Search results

The purpose of this paper is to understand the philosophical changes which underpin research and practices in project management. This study is an attempt to challenge previous studies that have tried to explain this change in order to provide a better explanation.

The authors adopt a critical review research method to challenge previous explanations of the paradigm change and definition of communication. For this purpose, philosophical and social theories and concepts have been used.

This paper proposed changing the paradigm from modernism to postmodernism and the paradigm shift, which happens from postmodernism to participation, as a better explanation for the paradigmatic change in project management. Furthermore, the important role of communication has been illustrated in the participation paradigm.

For the first time in project management, the authors attempt to clarify the role of power in this paradigmatic shift, especially because this concept is an axial concept in postmodern philosophy and a neglected concept in project management literature. In addition, communicative action theory has been used with the aim of pursuing the influence of informal power in the participation paradigm and paving the way for confronting its emerging challenges in future studies.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce, in the project management field, an Aristotelian ethics lens moving beyond the classical deontological and consequentialism approaches underlying the current ethical practices and codes of ethics and professional conducts. In doing so, the author wishes to pose the premises of a debate on the implications of a conscious ethical perspective for the structure and agency relationship within the project management field.

Project management is a knowledge field on its own right. However, the current perspectives applied to make sense and develop the field (modernism vs postmodernism) leads to dichotomous thinking rather than recognizing the merits and contextual validity of both sides. The author calls for Aristotelian ethics as a way of moving beyond this dichotomous thinking. The author introduces briefly Aristotelian ethics and its consequences in term of relation theory – practice, means and ends, facts and values and finally politics (i.e. being part of a community of practitioners). Then the author illustrates some consequences for the field taking PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct and APM Code of Professional Conduct as supports for discussion.

The author suggests a need for revisiting and/or redesigning the codes of ethics and professional conducts for project management according to an Aristotelian perspective, in order to move beyond the normative limitations of classical deontological (conflict between competing duties, exemplified by PMI Code) or consequentialism (focusing on the “right” outcome to the detriment of duties, exemplified by APM Code) approaches (both, in fact, leading to a disconnection means and ends, and facts and values). This implicates shifting the view from the question “what is my duty”? to the questions “why should I undertake my duty”? and “how ought I act in this situation”?

Raising professional bodies, industry and education institutions awareness and consciousness and leading them to rethink about codes of ethics and the implications for the way they conceive practice and research, bodies of knowledge, credentialing, education, etc.

To the best of the author's knowledge, this kind of discussion has not yet been conducted within the project management field, and considering the implication of project management in the life and for the well-being of the society, an ethical debate may present some value(s).

The purpose of this paper is to holistically explore value creation approaches in a program of cultural projects to inform the practices of project/program management in both public and private sectors.

The paper brings together the literature on project, program and portfolio value creation to inform a case study conducted with engaged scholarship research methods.

Three themes of value creation are revealed: managing collaboration, coordination and perception. Effectuation and causation are both observed, demonstrating that a combination of logics underpin decision making in projects.

The results are based on a single case in a cultural context. Further research is needed to determine whether the observed value creation themes apply more generally, and to explore more deeply the use of logics associated with entrepreneurship in project decision making.

The study reveals several non-commercial aspects of value creation that may play a role across a range of project environments. Practitioners may be able to recognize a wider range of value creation and to better nurture these previously unacknowledged types of value.

The study provides new insights on value and decision logic through in-depth analysis of value creation in a program of culture projects.

The contribution of project success and the organisation's efficiency is consensual in the literature. However, the value of project management (PM) brings to the organisation's effectiveness through the alignment with strategy, contributing to its competitiveness and business success, is yet little explored. This study addresses the literature gap that concerns the relationship between PM and the organisation's competitiveness, proposing a holistic conceptual model to understand of how PM brings value to the organisation. This work also aims to demonstrate the practical implications of theoretical contributions to the value of PM. For this, a detailed action research (AR) was planned to show how researchers and practitioners could work and collaborate in a real problem and prove the AR approach's adequacy to the PM field.

The methodology starts with a systematic literature review (SLR), followed by content analysis to develop a conceptual model of PM's value. To validate the theoretical constructs and transfer the results to real context, an AR plan is then carried out to support a specific PM problem presented by an automotive industry company.

The results have theoretical and practical implications. An original conceptual model is developed–the value of PM: Key factors–defending a multidimensional and holistic perspective to understand the PM's value. A set of key factors was identified, structured, interrelated and exemplified their practical implementation in a single company. In addition to the technical key factors identified in the literature review, the AR plan unveils crucial social aspects to improve PM's value, such as leadership, strong communication and open processes. This work shows the central role of PM methodologies in integrating and interconnecting the key factors, emphasizing the projects' strategic level.

The present work was developed in a specific and particular organisational context and industry.

The AR plan presents a company's original programme–Hyper Competitiveness (HC) Temple–implemented in an automotive company. Project management professionals could understand how this company implemented each key factor, defended in a conceptual model and lead the project's results to the business value.

The research originality lies in rethinking PM's value to organisations from a holistic perspective: multi-dimensional, temporal, life cycle, multi-organisational, pointing out a set of technical and social key factors.

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 empirically investigate an effective project management practice focusing on planning and control. By doing so, it contributes to the debate on rethinking traditional project management practices and accentuates the need for adjustments based on the project context.

This paper extends the project management theory by proposing a lean project planning (LPP) and control framework, developed and tested in collaboration with ten engineer-to-order (ETO) companies. By following a design science research approach, elements from lean thinking and current project planning and control practices are combined into a maturity model (MM).

ETO project characteristics are identified, and their implications for planning and control are discussed. Nine enablers that transform current project planning and control approaches into a lean approach are defined, allowing the analysis of the underlying complexity of planning and controlling ETO projects and thus facilitating the determination of the actions required to improve project performance.

Once fully embedded in an organization, the presented MM can provide a safe framework for self-criticism and can be used to conduct self-assessments without the need for an external facilitator. Thus, this paper is of particular interest to practicing project managers who aim to implement LPP and control.

To the authors’ best knowledge, this paper is the first to empirically examine the journey toward LPP and control from a MM perspective. This research attempts to describe the enablers of LPP and control.

The purpose of this paper is to bring together two seemingly disparate bodies of literature – ambidexterity (the ability both to exploit and explore) and mindfulness – to take a fresh perspective on the management of uncertainty. The authors differentiate between “rule-based” and “mindfulness-based” reliability and explore project risk responses in environments characterised by varying degrees of uncertainty.

Five case organisations across a range of industries are used to illustrate how uncertainty may be prepared for and suitable responses activated. This also adds to the understanding of the nature of ambidexterity, which has previously been characterised primarily at the organisational level with relatively few studies looking at managerial actions and “switches” between modes. The data consist of initial survey responses to indicate the level of mindfulness under conditions of normality, followed by interviews studying particular incidents and the nature of the responses.

Key practices are identified that support high reliability in complex projects, with four managerial modes (“Traditional”, “Just-in-time”, “Infusion”, and “Entrepreneurial”) that emerged from the data.

The findings offer managers a practical framework to choose between different modes of reliable performance by considering the uncertainty of the environment and whether the primary driver of the work is efficiency or effectiveness. This allows managers to reflect on their own organisations and practices and identify whether their current approach is suitable.

This work offers new insight into risk responses in complex environments and shows how the mindfulness and ambidexterity literatures may be used as beneficial lenses to increase understanding. Blending these two schools also offers opportunities for future research.

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.