=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2851/paper7
|storemode=property
|title=Passion and Confidence in Success as Unaccounted Factors for ICB 4.0 IPMA Model
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2851/paper7.pdf
|volume=Vol-2851
|authors=Dmytro Lukianov,Yuri Primak,Viktor Gogunskii,Olexii Kolesnikov
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/itpm/LukianovPGK21
}}
==Passion and Confidence in Success as Unaccounted Factors for ICB 4.0 IPMA Model==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2851/paper7.pdf
Passion and Confidence in Success as Unaccounted Factors for
ICB 4.0 IPMA Model
Dmytro Lukianova, Yury Prymaka, Viktor Gogunskiib, Oleksii Kolesnikovc
a
Interdisciplinary Institute for Advanced Studies and Retraining, Belarusian National Technical University,
77, Partyzansky ave., Minsk, 220107, Belarus
b
Odessa National Polytechnic University, 1, Shevchenko ave., Odessa, 65044, Ukraine
c
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 60, Volodymyrska Street, Kyiv, 01033, Ukraine
Abstract
The article proposes to consider an approach to the analysis of complex systems using
elements of decision theory and game theory. This approach is a continuation of the
comprehensive approach to the analysis of the internal relationships of the structure of the
model of individual competencies of project managers, proposed by the International Project
Management Association, carried out using various methods and tools by the authors for over
10 years. As a basis for the analysis, the adjacency matrix for the Markov model is used, built
on the basis of the analysis of the content of the IPMA ICB 4.0 standard, which is further
considered as a «decision matrix». The number of connections between the elements of the
model is interpreted as the degree of «power» of the «reaction of nature» to the use of one or
another element as a «strategy of the players» in the analysis of cooperative games. It is
proposed to consider such criteria for choosing control strategies, which are based on the use
of modeling the values of a pair of interrelated parameters «gambler's position» − «cautious
gambler's position», used in a number of decision-making criteria in game theory. Under the
«passion» is proposed to consider the degree of confidence in the success of the project. The
relationship between the degree of such «passion» and the level of significance of specific
elements of the competence of the project manager of the ICB model is shown. A hypothesis
is proposed about the relationship between emotional and technical intelligence in the success
of project management and the importance of taking this parameter into account when
forming project teams
Keywords 1
Emotional intelligence, Decision making under uncertainty, Game theory, Gambling
position, Project management, Competency model, Markov models, Graph theory, Modeling
1. Introduction
In today's economic climate, project management is becoming more and more «operationalized»,
becoming a proven technology for organizations to achieve their strategic goals. «Estimated» metrics
such as «time to market» [1] are becoming more and more important; measured «speed» of the project
teams [2]. Nevertheless, «decision-making» technologies are spreading and improving, requiring
certain skills in this area − from testing hypotheses based on rapid prototyping when creating new
products, such as «design thinking» [3] to technology for solving inventive problems «TRIZ» [4]. All
this is impossible without using the peculiarities of creative thinking [5], as well as a serious
understanding of the features of any «soft factors» in general that affect the potential success of an
ongoing project, but are not measurable, predictable and controlled as «hard factors» used in
Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop IT Project Management (ITPM 2021), February 16-18, 2021, Slavsko, Lviv region, Ukraine
EMAIL: dlukiano@gmail.com (D. Lukianov); primak@mipk.by (Y. Prymak); vd.gogunsky@gmail.com (V. Gogunskii);
akoles78@gmail.com (O. Kolesnikov)
ORCID: 0000-0001-8305-2217 (D. Lukianov); 0000-0002-2934-5577 (Y. Prymak); 0000-0002-9115-2346 (V. Gogunskii);
0000-0003-2366-1920 (O. Kolesnikov)
© 2021 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
management. Understanding (and recognizing) the possible irrationality (from the point of view of
classical «rational» methods) inherent in «soft factors» allows one to take into account the influence
of such factors as «excitement», «confidence», «passion» in management. Such manifestations of
«irrationalgo» in our time are attributed to the manifestation of «emotional intelligence», which,
having acquired a «name», has become interesting and at the same time available for research into its
influence in various spheres of human activity, including professional project management.
2. Review of existing approaches
The importance of understanding the logic of decision-making both in economics and in other
spheres of human activity hardly needs additional substantiation today. Nevertheless, the first studies
that would systematize such theories arose relatively recently from the point of view of modern
scientific thought, but, nevertheless, even before the spread of such a term as «emotional intelligence»
[6], as well as linking the specifics of managerial decision making to conditions of uncertainty. One of
the noteworthy models for assessing the possible success (or failure) of actions aimed at changing
something (which, by definition, is a project, and, accordingly, is in the sphere of interest of such an
area of knowledge as project management), is the famous «formula for change», also known as the
Glacier formula [7], whose history dates back to the 1960s [8]. It connects a number of «soft factors»,
showing their priority over all other «technical» actions in projects aimed at change, simply making
the likelihood of successful implementation of such changes to zero. At the same time, the classic
variables in this formula like «Dissatisfaction», «Vision», and «First Steps» do not at all describe,
perhaps, the entire possible range of «soft factors». One of these «factors» can be considered and
«excitement» based on belief in success [9], which is not necessarily backed up by some kind of
analytical calculations.
A huge contribution to this «paradigm shift», in our opinion, was made by the work of Daniel
Kahneman (in collaboration with the late Amos Tversky), who, despite the fact that he is a
psychologist, in 2002 received the Nobel Prize in economics for «for having integrated insights from
psychological research into economic science, especially concerning human judgment and decision-
making under uncertainty» [10]. Since then, all types of research on cognitive prejudices affecting the
nature of decision-making have become very popular, and the term «emotional intelligence» has
acquired a solid basis among the terms and definitions not only in applied psychology, but also in
economics. However, it should be understood that the idea of «emotional intelligence» is a kind of
spontaneous insight of genius. The works [11, 12], which are listed on the official Nobel Prize
website [13] regarding the relevant decision of the Nobel Committee have been separated for more
than 20 years.
It is worth noting that the idea of assessing what we understand today by «emotional intelligence»
was noted even earlier − in particular, back in 1958 in the work of such well-known and authoritative
authors today as David McClelland and Alfred Baldwin [14]. At the same time, he collaborated with
David McClelland and acted as a co-author, and in such works, which later served as the basis for the
development of ideas of all kinds of competence models in such a well-known expert in the world of
competencies as Richard E. Boyatzis [15], without references to the ideas of which today, perhaps, no
serious research in the field of competence management can do. At the same time, other authors have
studied the relationship between decision making under uncertainty, the characteristics of human
thinking and the economic consequences of such decisions [16]. In particular, the set of factors
«Individual», «Organization environment», and «Job demand», cited from [17] could very well be the
predecessor of both the PMI Talent Triangle [18] and the «Eye of competencies» Proposed by IPMA
in its ICB version 3 [19].
At the same time, it was Boyatzis who, perhaps, was the pioneer in researching models of effective
behavior of managers [20], raising, incl. and issues of assessing the impact of personnel competencies
on financial performance [21]. In the study of competence models, one way or another, the question
will arise not only about their assessment, but also about their development. In particular, through
appropriate educational programs. Therefore, there is nothing surprising in the fact that among such a
«virtual team» to see the famous today David Kolb [22]. Perhaps, after such a «chain» of
bibliographic «discoveries», the presence of the Daniel Goleman (not already mentioned Nobel
laureate Daniel Kahneman) among the co-authors of such an «expanded» group of authors is more a
necessity than an accident [23]. Moreover, the methods and tools proposed by Goleman [24] can be
seen today in modern systems for assessing and developing competencies, in particular, in the field of
project management.
On the other hand, it should be noted that a number of Nobel laureates associated with decision
theory − game theory, began their history back in 1970 [25], and Kahneman and Goleman can
rightfully be attributed to this galaxy of outstanding researchers. Thus, it can be stated that in the
middle of the last century, several trends were formed, including mathematical, economic,
pedagogical and psychological trends, which by the beginning of the 21st century formed a number of
multidisciplinary areas, both in science and in applied fields of activity. Modern project management
can be considered one of these areas. Moreover, research on the use of emotional intelligence in
project management also has a long history [26-31]. Modern standards in the field of project
management can hardly be called «unique documents» containing a kind of «knowledge system», the
likes of which are not found anywhere else. If even 30 years ago any framework on this topic would
have caused a huge surge of interest, today such interest arises only from the point of view of
comparing the «newbie» with already existing approaches. Almost all the leading «providers» of
knowledge systems for project management offer their own vision of the «competency sets» required
for successful project management. Such models are suggested by the International Project
Management Association [32], the American Project Management Institute [33] and even the authors
of the SCRUM Guide [34]. One way or another, the blocks or individual elements associated with
«soft» factors are clearly identified, the increasing dependence of the success of the project on the
accounting and use of the «human factor» in management is noted. And, what is also worth noting,
each of these documents, in fact, also offers a system for making decisions in the face of uncertainty.
What, nevertheless, still remains relevant - this is an attempt to formalize the influence of emotional
intelligence on decision-making in the form of appropriate mathematical models based not on the
description of past events and their interpretation, but on the construction of such models that could
make it possible to predict behavior of certain systems, taking into account the possible influence of
factors inherent in emotional intelligence. In such a problem, of course, there is some challenge and
contradiction, since this is an explicit attempt to describe in the language of IQ the logic of the
influence of EQ on IQ (moreover, at first glance, an insoluble conflict between IQ and EQ).
3. Problem
In recent years, as noted above, more and more attention has been paid to «soft factors» as
opposed to «hard» ones, the possession of which, as a rule, also requires possession of a serious set of
analytical tools and methods. Which, of course, requires a very serious investment, at least time and
attention, in obtaining such «tough skills». Without in any way belittling the importance of «soft
knowledge», we can nevertheless assume that the denial of the only possible path to professional
management through the acquisition of «hard knowledge» nevertheless «opened a loophole» for those
who do not possess either one or the other knowledge. , but, unfortunately, this relatively «soft skills»
can be difficult to verify, in particular, due to a good level of proficiency in a certain set of such
«tools». A number of authors have already written about this feature. calling it «The Dark Side of
Emotional Intelligence» [35]. Nevertheless, it is worth warning against neglecting «hard knowledge»,
incl. methods and tools of quantitative analysis, in particular, in risk management. In this regard, it
still seems worthwhile to carefully approach the ideas of the unconditional and necessary priority of
emotional intelligence [36]. Rather, it is worth combining both such approaches, as it is, in particular,
perfectly demonstrated in Fig. 1, which suggests considering in interrelation both the classic (already)
«EQ components» («inner circle») and «IQ components in project management», in the no less
«classical representation», based on the PMI PMBOK knowledge areas («outer circle») [37].
Modern practice knows examples of both successful and unsuccessful implementation of similar,
at first glance, projects being implemented in similar external conditions. For many years, attempts
have been made to identify and analyze formal, primarily, unambiguously identifiable and measurable
factors that affect the success of a project [38]. Nevertheless, despite the recognized importance of
«soft factors», they are not so easy and unambiguous to identify and assess their influence on the final
success or failure of a project, although a number of serious studies have argued for the importance of
such factors [39]. It seems useful to create models for assessing the impact of such factors, incl. to
adjust existing approaches to project management based on quantitative assessments, and not only on
qualitative parameters [40], although it is worth noting the emergence of quantitative studies on the
relationship between emotional intelligence and certain aspects of the elements of the model of
individual competencies of project managers [41], in ICB terms 4.0 IPMA [42], as well as to what
extent the presence of developed emotional intelligence indicates the potential of a manager [43].
Figure 1: EQ and EQ in project management [37]
Modern researchers in the field of project management also pay attention, albeit perhaps not
enough, to the phenomenon of emotional intelligence. Perhaps this is due to the presence in the
«picture of the world» of many technical specialists approaches to decision-making based on the use
of «analytic-oriented» IQ rather than EQ, to the extent of ignoring everything that cannot be explicitly
formalized. As Anthony Mersino writes in his work on self-change: «A big change came when I
began to recognize the value of emotions and relationships at work. I learned about feelings and
learned to trust them as sources of information. I have learned to acknowledge and reaffirm that I am
angry, fearful, or joyful. I also began to pay attention to how the people around me felt and take this
information into account when making decisions. Thanks to this, I was able to better manage my
projects and become a better leader for people» [44]. On the other hand, it is worth noting such a
moment as, from our point of view, insufficient attention, and, accordingly, the spread of approaches
associated with the use of decision-making theory in all the diversity accumulated by this developing
field of knowledge. But, nevertheless, it is worth noting the recent increase in interest in this area,
which is confirmed, in particular, by the appearance of relevant works, in particular as more focused
on the use of IQ [45, 46] And considering decision-making systems in conjunction with EQ [47].
In this regard, it is possible to formulate a research task as an analysis of the existing model of
individual competencies of project managers for its resistance to the effects of emotional intelligence
in the context of a possible propensity to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty based on
irrational factors such as passion, confidence, etc.
4. Decision
As a possible toolkit for constructing a model for assessing the impact of «soft factors», it is
proposed to consider the method of decision-making under uncertainty, based on the analysis of the
«payment matrix» known in game theory [48]. In 2011, Daniel Kahneman released another best-
selling book, «Think Slow, Decide Fast», in which he offered to consider two different systems of
thought. The first type, which he named System 1, is fast intuitive thinking, such as driving a car after
years of practice. The second type − System 2 − long-term, energy-consuming thinking [49]. We
propose to draw an analogy between these two types of thinking with the «position of the player» [50]
and the «position of extreme caution», directly related to each other. We will also call them «extreme
optimism» and «total pessimism» positions, where the first «position» is a state of «confidence in
success,» and the second is a lack of such confidence. As the main hypothesis, let us take a direct
connection between «confidence» and «passion», as shown in a number of sources [51-53]. This
approach is a logical continuation of those studies that were carried out earlier, but, to a greater extent,
were aimed at using the classical «IQ-approach» based on formalization in the form of mathematical
models of the system of connections inherent in one or another model in project management - from
the description «General approach» [54], to the logic of interaction of the project team with the
project environment [55], and, further, to a description of the possible role-based interaction of project
team members [56].
It is proposed to consider in further analysis precisely such criteria for evaluating alternatives (in
our case, the dominant influence of one or another element of the project manager's competence in the
implementation of managerial activities), known in decision-making theory and game theory, which
include taking into account the so-called «gambling position»: Hurwitz criterion [57]; Hodge-
Lehmann criterion [58].
To provide a basis for constructing a «payment matrix», it is proposed to consider an adjacency
matrix for a model of individual competencies built on the basis of a model of individual
competencies proposed by the International Project Management Association due to the fact that in
the text of this standard there are explicit references to the connections of each of the elements with
other elements of the system, which allows construct a first-order adjacency matrix (Fig. 2):
Figure 2: The 1st order adjacency matrix − fragment [59]
As the «payment matrix» itself, it is proposed to consider the adjacency matrix of such a minimum possible
order n, when the state of attainability of the influences of each element of the system on any other element of
the system through at least one indirect influence through n-1 other elements (or n-1 «nodes» graph if such a
system is represented as a directed graph of the Markov model). In our case, let's take an adjacency matrix of
order 2 (Fig. 3), although it contains one element equal to zero.
Figure 3: The 2nd order adjacency matrix − fragment [59]
Considering the resulting matrix as a «payment matrix» or «decision matrix», where the rows of
the matrix are considered as «strategies» of influence on the system, and the columns as «reactions»
of the elements of «nature» to the effects exerted. For better visualization of the system of
interconnections in the matrix shown in Figure 3, we transform it into the system landscape, as it was
proposed in [59], and it is this resulting matrix that will be considered as a «decision matrix». By
supplementing it with columns with maximum and minimum values in each row, as well as columns
with values for the probabilities of positions of «extreme caution» («pessimism» P) and «gambler»
(«optimism» O), one can calculate for the necessary criteria (Fig. 4).
Figure 4: The «Decision Matrix», created on the basis of the 2nd order adjacency matrix for the
IPMA ICB4.0 competency model - an example of calculating the Hurwitz criterion for the value
V = 0.4 (source: own development)
Now let's calculate the Hurwitz (Fig. 5) and Hodge-Lehman (Fig. 6) criteria with a variable
step V = 0.1 in the range from 0 to 1. Accordingly, V = 1 will correspond to the position of the
«gambler» with the maximum degree of «optimism», and V = 0 correspond to the position of
«extreme caution». The rules for calculating these criteria will not be cited in this article due to the
availability of their description both in the cited sources and on the Internet, as well as in the
calculation file [60] located by the authors in the Researchgate network. Further, according to the data
presented on Fig. 5 and Fig. 6, we construct Fig. 7 and Fig. 8, which represent the dynamics of
changes in the values of the indicators of these criteria for each of the model elements, depending on
the level of «pessimism» (on the graphs, the values of the horizontal axis correspond to 1 = maximum
caution («complete pessimism), 0 = maximum excitement («minimum caution», «maximum
confidence in success» or «extreme optimism»).
Figure 5: The Calculation of the Hurwitz criterion (source: own development)
Figure 6: The Calculation of the Hodge-Lehmann criterion (source: own development)
Figure 7: The Dynamics of changes in the influence of elements of the competence model
IPMA ICB 4.0 − an example of calculation to take into account the Hurwitz criterion
Figure 8: The Dynamics of changes in the influence of the elements of the competence model
IPMA ICB 4.0 − an example of calculation for taking into account the Hodge-Lehmann criterion
As can be seen in the presented Fig. 7 and Fig. 8, with such visualization, it is clearly seen that
when calculating by both methods, with a value of V = 0.5, a redistribution of the «demand» of a part
of the competency element occurs, which allows us to put forward a hypothesis that different
situations within the project in particular, the representation of certain factors in the mentioned
Beckhardt formula, which can be interpreted as the presence of «internal confidence» in the success
of the project, will require maximizing the use of a slightly different subset of competency elements
by both the project manager and the project team members.
5. Discussion
As can be seen in Fig. 9, the priority of using certain elements of the competence model of project
managers for the position of a «gambler» at V = 1 by the method of the Hodge-Lehman criterion
corresponds to the LL criterion proposed by the authors, based on the logic of taking into account the
total number of influences, both direct and mediated (through chains of related elements of
competence).
Figure 9: The priority of the influence of the elements of the IPMA ICB 4.0 competency model - an
example of calculation to take into account the Hodge-Lehmann criterion at V = 1 (source:
development of the authors)
But, if we consider the diametrically opposite position, where V = 0, the situation is already
somewhat different (Fig. 10):
the influence of «soft factors» − the «People» block in the terminology of IPMA ICB 4.0,
increases. The influence of such elements as «Result orientation», as well as «Resource»,
«Negotiation», «Teamwork», «Conflict and crisis» from the point of view of IPMA ICB 4.0 [42]
becomes very important. Perhaps this conclusion is critically important for ensuring the success of the
project - first of all, it is important to achieve first a «increase in the level of optimism» of the entire
project team, an understanding of its importance, despite the awareness of the difficulties that may be
associated with its further implementation, achievement and overcoming of the required «threshold «.
The level of «confidence in the success» of such a project, and only then the transition to the
«standard» model of the project team. In our opinion, this may be a kind of analogue of the creation
of a «single mental space of the project», or «BA», which is a prerequisite for the successful
implementation of a project in such a project management methodology as P2M PMAJ. [61]. On the
other hand, the previously mentioned two types of thinking according to Kahneman, perhaps it is
worth correlating the corresponding ranges of states of «optimism» − «pessimism» as a balance of
«confidence» and «caution», where the complete rejection of «System 1» in favor of «System 2» (
and vice versa) can hardly be considered a good solution in any case. As the analysis of the above
dynamic data shows for assessing the importance of the entire set of elements of the competency
model, it is worth
Figure 10: Priority of the influence of the elements of the competence model IPMA ICB 4.0 − an
example of calculation to take into account the Hodge-Lehmann criterion at V = 0 (source: authors
development)
As can be seen from the Figure 10, in the situation of «primary pessimism» the significance of
considering the IPMA ICB 4.0 model as the model most likely corresponding to the type of thinking
inherent in «System 1». As can be seen in Figure 6, the quantitative criterion LL, corresponding to the
«total power» calculated for each of the model elements, without taking into account the influence of
such» emotional factors «as excitement and confidence in success, and the rating of the model
elements built on its basis corresponds the rating calculated using criteria based on «player position»
is the «player position». From this point of view, the type of thinking inherent in «System 2» will be
ignored - simply because it is closer to the position of «extreme caution» or «pessimism». Perhaps it
is worth considering the areas of application of each of the types of thinking and their combination,
for example, on a scale between such «extremes» as the classical model of «waterfall», which, from
our point of view, is quite close to prevalence. thinking type «System 2» and «projects of flexible
management technologies», rather related to the type of thinking «System 1». One way or another,
with this approach, it is worth making an «additional comment» or, rather, a «warning» regarding the
scope of such competency models, depending both on the type of methodology used in the project
and, possibly, on the level of «risk appetite» specific to the customer and contractor in a specific
project. On the other hand, it's worth noting that the EQ concept continues to evolve as well. In
particular, all the same well-known authors Goleman and Boyatzis offer already more complex
models, which include more elements than the models presented in the «inner circle» in Fig. 1 [62].
With «coming out of the shadows», EQ has become a subject of research in organizations. In
particular, in [43] presents the results of the study, which are of undoubted interest both in relation to
which levels of the organization are most in demand for EQ (regarding the logic of project
management systems in relation to role-based certification models, from our point of view it could
correlate with the respective levels of both the certification model offered by PMI and IPMA − from
project team members to project portfolio managers) − Fig. 11:
Figure 11: Coefficient of EI in relation with position in organizational hierarchy [43]
and, just as interestingly, it is the high EQ level of those who are traditionally viewed as more likely
to have a high IQ level − Fig. 12:
Figure 12: Respondent’s average EI coefficient in relation with education level [43]
As the authors interpret the results of their study, the maximum efficiency can still be expected
when there is a balance between IQ and EQ (as well as other types of «intelligences» [63], At the
same time, perhaps, among successful project managers, it will really be possible to meet those who
will have both high IQ and EQ levels at the same time, but, perhaps, will «pay» for such a
combination with less outstanding indicators of some other types of «Q».
6. Conclusion
The presented model, according to the authors, can be used in the analysis of other complex
systems, where not only the influence of «soft factors» can be identified, but it can also be argued that
there is a strong emotional component that affects the potential success of the project. Maybe, such an
approach, will allow a more «instrumental» approach to assessing the importance of such a
component as «emotional intelligence» and the recognition of such a phenomenon as «failure» of
projects, at first glance, «technically» doomed to success, and, conversely, the success of «failed»
projects «pulled out» by teams emotionally «charged for success». At the same time, perhaps, the
failure can be ensured by the fact that in a situation of objective «lack of confidence» (pessimism),
tools were used that were more suitable for the position of a «gambler» and vice versa. According to
the authors, further research in this direction could provide a good theoretical basis for the analysis of
such relationships [64], as well as useful practical recommendations for planning the use of decision-
making logic based on emotional intelligence as the ability to create both «opportunities» and
«threats» for the implementation of specific projects in any fields of practice including information
technologies and software development.
7. References
[1] How to shorten the time-to-market: a story about testing automation in M.Video. URL:
https://habr.com/ru/company/jetinfosystems/blog/438876/
[2] We speed up the process of developing complex projects. Without chaos and nerves. URL:
https://habr.com/ru/company/simbirsoft/blog/422429/
[3] Kolesnikov O. et al. The use of the «design-thinking» and «seven hats» methods at the project
initiation and planning stage. Herald of Advanced Information Technology, 1(01), (2018): 46-52
[4] What is TRIZ? 2020. URL: https://www.triz.co.uk/what-is-triz
[5] D. Lukianov, O. Vlasenko, Process model for innovation projects ideas search «Seven Hats»
method. Social–Economic Development: the Role of Information and New Technologies, (2016)
263-270.
[6] H. Simon, Theories of Decision-Making in Economics and Behavioral Science. The American
Economic Review 49(3), (1959) 253-283.
[7] V. Tomashevskyi, A. Yatsyshyn, V. Pasichnyk, N. Kunanets, A. Rzheuskyi, Data Warhouses of
Hybrid Type: Features of Construction. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book
series 938 (2019) 325–334.
[8] Beckhard-Harris Change Equation, 2020. URL: https://www.businessballs.com/change-
management/formula-for-change/5
[9] D. V. Lukyanov, Faith in success coefficient for Beckhardt's formula of successful changes in
assessing the feasibility of roadmaps for the development of organizations. Project, Program,
Portfolio Management 2 (2016) 82–87.
[10] The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, 2002. URL:
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2002/summary/
[11] D. Kahneman, A. Tversky. «Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk». Econometrica
47 (1979) 263-291.
[12] D. Kahneman, A. Tversky, Choices, Values and Frames, Cambrige University Press, 2000.
[13] Useful Links / Further Reading. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Media AB 2020. URL:
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2002/9235-useful-links-further-reading-
2002/
[14] Book Reviews: David C. McClelland , Alfred L. Baldwin, Urie Bronfenbrenner, Fred L.
Strodtbeck, Princeton, New Jersey, Talent and Society. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1958.
275 pp.
[15] McClelland, David C., and Richard E. Boyatzis. «Leadership motive pattern and long-term
success in management.» Journal of Applied psychology vol. 67.Issue 6 (1982): 737 -755
[16] Garner, C. Uncertainty, Human Judgment, and Economic Decisions. Journal of Post Keynesian
Economics, vol.4 iss.3, (1982): 413-424. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4537676
[17] Boyatzis R., Boyatzis R. E. Competencies in the 21st century, Journal of management
development, 2008. URL: https://www.oostvoorncoaching.nl/wp-content/uploads/boyatzis-
the+21st+century+competencies.pdf
[18] PMI Talent Triangle, 2020. URL: https://www.pmi.org/learning/training-development/talent-
triangle
[19] IPMA ICB ver. 3.0, 2020. URL: https://www.aipm.com.au/documents/aipm-key-
documents/ipma_pm_assessment_competence_baseline.aspx
[20] Boyatzis R. E. The competent manager: A model for effective performance. John Wiley & Sons,
1982.
[21] Boyatzis, R. The financial impact of competencies in leadership and management of consulting
firms, Department of Organizational Behavior Working Paper, Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, 1999.
[22] Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., Mainemelis, C. Experiential learning theory: Previous research and
new directions. Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles 1 (8) (2001) 227–247.
[23] Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. Primal Leadership. Realizing the power of emotional
intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2002
[24] Goleman D. An EI-based theory of workplace performance // The emotionally intelligent: How
to select for, measure, and improve emotional intelligence in individuals, groups, and
organizations, vol. 1, (2001): 27-44.
[25] Game Theorists who have received the Nobel Prizeб 2020. URL:
http://lcm.csa.iisc.ernet.in/gametheory/nobel.html
[26] Casper, C. M. Using emotional intelligence to improve project performance. Paper presented at
Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposium, San Antonio, TX. Newtown
Square, PA: Project Management Institute, 2002
[27] Maqbool R, Sudong Y, Manzoor N, Rashid Y. The Impact of Emotional Intelligence, Project
Managers’ Competencies, and Transformational Leadership on Project Success: An Empirical
Perspective. Project Management Journal, vol.48, issue 3, (2017): 58-75.
doi:10.1177/875697281704800304
[28] Rezvani A., Khosravi P., Ashkanasy N. M. Examining the interdependencies among emotional
intelligence, trust, and performance in infrastructure projects: A multilevel study, International
Journal of Project Management, vol.36, iss.8, (2018): 1034-1046
[29] Bushuyev S., Bushuiev D., Bushuieva V. Modelling of Emotional Infection to the Information
System Management Project Success. International scientific-practical conference. Springer,
Cham, (2020): 341-352 .
[30] Bushuyev S. et al. Emotional Infection of Management Innovation SMART Government
Projects. 2020 IEEE European Technology and Engineering Management Summit (E-TEMS),
(2020): 1-5.
[31] Bushuyev S. et al. Emotional Infection of Management Infrastructure Projects based on the Agile
Transformation, (2020): 1-12 .
[32] S. D. Bushuyev, R. F. Wagner. IPMA Delta and IPMA Organisational Competence Baseline
(OCB): New approaches in the field of project management maturity, International Journal of
Managing Projects in Business, vol. 7, iss. 2, (2014): 302-310
[33] Standard PMI Project Management Competency Development Framework (PMCDF). Project
Management Institute, 2013.
[34] K. Schwaber, D. Sutherland. A Comprehensive Guide to Scrum: The Rules of the Game, 2020.
URL: https://www.scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v2016/2016-Scrum-Guide-Russian.pdf
[35] Alison Coleman The Real Impact of Emotional Intelligence in Project Management, 2020.
URL: https://www.liquidplanner.com/blog/the-real-impact-of-emotional-intelligence-in-project-
management /
[36] D. Goleman, Emotional intelligence. Why it can matter more than IQ. Learning 24(6) (1996) 49-
50.
[37] Gaurav Wadekar The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Successful Project Delivery, 2020. URL:
https://www.projectmanagement.com/articles/545009/The-Role-of-Emotional-Intelligence-in-
Successful-Project-Delivery]
[38] Clancy, T. The Standish Group Report CHAOS. Project Smart, (2014): 1-16.
[39] Lochner, K. Is EQ Really Inversely Proportional to IQ?, 2020. URL:
https://insights.humancapital.aon.com/talent-assessment-blog/is-eq-really-inversely-proportional-to-iq
[40] Druskat V., Druskat P. Applying emotional intelligence in project working //The management of
complex projects: A relationship approach, (2006): 78-96.
[41] Tessema D. B. The relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership
in project management: A quantitative study.Walden University, 2010
[42] Vukomanović M., Young M., Huynink S. IPMA ICB 4.0. A global standard for project,
programme and portfolio management competences, International Journal of Project
Management,vol. 34, iss.8, (2016): 1703-1705
[43] Obradovic V. et al. Project managers’ emotional intelligence-A ticket to success. Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, vol.74, iss.29, (2013): 274-284
[44] Anthony C. Mersino. Emotional Intelligence for Project Managers: The People Skills You Need
to Achieve Outstanding Results, 2nd ed., AMACOM, American Management Association,
International, New York, NY, 2019
[45] Kolomiiets A., Morozov V. Investigation of Optimization Models in Decisions Making on
Integration of Innovative Projects in: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference
«Intellectual Systems of Decision Making and Problem of Computational Intelligence»,
Springer, Cham, (2020): 51-64.
[46] Morozov V., Mezentseva O., Proskurin M. Application of game theory for decisions making on
the development of IT products, in: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference
«Intellectual Systems of Decision Making and Problem of Computational Intelligence»,
Springer, Cham, (2020): 377-394.
[47] Weerain, L., Trumper, M., & Weeraine, E. Emotions and project management. Project and
Program Management, vol. 1, (2016): 20-27.
[48] N. A. Zenkevich, L. A. Petrosyan, E. A. Semina. Theory of games, Higher School, 1998.
[49] Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan, 2011.
[50] Rodionov, I. B. Systems theory and systems analysis, 2020. URL: http://victor-
safronov.ru/systems-analysis/lectures/rodionov/10.html
[51] R. Kaminskyi, N. Kunanets, A. Rzheuskyi, A. Khudyi, Methods of statistical research for
information managers, in: Proceedings of the 13th International Scientific and Technical
Conference on Computer Sciences and Information Technologies, CSIT 2018, 2018, pp. 127–
131.
[52] How not to lose your passion at work, 2020. URL:
https://hrliga.com/index.php?module=news&op=view&id=11845
[53] R. Kaminskyi, N. Kunanets, V. Pasichnyk, A. Rzheuskyi, A. Khudyi, Recovery gaps in
experimental data. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2136 (2018) 108–118.
[54] Gogunskii, V., Kolesnikov, O., Oborska, G., Harelik, S., Lukianov, D. Representation of project
systems using the Markov chain, Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2 (3-86),
(2017): 60-65
[55] Kolesnikov, O., Gogunskii, V., Kolesnikova, K., Lukianov, D., Olekh, T. Development of the
model of interaction among the project, team of project and project environment in project
system Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 5(9), (2016): 20–26
[56] Lukianov, D., Bespanskaya-Paulenka, K., Gogunskii, V., ... Moskaliuk, A., Dmitrenko, K.
Development of the markov model of a project as a system of role communications in a team
Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3(3-87),(2017): 21-28
[57] Hurwitz stability criterion, 2020. URL: http://www.tehnoinfa.ru/teorijasistempravlenija/25.html
[58] M. Odrekhivskyy, V. Pasichnyk, A. Rzheuskyi, V. Andrunyk, M. Nazaruk, O. Kunanets, D.
Tabachyshyn, Problems of the intelligent virtual learning environment development. CEUR
Workshop Proceedings 2386 (2019) 359–369.
[59] D. Lukianov, K. Mazhei and V. Gogunskii. Transformation of the International Project
Management Association Project Managers Individual Competencies Model», in: Proceedings of
the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Trends in Information Theory (ATIT2019),
Kyiv, Ukraine, (2019): 506-512.
[60] Implementation Game Theory elements to IPMA ICB4.0 system landscape analyses. Excel
calculation example, 2020. URL: https://www.researchgate.net
/publication/344329979_ICB4_Theory_of_Games_Lukianov_01082020
[61] Ohara, S. P2M: A guidebook of Project and Program Managements for Enterprise Innovation,
vol. 1, Rev. 3, Project Management Association of Japan, 2005.
[62] Goleman D., Boyatzis R. Emotional intelligence has 12 elements. Which do you need to work
on, Harvard Business Review, vol. 84, iss.2, (2017): 1-5.
[63] Gardner H. Frames of Mind, The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books; 2011.
[64] O. Kolesnikov, D. Lukianov. The power of structural models of project management processes,
Shlyakhi realizatsii credit-modular system, vol.11, (2015): 30-39.