This wiki is a living document. It was seeded with a body of governance research and a set of case studies from project management award winners. It is now open for the profession to extend, challenge, and enrich. This page explains how.

Why contributions matter

The claim at the centre of this wiki — that a small number of governance and leadership factors account for the majority of variation in project outcomes — is well-supported by existing research. But that research has gaps.

The current evidence base skews toward:

• Large and mega projects
• IT and infrastructure sectors
• Anglophone and European contexts
• Projects that were clearly successful or clearly failed

The factors may well hold across smaller projects, different industries, and different cultural contexts — but that needs to be tested, not assumed. Contributions that fill these gaps are particularly valuable.

Equally valuable are contributions that challenge the current framing. If you have evidence that a factor ranked in the 20% has less impact than claimed, or that something currently in the 80% should be elevated, that is exactly the kind of contribution that improves a synthesis over time.

Three ways to contribute

1. Add a case study

Case studies are the most powerful form of contribution to this wiki — they connect abstract factors to recognisable situations.

A useful case study for this wiki does not need to be a full academic write-up. It needs to:

• Describe a real project (named or anonymised) with enough context to understand its scale, sector, and stakes
• Identify which of the six factors were present or absent — and what the outcome was
• Be honest about what worked and what didn't
• Be attributable (your name, role, and organisation, or a published source)