Shouldn't project sponsors be held accountable if the deliverables of the project fail to deliver the promised business value ?

yes sir, SUCCESS HAS MANY PARENTS BUT FAILURE IS ALWAYS ORPHAN. failure is always collective as team like success of any project but who to held responsible for that ??? MY CONVICTION IS THAT TOP MANAGEMENT IS THE CAUSE,,THEY MUST OWN THE FAILURE IF THEY ARE LEADERS, BUT THEY WILL PUT ALL THE BLAME ON SOME ONE IN THE MIDDLE MANAGEMENT AND WILL GET RELAX.

In my opinion, the Project sponsors, which can be the highest level of senior executive people, are the ultimate responsible for the success and the failure of the project deliverables.

Yes why not? Project sponsor is the one who initiates the project (creates the project charter, puts in business case) and he is responsible in identifying the business value of the project to the company. Project Sponsor and Project manager together need to prioridically assess whether the initial assumptions holds still true for the project or not, and at any time if they find from the analysis that the project is not going to bring the business value what it was planned for, then they have to escalate to Sr. Management and decision should be made whether to continue or stop the project...

Failures are best tools of learning absorb learning behind failures and adapt the approach of unsuccessful instead of failures then keep your efforts with you.

As a Project Manager, even if the team has performed badly in the entire Project *due to various factors) it is our responsibility to take ownership and get the bad name. However, the correct / right / positive feedback needs to be given to the team as a "Leasons Learnt" for them to handle better in future projects.

Leader and whole team is responsible for failure of any project . Why give a bad name to PS and hang hin alone ?

I am not talking about project failure 

I am talking beyond this point If the project is successful and the deliverable(s) are there (product, service, result, ...etc)

But ...

These project deliverables - when put in operation/production - fail to deliver the anticipated/expected/desired business value ...   that was orogiginally the JUSTIFICATION and basis  of acceptance/approval of the projet Then ..

Shouldn't the project sponsor (the one who requested/justified the project) be held accountable for this failure of the product/service/result in delivering the promised business value that this project sponsor relied on in justifying the project ??

i believe they should, but we are all responsible too.

In theory they should be held responsible but the facts are different. It is a very competitive market and at times to attain project a few plans are too aggressive but this is how the world of business works. We look around many companies and especially Chinese companies who by habit over commit and at most fulfill it proves that if intent is there, the results may come. 

Business value is generated by more in less for customer. Sponsors do get blame and rightly so - a full 360 view of organisation and considering the pressures to get projects to retain manpower, at times organisation and management strive and make tough decisions. 

By all means, the failures of a Project may be rightfully accounted to Project sponsor.

But, the channel of acountability is like a SDLC waterfall model.Hence, the Project Manager and his team is finally held responsible for failures in the project.  

Perhaps, one among the accountabilities of project sponsor is to identify the reason for project failure .

This is one of the primary reason , why a Project Manager and his Team gets dissolved in cases of Project Failure . 

Overall, the accountability of a Project Manager and his team in chances of failure is more . Whereas, the accountability of a Prokect Sponsor in chances of Success is more. 

The main accountability for creating perception for "Project Success" and delivery of successful deliverables rests with Project Manager and Project Sponsor. However in place of indulging in 'Blame Game'/ "Power Politics', it would be more beneficial from organizational perspective to conduct the root cause analysis and document the lessons learned from the failures.

However it is pertinent to note that there could be number of reasons why project did not deliver business benefits as intended in the initial business case or perceived as 'Failure'. Some of the key reasons that I observed in professional career are:

(A) Business case did not mention the clearly defined and quantifiable business benefits at the time business case approval.

(B) During program/ project planning and execution, project sponsor did not do the business benefits mapping with program deliverables. They were not quantified.

(C) Project team did not work closely with operations team to create method, mechanisms, tools and infrastructure to collect and gather data on business benefits as part of project hand-over

(D) If the project had long life cycle, than it is possible that business environment and market conditions may change by the time project went live.

(E) If the project required coordination of multiple functional team that it is the responsibility project sponsor get their buy-in on the project implementation, harnessing of new features in business operations to accrue business benefits as intended.

(F) Like it or not, humans are 'Political Animals'. Hence we must understand the hidden agendas, personal motives of people occupying key roles in organizations. Therefore if the project creates shift of power centers then it is quite likely possible that the incumbent business operations team will create road blocks in tracking and monitoring business benefits.

In conclusion, we must conduct a fair evaluation and assessment in PMR and post implementation phase before assigning the responsibility of 'Failure' squarely to project sponsor or project manager.