Proactive Approach to Revenue Assurance in Integrated Project Management

  • Gilberto F. Castro
  • Anié Bermudez-PeñaEmail author
  • Francisco G. Palacios
  • Fausto R. Orozco
  • Diana J. Espinoza
  • Inelda A. Martillo
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 895)


In project management organizations, it is advisable to conduct a proactive and positive management to improve the implementation of processes. Moving forward in a project without a proactive approach to risk management is likely to lead to a greater number of problems and income leaks, because of unmanaged threats. Revenue assurance allows to reduce costs and maximize the income in organizations, for them it applies statistical techniques, risk management, scope, and time. The objective of this work is to present a proactive approach for revenue assurance that is applied in Integrated Project Management. Risk management is developed with a proactive approach, based on the application of PMBOK and computing with words techniques for planning and qualitative risk assessment. For validation, the proposal is applied in a real environment, using data from concluded projects, criteria of multiple experts and soft computing techniques. A final analysis is carried out that shows the great advantages of the proposal with respect to the results obtained with the traditional PMBOK technique. The proposed method is integrating into a platform for project management that support decision-making in organizations and have many functionalities for revenue assurance.


Revenue assurance Integrated Project Management Risk management 


  1. 1.
    Delgado, R.: La Dirección Integrada de Proyecto como Centro del Sistema de Control de Gestión en el Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Comunicación y la Información, CENDA, Caracas, Venezuela (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    PMI: IBM: Keys to Building a Successful Enterprise Project Management Office. Project Management Institute, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    PMI: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. PMBOK® Guide, 6th edn. Project Management Institute, Pennsylvania, EE.UU (2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paquin, J.P., Gauthier, C., Morin, P.P.: The downside risk of project portfolios: the impact of capital investment projects and the value of project efficiency and project risk management programmes. Int. J. Project Manag. 34(8), 1460–1470 (2016). Scholar
  5. 5.
    The Standish Group International: The CHAOS Manifesto. The Standish Group International, Incorporated (2014).
  6. 6.
    The Standish Group International: Standish Group 2015 Chaos Report. The Standish Group International, Inc., New York (2015).
  7. 7.
    Burke, R.: Project Management: Planning and Control Techniques, 5th edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schwalbe, K.: Information technology project management. Cengage Learning, 7th edn. Cengage Learning, Boston (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Phillips, J.: PMP, Project Management Professional (Certification Study Guides), Sybex, 7th edn. McGraw-Hill Osborne Media (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leach, L.P.: Critical Chain Project Management, 1st edn. The North River Press, Artech House, Great Barrington (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Verzuh, E.: The Fast Forward MBA in Project Management, 5th edn. Wiley, New York (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fischer, H., Dreisiebner, S., et al.: Revenue vs. costs of MOOC platforms. Discussion of business models for xMOOC providers based on empirical findings and experiences during implementation of the project iMOOX. In: 7th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI2014), IATED, pp. 2991–3000 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wojnar, K.: Comparison between ISO 21500 and PMBOK® Guide 5th Edition. Theoretical background and practical usage of ISO 21500 in IT projects (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    TM Forum: Revenue Assurance a survey pre-result blog: Lack of cross-functional mandate holds back change, say Revenue Assurance professionals (2014).
  15. 15.
    TM Forum: Revenue Assurance practitioner blog: do we need a new approach to revenue assurance in the digital world? & Seeing is believing: Setting revenue assurance KPIs (2014).
  16. 16.
    Acosta, K.: Aseguramiento de ingresos: una actividad fundamental en las empresas de telecomunicaciones. Revista Ingeniería Industrial 29(2), 1–6 (2008)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mattison, R.: The Telco Revenue Assurance Handbook. XiT Press, Oakwood Hills (2005). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mattison, R.: The Revenue Assurance Standards? Release 2009. GRAPA. XiT Press, Oakwood Hills (2009).
  19. 19.
    GRAPA: The Global Revenue Assurance Professional Association (GRAPA) Professionalizing the Information, Communications and Technology Industry (2016).
  20. 20.
    Software Engineering Institute: CMMI para Desarrollo, Versión 1.3. Mejora de los procesos para el desarrollo de mejores productos y servicios. Technical report, Software Engineering Institute, EE.UU (2010).
  21. 21.
    IPMA: International Project Management Association (2015).
  22. 22.
    ISO: ISO 21500:2012 Guidance on Project Management. International Organization for Standardization (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Castro, G.F., et al.: PRODanalysis, un Sistema para el Aseguramiento de Ingresos Basado en Minería de Outliers. INNOVA Res. J. 1(7), 18–36 (2016)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Herrera, F., Martinez, L.: A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 8(6), 746–752 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Merigó, J.: New extensions to the OWA operators and its application in decision making. Department of Business Administration, University of Barcelona, Ph.D. (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Merigó, J.M., Yager, R.R.: Norm aggregations and OWA operators. In: Bustince, H., Fernandez, J., Mesiar, R., Calvo, T. (eds.) Aggregation Functions in Theory and in Practise. AISC, vol. 228, pp. 141–151. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nielsen, T.D., Jensen, F.V.: Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs, 2nd edn, p. 448. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vattai, Z.A.: FLOYD-warshall in scheduling open networks. Procedia Eng. 106–114 (2016). Scholar
  29. 29.
    Castro, G.F., et al.: Platform for project evaluation based on soft-computing techniques. In: Valencia-García, R., Lagos-Ortiz, K., Alcaraz-Mármol, G., del Cioppo, J., Vera-Lucio, N. (eds.) CITI 2016. CCIS, vol. 658, pp. 226–240. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  30. 30.
    Paselli, L.: The Project Management Advisor: 18 Mayor Project Screw-Ups, and How to Cut Them Off at the Pass, p. 167. Financial Times Prentice Hall (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    STS Sauter Training and Simulation: Comparing PMBOK Guide 4th, PMBOK Guide 5th and ISO 21500, STS Sauter Training and Simulation (2016).
  32. 32.
    QuitusServices, Portal corporativo compañía de servicios informáticos. Guayaquil-Ecuador (2018).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad de Ciencias Matemáticas y FísicasUniversidad de GuayaquilGuayaquilEcuador
  2. 2.Facultad de IngenieríaUniversidad Católica Santiago de GuayaquilGuayaquilEcuador
  3. 3.Facultad 2Universidad de las Ciencias InformáticasHavanaCuba
  4. 4.Facultad de Jurisprudencia, Ciencias Sociales y PolíticasUniversidad de GuayaquilGuayaquilEcuador

Personalised recommendations