Nearly 1 in 2 Experience Project Failures; 'Absence of Project Success Design' Highlighted as Structural Cause
A survey conducted by Flags Inc. targeting 235 IT project professionals revealed that approximately 1 in 2 people have experienced project failure, and the lack of clear success definitions and misaligned goal recognition are common. This report illuminates structural issues within Japanese project sites.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: April 30, 2026 at 20:00
- 🔍 Collected: April 30, 2026 at 11:32
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: April 30, 2026 at 12:20 (48 min after Collected)
Flags Inc. (Shibuya-ku, Tokyo; Representative Director: Masaki Hayashiya), which develops "Flagxs," a project portfolio management platform tool that supports the improvement of project/business productivity, conducted a survey on "The Reality of Project Management" targeting 235 IT project professionals nationwide.
The results revealed that 44.3% had experienced project failure in the past, only 30.2% responded that the definition of success was clear, 74.9% felt a misalignment in goal recognition between PMs and the field, and 77% responded that progress was not visible. The reality emerged that "prerequisites for project success" are progressing without being designed in Japanese project sites.
## Survey Summary
- Experienced IT project failure: 44.3% (n=235, overall)
- Definition of success was unclear/ambiguous: 69.8% (n=235, overall)
- Who decides what was unclear: 68.9% (n=235, overall)
- Misalignment in goal recognition between PM and field: 89.4% (n=104, those with failure experience)
- Experienced lack of visibility into progress/issues: 87.5% (n=104, those with failure experience)
- Centralized information management is insufficient: 76.6% (n=235, overall)
- Layered division in perception of centralized management: 32.8 percentage point difference between PM layer and engineers
## Survey Background
Due to expanding investment in DX, corporate projects are increasing in number and complexity. Meanwhile, problems such as delivery delays, budget overruns, and cycles of failure and recovery still occur.
Causes are often attributed to "talent shortage," "insufficient management," or "lack of execution ability," but is that really the case? This survey focused on "project prerequisites design," such as the definition of success, decision-making design, and visualization of progress and resources.
## Nearly 1 in 2 Experience Project Failures
When asked if they had experienced a project that "failed/was about to fail" in the past three years, 44.3% responded that they had. The fact that approximately 1 in 2 people have experienced failure indicates that project failure is not an exceptional trouble but a structural problem occurring with a certain frequency.
And many of these failures are not sudden accidents but are likely the result of projects starting without the design of prerequisites to drive them.
## The Reality of Undesigned Success Prerequisites
Only 30.2% responded that "the definition of success was clear" at the start of the project, with about 70% stating that the definition of project success was not decided or was ambiguous. Furthermore, only 31.1% responded that "who decides what was clear," revealing that about 70% of projects proceeded without the location of responsibility and judgment being designed.
Notably, both the ambiguity of success definitions and the unclearness of decision-making showed no statistically significant difference based on the presence or absence of project failure experience, appearing at almost the same level. The reality that many projects begin without clarifying prerequisites like "what is success" and "who decides" is not just a problem for failed sites but a widespread structural issue across all Japanese project sites.
## Misalignment in Goals Between PMs and the Field; Progress, Issues, and Results Not Shared
The percentage of people who "felt a misalignment in project goals" between PMs and the field, including "frequently" and "sometimes," reached 74.9%. Furthermore, among those with failure experience, this ratio reached 89.4%, which was approximately 26 percentage points higher than the non-failure group (63.4%). Similarly, 77.0% responded that they "experienced a lack of visibility into progress and issues," with 87.5% among those with failure experience, surpassing the non-failure group (68.7%) by approximately 19 percentage points.
Goal misalignment and lack of visibility were the items most strongly correlated with project failure in this survey. This is not merely a lack of communication but is considered a visible manifestation of the "absence of project success design," where the definition of success is ambiguous and it's unclear what, to whom, and at what granularity information should be reported.
## Significant Layered Division in "Project Visibility"
To the question, "Is project information such as progress, issues, and resources centrally managed?", only 23.4% responded, "It is sufficiently centrally managed." Approximately 76.6%, combining "partially managed" (53.6%), "hardly managed" (15.7%), and "unknown/no management system" (7.2%), felt that management was insufficient.
By job title, this shows...
The results revealed that 44.3% had experienced project failure in the past, only 30.2% responded that the definition of success was clear, 74.9% felt a misalignment in goal recognition between PMs and the field, and 77% responded that progress was not visible. The reality emerged that "prerequisites for project success" are progressing without being designed in Japanese project sites.
## Survey Summary
- Experienced IT project failure: 44.3% (n=235, overall)
- Definition of success was unclear/ambiguous: 69.8% (n=235, overall)
- Who decides what was unclear: 68.9% (n=235, overall)
- Misalignment in goal recognition between PM and field: 89.4% (n=104, those with failure experience)
- Experienced lack of visibility into progress/issues: 87.5% (n=104, those with failure experience)
- Centralized information management is insufficient: 76.6% (n=235, overall)
- Layered division in perception of centralized management: 32.8 percentage point difference between PM layer and engineers
## Survey Background
Due to expanding investment in DX, corporate projects are increasing in number and complexity. Meanwhile, problems such as delivery delays, budget overruns, and cycles of failure and recovery still occur.
Causes are often attributed to "talent shortage," "insufficient management," or "lack of execution ability," but is that really the case? This survey focused on "project prerequisites design," such as the definition of success, decision-making design, and visualization of progress and resources.
## Nearly 1 in 2 Experience Project Failures
When asked if they had experienced a project that "failed/was about to fail" in the past three years, 44.3% responded that they had. The fact that approximately 1 in 2 people have experienced failure indicates that project failure is not an exceptional trouble but a structural problem occurring with a certain frequency.
And many of these failures are not sudden accidents but are likely the result of projects starting without the design of prerequisites to drive them.
## The Reality of Undesigned Success Prerequisites
Only 30.2% responded that "the definition of success was clear" at the start of the project, with about 70% stating that the definition of project success was not decided or was ambiguous. Furthermore, only 31.1% responded that "who decides what was clear," revealing that about 70% of projects proceeded without the location of responsibility and judgment being designed.
Notably, both the ambiguity of success definitions and the unclearness of decision-making showed no statistically significant difference based on the presence or absence of project failure experience, appearing at almost the same level. The reality that many projects begin without clarifying prerequisites like "what is success" and "who decides" is not just a problem for failed sites but a widespread structural issue across all Japanese project sites.
## Misalignment in Goals Between PMs and the Field; Progress, Issues, and Results Not Shared
The percentage of people who "felt a misalignment in project goals" between PMs and the field, including "frequently" and "sometimes," reached 74.9%. Furthermore, among those with failure experience, this ratio reached 89.4%, which was approximately 26 percentage points higher than the non-failure group (63.4%). Similarly, 77.0% responded that they "experienced a lack of visibility into progress and issues," with 87.5% among those with failure experience, surpassing the non-failure group (68.7%) by approximately 19 percentage points.
Goal misalignment and lack of visibility were the items most strongly correlated with project failure in this survey. This is not merely a lack of communication but is considered a visible manifestation of the "absence of project success design," where the definition of success is ambiguous and it's unclear what, to whom, and at what granularity information should be reported.
## Significant Layered Division in "Project Visibility"
To the question, "Is project information such as progress, issues, and resources centrally managed?", only 23.4% responded, "It is sufficiently centrally managed." Approximately 76.6%, combining "partially managed" (53.6%), "hardly managed" (15.7%), and "unknown/no management system" (7.2%), felt that management was insufficient.
By job title, this shows...