Why Do We Use Project Management?

The business case for project management—backed by data showing why organizations that invest in PM significantly outperform those that don't.

The Short Answer

We use project management because the cost of not using it is too high. Without structure, projects fail—they run over budget, miss deadlines, and deliver the wrong things. With proper project management, organizations achieve their goals 92% of the time and waste 28 times less money than those without it.

Project management exists to reduce chaos, increase predictability, and ensure that work actually delivers the intended value. It's not bureaucracy—it's the difference between hoping for success and planning for it.

The Data: Why PM Matters

This isn't theory—it's backed by extensive research from PMI, McKinsey, and other organizations that track project performance globally:

92%
Success Rate
Organizations using proven PM practices meet their project objectives
28x
Less Waste
High-performing organizations waste 28x less money than low-performers
$1M
Lost Every 20 Seconds
Amount wasted globally due to poor project performance
70%
Failure Rate Without PM
Approximate failure rate for projects without structured management

These numbers represent real money, real time, and real competitive advantage. The question isn't whether you can afford project management—it's whether you can afford not to use it.

6 Core Reasons Organizations Use Project Management

To Deliver On Time and On Budget

The most fundamental reason: project management creates the schedules, budgets, and tracking mechanisms that make deadline and budget adherence possible. Without it, work expands to fill available time, scope creeps without budget adjustments, and no one knows if the project is on track until it's too late.

Without PM: Teams work without clear milestones. The deadline arrives and the project is 'almost done.' Budget is exceeded because no one tracked spending against plan.
With PM: Milestones create checkpoints. Earned Value Management shows whether you're ahead or behind. Course corrections happen early, not after the budget is gone.

To Reduce Risk and Uncertainty

Every project faces uncertainty—technical challenges, market changes, resource constraints. Project management includes systematic risk identification, analysis, and response planning. Instead of being surprised by problems, teams anticipate and prepare for them.

Without PM: Risks are discovered when they become crises. No mitigation was planned. Teams scramble to respond reactively.
With PM: Risks are identified during planning. High-probability, high-impact risks get mitigation strategies. When problems occur, there's a plan.

To Align Work with Strategy

Not every project should be done—only those that support organizational goals. Project management forces the question: 'Why are we doing this?' at the start and checks 'Should we still be doing this?' throughout. This prevents organizations from completing projects that no longer matter.

Without PM: Projects continue because 'we've already started.' Resources stay committed to zombie projects. Strategic priorities shift but projects don't.
With PM: Business justification is reviewed at stage gates. Projects that no longer align with strategy are killed early. Resources flow to highest-value work.

To Coordinate Complex Work

Modern work is interdependent. A product launch requires Engineering, Design, Marketing, Sales, Legal, and Support to all deliver their pieces in the right sequence. Without coordination, handoffs fail, dependencies create delays, and teams blame each other.

Without PM: Marketing creates launch materials before the product is finalized. Engineering makes changes that invalidate Sales training. No one owns coordination.
With PM: Dependencies are mapped. Handoffs are planned. One person owns the integrated timeline. Cross-functional conflicts are resolved before they cause delays.

To Provide Visibility and Control

Leaders can't make good decisions about what they can't see. Project management creates the dashboards, status reports, and metrics that give leadership visibility into what's happening. This enables informed decisions about resources, priorities, and trade-offs.

Without PM: Leaders ask 'How's the project going?' and get vague answers. Problems are hidden until they're crises. No data exists to support decisions.
With PM: Standardized reporting shows status across all projects. Leaders can see which projects are at risk. Data supports resource allocation decisions.

To Learn and Improve

Every project is an opportunity to learn—what worked, what didn't, and how to do better next time. Project management includes formal closure processes that capture lessons learned and feed them back into organizational capability.

Without PM: Projects end chaotically. No one captures what was learned. The same mistakes repeat on the next project.
With PM: Retrospectives identify improvements. Lessons learned are documented and shared. Each project makes the organization more capable.

Managing the 'Messy Middle'

Every project has an exciting beginning (the vision!) and a satisfying end (the launch!). But between them lies the 'messy middle'—where enthusiasm fades, problems emerge, and projects go to die.

The messy middle is filled with conflicting stakeholder demands, resource shortages, technical surprises, scope changes, and team conflicts. This is where project management earns its value. It provides the structure to navigate complexity, the processes to handle change, and the discipline to keep moving forward when things get hard.

Without PM, the messy middle becomes a black hole. With PM, it becomes a series of solvable problems.

Making Trade-offs Explicit

One of PM's most valuable functions is making the Triple Constraint trade-offs visible. Every project manager knows: you can have it fast, cheap, or good—pick two.

When a stakeholder asks for more scope, project management forces the conversation: 'We can add that feature, but it will cost X more or take Y longer. Which constraint do you want to adjust?' Without this discipline, scope creeps invisibly until the project fails.

By making trade-offs explicit rather than implicit, project management gives leadership the control levers they need to make informed decisions rather than discovering problems after it's too late.

Key Takeaways

  • Organizations with PM achieve 92% success rates vs ~30% without it
  • PM exists to deliver on time/budget, reduce risk, align with strategy, coordinate work, and provide visibility
  • The 'messy middle' of projects is where PM adds the most value
  • Making trade-offs explicit enables informed leadership decisions
  • The cost of not using PM (28x more waste) far exceeds the cost of using it
Try Edworking Background

A new way to work from anywhere, for everyone for Free!

Get Started Now