ASSIGNMENT 1

PROJECT SELECTION TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES

SUBMITTED TO: MR. ANIL KASHYAP FACULTY INCHARGE NIFT KANGRA

SUBMITTED BY: ABHISHEK RANJAN VAISHNAVI B.F.TECH SEMESTER VI

1

NIFT KANGRA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SL. NO.
I II III

DESCRIPTION
INTRODUCTION PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS CHARACTERSTIC OF MODEL FOR PROJECT SELECTION

PAGE NO.
3 4 6

IV V VI

PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA PROJECT JUSTIFICATION ISSUES IN PROJECT SCREENING AND SELECTION

7 8 9

VII VIII IX

PROJECT SELECTION MODELS CONCLUSION REFERENCES

10 22 23

I. INTRODUCTION
A project in business and science is typically defined as a collaborative enterprise, frequently involving research or design, which is carefully planned to achieve a particular aim. Projects can be further defined as temporary rather than permanent social systems that are constituted by teams within or across organizations to accomplish particular tasks under time constraints. The temporary nature of projects stands in contrast with business as usual (or operations) which are repetitive, permanent, or semi-permanent functional activities to produce products or services. In practice, the management of these two systems is often quite different, and as such requires the development of distinct technical skills and management strategies.

Project management is the discipline of planning, organizing, motivating, and controlling resources to achieve specific goals. The primary challenge of project management is to achieve all of the project goals and objectives while honouring the preconceived constraints. The primary constraints are scope, time, quality and budget. The secondary and more ambitious challenge is to optimize the allocation of necessary inputs and integrate them to meet pre-defined objectives.

Firms are literally bombarded with opportunities but no organization enjoys infinite resources to be able to pursue every opportunity that presents itself. Choices must be made. In order to best ensure that they select the most viable projects. Many managers develop priority systemsguidelines for balancing the opportunities and costs entailed by each alternative. The goal is to balance the competing demands of time and advantage. The pressures of time and money affect most major decisions. Thus organizational decision makers develop guidelinesselection models that permit them to save time and money while maximizing the likelihood of success. Project selection is the process of choosing a project or set of projects to be implemented by the organization. Since projects in general require a substantial investment in terms of money and resources, both of which are limited, it is of vital importance that the projects that an organization selects provide good returns on the resources and capital invested. This requirement must be balanced with the need for an organization to move forward and develop.

II. PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS

A generic project selection process looks as follows.

1. Identification of Projects- The first step of this process, identification, requires a

clearly defined and communicated strategy. The best option would be to set up a strategy development process that contains project identification and project selection as an integral part. In fact, we observe that most organizations identify investment projects within their strategy development process, but delegate the identification of customer projects to their key account and sales departments.

2. Evaluation and Prioritization of Projects- Central part of the project selection process is evaluation and prioritization of identified projects. There are a couple of methods available: Net Present Value (NPV) Internal Rate of Return (IRR) Benefit / Cost Ratio (BCR) Opportunity Cost (OC) Payback Period (PP) Initial Risk Assessment

These methods require a certain minimum level of "planning" for each one of the projects to be evaluated. We need to know Project life cycle duration, in number of accounting periods, Expected project cost per accounting period, Expected project revenue per accounting period, Overall risk values of the projects to be evaluated.

3. Selection and Initiation of Projects- Project selection and initiation is the step that naturally follows evaluation and prioritization. A particularly delicate step of project initiation turns out to be the staffing of project teams. On a medium / long term scale, it seems to be the better option to initiate projects in a way so that the teams can focus and work on one project at a time, thus, avoiding disturbances of one project by the others.

4. Review of Projects- After project selection we need to regularly review projects that are under way in order to find out if they are still in-line with our strategy. Thus, the first way of checking them is repeating the initial evaluation with more accurate estimates as they become available; the second way is holding regular project management review meetings in order to identify major problems on a per-project basis, via project status reports. In our view, the minimum requirements of project management reviews along each project's life cycle are as follows.

SELECTION OF PROJECTS IS BASED ON:

Benefits: A measure of the positive outcomes of the project. These are often described as "the reasons why you are undertaking the project". The types of benefits of eradication projects include:
o o o o

Biodiversity Economic Social and cultural Fulfilling commitments made as part of national, regional or international plans and agreements.
5

Feasibility: A measure of the likelihood of the project being a success, i.e. achieving its objectives. Projects vary greatly in complexity and risk. By considering feasibility when selecting projects it means the easiest projects with the greatest benefits are given priority.

III. CHARACTERISTICS OF MODEL FOR PROJECT SELECTION

Project selection is a vital task as it requires various techniques and it is also checked for its feasibility. According that various characteristics of models that are required for selection of a feasible project are as follows. Realism: An effective model must reflect organizational objectives, including a firms strategic goals and mission. The model must take into account both commercial risks and technical risks, including performance, cost, and time.

i.

ii.

Capability: A model should be flexible enough to respond to changes in the conditions under which projects are carried out. For example, the model should allow the company to compare different types of projects (long-term versus short-term projects, projects of different technologies or capabilities, projects with different commercial objectives). It should be robust enough to accommodate new criteria and constraints, suggesting that the screening model must allow the company to use it as widely as possible in order to cover the greatest possible range of project types.

iii.

Flexibility: The model should be easily modified if trial applications of a project require changes. It must allow for adjustments due to changes in exchange rates, tax laws, building codes etc.

iv.

Ease of use: A model should be simple enough to be used by people in all areas of the organisation.

v.

Cost: The model should be cost-effective.

vi.

Comparability: It must be broad enough to be applied to multiple projects.

Project selection models can be classified into two classes:

Numeric models Non-numeric models

Numeric models- These models use numbers as inputs for the decision making process involved in selecting projects.

Non-numeric models- These models do not employ numbers at decision inputs and instead rely on data.

Key Elements of the Project Selection Process

Commitment of senior management to the process Project selection based on realistic, available metrics Voice of the Customer/Voice of the Business/Voice of the Process Clear linkage to organizational goals Specific, detailed project plans Properly selected and prepared implementers, with key organizational support and alignment

IV. PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA

A project selection criterion is one of the major inputs of project initiation stage. A project selection criterion is represented in a project selection matrix. Possible criteria for project selection includes the following: Financial return of the project Effect of the project on employees/alignment with corporate culture Technical advancement or innovation Market value/share Public perception Alignment with/advancement of corporate strategy

CRITERIA Market value/share Public perception

Alignment with organization expertise Needed infrastructure improvement

POSSIBLE BENEFIT MEASUREMENTS Increase value/share according to set formula. research or surveys Measure perceived increase/decrease in perception based on focus groups, surveys or interviews. Estimate the awareness that will be created. Calculate the number of people affected/made aware Does the project team has the expertise to do the project? Will the project efforts help develop some expertise or skills it wants to get developed. Improved productivity Compare with other infrastructure projects

V. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
Selection of the project criteria and assign a weighting factor to each criteria. Selection of the benefit measurement for each criterion. Listing of the proposed projects followed by their rating. Multiply the weighting factor to each rating received. Ranking of the projects. Selection of the project to be carried further.

CRITERIA Supports key business objectives Has strong internal sponsor Realistic level of technology Can be implemented

Weight 25%

Project 1 90

Project 2 90

Project 3 50

Project 4 20

15%

70

90

50

20

15%

50

90

50

20

10%

25 8

90

50

70

in one year or less Provides positive NPV Has low risk in meeting scope, time and cost goals Weighted project scores Has strong customer support 100% 56 78.5 50 41.5 10% 20 50 50 90 20% 50 70 50 50 5% 20 20 50 90

VI. ISSUES IN PROJECT SCREENING AND SELECTION

1.

Riski. ii.

Factors that reflect elements of unpredictability to the firm, including: Technical risk- Risks due to the development of new or untested technologies Financial risk- Risks from the financial exposure caused by investing in the project.

iii. iv.

Safety risk-Risks to the well-being of users or developers of the project. Quality risk- Risks to the firms goodwill or reputation due to the quality of the completed project.

v.

Legal exposure-Factors that reflect the market potential of the project.

2.

Commercial- Factors that

i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. Payback period Potential market share

reflect the market potential of the project including:

Expected return on investment

Long-term market dominance Initial cash outlay Ability to generate future business/new market.

3.

Internal operating issues: Factors that refer to the impact of the project on
internal operations of the firm. i. ii. iii. iv. Need to develop/train employees Change in workforce size or composition Change in physical environment Change in manufacturing or service operations resulting from the project.

4. Additional factors
i. ii. iii. Patent protection Impact on companys image Strategic fit

VII.

PROJECT SELECTION MODELS

Various models for selection of project are:

I.

CHECKLIST MODEL :-

It is the simplest model for project selection. It comprises of a list of criteria for project selection, and then applying them to different possible projects. Checklist approach to the evaluation of project opportunities is a fairly simple device for recording opinions and encouraging discussion. Thus, checklists may best be used in a consensus-group setting, as a method for initiating conversation, stimulating discussion and the exchange of opinions, and highlighting the groups priorities.

Flaws in the checklist model: In a checklist model, the qualitative/subjective nature of ratings such as low, medium, high is a major drawback. Such terms are inexact and subject to misinterpretation/misunderstanding. Checklist screening models fail to resolve trade-off issues.

Example of checklist model:There is an example of SAP Corporation which is a leader in business application software industry interested in developing a new application package for inventory management and shipping control.

10

It is trying to decide which project to select from a set of four potential alternatives. Based on past commercial experiences, the company feels that the most important selection criteria for its choice are: cost, profit potential, time to market, and development risks. In addition to developing the decision criteria, evaluative descriptors are calculated which reflect how well the project alternatives correspond to the key selection criteria. Each criterion is evaluated as high, medium or low in order to see which project accumulates the most positive checks and can be regarded as the optimal choice. Project Project Alpha Criteria Cost Profit potential Time to market Development risks Cost Profit potential Time to market Development risks Cost Profit potential Time to market Development risks Cost Profit potential Time to market Development risks High X X X X X X X Medium Low X

Project Beta

Project Gamma

Project Delta

X X X X

Based on this analysis, Project Gamma is the best alternative in terms of maximizing our key criteriacost, profit potential, time to market, and development risks.

II.

SIMPLIFIED SCORING MODELS

In the simplified scoring model, each criterion is ranked according to its relative importance. Thus the simple scoring model consists of the following steps: Assigning importance weights to each criterion: This step involves developing logic for differentiating among various levels of importance and devises a system for assigning appropriate weights to each criterion.

Assign score values to each criterion in terms of its rating:11

High = 3 Medium = 2 Low = 1

Multiply importance weights by scores to arrive at a weighted score for each criterion

Add the weighted scores to arrive at an overall project score: The final score for each project becomes the sum of all its weighted criteria.

Here is an example of SAP CORPORATION concerning an optimal project for funding.

Project

Criterion

Importance Weight(A)

(B)Score

(A)*(B)Weighted Score

Project Alpha

Cost Profit potential Development risk Time to market Total score

1 2 2 3

3 1 1 2

3 2 2 6 13

Project Beta

Cost Profit potential Development risk Time to market Total score

1 2 2 3

2 2 2 3

2 4 4 9 19

Project

Criteria

Importance Weight(A)

(B)Score

(A)*(B) Weighted Score

Project gamma

Cost Profit potential Development Time to market Total score

1 2 2 3

3 3 3 1

3 6 6 3 18

Project delta

Cost Profit potential Development risk Time to market Total score

1 2 2 3

1 1 2 3

1 2 4 9 16

12

The numbers in the column labelled Importance Weight specify the numerical values that it is assigned to each criterion: Time to Market always receives a value of 3, profit potential a value of 2, development risk a value of 2, and cost a value of 1. A relative value is then assigned to each of the four dimensions. The numbers in the column labelled Score replace the Xs with their assigned score values: High = 3 Medium = 2 Low = 1 In Project Alpha, for example, the High rating given Cost becomes a 3 in because High is here valued at 3. Likewise, the Medium rating given Time to Market becomes a 2. Weighted score is obtained by multiplying the numerical value of Cost (1) by its rating of High (3), to get a Weighted Score of 3. But when we multiply the numerical value of Time to Market (3) by its rating of Medium (2), we get a Weighted Score of 6.We add up the total Weighted Scores for each project, and according to Table 3.3, Project Beta (with a total of 19) is the best alternative, compared to the other options: Project Alpha (with a total of 13), Project Gamma (with a total of 18), and Project Delta (with a total of 16).

THE ADVANTAGES OF SCORING MODEL:-

The simple scoring model has some useful advantages as a project selection device It is easy to use it to tie critical strategic goals for the company to various project alternatives. The simple scoring model is easy to comprehend and use. With a checklist of key criteria, evaluation options (high, medium, and low), and attendant scores, top managers can quickly grasp how to employ this technique.

THE LIMITATION OF SCORING MODEL:In general, scoring models try to impose some structure on the decision-making process while, at the same time, combining multiple criteria. Most scoring models, however, share some important limitations. A scale from 1 to 3 may be intuitively appealing and easy to apply and understand, but it is not very accurate .From the perspective of mathematical scaling, it is simply wrong to treat evaluations on such a scale as real numbers that can be multiplied and summed. If 3 means

13

High and 2 means Medium, we know that 3 is better than 2, but we do not know by how much. Furthermore, we cannot assume that the difference between 3 and 2 is the same as the difference between 2 and 1. They depend on the relevance of the selected criteria and the accuracy of the weight given them. From a managerial perspective, another drawback of scoring models is the fact that they depend on the relevance of the selected criteria and the accuracy of the weight given them. In other words, they do not ensure that there is a reasonable link between the selected and weighted criteria and the business objectives that prompted the project in the first place.

III.

THE ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS

The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was developed by Dr. Thomas Saaty to address many of the technical and managerial problems frequently associated with decision making through scoring models. An increasingly popular method for effective project selection, the AHP is a four-step process.

a) STRUCTURING THE HIERARCHY OF CRITERIA- The first step consists of constructing a hierarchy of criteria and sub-criteria. For example, a firms IT steering committee has selected three criteria for evaluating project alternatives: (1) Financial benefits, (2) Contribution to strategy, and (3) Contribution to IT infrastructure. The Financial benefits criterion, which focuses on the tangible benefits of the project, is further subdivided into long-term and short-term benefits. Contribution to strategy, an intangible factor, is subdivided into three sub-criteria: (a) Increasing market share for product X; (b) Retaining existing customers for product Y; and (c) Improving cost management. First Level 1. Financial Benefits 2.Contribution to strategy Second Level 1A: Short-term 1B:Long-term 2A:Increasing market share for product X 3C:Improving cost management

3.Contribution to IT Infrastructure

14

It is a representational breakdown of all these criteria. The subdividing relevant criterion into a meaningful hierarchy gives managers a rational method for sorting among and ordering priorities. Higher-order challenges, such as Contribution to strategy, can be broken down into discrete sets of supporting requirements, including market share, customer retention, and cost management, thus building a hierarchy of alternatives that simplifies matters. Since the hierarchy can reflect the structure of organizational strategy and critical success factors, it also provides a way to select and justify projects according to their consistency with business objectives.10 This illustrates how we can use meaningful strategic issues and critical factors to establish logic for both the types of selection criteria and their relative weighting.

b) ALLOCATING WEIGHTS TO CRITERIA- The second step in applying AHP consists of allocating weights to previously developed criteria and, where necessary, splitting overall criterion weight among sub-criteria. This procedure permits more accurate weighting because it allows managers to focus on a series of relatively simple exchanges namely, two criteria at a time. The hierarchical allocation of criteria and splitting of weights resolves the problem of double counting in scoring models. In these models, criteria such as Service, Quality, and Customer satisfaction may be either separate or overlapping factors, depending on the objectives of the organization. As a result, too little or too much may be assigned to a given criterion. With AHP, however, these factors are grouped as sub-criteria and share the weight of a common higher-level criterion.

c) ASSIGNING NUMERICAL VALUES TO EVALUATION DIMENSIONS- Once the hierarchy is established, the pair-wise comparison process can be used to assign numerical values to the dimensions of the evaluation scale.

The above scale is an evaluation scale with five dimensions: Poor, Fair, Good, Very Good, and Excellent. It also shows that for purposes of illustration, the values of 0.0, 0.10, 0.30, 0.60, and 1.00 have been assigned respectively, to these dimensions which can be changed accordingly. For example, if
15

a company wants to indicate a greater discrepancy between Poor and Fair, managers may increase the range between these two dimensions. By adjusting values to suit specific purposes, managers also avoid the fallacy of assuming that the differences between numbers on a scale of, say, 1 to 5 are equal i.e assuming that the difference between 4 and 5 is the same as the difference between 3 and 4.With the AHP approach, the best outcome receives a perfect score of 1.00 and all other values represent some proportion relative to that score. When necessary, project managers are encouraged to apply different scales for each criterion.

d) EVALUATING PROJECT PROPOSALS- In the final step, the numeric evaluation of the project is multiplied by the weights assigned to the evaluation criteria and then added to the results for all criteria.

IV.

PROFILE MODELS

Profile models allow managers to plot risk/return options for various alternatives and then select the project that maximizes return while staying within a certain range of minimum acceptable risk. The profile model offers another way of evaluating, screening, and comparing projects.

The six project alternatives are plotted on a graph showing perceived Risk on the y-axis and potential Return on the x-axis. All projects will be assigned some risk factor value and plotted relative to the maximum risk that the firm is willing to assume. In our example, SAP can employ a variety of measures to assess the likely return offered by this project, including discounted cash flow analysis and internal rate of return expectations. Project X2 and Project X3 have similar expected rates of return. Project X3, however, represents a better selection choice.
16

Project X5 is a superior choice to X4: Although they have similar risk levels, X5 offers greater return as an investment. Finally, while Project X6 offers the most potential return, it does so at the highest level of risk. When we look at the profile model, we note that certain options (X1, X3,X5, X6) lie along an imaginary line balancing optimal risk and return combinations. Others (X2 and X4), are less desirable alternatives and would therefore be considered inferior choices. Profile models also have disadvantages: They limit decision criteria to just tworisk and return. Although an array of issues, including safety, quality, and reliability, can come under the heading of risk, the approach still necessarily limits the decision maker to a small set of criteria.

In order to be evaluated in terms of an efficient frontier, some value must be attached to risk. Expected return is a measure that is naturally given to numerical estimate. But because risk may not be readily quantified, it may be misleading to designate risk artificially as a value for comparison among project choices.

V.

FINANCIAL MODELS
Discounted cash flow analysis Net present value Internal rate of return.

Financial models are all predicated on the time value of money principle. The time value of money suggests that money earned today is worth more than money we expect to earn in the future. The intent of project payback period is to estimate the amount of time that will be necessary to recoup the investment in a project i.e. how long it will take for the project to pay back its initial budget and begin to generate positive cash flow for the company. Discounted cash flow analysis is used to determine the payback period. The goal of the discounted cash flow (DCF) method is to estimate cash outlays and expected cash inflows resulting from investment in a project.

Payback period = investment/annual cash savings

17

a) Net present value The most popular financial decision-making approach in project selection is the net present value method. The (NPV) method, projects the change in the firms value if a project is undertaken. Thus a positive NPV indicates that the firm will make moneyand its value will riseas a result of the project. Net present value also employs discounted cash flow analysis, discounting future streams of income to estimate the present value of money.

The simplified formula for NPV is as follows:

NPV (project) = I0 + g Ft /(1 + r + pt)t

Where:

Ft = the net cash flow for period t r = the required rate of return I = initial cash investment (cash outlay at time 0) Pt = inflation rate during period t

Net present value is one of the most common project selection methods in use today. Its principal advantage is that it allows firms to link project alternatives to financial performance, better ensuring that the projects a company does choose to invest its resources in are likely to generate profit.

Among its disadvantages is the difficulty in using NPV to make accurate long-term predictions.

b) Discounted cash flow In finance, discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis is a method of valuing a project, company, or asset using the concepts of the time value of money. Discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis uses future free cash flow projections and discounts them (most often using the weighted average cost of capital) to arrive at a present value, which is used to evaluate the potential for investment. If the value arrived at through DCF analysis is higher than the current cost of the investment, the opportunity may be a good one. In simple terms, discounted cash flow tries to work out the value of a company today, based on projections of how much money it's going to make in the future. DCF analysis says that a company is worth all of the cash that it could make available to investors in the future. It is described as discounted" cash flow because cash in the future is worth less than cash today.
18

It is calculated as:-

c) Internal rate of return The discount rate often used in capital budgeting that makes the net present value of all cash flows from a particular project equal to zero. The higher a project's internal rate of return, the more desirable it is to undertake the project. As such, IRR can be used to rank several prospective projects a firm is considering. Assuming all other factors are equal among the various projects, the project with the highest IRR would probably be considered the best and undertaken first. It is also defined as an alternative method for evaluating the expected outlays and income associated with a new project investment opportunity. IRRs can also be compared against prevailing rates of return in the securities market. If a firm can't find any projects with IRRs greater than the returns that can be generated in the financial markets, it may simply choose to invest its retained earnings into the market.

The advantage of using IRR analysis lies in its ability to compare alternative projects from the perspective of expected return on investment (ROI). Projects having higher IRR are generally superior to those having lower IRR. Calculation of IRR- Given a collection of pairs (time, cash flow) involved in a project, the internal rate of return follows from the net present value as a function of the rate of return. A rate of return for which this function is zero is an internal rate of return. Given the (period, cash flow) pairs ( , ) where is a positive integer, the total number of periods , and the net present value , the internal rate of return is given by in:

The period is usually given in years, but the calculation may be made simpler if is calculated using the period in which the majority of the problem is defined (e.g., using months if most of the cash flows occur at monthly intervals) and converted to a yearly period thereafter.

19

Any fixed time can be used in place of the present (e.g., the end of one interval of an annuity); the value obtained is zero if and only if the NPV is zero. In the case that the cash flows are random variables, such as in the case of a life annuity, the expected values are put into the above formula. Often, the value of cannot be found analytically. In this case, numerical methods or graphical methods must be used. IRR has certain disadvantages: First, it is not the rate of return for a project. In fact, IRR equals the projects rate of return only when project-generated cash inflows can be reinvested in new projects at similar rates of return. If cash flows are not normal, IRR may arrive at multiple solutions. For example, if net outflows follow a period of net cash inflows, IRR may give conflicting results.

VI.
data.

NON-NUMERIC MODELS

Non-numeric models- These models do not employ numbers at decision inputs and instead rely on

The non-numeric models are: The sacred cow model The operating necessity model The competitive necessity model The product line extension model

a) The sacred cow model In this case the project is suggested by a senior and powerful official in the organization. The project is sacred in the sense that it will be maintained until successfully concluded, or until the top management personally, recognizes the idea as a failure and terminates it.

20

b) The operating necessity model The selection of a particular project under this model occurs due to intense necessity or when there is critical need for its initiation. The decision for implementation of the project is concerned whether a project is worth to be implemented within the given budget or not.

c) The competitive necessity model The decision to undertake the project under this model is based on a desire to maintain the companys competitive position in the market. Investment in an operating necessity project takes precedence over a competitive necessity project, but both types of projects may bypass the more careful numeric analysis used for projects deemed to be less urgent or less important to the survival of the firm d) The Product Line Extension: In this case, a project to develop and distribute new products is judged on the degree to which it fits the firms existing product line, fills a gap, strengthens a weak link, or extends the line in a new, desirable direction. Sometimes careful calculations of profitability are not required. Decision makers can act on their beliefs about what will be the likely impact on the total system performance if the new product is added to the line.

21

VIII. CONCLUSION
Project Selection is a very tough and critical phenomena. Moreover it is also very important as per industry point of view and this could be easily achievable with the help of different tools (both numeric and non-numeric) for project selection. Industries often have a number of suggested projects but not enough resources, money or time to undertake all of the projects. The ideas for eradication projects may have come from many sources including: the community, funders, local and national governments and Non-Governmental Organisations. Therefore there should be a way of deciding on a priority order and choosing a project and which is easily selected by using project selection tools. The Project Selection Stage, tools and techniques will assist by providing a process to compare the importance of the projects and select the most suitable project to undertake. The tools and techniques of project management help to proceed in a systematic, effective and efficient manner. They also help in the identification of what parameters need to be considered while taking up a new project in order to achieve the goal. They also help to reduce the confusion, backtracking and errors associated with developing or introducing a new project.

22

IX. REFERENCES:
Project Management: Achieving Competitive Advantage, Second Edition, by Jeffrey K. Pinto. http://www.pacificinvasivesinitiative.org/rk/project/1_Project_Sel ection.html http://www.project-managementknowhow.com/project_selection.html www.wikipaedia.com Territorial Cooperation projects 2007-2013: Project Evaluation and Selection Manual Project Management by Harold Kerzner, Wiley India.

23