The Development of Project
Management: Past, Present and
Future
Theme Day
Goal Directed Project Management in 30 Years
13 May 2014
Prof Ralf Müller
BI Norwegian Business School
Department of Leadership and Organizational Behaviour
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Where do we come from
Where are we now
Where do we og from here
… in research and practice
“Life can only be understood backwards; but it
must be lived forwards.”
― Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
BI Norwegian Business School
Department of Leadership and Organizational Behaviour
Research: where do we come from
Analysis of 15 years of IRNOP papers
showed
• a significant dominance of project
management research which is based on
subjectivity, interpretivism, and use of
case study methodologies together with
qualitative methods.
• Contributions to knowledge were mainly
in the governance, behavior and
optimization school of thought.
Biedenbach & Müller 2011
Research: where are we now
Analysis of 15 years of IRNOP papers showed
• Subjective research paradigms are gradually reduced at the
expense of more objective paradigms, albeit at a low level.
• About 80 percent of studies are subjective, interpretivistic and
use qualitative methods.
• Methodologies shift towards multiple case studies
• Along with a slight reduction in subjective studies comes an
increase in objective and positivist studies, using quantitative
methods (slightly less than 20 percent of all studies).
• Contributions to knowledge have strongly shifted towards the
process school of thought and to a lesser extend the behavior
and contingency schools.
Biedenbach & Müller 2011
Research: where are we heading?
• Imbalance between objective and subjective research
paradigms will prevail. Too large is the gap in popularity of
paradigms.
• Trend shows a steady growth of objective studies and decline
of subjective studies.
• Trend in conference papers (80% QUAL, 20% QUAN) is in
contrast to published research in project management with 66
percent positivist studies (Smyth and Morris, 2007). General
management studies report 10% QUAL and 90% QUAN 90%
with a steady increase in QUAL studies (Aguinis et al., 2007).
• The two streams are moving towards each other and will
eventually be at par in a world of paradigmatic pluralism.
• The philosophical emphasis in project management research
changed slightly, with gradual implications at the
methodological level.
Biedenbach & Müller 2011
Practice: where do we come from?
• 1950s and 1960s: Systems development
– Matrix organizations to develop major weapon systems,
integrated through “special project offices” under a
“project manager”
– WBS, PERT, CPM, EV ….
– PMOs, Professional organizations
• 1970s to 1990s
– Success and failure studies
– PMBoKs
– Diversity in management
• 1990s and early 20th century
– IT, critical chain, agility
– Enterprise-wide project management, programs, portfolios
– Strategy and governance
Morris 2011
Practice: where are we now
• Methodological multiplicity
• Agile and combinations of traditional &
agile approaches
• Awareness of soft factors increases
• Awareness for governance grows
• Enterprise project management on the
rise
Practice: where are we now
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Educated project managers
Sustainability aware generation
Declining tolerance for failure
Leadership “In command: out of control”
New commercial odels
Poly project management
Growing profile
Taylor 2014
Practice: where are we heading?
• Increase in large infrastructure projects
– 2004-2998 China spent more on
infrastructure than during the 20th century, a
20 fold increase
– “Biggest investment boom in history”
(Economist (2008)
• Price levels of USD 50-100 billion are
common for gigaprojects, prices above
USD 100 billion not uncommon
Flyvbjerg 2014
Practice: where are we heading?
DEPEST analysis:
• Demographics
• Economics
• Political-legal factors
• Ecological factors
• Social-cultural factors
• Technology
Jugdev, Müller & Hutchison 2009
Practice: where are we heading?
• Demographics
– Multilingual business
– Retiring baby boomers demand more projects for
hospitality, travel, entertainment
• Economics
– Globalization and multi-culturality increases project
complexity
– Increase in social projects, and importance of values
such as ethics, green, CSR etc
• Political-legal factors
– Political unrest will continue to demand
specialization of project managers, e.g. in
technology, military, IT, logistics etc.
Jugdev, Müller & Hutchison 2009
Practice: where are we heading?
•
Ecological factors
– Net generation at mid career by 2025
– Increase in energy projects, but also freshwater supply and agricultural
projects
•
Social-cultural factors
– Social networks impact the development of tools and work practices of
project managers
– PM a topic at undergraduate and grade school
– Work-life balance importance for Generation X and Y (1983 onwards)
– Communities driven projects
•
Technology
– Aging population demands more pharmaceutical projects and technology
enhancements for health and wellness
– Virtual teams and virtual work, e.g. using highly intelligent analysis tools for
business intelligence
– Advances from interactive computer games will make their way in project
management, control and reporting
Jugdev, Müller & Hutchison 2009
Practice: Some pragmatic trends
• Demand for project managers to meet triple constraints
plus expectation will continue. Companies will:
– Increase training and education
– develop intelligent project selection techniques/tools and
project management tools
• Diversity of projects will increase, calling on well
educated and trained PMs, e.g. in
– Nanotechnology or other upcoming technologies,
– Social competences for social media, crowdfunding and
community-based project management
– Collaboration of companies, communities of practice and
professional organizations for knowledge sharing and
integration
Jugdev, Müller & Hutchison 2009
Practice: Some pragmatic trends
• Professional organizations to:
– Continue their BoKs, but diversify in
more industries
– Expand certification to industries and
upcoming methodologies using more
applied rather than rote learning
apporaches
– Emphasize the role of values and ethics
for a long-term orientation of and for
projects
Jugdev, Müller & Hutchison 2009
Thank you
References
Aguinis, H., Pierce, C. a., Bosco, F. a., & Muslin, I. S. (2007). First Decade of Organizational
Research Methods: Trends in Design, Measurement, and Data-Analysis Topics. Organizational
Research Methods, 12(1), 69–112.
Biedenbach, T., & Müller, R. (2011). Paradigms in project management research: examples from 15
years of IRNOP conferences. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 4(1), 82–
104.
The Economist (2008). Building BRIC’s of growth, June 7, p. 80.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2014). What You Should Know About Megaprojects and Why : An Overview. Project
Management Journal, 45(2), 6–19. doi:10.1002/pmj
Jugdev, K., Müller, R., & Hutchison, M. (2009). Future Trends in Project Management: A MacroEnvironmental Analysis. In D. L. Cleland & B. Bidanda (Eds.), Project Management Circa 2025.
Newtown Square, PA, USA: PMI.
Morris, P. W. G. (2011). A brief history of project management. In P. W. G. Morris, J. K. Pinto, & J.
Söderlund (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Project Management (pp. 15–36). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press, UK.
Smyth, H., & Morris, P. (2007). An epistemological evaluation of research into projects and their
management: Methodological issues. International Journal of Project Management, 25(4), 423–
436.
Taylor, T. (2014): Project management trends and fashions. BalticPM Days conference, May 8-9,
2014, Vilnius, Lithuania.