In contemporary world, companies face various pressures to remain competitive, facing a market with rapid and frequent changes, and in this context more and more automation projects are employed seeking for productivity gains. This study aimed to discuss the role of project management in the efficiency and effectiveness of automation implementation in organizations. The research method was to review the literature on project management and on automation, discussing with a single case study.

Keywords: technological innovation, automation, project management

In the current context of digital transformation and fierce competition, organizations are constantly seeking technological innovations to increase their efficiency and agility.¹ Among these innovations, this article focuses on automation and robotization. Automating a process basically consists of replacing a manual procedure with a more automated system, with less or no human intervention.

The implementation of automation goes through different phases of a project, starting with pre-implementation, followed by the implementation itself, and ending in post-adoption. Project management is essential for the success of these initiatives² and the literature has devoted increasing attention to its role in the implementation of automation in recent years.^3-6

The success of a project can be analyzed from two complementary perspectives: the execution process to obtain the expected result (efficiency) and the impact generated after its adoption (effectiveness). Efficiency is related to meeting the tripod of time, budget, and scope, as well as specific metrics according to the context of each project. In short, it is the ability to deliver the expected result according to the established objectives. On the other hand, effectiveness refers to the evaluation of long-term results, considering their impacts and benefits.² Thus, these two perspectives, combined, make it possible to determine not only whether the project was executed correctly and achieved its immediate objectives, but also its future implications and the real use of the expected benefits.

The literature points to increased productivity, agility in processes, and improved accuracy as the main benefits of automation. In addition, its uninterrupted operation allows continuous execution, 24 hours a day.^{5, 7-10} However, one of the main challenges is the appropriate selection of the process to be automated, which must be previously optimized and redesigned to ensure greater efficiency.^5-7,9 These factors are directly related to the effectiveness of automation projects.

However, the successful introduction of automation depends not only on the technology used, but also on the management of its implementation in the organizational context. Effectiveness will only be achieved if automation is effectively adopted by users. To maximize this adoption, both technical aspects, such as performance, usability, and usefulness, as well as behavioral aspects, such as organizational culture, change management, training, and voluntariness of use, must be considered.^11-15 Despite being a promising solution, a significant portion of automation projects still fail.^16,17 In addition to the technical and human challenges mentioned, recent studies highlight project management as a key factor for the success of robotic process automation (RPA) deployment. Careful management must include risk assessment, as the innovative nature of technology can generate unforeseen challenges, requiring quick and effective responses.¹⁸

In this context, this study aims to discuss the role of project management in the effectiveness and effectiveness of the implementation of automation in organizations. For this, a literature review on project management and automation was carried out, highlighting its critical success factors.

The article is structured as follows: first, a review of the literature on project management is presented. Next, the research method is described. Subsequently, results and discussion based on the existing literature debated with a single case study. The last section brings the final considerations and implications of the study.

Project management and portfolio management are intertwined but distinct. While portfolio management refers to the selection of the right projects, project management is related to their effective execution.¹⁹

The project portfolio reflects the business strategy and is managed to allocate resources efficiently, promoting competitiveness.²⁰ Portfolio management can follow top-down approaches, starting with strategy and then looking for opportunities; bottom-up, where ideas are launched without formal business direction; or hybrid, mixing the spontaneity of free ideas with strategic direction. Ideas must be selected, and for this methods such as bubble charts and scoring models are used.²¹ However, effective project selection is not enough; For the selected projects, efficient management of their execution is necessary. In project management, two widely used methodologies are the Stage-Gate and the Innovation Funnel.

The Stage-Gate, created by Cooper in the 1980s, structures the development of projects into stages and decision points (gates). Each phase involves activities conducted by cross-functional teams, and progression occurs upon approval at the gates. Adapted versions, such as Stage-Gate Express and Stage-Gate Lite, simplify the process for less complex projects, joining stages and reducing gates.²²  More recently, ²³Cooper has improved the approach with Spiral Development, emphasizing constant customer feedback, developing Agile-Stage-Gate, which incorporates iterative development cycles.²³

The Innovation Funnel focuses on the gradual selection of projects and is widely applied in the consumer goods industry. Similar to Stage-Gate, it is divided into phases with decision points, starting with the capture of ideas until post-launch evaluation.^24,25 The concept of Minimum Viable Product (MVP) allows quickly testing ideas before allocating significant resources, reducing risks.¹

Project management directly impacts the success of innovations. Studies indicate that flexible methodologies result in better performance.² Automation projects, such as Robotic Process Automation (RPA), require adaptation of traditional methods to maximize benefits.²⁶ The implementation of RPA follows four phases: process identification, analysis, implementation, and go-live. A key factor is change management to minimize user resistance.⁴ The Agile methodology also stands out for allowing quick adjustments and greater user involvement throughout the project.⁶ Another study suggests the use of the PDCA (Plan, Do, Control, Act) cycle for RPA projects, dividing the process into planning, execution, control, and continuous improvement.³ Thus, the choice of the appropriate methodology directly influences the success of innovation project management.

To discuss the role of project management in the implementation of automation projects, a single case study²⁷ was carried out in a Brazilian multinational company that has several RPAs implemented.

Qualitative case studies are a useful methodological approach in this type of study, in which there is little literature, the limits known a priori are not clear, and the aim is to interpret the phenomenon considering various aspects, including the context and emerging perspectives.²⁸ The research included data triangulation and literature review.²⁹

The company studied is a Brazilian multinational that has a Center of Excellence (COE), responsible for the implementation and management of RPAs throughout the organization, in areas such as shared services, taxes, and procurement. Data collection took place through an interview, held in October 2024, with the leader of this area.

The COE manages its portfolio as follows: throughout the year, it receives submissions of RPA projects from all areas of the company, identifies which are suitable for RPA, and applies methods to select which ones will be prioritized for the next cycle. To support the decision, a scoring system is used, in which aspects such as the necessary effort and potential for productivity gains are weighted. Figure 1 illustrates this flow.

Figure 1 RPA portfolio management in the case study, created by the authors.

Each approved RPA starts an implementation project, conducted by a cross-functional team composed of at least one developer and one area expert whose task will be automated. Figure 2 illustrates the dynamics of project management.

Figure 2 RPA project management in the case study, created by the authors.

The case study is consistent with most of the findings in the literature. Initially, even before it becomes a project, the selection phase takes place, in which the Center of Excellence (COE) identifies and prioritizes the projects among those received in its funnel. This process is similar to that described in the literature, both in relation to the structure of phases (stages) and decision-making gates and the strategy of funneling the projects to select the most appropriate ones.^19,24 Another finding consistent with the literature is the existence of the COE in the company studied. This area centralizes knowledge about the management of robotic process automation (RPA), being responsible for selecting, conducting, and managing RPAs, in addition to managing the project portfolio.^4,18 The flow identified in the study is similar to that described in the literature: the COE conducts an initial assessment to validate the adherence of the task to the RPA criteria. If approved, the project effort is estimated based on the complexity of the RPA to be developed, and then the project waits for its prioritization to be started ⁴

In the company studied, as reported in the literature, productivity gains are the main expected and perceived benefit of automation.⁸ In addition, the main challenge identified was pointed out by the project leader: the appropriate selection of the task and its optimization before automation ^4-7,9

The case study reinforced the fundamental role of the participation of users with extensive knowledge of the operational routine, facilitating the acceptance of the user. This aspect is widely discussed in the literature on project management, which suggests models such as Agile or Spiral to ensure constant user feedback throughout the process, preventing any errors from being identified only at the end, when the correction may be more costly.^4,6,23,30 

The study also highlighted the importance of project management in ensuring compliance with the schedule, in the formation of a multidisciplinary team and in the validation of the project phases by the leadership, working in a manner analogous to decision-making gates. Thus, in line with the literature, it is observed that, although there is no single path for the implementation of automation in the context of innovation, project management plays a fundamental role in this process.^{4, 6}

It is concluded that the success of the project studied can be evaluated from two perspectives. Efficiency, to check if the project met the schedule and the defined resources, in addition to delivering the previously established objective; and Effectiveness, to demonstrate the impact of automation on productivity, evidenced not only by the volume of tasks processed by the robot, but also by the perception of users.²

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of automation projects from the perspective of innovation project management. The results support the relevance of project management, with emphasis on the human factor, both in the formation of adequate teams and in the constant interaction with users throughout the project phases. This frequent contact allows for adjustments in early stages, when correction costs are still reduced. In this way, project management plays a key role in maximizing the benefits of automation.

The main contribution of this work is the analysis of the case under the project management approach. However, a limitation of the study lies in the method employed: the analysis of a single case study. Although the findings are consistent with the literature, this approach does not allow for generalizations. Thus, it is suggested that future research expand the number of cases studied and deepen the discussion on the challenges and impacts of automation in the management of innovation projects.

None.

There is no conflicts of interest.

1. Rogers D. Innovate by rapid experimentation. In: The Digital Transformation Playbook: Rethink Your Business for the Digital Age. [S.l.]: Columbia Business School; 2016:123–164.
2. Joslin R, Müller R. Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts. Int J Proj Manag. 2015;33(6):1377–1392.
3. Patrício LFS, et al. Structure for the implementation and control of robotic process automation projects. In: International Conference on Advanced Network Technologies and Intelligent Computing. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2022:261–274.
4. Soybir S, Schmidt C. Project management and RPA. In: The Digital Journey of Banking and Insurance, Volume I: Disruption and DNA. [S.l.]: Springer International Publishing; 2021:289–305.
5. Stravinskienė I, Serafinas D. Process management and robotic process automation: The insights from systematic literature review. Manag Organ Syst Res. 2021;86(1):87–106.
6. Van Leeuwen T. Project management methodology for robotic process automation implementation. In: 28th Twente Student Conference on IT. [S.l.: s.n.]; 2018:1–10.
7. Hofmann P, Samp C, Urbach N. Robotic process automation. Electron Markets. 2020;30(1):99–106.
8. Ivančić L, Suša Vugec D, Bosilj Vukšić V. Robotic process automation: Systematic literature review. In: International Conference on Business Process Management. Cham: Springer; 2019:280–295.
9. Palvadi SK, Dixit P, Dutt V. Introduction to robotics. In: AI and IoT-Based Intelligent Automation in Robotics. [S.l.]; 2021:1–14.
10. Willcocks L, Lacity M, Craig A. The IT function and robotic process automation professor. The Outsourcing Unit Working Research Paper Series. 2015;(October):1–39.
11. Kearns MB, Taylor JB, Hull CE. The six facets model: Technology management in the effective implementation of change. Int J Innov Technol Manag. 2005;2(1):77–100.
12. Oliveira T, Martins MF. Literature review of information technology adoption models at firm level. Electron J Inf Syst Eval. 2011;14(1):110–121.
13. Pavan CD, et al. Satisfaction in the adoption of technologies based on the usability of the system and organizational culture. Competitive Intelligence Mag. 2020;10(2):22–39.
14. Ruivo P, Oliveira T, Neto M. Examine ERP post-implementation stages of use and value: Empirical evidence from Portuguese SMEs. Int J Account Inf Syst. 2014;15(2):166–184.
15. Syed R, et al. Robotic process automation: Contemporary themes and challenges. Comput Ind. 2020;115:103162.
16. Saeed KA, Abdinnour-Helm S. Examining the effects of information system characteristics and perceived usefulness on post-adoption usage of information systems. Inf Manag. 2008;45(6):376–386.
17. Herm LV, et al. A framework for implementing robotic process automation projects. J Decis Syst. 2023;21.
18. Schlegel D,Bernh Rosenberg, patrick kraus. How to conduct successful business process automation projects? An analysis of key factors in the context of robotic process automation. Bus Process Manag J. 2024;30(8):99–119.
19. Cooper RG, Edgett SJ. Portfolio Management: Fundamental for New Product Success. [S.l.]; 2024.
20. Cooper R, Edgett S, Kleinschmidt E. Portfolio management for new product development: Results of an industry practices study. R&D Manag. 2001;31(4):361–380.
21. Terwiesch C, Ulrich K. Managing the opportunity portfolio. Res Technol Manag. 2008;51(5):27–38.
22. Cooper RG. Perspective: The stage-gates® idea-to-launch process—Update, what's new, and NexGen systems. J Prod Innov Manag. 2008;25(3):213–232.
23. Cooper RG. The drivers of success in new-product development. Ind Mark Manag. 2019;76:36–47.
24. Gavira MO, et al. Technological innovation management: an analysis of the application of the innovation funnel in a consumer goods organization. Rev Adm Mackenzie. 2020;8(1):77–107.
25. Wheelwright SC. Structuring the development funnel. In: Managing New Product and Process Development: Text Cases. [S.l.]: Simon and Schuster; 2010:291–362.
26. Figurelli R. RPA Robotic Process Automation: Companies and Businesses at the Speed of Light. 2nd ed. Kindle e-book: Editora Trajecta; 2016.
27. Yin RK. Case Study: Planning and Methods. 3rd ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman; 2005.
28. GIL, Antonio Carlos. Methods and techniques of social research. 6. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2008.
29. Zappellini MB, Feuerschütte SG. The use of triangulation in Brazilian scientific research in administration. Adm Ens Pesqui. 2015;16(2):241.
30. Salvato JJ, LaPlume AO. Agile Stage-Gate Management (ASGM) for physical products. R&D Manag. 2020;50(5):631–647.