“Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUSTAINABILITY

AND PROJECT PERFORMANCE BASED ON EARNED
VALUE MANAGEMENT (EVM)
Hossein RADMEHR, DBA, Iran PMA member of board, Tehran, Iran;
h.radmehr78@gmail.com

Graça Miranda SILVA, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Management Department,

Information Systems and Operations Management of ISEG, Lisbon University,
Portugal; gracamsilva@iseg.ulisboa.pt

Abstract: The proliferation of scientific literature presents researchers and clinicians

with substantial problems, particularly in terms of being current with the fundamental
literature in their respective domains. There is a need for efficient tools that can analyse
and visualize trends and patterns in scientific literature as the number and complexity of
bibliographic databases continues to grow. CiteSpace is an example of such a tool. It is
a Java application that is freely available and was built for the purpose of displaying and
evaluating scientific literature. In this article, after reviewing the literate of our main
keyword; project performance, EVM analysis approach and sustainability, we decided
to search for keywords related to this topic in the citation database Web of Science1.

Furthermore, the result of this research shows the relationship and correlation of
sustainability, performance and planning and control of projects. In addition, the effect
of sustainability and sustainable development on the methods of earned value, which is
introduced as earned green value management, was investigated and its improvement
points were reviewed.

Keywords: Earned value; Performance; Project management; Sustainability

1. Introduction

Companies around the world are faced with the problem of adapting their projects to the
ever-changing needs of the market as a result of technological advancements,
competition, regulations, societal pressure, and economic demands (Magalhaes &
Magalhaes, 2018). Project management is essential to the success of a company because
projects serve as agents for resource usage and transformation (Turner & Müller, 2003).

The significance of sustainability in project management has drawn a lot of attention as

the field of projects and project management has evolved from an accidental occupation
to a systemic organizational reorganization (Rosenau & Githens, 2005). Sustainability
has been identified by academics as an issue in a number of industries, including
infrastructure, mining, new product development, energy, and construction (Marcelino-
1
The Web of Science is a paid-access platform that provides access to multiple databases that provide reference and
citation data from academic journals, conference proceedings, and other documents in various academic disciplines
Corresponding author: Hossein RADMEHR, h.radmehr78@gmail.com; 212
Copyright © 2024, The Authors. Published by IPMA.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
https://doi.org/10.56889/smci6281
PAGE 212-224
 12th IPMA Research Conference
“Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

Sádaba et al., 2014). However, integrating sustainability into project management

practices has proven to be a stretch for many organizations (Carboni et al., 2018).

The purpose of this article is to investigate, via the application of Earned Value
Management (EVM), how sustainability affects project performance. We can determine
the gaps and offer a conceptual framework for integrating sustainability into project
performance evaluation by examining the body of research on sustainability in project
management and EVM that is currently available.

2. The Methods of Evaluating the Project Performance

During the 1960s and 1970s, conventional techniques were employed to assess the
accomplishment of projects. Conventional approaches focus on the three fundamental
components of project performance-cost, time, and quality-without accounting for the
variables that affect these components and alter as the project's environment changes.
Therefore, in order to improve the accuracy, realism, and effectiveness of project
performance measurement, it is necessary to identify the risk-related aspects influencing
the infrastructure project performance evaluation process. Performance measurement is
used to measure construction project performance in order to ascertain the percentage of
the project's progress, as explained by Trnka and Taspinar (1995) and Titarenko et al.
(2015). It is also used to gauge how well the project is doing in relation to the intended
objectives, such as meeting customer satisfaction standards and finishing the project
within the allotted budget, time, and quality constraints.

3. Earned Values Management

EVM is a helpful tool and system for managing the performance of projects. According
to Chen (2017), the vast majority of academics who research project performance are of
the opinion that EVM is an excellent tool for evaluating and computing project
performance. Specifically, Fleming and Koppelman (2000) and PMI (2013) outline the
three fundamental components that form the basis of EVM: Actual Cost (AC), which
represents the actual cost of work completed; Earned Value (EV), which represents the
budgeted cost of work performed (BCWP); and Planned Value (PV), which represents
the budgeted cost of work scheduled (BCWS) (ACWP).

According to Chin Keng and Shahdan (2015), the following is a summary of the
advantages of using earned value management (EVM): EVM makes appropriate
decisions making information in critical situations and reach to project objectives; has a
clear understanding of the project's scope and performance; provides an early warning
mechanism for potential risks and defects; and controls costs and time to predict the
project's final budget.

Lipke (2004) addresses the drawbacks of using the EVM idea to estimate the project's
ultimate duration. Lipke (2004) has created the concept of Earned Schedule
Management (EVM) to address the prediction problem in the project's final stages,
when using earned schedule (ES) was suggested. Additionally, the project compared the
use of earned schedule (ES) on various paths to determine the most effective use of the
earned schedule (ES). The longest route (LP) produced the best and most accurate
outcomes, according to the findings. In their 2011 study, Naderpour and Mofid examine
the various aspects of the EVM idea and draw comparisons between its use and that of

213
 Hossein RADMEHR, 12th IPMA Research Conference
Graça Miranda SILVA “Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

the conventional approach. Acebes and colleagues (2014) provide a novel approach to
monitoring and using a combination of risk management and EVM to assess the success
of initiatives. Before extending into new areas, Chin Keng and Shahdan (2015) point
out that it is preferable to recognize and comprehend the fundamentals and tenets of the
notion of EVM when those in charge of building projects have a limited degree of
awareness regarding its use and application. In their 2014 study, Naeni et al. present a
novel fuzzy logic model under uncertainty that evaluates the project's progress toward
completion and has enhanced time and cost estimations at completion. Building on this,
the discussion in this paper identifies the primary risk variables for evaluating EVM.

The preceding list provides a summary of EVM's drawbacks. These include:

a. the difficulty of making predictions in the latter stages of the project;
b. project management authorities' lack of understanding of the application of the
EVM concept;
c. time and cost estimations at completion under uncertainty; and
d. the incompatibility of EVM and risk management.

In addition, this article addressed the drawbacks of using a concept of EVM that only
focuses on the cost and the time, without taking into account other important factors
such as sustainability, stakeholder requirements, communication strategies, and
procurement strategies, as well as other factors for measuring and predicting the
performance of a project.

4. The Importance of Sustainability in Project Management

There are very few academics or professionals working in the world today who disagree
with the idea that achieving sustainable development is one of the most important
obstacles facing our generation at this time (Goedknegt & Silvius, 2012). A definition
of sustainability, was formulated by the World Commission on Environment and
Development (WCED) and has since gained widespread acceptance. According to this
definition, sustainability, also known as sustainable development, is "development that
satisfies the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations
to satisfies their own needs." (WECD,1987: 41). Elkington (1997) refers to the concept
of sustainability as the "triple bottom line" or "3P (People, Planet, Profit),”. It is based
on three pillars: economic prosperity, social wellbeing, and responsible use of natural
resources. There is broad agreement on the idea that all three aspects are interdependent
(Elkington, 1997; General Assembly resolution 60/1, 2005), and that all three aspects
must be followed at the same time (Dyllick & Hockerts, 2002).

According to the conclusion reached by LaBrosse (2010: 90), "it does not matter where
you begin, as long as you begin someplace." More importantly, focusing in on the
reason why this article was written, Goedknegt and Silvius (2012) state that a change in
the project management profession will necessitate the need to develop new tools, as
well as "new performance indicators to measure the achievement of the project's
sustainability goals." This statement is directly relevant to the objective of this piece of
writing.

Several studies have tried for developing SPM key factors. Marios Stanitsas, et al.
(2021) identified 82 indicators through systematic literature review and semi-structured
interviews with construction management experts: 27 economic indicators, 18

214
 12th IPMA Research Conference
“Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

environmental indicators, and 37 social indicators. In their paper, they stated that in
order to identify and select the most appropriate set of indicators for sustainable project
management activities in construction projects, there is an urgent need to define a
commonly accepted process. This research has been conducted in construction projects
in Greece and the United Kingdom, and based on their conclusions, it is necessary to
conduct this study in other countries as well as in other sectors of the industry. This
paper will be considered one of the base articles of my thesis, because it is both up-to-
date and relevant to sustainability indicators.

Martens and Carvalho (2016) present, for the very first time, a set of variables that were
selected from among roughly 700 different variables. Marcelino-Sádaba et al. (2014)
conducted a comprehensive literature evaluation that covered more than one hundred
references. With this research, they investigated the connections that exist between the
two fields of study-project management and sustainability. According to Fernández-
Sánchez and Rodrguez-Lópezone (2010), one of the most difficult challenges associated
with evaluating sustainability is determining which indicators of sustainability should
be used and choosing which indicator set to use. Their methodology offers a first effort
towards standardization for the identification and selection of sustainability indicators in
building projects, and they have advocated using it. They came up with an SBS
(sustainability breakdown structure) that contains all-inclusive sustainability metrics.

There are two recognized indicator sets, the SUSAIP model, which is based on surveys,
and the other set is based on documentation review (the SUSAIP and TSI models). 36
opportunities/indicators were chosen for further investigation. Following it came an
examination of Spanish law on both the national and regional levels. There is a newly
developed index that has been given the name "index of structures contribution to
sustainability" (ICES), although it can only be used for concrete structures. Out of all
the documents provided by the Act, a total of 62 chances and indications were chosen.
As a consequence of this, 22 possibilities and indicators related to linear infrastructure
projects were offered. In the end, they were successful in identifying all of the
opportunities associated to the cause-effect diagram by using layout strategies (Ishikawa
diagram). In the end, 41 opportunities and indicators were chosen for further
investigation.

A well-known technique for assessing project performance, particularly in relation to

time and expense, is earned value. Koke and Moehler (2019) looked into the
combination of earned value and sustainability in a single piece, which is why it was
chosen as the base article.

EVM has been applied for carbon emission budgeting; however, it has not been utilized
for sustainability in its entirety, as indicated by Koke and Moehler (2019) analysis of the
relevant literature. In addition, EVM was cited in the research literature on the topic of
sustainability in project management as a potential instrument for monitoring the
performance of sustainability, but it was never actually used. The two entities have been
merged into a single, all-encompassing conceptual framework that applies EVM
technique to sustainability and includes sustainability.

The authors suggest a paradigm known as Earned Green Value Management (EGVM),
which differs significantly from the traditional method in a number of significant ways.
The vast majority of the duties involved in project planning, such as the utilization of a

215
 Hossein RADMEHR, 12th IPMA Research Conference
Graça Miranda SILVA “Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

WBS, OBS, and control accounts, are amenable to modification for EGVM;
nevertheless, a Sustainable Breakdown Structure is necessary in order to identify
relevant indicators (SBS). The scheduling of the project needs to make allowances for
greater time, particularly in light of the increased amount of labor required for
measuring.

Instead of applying EGVM at the project level, it should be done so on the portfolio to
ensure optimal benefits management (Koke & Moehler, 2019).

It is necessary to extend the project lifecycle beyond project closure and take the
implications of the product lifecycle into account. Rather than using the conventional
iron triangle, the concept concentrates on the sustainability triple bottom line. A sunk
cost perspective on value creation gives way to an opportunity cost-based one, which
emphasizes cost savings through improved use of human and natural capital resources.

In its most basic form, EGVM is a cutting-edge instrument that bridges the gap between
traditional project management practices and environmentally responsible project
management. EGVM works in conjunction with EVM rather than in substitute of it.
Koke and Moehler's research from 2019 is cited here (Koke & Moehler, 2019).

5. Citespace Results and Our Finding

In this investigation we searched for keywords ‘sustainability’ and ‘project

performance’ in the time range of years (1975 - 2023), which resulted in 22.472 articles.
This number shows how important these keywords and topics have been and how much
action and research has been done on this subject. To be able to use the results obtained
better for further research, we chose the words more specialized and closer to the main
topic of the research and set aside the articles that had been used in earlier years. For
example, in the next step, we searched for these keywords in the last 5 years, which
included 14.579 scientific findings. Of course, all these searches and results have been
extracted until this scientific document is prepared and this process is expanding every
day and day by day and week by week, the volume of information on this subject is
added, but these results and analyses are for sensitizing the subject in mind. But the
topic that might be interesting in this regard is that when we add the word Earned Value
Management to the searches, this amount of scientific record suddenly decreases, which
may be due to the researchers’ neglect of this important issue. Therefore, in this
research, it has been tried to use this field to emphasize the importance of this issue and
highlight its role. As this review showed that this search in this regard includes 21
scientific records in the time period of (1975 – 2023).

In the table 1, we can see the dispersion and importance of keywords and fields related
to this research, and as you can see, the highest amount in this regard is related to field
“Environmental Sciences”, then “Green Sustainable Science Technology” and
“Environmental Studies”.

216
 12th IPMA Research Conference
“Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

Table 1. dispersion and importance of keywords and fields related to this research
Field: Web of Science Categories Record Count %
Environmental Sciences 13 61.905%
Green Sustainable Science Technology 13 61.905%
Environmental Studies 11 52.381%
Construction Building Technology 3 14.286%
Engineering Environmental 3 14.286%
Business Finance 2 9.524%
Engineering Civil 2 9.524%
Management 2 9.524%
Ecology 1 4.762%
Economics 1 4.762%
Energy Fuels 1 4.762%
Oceanography 1 4.762%
Water Resources 1 4.762%
Time of creation: Fri Sep 08 15:24:04 GMT+03:30 2023

The summary begins by highlighting the most important clusters, including the papers
and references that were cited. It will be possible to characterize the significance of
nodes in terms of citation-based metrics like citation counts and citation bursts, as well
as network-based metrics like degree centrality and betweenness centrality. The concept
of sigma can be thought of as an amalgamation of the two sorts of centrality, namely
burst and betweenness.

Other elements, such as structural variation analysis, analysis of uncertainty, concept

trees, and dual-map overlays, are not included in this particular summary. These features
can be found, among others, in the full report. The network consists of 7 clusters. The
largest 7 clusters are summarized as follows.

Table 2. Summary of the largest 7 clusters

Cluster Silhouet Averag
Size Label (LSI) Label (LLR) Label (MI)
ID te e Year
value
reducing
0 45 0.883 project control management 2016
rework (0.78)
(9.53, 0.005)
unlocking digital survey
digitalization-based
1 33 0.937 technologies research 2018
circular economy
(8.45, 0.005) (0.93)
privately-owned integrated
public rental project
3 31 0.997 multiple option 2014
housing project delivery
(8.21, 0.005) (0.23)
an integrated efficiency- sustainable sustainable
4 29 1 risk approach in project control project 2015
sustainable project control (7.74, 0.01) control (0.06)
Keeping a semi-arid
semi-arid semi-arid
savanna's rangeland
5 24 1 savanna (7.74, savanna 2007
ecology in good health has
0.01) (0.06)
important repercussions

217
 Hossein RADMEHR, 12th IPMA Research Conference
Graça Miranda SILVA “Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

for the economy.

BIM-based four-
dimensional simulation to
improve the efficiency of sustainable sustainable
6 24 0.998 module manufacture for building project building 2015
environmentally (7.74, 0.01) project (0.06)
responsible building
projects
a comprehensive analysis
of earned value
management techniques value value
for the purpose of tracking management management
12 5 0.974 2021
and managing the method (5.1, method
performance of a project's 0.05) (0.12)
timeline using an AHP
methodology

7.1 Cluster #0 VALUE MANAGEMENT

The largest cluster, which is denoted by the number 0, is made up of 45 different

individuals and has a silhouette value of 0.883. The LLR team calls it value
management, the LSI team calls it project control, and the MI team calls it decreasing
rework (0.78).

Willems, LL is highlighted as the most important source inside the cluster (2015.0) A
categorization of periodicals and papers on project control and earned value
management (Willems & Vanhoucke, 2015). The most cited members in this cluster are:
5 costs
5 earned value management
3 frameworks

7.2 Cluster #1 UNLOCKING DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES

Willems, LL is identified as the most significant referencing article in the cluster

(2015.0) Organizing the various articles and periodicals published on project control
and earned value management (Willems & Vanhoucke, 2015).
The article "Kurniawan, TA (2022.0) Unlocking digital technologies for trash recycling
in industry 4.0 era: a transformation towards a digitalization-based circular economy in
Indonesia" by TA Kurniawan is the most important piece of research that is cited by the
cluster (Kurniawan et al., 2022). The most cited members in this cluster are:
10 management
3 challenges
2 accruals
7.3 Cluster #3 PRIVATELY-OWNED PUBLIC RENTAL HOUSING PROJECT
The third largest cluster (#3) has 31 members and a silhouette value of 0.997. It is
labeled as privately-owned public rental housing project by LLR, multiple option by
LSI, and integrated project delivery (0.23) by MI.

218
 12th IPMA Research Conference
“Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

The major citing article of the cluster is: Li, D (2016.0) Assessing investment value of
privately-owned public rental housing projects with multiple options (Li et al.,
2016).The most cited members in this cluster are:
6 model
1 Taiwo A, 2015, URBAN DES INT, V20, P56, DOI 10.1057/udi.2013.37
1 real option pricing model

7.4 Cluster #4 SUSTAINABLE PROJECT CONTROL

The 4th largest cluster (#4) has 29 members and a silhouette value of 1. It is labelled as
sustainable project control by LLR, an integrated efficiency-risk approach in sustainable
project control by LSI, and sustainable project control (0.06) by MI.

The major citing article of the cluster is: (Ghazvini et al., 2017) An integrated
efficiency-risk approach in sustainable project control

1 Rodriguez JCM,
1 critical chain

7.5 Cluster #5 SEMI-ARID SAVANNA

Cluster number 5 is the fifth largest cluster overall, and it consists of 24 members and
has a silhouette value of 1. It has the classification of semi-arid savanna according to
LLR, economic implications of preserving rangeland ecosystem health in a semi-arid
savanna according to LSI, and semi-arid savanna (0.06) according to MI.

The major citing article of the cluster is: Teague (Teague et al., 2009)
The most cited members in this cluster are:
1 (Ansley et al., 2004)
1 sustainability simulator sess
1 (Diaz-Solis et al., 2006)

7.6 Cluster #6 SUSTAINABLE BUILDING PROJECT

The sixth largest cluster, or cluster number 6, consists of 24 individuals and has a
silhouette value of 0.998. It is referred to as a sustainable building project by LLR, a
bim-based 4d simulation to increase module manufacturing productivity for sustainable
building projects by LSI, and a sustainable building project (0.06) by MI.

The most important source of citations for this cluster is: Lee, J. (2017.0) BIM-based
four-dimensional simulation to enhance the productivity of module manufacture for
environmentally responsible building projects. DOI: 10.3390/su9030426
SUSTAINABILITY DOI:10.3390/su9030426.The most cited members in this cluster
are:
2 constructions
1 (Kamali, 2016)

7.7 Cluster #12 VALUE MANAGEMENT METHOD

The 7th largest cluster (#12) has 5 members and a silhouette value of 0.974. It is
labelled as value management method by LLR, a systematic review of earned value

219
 Hossein RADMEHR, 12th IPMA Research Conference
Graça Miranda SILVA “Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

management methods for monitoring and control of project schedule performance: an

AHP approach by LSI, and value management method (0.12) by MI.

The major citing article of the cluster is: (Mayo-Alvarez et al., 2022)
The most cited members in this cluster are:
2 (Koke & Moehler, 2019)
2 earned value management (EVM)
1 earned schedule (es)

7.8 CITATION COUNTS

As it is shown in table 3 the top ranked item by citation counts is (2009) in Cluster #1,
with citation counts of 10. The second one is (2015) in Cluster #3, with citation counts
of 6. The third is (2015) in Cluster #0, with citation counts of 5. The 4th is (2015) in
Cluster #0, with citation counts of 5. The 5th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with citation
counts of 3. The 6th is (2016) in Cluster #2, with citation counts of 3. The 7th is (2018)
in Cluster #1, with citation counts of 3. The 8th is (2017) in Cluster #0, with citation
counts of 3. The 9th is (2020) in Cluster #0, with citation counts of 3. the 10th is (2015)
in Cluster #0, with citation counts of 3.

Table 3. The top ranked item by citation counts

Citation Counts References DOI Cluster ID
10 , 2009, , , null 1
6 , 2015, , , null 3
5 , 2015, , , null 0
5 , 2015, , , null 0
3 , 2015, , , null 0
3 , 2016, , , null 2
3 , 2018, , , null 1
3 , 2017, , , null 0
3 , 2020, , , null 0
3 , 2015, , , null 0

7.9 BURSTS

As it is shown in table 4 the top ranked item by bursts is (2009) in Cluster #1, with
bursts of 3.16. The second one is (2015) in Cluster #3, with bursts of 0.00. The third is
(2015) in Cluster #0, with bursts of 0.00. The 4th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with bursts of
0.00. The 5th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with bursts of 0.00. The 6th is (2016) in Cluster
#2, with bursts of 0.00. The 7th is (2018) in Cluster #1, with bursts of 0.00. The 8th is
(2017) in Cluster #0, with bursts of 0.00. The 9th is (2020) in Cluster #0, with bursts of
0.00. The 10th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with bursts of 0.00.

220
 12th IPMA Research Conference
“Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

Table 4. The top ranked item by bursts

Bursts References DOI Cluster ID
3.16 , 2009, , , null 1
0.00 , 2015, , , null 3
0.00 , 2015, , , null 0
0.00 , 2015, , , null 0
0.00 , 2015, , , null 0
0.00 , 2016, , , null 2
0.00 , 2018, , , null 1
0.00 , 2017, , , null 0
0.00 , 2020, , , null 0
0.00 , 2015, , , null 0
7.10 DEGREE

As it is shown in table 5 the top ranked item by degree is (2015) in Cluster #3, with
degree of 46. The second one is (2009) in Cluster #1, with degree of 38. The third is
(2015) in Cluster #0, with degree of 36. The 4th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with degree of
36. The 5th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with degree of 32. The 6th is (2017) in Cluster #4,
with degree of 31. The 7th is (2017) in Cluster #4, with degree of 31. The 8th is (2017)
in Cluster #4, with degree of 31. The 9th is (2016) in Cluster #2, with degree of 30. The
10th is (2016) in Cluster #3, with degree of 30.

Table 5. The top ranked item by degree

Degree References DOI Cluster ID
46 , 2015, , , null 3
38 , 2009, , , null 1
36 , 2015, , , null 0
36 , 2015, , , null 0
32 , 2015, , , null 0
31 , 2017, , , null 4
31 , 2017, , , null 4
31 , 2017, , , null 4
30 , 2016, , , null 2
30 , 2016, , , null 3

7.11 CENTRALITY

As it is shown in table 6 the top ranked item by centrality is (2009) in Cluster #1, with
centrality of 0.36. The second one is (2015) in Cluster #3, with centrality of 0.29. The
third is (2017) in Cluster #6, with centrality of 0.19. The 4th is (2015) in Cluster #0,
with centrality of 0.18. The 5th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with centrality of 0.12. The 6th
is (2018) in Cluster #1, with centrality of 0.11. The 7th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with
centrality of 0.10. The 8th is (2017) in Cluster #0, with centrality of 0.09. The 9th is

221
 Hossein RADMEHR, 12th IPMA Research Conference
Graça Miranda SILVA “Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

(2015) in Cluster #0, with centrality of 0.08. The 10th is (2017) in Cluster #4, with
centrality of 0.06.
Table 6. The top ranked item by centrality
Centrality References DOI Cluster ID

0.36 , 2009, , , null 1

0.29 , 2015, , , null 3

0.19 , 2017, , , null 6

0.18 , 2015, , , null 0

0.12 , 2015, , , null 0

0.11 , 2018, , , null 1

0.10 , 2015, , , null 0

0.09 , 2017, , , null 0

0.08 , 2015, , , null 0

0.06 , 2017, , , null 4

7.12 SIGMA
As it is shown in table 7 the top ranked item by sigma is (2009) in Cluster #1, with
sigma of 2.63. The second one is (2015) in Cluster #3, with sigma of 1.00. The third is
(2017) in Cluster #6, with sigma of 1.00. The 4th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with sigma of
1.00. The 5th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with sigma of 1.00. The 6th is (2018) in Cluster
#1, with sigma of 1.00. The 7th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with sigma of 1.00. The 8th is
(2017) in Cluster #0, with sigma of 1.00. The 9th is (2015) in Cluster #0, with sigma of
1.00. The 10th is (2017) in Cluster #4, with sigma of 1.00.
Table 7. The top ranked item by sigma
Sigma References DOI Cluster ID
2.63 , 2009, , , null 1
1.00 , 2015, , , null 3
1.00 , 2017, , , null 6
1.00 , 2015, , , null 0
1.00 , 2015, , , null 0
1.00 , 2018, , , null 1
1.00 , 2015, , , null 0
1.00 , 2017, , , null 0
1.00 , 2015, , , null 0
1.00 , 2017, , , null 4

222
 12th IPMA Research Conference
“Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

6. Conclusion and Outlook

In conclusion, sustainability is an extremely important aspect of project management,

and there is a growing demand to incorporate sustainability into the process of
measuring the performance of projects. In addition, there is a growing demand to
incorporate sustainability into the process of managing projects. The EVM method
provides a solid foundation on which to monitor the degree to which projects are
making progress toward reaching their sustainability goals. If companies construct the
conceptual framework for Earned Green Value Management, it will be possible for
them to accurately measure and manage the performance of their projects in terms of
sustainability.

Going forward, additional study is required to hone and confirm the EGVM technique
in order to move forward. The primary emphasis of future research should be the
development of particular metrics and methods for monitoring the performance of
sustainability initiatives within the EVM framework. Organizations have the potential to
contribute to a more sustainable future if they continually work to improve the ways in
which sustainability is measured and managed inside initiatives.

Adopting the EGVM approach will enable organizations to align their projects with
their sustainability goals and make informed decisions that benefit both the organization
and society as a whole. Given the growing emphasis on sustainability and the
importance of project management in driving sustainable development, the adoption of
this approach will enable organizations to align their projects with their sustainability
goals.

The connection and correlation of the issues of sustainability and performance and
planning has made me focus more on this issue in the next research.

References

Ansley, R. J., Pinchak, W. E., Teague, W. R., Kramp, B. A., Jones, D. L., & Jacoby, P.
W. (2004). Long-Term Grass Yields following Chemical Control of Honey Mesquite.
Journal of Range Management, 57(1), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/4003954
Carboni, J., Milsom, P., Gonzalez, M., Duncan, W., & Young, M. (2018). Sustainable
Project Management. The GPM Reference Guide.
Chen, C. (2017). Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal
of Data and Information Science, 2(2), 1-40. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/jdis-2017-
0006
Diaz-Solis, H., Kothmann, M. M., Grant, W. E., & De Luna-Villarreal, R. (2006).
Application of a simple ecological sustainability simulator (SESS) as a management
tool in the semi-arid rangelands of northeastern Mexico. Agricultural Systems, 88(2),
514-527. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2005.07.008
Fleming, Q., & Koppelman, J. (2000). Earned Value Project Management (Vol. 39).
Ghazvini, M., Ghezavati, V., Raissi, S., & Makui, A. (2017). An Integrated
Efficiency–Risk Approach in Sustainable Project Control. Sustainability, 9, 1575.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091575
Goedknegt, D., & Silvius, A. J. G. (2012). The implementation of sustainability
principles in project management. Proceedings of the 26th IPMA World Congress,
875-882.

223
Hossein RADMEHR, 12th IPMA Research Conference
Graça Miranda SILVA “Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence”

Kamali, S. (2016). Feasibility analysis of standalone photovoltaic electrification

system in a residential building in Cyprus. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 65, 1279-1284. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.018
Koke, B., & Moehler, R. C. (2019). Earned Green Value management for project
management: A systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 230, 180-197.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.079
Kurniawan, T. A., Dzarfan Othman, M. H., Hwang, G. H., & Gikas, P. (2022).
Unlocking digital technologies for waste recycling in Industry 4.0 era: A
transformation towards a digitalization-based circular economy in Indonesia. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 357, 131911.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131911
Li, D., Guo, K., You, J., & Hui, E. (2016). Assessing investment value of privately-
owned public rental housing projects with multiple options. Habitat International, 53,
8-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.10.018
Lipke, W. (2004). The probability of success. The Journal of Quality Assurance
Institute, 14-21.
Magalhaes, d., & Magalhaes, d. (2018). Project management applied to the
implementation of organizational strategies. Journal of Business Research, 88, 140–
148.
Marcelino-Sádaba, S., Pérez-Ezcurdia, A., Lazcano, A., & Villanueva, P. (2014).
Project risk management methodology for small firms. International Journal of
Project Management, 32, 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.05.009
Martens, M. L., & Carvalho, M. M. (2016). The challenge of introducing
sustainability into project management function: multiple-case studies. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 117, 29-40.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.039
Mayo-Alvarez, L., Alvarez-Risco, A., Del-Aguila-Arcentales, S., Sekar, C., & Yáñez,
J. (2022). A Systematic Review of Earned Value Management Methods for
Monitoring and Control of Project Schedule Performance: An AHP Approach.
Sustainability, 14, 15259. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215259
Rosenau, & Githens (2005). Successful project management : a step-by-step
approach with practical examples (4th ed.). Wiley.
Teague, W. R., Kreuter, U., Grant, W. E., Diaz-Solis, H., & Kothmann, M. M. (2009).
Economic implications of maintaining rangeland ecosystem health in a semi-arid
savanna. Ecological Economics, 68, 1417-1429.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.10.014
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2003). On the nature of the project as a temporary
organization. International Journal of Project Management, 21(1), 1-8.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00020-0
Willems, L. L., & Vanhoucke, M. (2015). Classification of articles and journals on
project control and earned value management. International Journal of Project
Management, 33(7), 1610-1634.

224