) reducing a cost base, 10) descriptive analysis, and respondents' demographics statistics,
increasing efficiency, and 11) attrition. These were measured (11 assessing data reliability and analyzing the correlation. Correlation
items) on five points Likert Scale that ranged from strongly disagree and regression analysis were used to test the study hypotheses.
to strongly agree. Correlations were studied through SPSS 20 whereas regression and
mediation relations were studied by structural equation modeling
with the help of AMOS 18. Structural equation modeling (SEM) is
4.2.5. Measure of environmental factors maintained, in part, to examine more complex models in a single
For environmental factors, scales were adopted from Zhao et al. analysis as a replacement for testing isolated regression analyses.
[67]; Fang & Zeng [107]; and Sudhakar [106]. Environmental factors The technique of SEM determines indirect effect tests via above
has eight dimensions namely; 1) stability of political situation, 2) methods for defining significant analysis. Additionally, the
continuity of policies, 3) policy of paying foreign currencies, 4) approach of SEM analysis provides model fit information that offers
credit management system, 5) domestic interest rate, 6) domestic evidence regarding the uniformity of the hypothesized mediational
capital markets and credit rating, 7) legal environment, and 8) model. Measurement error could be another possible apprehension
community involvement. It was measured by 9 items on five points in mediation testing due to attenuation of relationships and the
Likert Scale that ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree. approach of SEM can solve this issue by eliminating error from the
data of the associations between the variables.
4.2.6. Measure of project efficiency
Project efficiency was measured by three items: on time, on cost
Table 1
and on quality, as suggested by Sanchez & Perez [108,109]. Partic-
Respondents’ demographic.
ipants were asked to indicate the extent to which the project ful-
filled the planned schedule, cost and quality, as set at the start of Characteristics Category Frequency Percentage
the project. Project efficiency was then calculated as averaging the Gender Male 218 80.15%
three reported items to ensure higher scale values represent higher Female 54 19.85%
levels of efficiency. Educational background PhD/Master 77 28.31%
Bachelor 132 48.53%
<Bachelor 63 23.16%
4.2.7. Measure of project success Experience >15 Years 133 48.90%
10e15 Years 108 39.71%
To measure project success, scales developed by Muller &
5e10 Years 31 11.39%
Turner [57] and Maqbool et al. [58] were used, which included the Designation Project director 36 13.24%
dimensions of on scheduled time, on budgeted cost, desired quality Project manager 95 34.93%
and satisfaction of stakeholders. Project success was measured by 9 Functional manager 79 29.04%
items on five points Likert Scale that ranged from strongly disagree Team leader 52 19.12%
Other 10 3.68%
to strongly agree.
950 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956

5.2. Data screening, normality, and reliability of the data
Before starting data analysis, the survey data was vigilantly
checked for outliers, missing values, normality, and multi-
collinearity. It was found that not a single value fell beyond the
limits (as of Q1 -1.5 IQR, Q3 þ 1.5 IQR); consequently, no outliers
were found within the whole data. According to Tabachnick & Fidell
[111]; there are three ways to deal with missing data including;
imputation, list wise deletion and pair wise deletion. For this study,
imputation method was used to avoid the loss of meaningful data.
Very few missing values were found in the dataehardly 1 or 2 in
most of the variables' items. Data non-normality was also clarified
by performing the kurtosis and skewness. The values found were
within the range of 2 and 2 as per the suggestion of Tabachnick &
Fidell [111] for normal data distribution.
Construct validity of the variables was tested by using the
exploratory factor analysis (EFA) via principle components. Factor
analysis was done through varimax rotation for grouping the inde-
pendent, mediating and dependent constructs. Those items were
retained which contain correlation values between 4 and 8 within a
construct group, and communalities more than 0.5. Cronbach's
alpha was performed to check the reliability of the measurement
scales, and the value for each separate construct was found at
minimum 0.7. The reliability analysis performed for present research
remained 0.7 and above, which is fine as per the suggested guide-
lines of Nunnally & Bernstein [110] and Andertson & Gerbing [112].
For present research, entire data was within satisfactory range.
exploratory factor analysis (EFA) via principle components. Factor
analysis of the grouping of constructs was determined by Varimax
rotation. The factor loadings for most of the constructs could not
load on construct dimensions rather items loaded on the study
construct itself precisely. Only those variables were extracted
which presented the factor loading values greater than 0.5 [113].
Moreover, the factors with Eigen values more than one were
extracted, which were only 2 to 3. The factor loadings for the
project success items found within the range of 0.714e0.930 which
depicts a prominent internal consistency between the items of
project success. Likewise, factor analysis was performed to group 11
items of communication factors construct. Only one item was
excluded due to low factors loading, however other 10 items were
found within the range from 0.706 to 0.913. Factor analysis
employed to group 8 items construct of team factors results in all
the items acceptable range from 0.694 to 0.902. The factor loading
for technical factors was found within the range of 0.684e0.896 for
7 items, however 2 times were dropped because of little factor
loading values. Additionally, the factor loading values for organi-
zational factors and environmental factors were also found within
the acceptable ranges of 0.691e0.915 and 0.713 to 0.924 respec-
tively. None of the item of organizational factors and environmental
factors was found with less factors loading value. Results of the
factors analysis are presented in Table 3.
5.5. Confirmatory factor analysis

5.3. Descriptive Model measurement was confirmed by employing the Confir-

matory Factor Analysis (CFA) [112]. SPSS statistical package was
Table 2 demonstrates the descriptive statistics of the constructs. used to analyze the data. The model refinement was employed to
Among all the constructs, project success exhibited the maximum enhance fit to suggested levels. Several trials were performed to
uniformity amongst the items (a ¼ 0.902), showing that it can be exclude some items and to meet all the scales to recommended
run as a sole index. The Mean score (M ¼ 4.25, SD ¼ 1.03) indicates levels. Furthermore, all the constructs were determined with the
that project success is the most important concern for the stake- composite reliability more than 0.7 levels, as recommended by Hair
holders i.e. project success can be well guaranteed if stakeholders et al. [114]; depicting fair reliability of each construct variable.
work collected as a team with substantiated mutual objectives and Factor loadings for constructs' items were exceeded the 0.5
established procedures for collective problem solving [63]. More- standard [115] and determined at the 5% of statistically significant
over, dependent variable, communication factors also found within level, as shown in Table 3. Adequate convergent validity was
range with (a ¼ 0.0886, M ¼ 4.22, SD ¼ 1.06). Furthermore, media- demonstrated by all the constructs. Discriminant validity de-
tion factors were also found to be in the acceptable ranges; team termines the different measuring concepts of variable constructs
factors (a ¼ 0.0.837, M ¼ 4.01, SD ¼ 1.17), technical factors [114]. The discriminant validity of all the variable constructs were
(a ¼ 0.813, M ¼ 3.72, SD ¼ 1.39), organizational factors (a ¼ 0.46,
M ¼ 4.02, SD ¼ 1.01), and environmental factors (a ¼ 0.897,
Table 3
M ¼ 4.19, SD ¼ 1.056), showed good reliability. Results of factor analysis.
Hence, the subsequent scales for all constructs exhibited satis-
Factor Number Factor % of variance Eigen
factory reliability, and scales' composites can be calculated by
of items loading explained value
averaging the respective scales items. Moreover, the kurtosis and
Project success 9 0.714e0.930 77.16 6.24
skewness were also found within the acceptable range. Conse-
Project efficiency 3 0.710e0.922 75.02 5.42
quently, survey data is fairly normal. Communication factors 11 0.706e0.913 87.32 5.26
Team factors 8 0.694e0.902 71.32 4.46
5.4. Construct validity Technical factors 9 0.489e0.892 65.56 3.85
Organizational factors 11 0.691e0.907 72.80 3.69
Environmental factors 9 0.713e0.924 76.13 4.60
Construct validity of the study variables was tested by using the

Table 2
Descriptive.

Variable Mean S.D Skewness Kurtosis Cronbach's a Items

Project success 4.2534 1.03268 .176 1.035 .902 9

Project efficiency 4.1735 1.04136 .194 .287 .895 3
Communication factors 4.2163 1.06324 .276 -.183 .886 11
Team factors 4.0116 1.17443 .157 -.545 .837 8
Technical factors 3.7164 1.39165 .052 -.721 .813 9
Organizational factors 4.0211 1.01461 .237 .387 .746 11
Environmental factors 4.1945 1.05635 .204 .368 .897 9
 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956 951

Table 4 Apart from technical factors and communication factors, all the
Fitness indicators of CFA model. factors were positively co-related. This study was an effort to
CMIN DF CMIN/DF P-Value TLI GFI CFI RMSEA investigate the relations among communication factors, technical
252.3 93 2.71 0.00 0.96 0.94 0.14 96.2 factors, environmental factors, team factors, and organizational
factors (independent variables) over project success (dependent
variables). Literature suggests that there is an affirmative relation of
assessed. First of all, each group of variable findings was paired with constructive communication with enhancement in technical abili-
another group of findings. Then, every model analyzed twice by ties, smooth flow of organizational factors, and firm's external
following suggestions of Li & Cavusgil [116]; once by running the environment [1,120,121].
correlations among the two variable constructs to unity and once The results of the SEM demonstrated that all the direct relations
through freeing this criterion. Discriminant validity of the variable of hypotheses are significantly affecting the project success. The sig
constructs was determined from the given results. Fitness in- values for all the direct hypotheses were found within the accept-
dicators of CFA model are given in Table 4. able ranges; H1(0.000), H2(0.000), H3(0.006), H4(0.000),
Validity of the dimensions was measured by construct validity H5(0.000). All the five factors were significantly contributing to
[117], however validity of constructs was determined by utilizing project success in their capacity. Jugdev & Mathur [122] stated that
factor analysis. Data results for factor analysis are given in Table 3. communication was a significant factor in promising success for
According to Malhotra [118]; once the KMO (Kasier Meyer Olkin) project success. Similar result was confirmed from Pakistani con-
value stands between 0.5 and 1.0, then the factor analysis reflects to struction project industry. Similarly, project success was also
be suitable. The KMO value of the data found to be well within delivered internationally by Technical [123], Organizational [124],
range; between 0.5 and 1.0, as per the findings of the KMO, so the Environmental [125], and Team factors [126]. The study expended
factor analysis is pertinent for present study. Furthermore, “statis- the generalizability of these factors in the Pakistani renewable
tical test for Bartlett test of sphericity was found significant energy projects and it can be argued that to ensure construction of
(p ¼ 0.000; d.f. ¼ 93) for all the correlations within a correlation renewable energy projects these five factors must be taken into
matrix (atleast for some of the constructs)” [119]; p.159). Results of account as they were immensely related to stakeholder manage-
varimax rotation and principle components analysis demonstrated ment. The results of the SEM are given in Table 6.
that the Eigen values for all the study constructs are higher than Hypotheses 6a to 6e were accepted as the project efficiency
level 1. Factor loadings for all the study constructs were also found mediates the relationships between critical success factors and
above the level of 0.50, shown in Table 3. Items of each particular project success. The direct relation after the addition of mediating
measuring construct were loaded together and found to be with factors was insignificant between critical success factors and proj-
factor loading values above the 0.5 level. Hence, a higher degree of ect success. The results imply that the influences of critical success
convergent validity is found in all the studied measurement scales. factors are enhanced on project success through project efficiency.
It was determined by outcome of the discriminant validity that So, project efficiency leads to project effectiveness. The firms
items were not cross-loading and rather supported the respective working on renewable energy projects should focus on time, cost
variable constructs, as all the items were assigned rendering to the and quality of such projects to gain the ultimate long-term success.
different study constructs. As these projects mainly fail due to their poor quality of the final
product which is not as was promised or due to the failure of
project management which mainly go beyond the boundary of cost,
5.6. Correlation
time, and scope. These results are in line with the earlier literature
[99e103]. Thus, we may say that for getting long results in
The bivariate correlations between all the observed variables are
renewable energy projects, the short-term results are more
shown in under mentioned Table 5. All correlations were found to
important.
be within the expected directions and statistically at significant
The relation of communication factors and project success was
level (p < 0.05), except the correlations between technical factors
constructed by Holland & Light [127] and Shenhar et al. [128]. This
and communication factors (g ¼ 0.072, p > 0.05).
relation was tested in the construction industry of Pakistan and was
found correct hence its generalizability can be promoted to the
5.7. Hypothesis testing and discussion construction industry as well. Other part was the testing of medi-
ations if they cause any alteration in the effects. It was noted that
During data analysis, none of the variables had multi co- the environment factors were predominant in its direct effect over
linearity problem. Maximum co-relation was observed in be- project success. Internal as well as the external environment of the
tween communication factors and project success which was 0.547. construction organizations arose to be an imperative factor for the
accomplishment of the final product and the project management
processes. Wüste & Schmuck [129] and Rajkumar [72] also dis-
Table 5
Correlation analysis.
cussed that environmental factors influence the project success.
The results are unique to Pakistani context and may also be discover
Variable Correlation
in other parts as well if are tried to dig out. The failure rate of
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 renewable projects worldwide is alarming and these results of
1 Project success 1 mediation would help the policymakers.
2 Project efficiency 416b 1 This study was triggered by the research quest that, despite the
2 Communication Factors .547b .403b 1 exponential boom in project management, little is known about the
3 Team factors .513b .381b .324b 1
instrumental association among CSFs and renewable energy pro-
4 Technical factors .217b .212b .072 .145a 1
5 Organizational factors .234a .208a .192a .279b .205b 1 jects in framing project success at acceptable level of all the key
6 Environmental factors .292a .314b .351b .406b .303b .408b 1 stakeholders. The basic theme of the current study was to identify
N ¼ 272.
critical success factors (CSFs), and propose and validate a model
a
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. grounded in theoretical concepts that explicitly motivates in un-
b
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level. derstanding project stakeholders' intentions to behave positively in
952 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956

Table 6 organizational factors, and environmental factors; (3) proposes a

Regression weights. new model that encompasses the most important CSFs to foster
Hypothesis Estimate S.E. C.R. P project success, considering this is first time in the literature of
Hypothesis 1
renewable energy projects; to put in other words, the mediating
Project-Success <— Communication-Factors .196 .042 4.669 *** variable in present study, project efficiency can be named as index
Hypothesis 2 of performance booster in renewable energy projects through long-
Project-Success <— Team-Factors 1.067 .142 7.528 *** term success as well as short-term project success criteria; (4)
Hypothesis 3
opens the discussion and leads the way to the re-interpretation of
Project-Success <— Technical-Factors .124 .045 2.742 .006
Hypothesis 4 project success in the literature according to different nature of
Project-Success <— Organizational-Factors .161 .044 3.631 *** projects. Success, not only to the projects but to the organization
Hypothesis 5 working on renewable energy projects itself can be multiplied
Project-Success <— Environmental-Factors .502 .085 5.882 ***
manifolds through CSFs who required foresee planning to exhibit
Hypothesis 6
Project-Success <— Project-Efficiency .502 .085 5.882 ***
desired results.
Hypothesis 6a
Project-Efficiency <— Communication-Factors .030 .008 -.787 .431 6.2. Practical implications of the study
Project-Success <— Communication-Factors .103 .029 3.506 ***
Project-Success <— Project-Efficiency .689 .081 8.521 ***
This study was aimed to identify critical success factors (CSFs) in
Hypothesis 6b
Project-Efficiency <— Team-Factors .640 .085 14.618 *** renewable energy projects, and further examined the impact of
Project-Success <— Team-Factors .286 .018 -.684 *** these CSFs on project success. The findings imply that firms
Project-Success <— Project-Efficiency .319 .050 .910 *** working on Pakistan renewable energy projects must look for
Hypothesis 6c suggested CSFs for the successful completion of projects. Th results
Project-Efficiency <— Technical-Factors .715 .068 13.380 ***
Project-Success <— Technical-Factors .131 .028 1.490 ***
of the research identify environmental factors as the most signifi-
Project-Success <— Project-Efficiency .037 .012 -.474 *** cant CSFs in the Pakistani perspective, so the firms should have
Hypothesis 6d sound knowledge about Pakistani political situation, legal envi-
Project-Efficiency <— Organizational-Factors .887 .007 12.225 *** ronment, credit management system, peace situation and local
Project-Success <— Organizational-Factors .043 .006 -.672 ***
community influence. The political situation is stable from last ten
Project-Success <— Project-Efficiency .154 .055 2.820 ***
Hypothesis 6e years and democratic system is getting better, which is a good sign
Project-Efficiency <— Environmental-Factors .473 .061 9.413 *** for investors and business communities alongside the decision
Project-Success <— Environmental-Factors .025 .005 .526 *** powers of the country. However, the complicated legal system and
Project-Success <— Project-Efficiency .293 .032 1.649 *** corruption are still the big concern for the project firms to start
working in Pakistan. However, the intervention of government and
corruption is also the case of other countries such as Ke et al. [130]
a successful project while evaluating the perceived success level provided some evidence regarding project environment in China
and satisfaction in distinct performance contexts. A significantly where private sector required to spend a lot of time and money on
positive association was verified through SEM among project CSFs coping with government interventions and furthermore main-
and project success of renewable energy projects. Additionally, the taining their relationships or Guanxi.
mediating relation of project efficiency was also observed between In recent years, several major changes have been seen in the
five CSFs (communication factors, team factors, technical factors, financial system of Pakistan. Substantial developments across a
organizational factors, and environmental factors) and project wide spectrum of banking regulation and risk management have
success (dependent variable). The proposed model conceptualized taken place. The microeconomic environment is supportive such as
the theory that project success in renewable energy projects are the new areas of loaning are opening up rapidly. However, there are
due to five major types of critical success factors (CSFs) namely; many issues which continue to hinder the productivity of safe
communication factors, team factors, technical factors, organiza- lending procedures. There is no central register for land title in
tional factors, environmental factors; however, it is also observed Pakistan and, outside the urban areas, it is determined by the
that environmental factors are the predominant critical success revenue record [131]. p.294). So, the Pakistani government and
factors in influencing the renewable energy projects. The presented legislation bodies formulate such policies which could help the
model claims a contribution to further extend the concept of project investors, moreover ensure about its safe capital and assets
project development with the help of CSFs in renewable energy in the country. As far as the peace situation of the country, it is quite
projects, which have hardly been studied in the existing academic better as compare to five years ago when the terrorist activities
works of literature. Moreover, the analysis and comparison with were on the worse side for the project investors in the country. The
earlier researches purport worthy contribution in the present last point is the role of local community influence on the renewable
study. This study holds a pioneer status in analyzing and applying energy projects. Project firms should convince the local commu-
the impact of CSFs in renewable energy projects. nities to participate in the project completion as ultimately this is
all for their utility purpose in the coming future. Local governments
6. Implications of the results, limitations, and conclusion can also play a mediator role between project parties local com-
munities to build up trust and cooperation. This provides an at-
6.1. Theoretical findings mosphere of hope and openness that eventually raise gains to the
project organizations through effective accomplishment of allo-
The findings of the current research lead to report a strong cated tasks.
understanding towards identification of CSFs and their association
with the success of the project. The paper makes some important 6.3. Limitations and avenues for the future research
contributions. It: (1) identifies the significant success factors for
renewable energy projects in relevant literature for the first time; Though the CSFs are determined for renewable energy projects
(2) categories the significant success factors into five CSFs clusters; and their relationship is analyzed with project success, still the
communication factors, team factors, technical factors, study is not without limitations. First, some attentions are required
 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956
regarding the generalizing of current research findings, since the
sample data derived from a single country within the particular
projects (renewable energy projects) context, which may limit its
generalizability. Second, since Pakistan has just started to promote
the construction of renewable energy projects in recent years, the
number of qualified and capable experts in these projects is limited
nevertheless their expertise is beyond any doubt for construction
and general energy projects. However, the effect of these limita-
tions on the research has been reduced; by enhancing comparison
between findings of the current research and earlier studies, in
addition to extending the description and interpretation for re-
spondents' better understanding of the questions.
Future researches are expected to be carried out across the in-
dustries and countries in order to identify differences in between
different industrial settings and in different cultural implications
upon these success factors. So that results may be generalized in
multiple countries. As Dvir et al. [132] stated that the project suc-
cess factors are not universal for all kind of projects. The job
experience may also affect the results and their role as a mediator
may be studied. Apart from that other demographics may also be
taken into consideration and differences in research results vis-

-vis gender, age, and designation may be noted. Moreover, the
a success of the renewable energy projects. Since the renewable
model is the first one proposed for determining the CSFs in
renewable energy projects, upcoming studies may build further
precise models meant for determining the association among the
cooperative environment and private sector's attributes in PPP
(renewable energy projects) projects by enhancing the reciprocal
association on both constructs. This could definitely be a future
avenue of research, even if possibly further in-depth discussion of
the identified CSFs should be put forth, as well considering DART
(Dialogue, Access, Risk, Transparency) insights.
7. Conclusion
This paper has presented the relationship and impact of critical
success factors vis-a
-vis project success in construction of renew-
able energy projects. The present study is the very first attempt in
research to present a causal model for determining CSFs in
renewable energy projects. Clustering the critical success factors
(CSFs) for renewable energy projects and determining significant
sub-factors in all the relevant categories is the significant contri-
bution of the present study. Several success factors have been
identified via literature review and earlier case studies, and corre-
spondence and survey interviews with professionals and experts of
renewable energy projects. Further, these success factors are eval-
uated, refined, coded, and lastly classified into five major CSFs
categories; 1) communication factors, 2) team factors, 3) technical
factors, 4) organizational factors, and 5) environmental factors.
The study provided theoretical grounds to the concept of CSFs
presented by earlier studies. The empirical findings supported the
hypotheses that all the five CSFs categories have a straight positive
effect on the success of renewable energy projects. All the five CSFs
categories were concluded to be imminent for successful con-
struction of renewable energy projects. Alongside, this study also
offer support to the hypotheses that project efficiency mediates the
relation of such CSFs categories, namely; communication factors,
team factors, technical factors, and organizational factors with
project success. As the critical success factors were vital for project
success the project efficiency was important gear to enhance the
relationship between CSFs and project success. It is observed that
the effectiveness (long-term success) in renewable projects can
only be observed through project efficiency (short-term success).
Furthermore, environmental factors were found to be predom-
inant critical success factors category which influences the project
success in renewable energy projects. The environmental factors
953
which influence the project success are; political situation, legal
environment, credit management system, peace situation and local
community influence. The role of the Pakistani government and
legislation bodies is most important to formulate such policies
which could help the project investors, moreover ensure about its
safe capital and assets in the country. Firms should also consider
the internal as well as the external environment, which can play an
important role in the success or failure of the renewable project.
Similarly, the project success depends upon the cohesiveness and
support for each other among the project organizations and the
level of support and cooperation between government and legis-
lation departments. Resultantly; this paves its way towards friendly
atmosphere among project stakeholders; which can further
contribute towards added efficiency to the success of renewable
energy projects in the country.
The present study will not only contribute to fill up the literary
gap as discussed above, nevertheless will also assist project firms in
weighing the CSFs from a different perspective that has not been
touched up till now. The present study will help towards widening
up the current knowledge base for the critical success factors (CSFs)
by adorning the research findings vis-a
-vis their impact on the
project is at a developing stage of germinate in Pakistan, a study of
the CSFs should lead a better perspective of the factors persuading
the success or otherwise of renewable projects. This can pave the
way for effective decision making in opting the suitable projects
(for which the CSFs can be guaranteed or managed in some way)
and in the enhanced administration of those already embarked
upon. Conforming effective approaches based on those identified
CSFs can also be made for successfully resulting future renewable
energy projects for accelerated excellence. It is believed that this
study has helped to describe the perspectives of Pakistani renew-
able energy experts in their estimation of CSFs for renewable en-
ergy projects in Pakistan. Nevertheless, readers must take into
account that there will be the consistent development of CSFs for
renewable energy projects from the time of data gathering till the
time of paper publication. The present study will also lay the first
stone for new direction to upcoming scholars in executing the
research at the international level with an intent to find out con-
crete recommendations for warranting performance in sustainable
as well as renewable projects.
References
[1] Olasupo AR, Ibrahim OO, Gazal HO. Effect of project management on project
success. Aust J Bus Manag Res 2012;2(3):1e11. Available online, https://
scholar.google.com/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%
2C5&q¼EffectþofþProjectþManagementþonþProjectþSuccess.&btnG¼
(accessed on 04 December 2017).
[2] Attarzadeh I, Ow SH. Modern project management: essential skills and
techniques. Commun IBIMA 2008;2:1e9. https://scholar.google.com/
scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%2C5&q¼Modernþprojectþmanagement%
3AþEssentialþskillsþandþtechniques.þ&btnG¼.
[3] Westerveld E. The Project Excellence Model®: linking success criteria and
critical success factors. Int J Proj Manag 2003;21(6):411e8. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00112-6.
[4] Jefferson M. Sustainable energy development: performance and prospects.
Renew Energy 2006;31(5):571e82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2005.
09.002.
[5] EIA. International energy outlook. Energy information administration. U.S.
Department of Energy; 2009. DOE/EIA-0484(2009). Available online, https://
www.eia.gov/outlooks/archive/ieo09/index.html (accessed on 04 December
2017).
[6] Amer M, Daim TU. Selection of renewable energy technologies for a devel-
oping county: a case of Pakistan. Energy Sustain Dev 2011;15(4):420e35.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2011.09.001.
[7] AEDB. Alternate energy development board. Ministry of Power Division;
Government of Pakistan; 2010. Available online, http://www.aedb.org/2010
(accessed on Jan 8, 2010).
[8] GoP. Policy for development of renewable energy for power generation. In:
Government of Pakistan, vol. 2006; 2006. Available online, http://aedb.org/
954 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956
Documents/Policy/REpolicy.pdf (accessed on 04 December 2017).
[9] Ahimbisibwe A, Cavana RY, Daellenbach U. A contingency fit model of critical
success factors for software development projects: a comparison of agile and
traditional plan-based methodologies. J Enterprise Inf Manag 2015;28(1):
7e33.
[10] Bayiley YT, Teklu GK. Success factors and criteria in the management of in-
ternational development projects: evidence from projects funded by the
European Union in Ethiopia. Int J Manag Proj Bus 2016;9(3):562e82.
[11] Chou JS, Pramudawardhani D. Cross-country comparisons of key drivers,
critical success factors and risk allocation for public-private partnership
projects. Int J Proj Manag 2015;33(5):1136e50.
[12] Cserhati G, Szabo L. The relationship between success criteria and success
factors in organisational event projects. Int J Proj Manag 2014;32(4):613e24.
[13] Ika LA, Donnelly J. Success conditions for international development capacity
building projects. Int J Proj Manag 2017;35(1):44e63.
[14] Osei-Kyei R, Chan AP. Review of studies on the critical success factors for
publiceprivate partnership (PPP) projects from 1990 to 2013. Int J Proj
Manag 2015;33(6):1335e46.
[15] Liu J, Love PE, Smith J, Regan M, Davis PR. Life cycle critical success factors for
public-private partnership infrastructure projects. J Manag Eng 2014;31(5):
1e7.
[16] Marzaga ~o DSL, Carvalho MM. Critical success factors for Six Sigma projects.
Int J Proj Manag 2016;34(8):1505e18.
[17] Mukhtar MM, Amirudin RB, Sofield T, Mohamad IB. Critical success factors
for public housing projects in developing countries: a case study of Nigeria.
Environ Dev Sustain 2017;19(5):2039e67.
[18] Pal R, Wang P, Liang X. The critical factors in managing relationships in in-
ternational engineering, procurement, and construction (IEPC) projects of
Chinese organizations. Int J Proj Manag 2017;35(7):1225e37.
[19] Ribeiro MB, Duarte VD, Salgado EG, Castro CV. Prioritization of critical suc-
cess factors in the process of software development. IEEE Latin Am Trans
2017;15(1):137e44.
[20] Shen W, Tang W, Siripanan A, Lei Z, Duffield CF, Wilson D, Wei Y. Critical
success factors in Thailand' s green building industry. J Asian Architect Build
Eng 2017;16(2):317e24.
[21] Williams T. Identifying success factors in construction projects: a case study.
Proj Manag J 2016;47(1):97e112.
[22] Xavier R, Komendantova N, Jarbandhan V, Nel D. Participatory governance in
the transformation of the South African energy sector: critical success factors
for environmental leadership. J Clean Prod 2017;154:621e32.
[23] Yalegama S, Chileshe N, Ma T. Critical success factors for community-driven
development projects: a Sri Lankan community perspective. Int J Proj Manag
2016;34(4):643e59.
[24] Yamin M, Sim AK. Critical success factors for international development
projects in Maldives: project teams' perspective. Int J Manag Proj Bus
2016;9(3):481e504.
[25] Zou W, Kumaraswamy M, Chung J, Wong J. Identifying the critical success
factors for relationship management in PPP projects. Int J Proj Manag
2014;32(2):265e74.
[26] Ahmed S, Mahmood A, Hasan A, Sidhu GAS, Butt MFU. A comparative review
of China, India and Pakistan renewable energy sectors and sharing oppor-
tunities. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;57:216e25.
[27] Ali SH, Zuberi MJS, Tariq MA, Baker D, Mohiuddin A. A study to incorporate
renewable energy technologies into the power portfolio of Karachi, Pakistan.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;47:14e22.
[28] Arshad M, Ahmed S. Cogeneration through bagasse: a renewable strategy to
meet the future energy needs. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;54:732e7.
[29] Asif M. Sustainable energy options for Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2009;13(4):903e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2008.04.001.
[30] Awan AB, Khan ZA. Recent progress in renewable energyeRemedy of energy
crisis in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:236e53.
[31] Ghafoor A, ur Rehman T, Munir A, Ahmad M, Iqbal M. Current status and
overview of renewable energy potential in Pakistan for continuous energy
sustainability. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;60:1332e42.
[32] Gondal IA, Sahir M. The potential of renewable hydrogen production in
Pakistan. ISESCO Sci Technol Vision 2010;10(6):68e81. Available online,
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%2C5&q¼Theþ
potentialþofþrenewableþhydrogenþproductionþinþPakistan.þ&btnG¼
(accessed on 04 December 2017).
[33] Gondal IA, Masood SA, et al. Review of geothermal energy development
efforts in Pakistan and way forward. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;71:
687e96.
[34] Hulio ZH, Jiang W, Rehman S. Technical and economic assessment of wind
power potential of Nooriabad, Pakistan. Energy, Sustain Soc 2017;7(1):35.
[35] Mirza UK, Maroto-Valer MM, Ahmad N. Status and outlook of solar energy
use in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2003;7(6):501e14. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2003.06.002.
[36] PMD. Feasibility reportethe establishment of commercial wind power plant
of 18 MW at GharoeSindh. Technical Report no. PMD-11/2004. Pakistan
Meteorological Department; 2004. p. 16. Available online, http://www.pmd.
gov.pk/wind/Wind_Project_files/Feasibility%20Report-Gharo.pdf (accessed
on 04 December 2017).
[37] Raja IA, Dougar MG, Abro RS. Solar energy applications in Pakistan. Renew
Energy 1996;9(1e4):1128e31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-1481(96)
88477-1.
[38] Shahbaz M, Loganathan N, Zeshan M, Zaman K. Does renewable energy
consumption add in economic growth? An application of auto-regressive
distributed lag model in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;44:
576e85.
[39] Shakeel SR, Takala J, Shakeel W. Renewable energy sources in power gen-
eration in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;64:421e34.
[40] Sheikh MA. Renewable energy resource potential in Pakistan. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2009;13(9):2696e702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.
06.029.
[41] Sahir MH, Qureshi AH. Assessment of new and renewable energy resources
potential and identification of barriers to their significant utilization in
Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12(1):290e8. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2006.07.002.
[42] Mirza UK, Ahmad N, Harijan K, Majeed T. Identifying and addressing barriers
to renewable energy development in Pakistan. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2009;13(4):927e31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.11.006.
[43] Chaudhry MA, Raza R, Hayat SA. Renewable energy technologies in Pakistan:
prospects and challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13(6):1657e62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2008.09.025.
[44] Czuchry AJ, Yasin MM. Managing the project management process. Ind
Manag Data Syst 2003;103(1):39e46. https://doi.org/10.1108/026355703
10456887.
[45] Dullemond K, Gameren B v. Technological support for distributed agile
development. Master Thesis. Department of Software Technology. Delft
Netherlands: Delft University of Technology; 2009. uuid:cb213f3aef6f5-
41e0-b56f-07f13f37af22.
[46] Alexandrova M, Ivanova L. Critical success factors of project management:
empirical evidence from projects supported by EU programmes. In: 9th in-
ternational ASECU conference on “systematic economic crisis: current issues
and perspectives”, Skopje, Macedonia; 2012. UDC: 005.8:005.334(497.2).
Retrieved from, http://www.asecu.gr/files/9th_conf_files/alexandrova-and-
ivanova.pdf.
[47] Bairi J, Manohar BM. Critical success factors in gaining user customer satis-
faction in outsourced IT services. J Enterprise Inf Manag 2011;24(6):475e93.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17410391111166530.
[48] Yang Z, Fang X. Online service quality dimensions and their relationships
with satisfaction: a content analysis of customer reviews of securities
brokerage services. Int J Serv Ind Manag 2004;15(3):302e26. https://doi.org/
10.1108/09564230410540953.
[49] Standish G. The CHAOS report. Boston: The Standish Group International,
Inc.; 1994. Available online, https://www.standishgroup.com/sample_
research_files/chaos_report_1994.pdf (accessed on 04 December 2017).
[50] Feger AL, Thomas GA. A framework of exploring the relationship between
project manager leadership style and project success. Int J Manag 2012;1(1):
1e19. Availabale online, https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl¼en&as_
sdt¼0%2C5&q¼Aþframeworkþofþexploringþtheþrelationshipþbetweenþ
projectþmanagerþleadershipþstyleþandþprojectþsuccess.þ&btnG¼
(accessed on 04 December 2017).
[51] Fincham R. Narratives of success and failure in systems development. Br J
Manag 2002;13(1):1e14. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00219.
[52] Belout A. Effects of human resource management on project effectiveness
and success: toward a new conceptual framework. Int J Proj Manag
1998;16(1):21e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(97)00011-2.
[53] Collins A, Baccarini D. Project success - a survey. J Construct Res 2004;5(2):
211e31. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1609945104000152.
[54] Pinto JK, Slevin DP. Project success: definitions and measurement tech-
niques. Proj Manag J 1988;19(1):67e73. Available online, https://scholar.
google.com/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%2C5&q¼Projectþsuccess%
3AþDefinitionsþandþmeasurementþtechniques.&btnG¼ (accessed on 04
December 2017).
[55] Hoegl M, Gemuenden HG. Teamwork quality and the success of innovative
projects: a theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organ Sci 2001;12(4):
435e99. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.4.435.10635.
[56] Shenhar A, Tishler A, Dvir D, Lipovetsky S, Lechler T. Refining the search for
project success factors: a multivariate typological approach. R Manag
2002;32(2):111e26. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9310.00244.
[57] Muller R, Turner R. Leadership competency profile of successful project
managers. Int J Proj Manag 2010;28(5):437e48. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijproman.2009.09.003.
[58] Maqbool R, Sudong Y, Manzoor N, Rashid Y. The impact of emotional intel-
ligence, project managers' competencies, and transformational leadership on
project success. Proj Manag J 2017;48(3):58e75. Available online, https://
scholar.google.com/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%
2C5&q¼TheþImpactþofþEmotionalþIntelligence%2CþProjectþManagers%
27þCompetencies%
2CþandþTransformationalþLeadershipþonþProjectþSuccess.þ&btnG¼
(accessed on 04 December 2017).
[59] Chua DKH, Kog YC, Loh PK. Critical success factors for different project ob-
jectives. J Construct Eng Manag 1999;125(3):142e50. https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1999)125:3(142).
[60] Diekmann JE, Girard MJ. Are contract disputes predictable? J Construct Eng
Manag 1995;121(4):355e63. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9364(1995)121:4(355).
[61] Gordon CM. Choosing appropriate construction contracting method.
J Construct Eng Manag 1994;120(1):196e210. https://doi.org/10.1061/
 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956
(ASCE)0733-9364(1994)120:1(196).
[62] Mohsini RA, Davidson CH. Determinants of performance in the traditional
building process. Construct Manag Econ 1992;10(4):343e59. https://doi.org/
10.1080/01446199200000030.
[63] Larson E. Project partnering: results of study of 280 construction projects.
J Manag Eng 1995;11(2):30e5. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-
597X(1995)11:2(30).
[64] Baccarini D, Collins A. Critical success factors for projects, surfing the waves:
management challenges; management solutions (pp. 2e5). In: Proceedings
of the 17th ANZAM conference, Perth, Australia; 2003. http://ro.ecu.edu.au/
ecuworks/7140.
[65] Ika LA, Diallo A, Thuillier D. Critical success factors for World Bank projects:
an empirical investigation. Int J Proj Manag 2012;30(1):105e16. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.03.005.
[66] Xu P, Chan EHW, Qian QK. Success factors of energy performance contracting
(EPC) for sustainable building energy efficiency retrofit (BEER) of hotel
buildings in China. Energy Pol 2011;39(11):7389e98. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.001.
[67] Zhao ZY, Zuo J, Zillante G, Wang XW. Critical success factors for BOT electric
power projects in China: thermal power versus wind power. Renew Energy
2010;35(6):1283e91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.09.016.
[68] Prabhakar GP. Project and their management: a literature review. Int J Bus
Manag 2008;3(9):3e10. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v3n8p3.
[69] Wixom BH, Watson HJ. An empirical investigation of the factors affecting
data warehousing success. MIS Q 2001;25(1):17e41. https://doi.org/
10.2307/3250957.
[70] Thite M. Leadership: a critical success factor in IT project management. In:
Proceedings of Portland international conference on management of engi-
neering and technology (PICMET’99), Portland, USA, 29-29 july 1999; 1999.
p. 298e303. https://doi.org/10.1109/PICMET.1999.787819. Print ISBN: 1-
890843-02-4.
[71] White D, Fortune J. Current practice in project managementdan empirical
study. Int J Proj Manag 2002;20(1):1e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-
7863(00)00029-6.
[72] Rajkumar S. Art of communication in project management. In: Paper pre-
sented at PMI® research conference: defining the future of project man-
agement. Washington, DC. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management
Institute; 2010. Retrieved from, https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/
effective-communication-better-project-management-6480.
[73] Zhao ZY, Chen YL. Critical factors affecting the development of renewable
energy power generation: evidence from China. J Clean Prod
2018;184(2018):466e80.
[74] Young J, Brans M. Analysis of factors affecting a shift in a local energy system
towards 100% renewable energy community. J Clean Prod 2017;169(2017):
117e24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.023.
[75] Zhao ZY, Yan H, Zuo J, Tian YX, Zillante G. A critical review of factors affecting
the wind power generation industry in China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2013;19(2013):499e508.
[76] Pantaleo AM, Giarola S, Bauen A, Shah N. Integration of biomass into urban
energy systems for heat and power. Part II: sensitivity assessment of main
techno-economic factors. Energy Convers Manag 2014;83(2014):362e76.
[77] Zhao XG, Wang JY, Liu XM, Liu PK. China's wind, biomass and solar power
generation: what the situation tells us? Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2012;16(8):6173e82.
[78] Wu G, Zeng M, Peng LL, Liu XM, Li B, Duan JH. China's new energy devel-
opment: status, constraints and reforms. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2016;53(2016):885e96.
[79] Lam JCK, Woo CK, Kahrl F, Yu WK. What moves wind energy development in
China? Show me the money! Appl Energy 2013;105(2013):423e9.
[80] Kaldellis JK, Kapsali M, Kaldelli E, Katsanou E. Comparing recent views of
public attitude on wind energy, photovoltaic and small hydro applications.
Renew Energy 2013;52(2013):197e208.
[81] Ansari MF, Kharb RK, Luthra S, Shimmi SL, Chatterji S. Analysis of barriers to
implement solar power installations in India using interpretive structural
modeling technique. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;27(2013):163e74.
[82] Goh HH, Lee SW, Chua QS, Goh KC, Kok BC, Teo KTK. Renewable energy
project: project management, challenges and risk. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2014;38(2014):917e32.
[83] Zhao ZY, Chen YL, Chang RD. How to stimulate renewable energy power
generation effectively?-China’s incentive approaches and lessons. Renew
Energy 2016;92(2016):147e56.
[84] Sangwan R, Bass M, Mullick N, Paulish DJ, Kazmeier J. Global Software
Development Handbook. ISBN: 978e0849393846. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach
Publications; 2006.
[85] Liang H, Ren J, Gao Z, Gao S, Luo X, Dong L, Scipioni A. Identification of critical
success factors for sustainable development of biofuel industry in China
based on grey decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL).
J Clean Prod 2016;131(2016):500e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2016.04.151.
[86] Lin BQ, Moubarak M. Renewable energy consumption-Economic growth
nexus for China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;40(2014):111e7.
[87] Baker BN, Murphy DC, Fisher D. Factors affecting project success. In: Project
Management Handbook. 2nd ed. 2008. p. 902e19.
[88] Kirchhoff H, Kebir N, Neumann K, Heller PW, Strunz K. Developing mutual
success factors and their application to swarm electrification: microgrids
955
with 100% renewable energies in the Global South and Germany. J Clean
Prod 2016;128(2016):190e200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.
03.080.
[89] Qi TY, Zhang XL, Karplus VJ. The energy and CO2 emissions impact of
renewable energy development in China. Energy Pol 2014;68(2014):60e9.
[90] Carlisle JE, Kane SL, Solan D, Bowman M, Joe JC. Public attitudes regarding
large-scale solar energy development in the U.S. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2015;48(2015):835e47.
[91] He YX, Xia T, Liu ZY, Zhang T, Dong Z. Evaluation of the capability of
accepting large-scale wind power in China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2013;19(2013):509e16.
[92] Gopalasamy P, Mansor Z. An investigation on project management standard
practices in IT organization. Int J Comput Eng Sci (IJCES) January 2013;3(1):
1e12. Available online, https://sites.google.com/site/ijcesjournal/volume-3-
issue-1 (accessed on 04 December 2017).
[93] Nastase M. Leadership development within SMEs: solving the organizational
conflict. Revista Manag Comp Int Rev Int Comp Manag 2009;10(5):1035e42.
Available online, https://scholar.google.com.sg/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%
2C5&q¼LeadershipþDevelopmentþwithinþSMEs%
3AþSolvingþtheþOrganizationalþConflict.&btnG¼ (accessed on 04
December 2017).
[94] Cooper R. Benchmarking new product performance: results of the best
practices study. Eur Manag J 1998;16(1):1e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0263-2373(97)00069-8.
[95] Pfeffer J. Competitive advantage through people: unleashing the power of
the work force. first ed. Boston, USA: Harvard Business Press; 1994.
p. 94e176. 087584717X, 9780875847177.
[96] Dong L, Liang HW, Gao ZQ, Luo X, Ren JZ. Spatial distribution of China's
renewable energy industry: regional features and implications for a
harmonious development future. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;58(2016):
1521e31.
[97] Pinto JK, Slevin DP. Critical success factors in R&D projects. Res Technol
Manag 1989;32(1):31e5.
[98] Belassi W, Tukel OI. A new framework for determining critical success/failure
factors in projects. Int J Proj Manag 1996;14(3):141e51.
[99] Sundqvist E, Backlund F, Chrone er D. What is project efficiency and effec-
tiveness? Proc Soc Behav Sci 2014;119:278e87.
[100] Serrador P, Turner JR. The relationship between project success and project
efficiency. Proc Soc Behav Sci 2014;119:75e84.
[101] Shenhar AJ, Renier JJ, Wideman RM. Improving PM: linking success criteria
to project type”, a paper presented at Southern Alberta Chapter. In: Sym-
posium on “creating Canadian advantage through project management”,
Calgary, Canada, may 13-15, 1996. Project Management Institute; 1996.
Available online, https://scholar.google.com.sg/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%
2C5&q¼ImprovingþPM%3Aþlinkingþsuccessþcriteriaþtoþprojectþtype.
þInþSouthernþAlbertaþChapter&btnG¼ (accessed on 04 December 2017).
[102] Martinsuo M, Lehtonen P. Role of single-project management in achieving
portfolio management efficiency. Int J Proj Manag 2007;25(1):56e65.
[103] Zwikael O, Smyrk J. Project governance: Balancing control and trust in
dealing with risk. Int J Proj Manag 2015;33(4):852e62.
[104] Rogers EM. New product adoption and diffusion. J Consum Res 1976;2(4):
290e301. https://doi.org/10.1086/208642.
[105] Li EY. Perceived importance of information system success factors: a meta
analysis of group differences. Inf Manag 1997;32(1):15e28. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0378-7206(97)00005-0.
[106] Sudhakar GP. A model of critical success factors for software projects.
J Enterprise Inf Manag 2012;25(6):537e58. https://doi.org/10.1108/
17410391211272829.
[107] Fang Y, Zeng Y. Balancing energy and environment: the effect and
perspective of management instruments in China. Energy 2007;32(12):
2247e61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2007.07.016.
[108] Sanchez AM, Perez MP. R&D project efficiency management in the Spanish
industry. Int J Proj Manag 2002;20(7):545e60.
[109] Bryde DJ, Robinson L. The relationship between total quality management
and the focus of project management practices. TQM Mag 2007;19(1):
50e61. https://doi.org/10.1108/09544780710720835.
[110] Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. third ed. New York, USA:
McGraw-Hill Education; 1994. p. 240e52. 007047849X, 9780070478497.
[111] Tabachnick BG, Fidell L. Using multivariate statistics. sixth ed. New Jersey,
USA: Pearson; 2012. p. 67e80. 0205849571, 9780205849574.
[112] Andertson J, Gerbing D. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review
and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 1998;103(2):411e23.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411.
[113] Hair JF, Anderson RE, Black WC. Multivariate data analysis with reading 4th
ed. New Jersey. USA: Prentice-Hall; 1995. p. 380e95. 0023490209,
9780023490200.
[114] Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data
analysis, vol. 6. Upper Saddle River. New Jersey, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall;
2006. p. 295e375. 0130329290, 9780130329295.
[115] Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unob-
servable variables and measurement error. J Market Res 1981;18(1):39e50.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.
[116] Li T, Cavusgil T. Decomposing the effects of market knowledge competence
in new product export. Eur J Market 2000;34(1):57e80. https://doi.org/
10.1108/03090560010306205.
956 R. Maqbool / Energy 158 (2018) 944e956
[117] Cavana RY, Delahaye BL, Sekaran U. Applied business research: qualitative
and quantitative methods. first ed. Milton, Queensland, Australia: John Wiley
& Sons Australia; 2001. p. 174e216. 0471341266, 9780471341260.
[118] Malhotra NK. Marketing research: an applied orientation. fifth ed. New Jer-
sey, USA: Pearson Education; 2008. p. 600e720. 8131723178,
9788131723173.
[119] Kwek CL, Lau TC, Tan HP. Education quality process model and its influence
on students' perceived service quality. Int J Bus Manag 2010;5(8):154e65.
Available online, https://scholar.google.com.sg/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%
2C5&q¼Educationþqualityþprocessþmodelþandþitsþinfluenceþonþ
students%E2%80%99þperceivedþserviceþquality&btnG¼ (accessed on 04
December 2017).
[120] Allen TJ. Architecture and communication among product development
engineers. 15-15 August 2000. In: Engineering management society, 2000.
Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE. Albuquerque, NM, USA: IEEE; 2000. p. 153e8.
https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872493. Print ISBN: 0-7803-6442-2.
[121] Varona F. Relationship between communication satisfaction and organiza-
tional commitment in three Gautemalan organizations. Int J Bus Commun
1996;33(2):111e40. https://doi.org/10.1177/002194369603300203.
[122] Jugdev K, Mathur G. Classifying project management resources by
complexity and leverage. Int J Manag Proj Bus 2012;5(1):105e24. https://
doi.org/10.1108/17538371211192928.
[123] Buchanan DA, Badham RJ. Power, politics, and organizational change: win-
ning the Turf Game. London. first ed. UK: SAGE Publications; 2008.
p. 173e286. 1412928338, 9781412928335.
[124] Kamal M. IT innovation adoption in the government sector: identifying the
critical success factors. J Enterprise Inf Manag 2006;19(2):192e222. https://
doi.org/10.1108/17410390610645085.
[125] Young R, Poon S. Top management supportdalmost always necessary and
sometimes sufficient for success: findings from a fuzzy set analysis. Int J Proj
Manag 2013;31(7):943e57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.11.013.
[126] Globerson S, Zwikael O. The impact of the project manager on project
management planning processes. Proj Manag J 2002;33(3):58e64. Available
online, https://scholar.google.com.sg/scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%2C5&q¼The
þimpactþofþtheþprojectþmanagerþonþprojectþmanagementþ
planningþprocesses.þ&btnG¼ (accessed on 04 December 2017).
[127] Holland CR, Light B. A critical success factors model for ERP implementation.
IEEE Software 1999;16(3):30e6. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.765784.
[128] Shenhar A, Levy O, Dvir B. Mapping the dimensions of project success. Proj
Manag J 1997;28(2):5e13. Available online, https://scholar.google.com.sg/
scholar?hl¼en&as_sdt¼0%2C5&q¼Mappingþtheþdimensionsþofþprojectþ
Success&btnG¼ (accessed on 04 December 2017).
[129] Wüste A, Schmuck P. Bioenergy villages and regions in Germany: an inter-
view study with initiators of communal bioenergy projects on the success
factors for restructuring the energy supply of the community. Sustainability
2012;4(2):244e56. https://doi.org/10.3390/su4020244.
[130] Ke Y, Wang S, Chan AP. Risk misallocation in publiceprivate partnership
projects in China. Int Publ Manag J 2013;16(3):438e60. https://doi.org/
10.1080/10967494.2013.825508.
[131] OECD. Credit risk and credit access in Asia. Paris, France: OECD Publishing;
2006. p. 290e8. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264035980-en. 978926403598
0, 9789264035973.
[132] Dvir D, Lipovetsky S, Shenhar A, Tishler A. In search of project classification:
a non-universal approach to project success factors. Res Pol 1998;27(9):
915e35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00085-7.