Search results

This chapter takes a look at the future of project management. It starts with a historic view of the development of project management in the last five decades including the present. It shows that the role of the project manager has changed from an engineer manager to a business developer and a leader capable of dealing with multi-perspectives.

Projects are positioned in the context of changing organizational forms, including silo and network organizations. This leads to the conclusion that projects will play a key role in the future, especially in change management, business modeling, and value creation.

A section will discuss increased emphasis on learning and knowledge sharing, suggesting focus on the reflective and experimenting project manager, and planning as a social process.

A section will look at project management as a profession and point to the risk that the profession may become too narrow focusing on a well-defined body of knowledge. Current trends suggest that a broader view of projects be adopted including its strategic role and interplay with stakeholders, as has been discussed at length in this book.

We conclude the chapter by proposing a shift of paradigm.

The world of management and technology has become accustomed to the notion of “2.0” advancements and transformative innovations. Is the field of Change Management/Organizational Development itself in this story? Not enough! We re-examine the field’s foundational beliefs, practices, focus, research directions, and value add. We conclude that there is strong evidence from the front line and from an IBM Case Study that the field must “reboot” – to rethink our methods and frameworks; the role and skills of change leadership for the future; change practitioner capabilities for the future; the metrics needed to evaluate progress; and the knowledge exchange between Academe and practitioners.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce library and information science professionals to the idea of combining the tools and techniques of project management and change management to support the success of their projects. Combining these two methodologies can assist professionals not only in carrying out their projects efficiently, helping them to meet project objectives, but can also increase the likelihood that their project objectives will be accepted by their organizations.

This chapter provides an overview of project management and change management methodologies with numerous examples from academic and practitioner literature and supplements them with concrete, specific examples of how these tools and techniques were implemented in an information management project.

This chapter contributes to the development of change management and project management competencies for librarians by providing explanations of project management and change management which include advice and evidence from the literature combined with examples of how these techniques and processes were applied in a library and information management project. This chapter should therefore serve as an educational tool for library and information management practitioners seeking either to develop their project management and change management skills or to apply these techniques to their own projects.

Articles which combine project management and change management methodologies are rare. This chapter takes these concepts and applies them in a library and information management setting in a way that should be practical and approachable to library and information science practitioners.

This chapter outlines current and emerging approaches in change communication from both scholarly and practice perspectives, and what this means for organisations and practitioners, including practical implications for education. A literature review is conducted using the Kemmis and McTaggart framework for studying practice based on individual-social, objective-subjective dichotomies leading to an integrated reflexive-dialectical approach. Five roles are suggested for the practitioner in leading and influencing change, namely that of a Communication Architect, a Story-enabler, an Empathiser, an Engager and a Community Builder. These roles go beyond the traditional informative role, to practitioners co-constructing communication with stakeholders during change. With new ways of thinking about change management, there is the possibility for new methods of educating practitioners beyond the traditional qualification or professional certification. These would require greater collaboration between scholars and practitioners in creating vehicles for continuous learning.

Accounting for quality and improved organizational performance has recently received attention in management control research. However, the extent to which process innovation changes have been integrated into management control research is limited. This paper contributes to that integration by drawing from institutional adaptive theory of organizational change and process innovation strategies. The paper utilizes a 2 by 2 contingency table that uses two factors: environmental conditions and organizational change/learning strategies, to build a process innovation framework. A combination of these two factors yields four process innovation strategies: mechanistic, organic, organizational development (OD) and organizational transformation (OT).

The four process innovation typologies are applied to characterize innovations in accounting such as activity based costing (ABC). ABC has been discussed as a multi-phased innovation process that provides an environment where both the initiation and the implementation of accounting change can occur. Technical innovation can be successfully initiated as organic innovation that unfolds in a decentralized organization and requires radical change and double loop learning. Implementation occurs best as a mechanistic innovation in a hierarchical organization and involving incremental change and single loop learning. The paper concludes that if ABC is integrated into an OD or OT intervention strategy, the technical and administrative innovation aspects of ABC can be utilized to manage the organization’s operating activities.

This chapter examines organisational change processes that occur when accountability demands from powerful external stakeholders change. It investigates, firstly, whether these external accountability demands impact on the performance management systems of two different types of organisations. Secondly, it considers whether the goals for improved performance contained within the external accountability demands are realised. The chapter derives its primary insights from analysing in-depth interviews with managers working in a private sector company and in public sector organisations. The analyses reveal complex organisational responses. In the public sector case study, the organisations tended to reorient their performance management systems towards the external accountability demands; whilst in the private sector organisation, pressures from falling share prices forced managers to focus their decision making on the preferred performance measures contained in shareholders’ accountability demands. However, whilst there is some evidence of performance management system changes, the desires for improved performance subsumed by the external accountability demands are not necessarily realised through the performance management system changes.

This study focuses on the factors that determine the readiness of hotels to implement customer relationship management (CRM) in hotels within the context of Ghana. The sample consisted of 292 employees (restaurant managers, customer service officers, customer relations' officers, and marketing managers) from 3- to 5-star hotels. The study adopted a quantitative deductive approach to collected data using cross-sectional survey, which was analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The findings revealed that management change initiatives and culture have significant impact on organizational readiness to implement CRM in hotels, specifically Ghana. Also, the organizational culture partly mediates management change initiatives and organizational readiness to implement CRM activities. On the other hand, use of technology proved not to mediate management change initiatives and organizational readiness as the relationship proved not to be significant. Also, culture and use of technology have not mediated management change initiatives and organizational readiness as the indirect path proved not to be significant. The outcomes have useful implications for CRM adoption by hotel managers.

Ulf Bengtsson works for Motorola Inc. as an Organization Effectiveness consultant. In this role he works in the area of change acceleration, organization design, and other strategic OD initiatives. His undergraduate degree is in Organizational Communication from Cleveland State University and he earned a Masters in Management and Organizational Behavior (concentration in OD) from Benedictine University. He has done award-winning papers and presentations and has numerous publications on topics including organizational behavior, organization development, and appreciative inquiry. A Swedish citizen, he now resides in Chicago. Ulf can be reached at: Ulfl@motorola.com.Allen C. Bluedorn (Ph.D. in sociology, University of Iowa) is the Emma S. Hibbs Distinguished Professor and the Chair of the Department of Management at the University of Missouri-Columbia. He has taught and studied management and the organization sciences, first at the Pennsylvania State University, then for the last 23 years at the University of Missouri-Columbia. These efforts have produced seven major teaching awards, over 30 articles and chapters, and his recently published book, The Human Organization of Time (Stanford University Press, 2002). He has served as president of the Midwest Academy of Management, as a member of the Organizational Behavior Teaching Society’s board of directors, as a representative-at-large to the Academy of Management’s board of governors, as associate editor of Academy of Management Learning and Education, and as division chair of the Academy of Management’s Organizational Behavior Division.David Coghlan is a member of the School of Business Studies at the University of Dublin, Trinity College, Ireland. His research and teaching interests lie in the areas of organisation development, action research, action learning, clinical inquiry, practitioner research and doing action research in one’s own organisation. His most recent books include Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization (co-authored with Teresa Brannick, Sage, 2001), Changing Healthcare Organisations, (coauthored with Eilish Mc Auliffe, Blackhall: Dublin, 2003) and Managers Learning in Action (eds. D. Coghlan, T. Dromgoole, P. Joynt & P. Sorensen, Routledge, 2004).Paul Coughlan is Associate Professor of Operations Management at the University of Dublin, School of Business Studies, Trinity College, Ireland where, since 1993, he has researched and taught in the areas of operations management and product development. His active research interests relate to continuous improvement of practices and performance in product development and manufacturing operations. He is President of the Board of the European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management, and a member of the board of the European Operations Management Association.Fariborz Damanpour received his Ph.D. from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He joined the Graduate School of Management at the Rutgers University in 1985. Currently he is a professor at the Department of Management and Global Business of the Rutgers Business School, where he served as the chairperson of the management department from 1996 to 2002. Prior to his academic career, he worked as an engineer, an organizational development consultant, and the manager of a start-up unit in a large organization. His primary areas of research have been management of innovation and organization design and change. His papers have been published in several management and technology management journals including the Academy of Management Journal, Administrative Science Quarterly, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Journal of Management Studies, Management Science, Organization Studies, and Strategic Management Journal. He serves on the editorial boards of the IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, and Journal of Management Studies.Joyce Falkenberg is Professor of Strategy and Associate Dean of the School of Management at Agder University College (HiA) in Kristiansand, Norway. She received a Ph.D. from the University of Oregon in 1984. Her dissertation focused on strategic change and adaptation as a response to changes in the environment. Her research has continued the focus on strategic change with an emphasis on implementation. Recent work has combined this emphasis with the strategy issues of congition, strategizing, and resource based perspective. Before coming to HiA in the summer of 2003, Joyce Falkenberg was a member of the faculty at the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. She taught in many international programs, including NHHs Masters of International Business; executive masters programs in Russia and Poland; and held seminars in Latvia, China, Switzerland, and Germany. Falkenberg has served on the Executive Board of the Academy of Management Business Policy Division and on the Editorial Board of the Academy of Management Review.Mary A. Ferdig Ph.D., is Director of the Sustainability Leadership Institute in Middlebury, Vermont, a research and education organization dedicated to developing leadership capacity for building a more sustainable world. Her research interests focus on leadership for sustainable organizational and social change, grounded in complexity and social constructionist perspectives. She consults with leaders in not-for-profit and business sectors as well as teaching process consultation and leadership communication in the Management and Organizational Behavior Master’s program at Benedictine University and the Public Administration and Community Services program at the University of Nebraska, Omaha. She also serves as an External Examiner in the Doctoral Program in the Complexity Management Centre, Hertfordshire University, London, U.K.Robert T. Golembiewski is Distinguished Research Professor, Emeritus at the University of Georgia, where he is part of the Public Administration program. Bob G is an internationally-active consultant in planned change, and he is the only pracademic who has won all of the major research prizes in management: the Irwin in business, Waldo Award in PA, the NASPAA Award in public policy, two McGregor awards for excellence in the application of the behavioral sciences, and the ODI Prize for global programs in planned change.