Search results

The purpose of this paper is to consider how multiple logic systems employed by project managers lead to manifold understandings of two foundational project management constructs (“project” and “planning”) that in turn influence both the practice of project management and project outcomes.

Largely conceptual in nature, this paper focuses on the language project managers use to make sense of projects and plans, seeking to get beyond the surface recitation of discourse to the underlying logic systems that influence practice. The discussion is illustrated with stories of practice, collected through interpretive phenomenological interviews with project managers perceived by their peers to demonstrate special skill or knowledge in successfully delivering projects, and reference to project management doctrine embedded in professional standards.

Expert project managers use multiple thinking styles to adapt their practice to emergent project issues. While instrumental rationality helps project managers focus on how to do things, other rationalities, particularly those labeled non‐rational, help them to decide what to do and why to do it. Expert judgment and practice supported by intuitive, holistic, and relational thinking allows project managers to navigate a sophisticated journey from ambiguity to accomplishment.

This paper illustrates how practice research can deconstruct interpretive phenomenological interviews to get beyond identifying the “what”, or empirical evidence, of practice to explore unique individual habitus that inform each individual's practice. Understanding the actions of expert project managers navigating between prescribed project management doctrine and their own praxis opens a space for us to rethink how we research, teach, and talk about project management.

This paper provides insight into the value and implications of practice‐based research by illustrating: how research grounded in practice identifies and raises more complex questions than professional doctrine currently reflects; and how simplifications utilizing duality as a means of theorizing (i.e. “hard” versus “soft”, rational versus non‐rational, etc.) is neither useful nor reflected in expert practice.

The purpose of this paper is to review the formation and evolution of the “Making Projects Critical” movement in project management research.

Retrospective and discursive paper.

Reflections on tensions and challenges faced by the MPC movement.

The paper establishes the historical trajectory of this movement and clarifies the tensions and challenges faced by MPC.

The purpose of this paper is to provide of a review of the theory and models underlying project management (PM) research degrees that encourage reflective learning.

Review of the literature and reflection on the practice of being actively involved in conducting and supervising academic research and disseminating academic output. The paper argues the case for the potential usefulness of reflective academic research to PM practitioners. It also highlights theoretical drivers of and barriers to reflective academic research by PM practitioners.

A reflective learning approach to research can drive practical results though it requires a great deal of commitment and support by both academic and industry partners.

This paper suggests how PM practitioners can engage in academic research that has practical outcomes and how to be more effective at disseminating these research outcomes.

Advanced academic degrees, in particular those completed by PM practitioners, can validate a valuable source of innovative ideas and approaches that should be more quickly absorbed into the PM profession's sources of knowledge. The value of this paper is to critically review and facilitate a reduced adaptation time for implementation of useful reflective academic research to industry.

The purpose of this paper is to present a cost‐benefit interpretation of academic‐practitioner research by describing and analysing several recent relevant examples of academic‐practitioner research with a focus on doctoral theses carried out at universities and business schools in clusters of research centred in North America, Australia and Europe.

Using case study examples, a value proposition framework for undertaking collaborative research for higher degree level study is developed and presented.

Value proposition benefits from this level of collaborative research can be summarised as enhancing competencies at the individual and organisational level as well as providing participating universities with high‐quality candidates/students and opportunities for industry engagement. The project management (PM) professional bodies can also extend PM knowledge but they need to be prepared to provide active support.

A model for better defining the value proposition of collaborative research from a range of stakeholder perspectives is offered that can be adapted for researchers and industry research sponsors.

Few papers offer a value proposition framework for explaining collaborative research benefits. This paper addresses that need.

The purpose of this editorial is to reflect on the growing interest of situated project research.

The editorial is conceptual and relies on published work and the articles included in the special issue.

With this special issue it is found that practice‐based studies, also called Projects‐as‐Practice studies, interested in the everyday activities of project practitioners, are multi‐faceted and rich. What may also be seen is that practice‐based studies are not yet a coherent area. However, it is more important that practice‐based studies allow researchers to understand the organization less as an entity and more as a socially‐accomplished task.

Several implications for research are offered, including the need for studies that emphasize the small details of organizing, and that practice‐based studies are not restricted to a certain methodology but depend on what a particular paper tries to accomplish.

With an ever‐growing stream of research focusing on projects the guest editors argue that it is about time to look into the details of organizing. This could be accomplished through a number of ways but in this special issue it is proposed that approaching traditional areas with a conscious naivety when asking the questions may do it. For the practitioner, the special issue offers important insights into how things are done in practice, which may be used as a mirror or reflection upon their own practice.

This editorial and special issue offer insights for any academic interested in understanding projects differently.

In the second of two articles, the potential of the internet for child victimisation by paedophiles and the challenges for controls that the technology poses are discussed. The links between the availability of imagery and the actual practice of paedophilia are considered and the problems of legal definition and control policies are outlined. The article concludes by outlining some controls presently available and makes suggestions for improved policing.