# Sustainable Approach in IT Project Management--Methodology Choice vs. Client Satisfaction
## 4 Research Results  
The data collected from Servperv questionnaires together with some discussion are reported in this section. Figure 4 presents the mean score of 48 IT project quality items for both groups. For clients whose profile was compatible with the methodology used (group A) the mean score ranges from 4.78 the lowest to 6.19 the highest. For clients whose profile was incompatible with the methodology used (group B) the lowest mean score is 2.94 and the highest one, 4.16. Detailed research results are included in the supplementary material (title: Study-results). The above 48 IT project quality items were grouped into 5 Servperv dimensions: tangibles, activities, effectiveness, competencies, empathy, and individual approach. A comparative analysis of two groups A and B was made in terms of these dimensions, according to the Servperv method (Table 3). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline
**Dimensions** & **Item No.** & **Theorem of Servperv Questionnaire** \\ \hline EmInAp1 & The behavior of the IT team inspired confidence in the client \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp2 & The IT company made the client feel secure \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp3 & The IT company treats the client individually \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp4 & IT company employees understand the specific needs of the client \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp5 & Work in the project was carried out in a way that was convenient for the client \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp6 & The IT team expressed themselves comprehensively to the client \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp7 & The IT company sought to resolve conflict and build consensus \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp8 & Some members of the IT team paid the client special attention during the project (client guardians) \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp9 & Some members of the IT team were always willing to help the client \\ \cline{2-3}  & EmInAp10 & There was a visible sense of commitment from the IT company towards the project \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: _Cont._ \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**Dimensions** & **[PERSON]’s Alpha Group A** & **[PERSON]’s Alpha Group B** & **N of Items** \\ \hline Tangibles & 0.756 & 0.901 & 6 \\ \hline Activities & 0.961 & 0.936 & 9 \\ \hline Effectiveness & 0.984 & 0.974 & 12 \\ \hline Competencies & 0.975 & 0.989 & 11 \\ \hline Empathy and individual approach & 0.994 & 0.992 & 10 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Reliability analysis result. Figure 4: Mean score of the Servperv survey. For all areas the dimension, the difference between mean score for group A and B, is significant (see Z-test Table 3). This means that client satisfaction with the IT project in both groups differs. Obtained final Servperv indicators for the two groups indicate a significant differences between them. It can be converted into the following percentages:  
* ServpervA = 80.55% for the client matching the IT project management methodology used,
* ServpervB = 49.10% for the client not matching the IT project management methodology used. The Servperv indicator shows a difference of over 30% between the groups, in favor of clients compatible with the IT project management methodology. The evaluation of IT projects managed by matching the methodology with the type of client ranks quite highly--above 80%. However, in the group of clients in which the methodology was not compliant with the client type, this evaluation was only 49%. The biggest differences between the two groups occurred in the dimensions of empathy and responsiveness. In the group of clients not matching the applied methodology in the IT project, the dimensions of empathy and responsiveness was rated the lowest. The same dimensions, in turn, obtained the highest quotations in the group of clients matching the methodology used. The projects implemented using a methodology compatible with the client type manifest much higher client satisfaction levels. These results clearly support the research hypothesis formulated at the beginning of the paper.