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 wide spread application of projects to many areas of society has led us to identify five generic elements that every project will have to address. They are: project management, project task, stakeholders, resources, and project environment. Each element will be further divided into five sub-elements. This five-by-five model will be used to identify the nature of a specific project and to develop appropriate approaches and means. It will also allow a circular planning process that gradually will lead to coherence among the five elements.

To illustrate the broad spectrum of projects that we see in practice, we have identified five types that will be characterized by the five-by-five model.

In view of the complex nature of most projects, the chapter will introduce four complementary perspectives: a technical, a business, an organizational, and a stakeholder perspective. Each perspective will describe key features of a project and is supported by theories, models, and methods. Although the perspectives are complementary, they are strongly interdependent.

The chapter will give an overview of the book.

The chapter evaluates the value of practice-based teaching and learning on a UK postgraduate unit and describes the development of conceptual models for the student practice-based experience.

Student experience is explored through the use of an in-depth case study. Student understanding is explored through an exit survey of students.

Student experience of the unit was positive and negative. Positive experiences stem from good client communications, a motivated student team, and the buzz of a real project. Positive experiences appear to lead to a perception of pride in outcomes and personal transferrable skills. Negative experiences stem from the lack of life experience, language difficulties, client unavailability, lack of subject knowledge, and literature gaps which left students feeling ill-equipped to deal with the international group context. Negative experiences lead to stress and poor group development.

The study is based on a single simple case. The methodology has sought to reduce problems with internal validity and bias. The data collection and analysis methods are repeatable and we encourage other academics to test our conceptual models and conclusions.

Conceptual models for positive and negative experience are proposed.

The study suggests there is a balance to be sought between providing a positive student experience and practical learning. Practice-based learning adds significant value to the student in terms of improved understanding of hard and soft tools, but may need to be based upon positive and negative experience.

Andreas Al-Laham has been holding the chair for strategic and international management at the University of Mannheim since September 2009. After his studies of economics and business administration at the Technical University of Dortmund he received his PhD (1996) and Habilitation (2000) degree at the same University, Faculty of Business Administration, Chair of Strategic and International Management. From 2000 to 2002 he worked as a visiting research scholar and visiting professor for strategic management and organizational theory at the J.L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Canada. Afterward he became professor of international management and business policy at the University of Stuttgart. In 2004 he took a professorship of strategic management at the CASS Business School, City University of London, UK. Up till today, he is visiting professor for General Management and International Strategy. Between 2006 and 2009 he held the chair for management and international strategy at the University of Kaiserslautern. He has written several books, for example! Strategisches Management. Theoretische Grundlagen-Prozesse-Implementierung (together with M. K. Welge), Organisationales Wissensmanagement. Vahlens Handbücher der Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaft, Praxis des strategischen Managements (together with M. K. Welge and P. Kajüter) and Strategieprozesse in deutschen Unternehmungen. His current research focuses on evolutionary dynamics in the German biotech-industry, alliances and network dynamics as well as the internationalization of SME.

Before starting to define the project task and plan the project, we suggest to seek a thorough understanding of the nature of the project task. This includes an analysis of uncertainties and complexities. Dimensions of complexity will be presented.

Projects create value. This will be discussed by means of understanding the need and formulating expected benefit. Also, objectives of the end result will be dealt with. Stakeholders’ expectations will define success criteria of the project.

Forming the project implies defining content and scope to be treated.

The chapter will finally discuss issues related to forming a project, e.g., how to deal with the world outside the project, to view forming a project as an organizational learning process, and to be aware of typical behavioral reactions to uncertainty and complexity.

Learning through international strategic alliances is usually influenced by dispersed locations and cultural difference between the countries of the two firms. This research highlights the importance of contextual factors on learning through international strategic alliances. Based on an empirical study of 271 alliances, our findings reveal that successful alliance learning not only depends on the partner’s openness to share knowledge but also relies on the firm’s capacity to identify and absorb such knowledge. Institutional differences between the countries from where partner firms originate are considered to hinder the alliance learning by decreasing the firm’s absorptive capacity and by enhancing knowledge ambiguity. However, our research suggests that frequent direct communication and high levels of mutual trust and reciprocal commitment between partner firms positively moderate the noxious effects of institutional differences on the alliance learning process.