About the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

Citation

Walker, D.H.T. (2009), "About the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business", International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 2 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijmpb.2009.35302aaa.001

About the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

Article Type: From the Editor From: International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Volume 2, Issue 1

This issue is the first in the second volume of the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business (IJMPiB). It seems appropriate to reflect on the first year’s Volume 1 and how this journal is evolving. As stated in the editorial of the first issue of Volume 1, the aim and vision for this journal is to be an effective vehicle for encouraging PM knowledge generation and its development and refinement. It encourages PM theorists and practitioners to effectively stand back and critically reflect on how PM is evolving through reflecting in action as well as reflecting on action to make sense of the interplay between theory and observation. This generates deeper understanding of “why” we should and “how” we should improve PM practice. IJMPiB also has an “international” flavour of papers published. The first volume certainly brought together contributors from a variety of industry segments in a global context. Papers published ranged from strategy at the very boundaries of PM to more traditionally practice based issues that define a project manager’s role and potential contribution to business success. The feedback I have received while at PM meetings and conferences during 2008 has been positive and encouraging. I recognise and highly appreciate the generously of both editorial board members, who have been very supportive, and the span of reviewers (including board members) who have donated their valuable time to review papers. Also the contributors of these papers have been a joy to work with.

In September 2008 the IJMPiB was nominated for the best new journal of 2008 against several other leading journals for consideration of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) see link www.alpsp.org/ngen_public/default.asp?ID = 251 – we did not win, but being nominated was an honour. An innovation that was recognised by ALPSP (and by many of the people who have spoken to me during 2008) has been our Research Thesis Notes section. This initiative opens our eyes to both the range of PM-related topics under study at the doctoral level as well as the range of universities that offer PM doctoral level study. I hope that we can continue to get a wide range of papers featured in this paper so that readers are aware of research options available to them across the globe, as well as being exposed to the interesting topics of research that takes the PM discipline forward and heralds its status as a serious discipline that effective transmutes ideas from other disciplines to expand and improve the understanding of the practice of PM.

I get many emails from experienced masters degree-qualified practitioners asking me to advise them about undertaking a doctorate in PM. It became evident that:

• •

  while there are only a few people who want to take “time-out” to undertake a traditional 3-4 year PhD in PM that there are many others who would prefer to take a doctorate while holding down their high-level PM role; and that

• •

  there is not enough knowledge “out there” that academics and practitioners can draw upon about what options (potential thesis topics, modes of study and supervisory capabilities) may be feasible about studying for a doctorate in PM.

It must be acknowledged that there is a crucial limitation to people studying for a PM doctorate and that is supervision capacity and access to potential external examiners. The Research Thesis Notes section is useful because it expands our knowledge of DPM research topics being studied and universities that offer PM doctoral programs – also it helps identify potential future supervisors and examiners. This section is an essential service for academics and those practitioners who are contemplating undertaking a PM doctorate.

About this issue

Contributing authors to this issue are based in Canada, Germany, Sweden, Australia, the UK and the USA. The opening paper entitled Risk Management Applied to Projects, Programs and Portfolios by Hynuk Sanchez, Benoît Robert, Mario Bourgault and Robert Pellerin presents a review of recent risk management literature applied to projects, programs and project portfolios performed inside an organization with the aim of finding areas of opportunity to continue research and the development of current guides and methodologies. The review shows that project risk management is a well developed domain in comparison to the program risk management and portfolio risk management fields, for which specifically written methodologies are difficult to find. The table they present in the paper’s conclusions provides a very useful summary of the “state-of-the art” of risk management across projects, programs and portfolios so it invaluable for those who have an interest in advancing their knowledge of risk management and those who are looking for gaps in knowledge to investigate. Risk management could be seen to link in with learning from past mistakes and so a reliable method of understanding project performance (causes of success and failure) would be an invaluable aid. A useful way of doing this is through using systems theory.

The second paper presented by Diana White and Joyce Fortune entitled “The project-specific Formal System Model”, provides a model for understanding systemic project performance. This paper introduces a project-specific version of the formal systems model that can be used by project managers and other professionals to identify actual or potential weaknesses in a project’s structure or processes and to look for difficulties in the relationship between the project and the context in which it is or will be taking place. In so doing it provides a robust means of helping project managers to avoid failure. A case study project is used to illustrate how this model can be applied. This paper links with the first paper by Sanchez et al. by systemically facilitating the understanding of a project’s contextual dynamics and thus can help facilitate effective risk management and post project auditing for lessons learned.

The third paper continues this logical thread relating to the identification and management of risk. “Deviations and the breakdown of project management principles” by Markus Hällgren and Eva Maaninen Olsson contributes to our understanding of how unexpected events (deviations) are handled and how the limited time available in a project affects approach to develop an exploratory study of a power plant project found in an integrated provider of projects of this type. Results show that in contrast to contemporary project management theories, the management of deviations was found to be primarily informal. This paper is a practical paper that can advance PM practice by presenting several suggestions to practitioners. First, small deviations should be paid attention to. Second, bureaucracy hampers flexibility and the organization should setup organizational structures, i.e. dual formal and informal structures to allow for a smoother process. Third, networks and confidence were found to be essential for the process to work effectively. Finally, there is a need to pay attention to different time frames when managing deviations to plans. It presents a practical aid for risk management because it develops a more intricate view of project organizing coming from the new Project-as-Practice agenda. Rather than focusing on what should be done, it focuses on what is done, which is a research area that needs further attention.

Paper 4 sheds some light onto the reality of leading projects in terms of understanding how cultural differences may impact the way that different team members may understand what can reasonably be expected of them. We live in a world where global teams from varying cultural backgrounds may present inherent risks to projects. This paper by Ralf Müller, Konrad Spang, and Sinan Özcan entitled “Cultural Differences in Decision-Making in Project Teams” reports on research undertaken in cultural differences in decision making styles by project teams composed of team members from different nationalities – Differences in decision making in mainly German teams versus mainly Swedish teams. Locus-of-control differences in decision-making were identified, together with factors for differences in decisions, namely decision making style, process and involvement. Correlated cultural antecedents to these factors, in the form of personal attributes, were found. The study helps team members and project managers to understand the impact of their cultural differences on decision making process and style. The study helps us to minimize the potential friction when working on multicultural projects through considering recommendations for practitioners that are provided. Leading multicultural teams can be seen as a risk that is not effectively catered for in many risk management plans.

Paper 5 is linked to leadership and teams from another cultural aspect, the work and life balance. The paper entitled “Work-life balance: An exploratory study of supports and barriers in a construction project” presented by Michelle Turner, Helen Lingard and Valerie Francis focuses on employees’ perceptions of work-life balance (WLB) in an Australian infrastructure construction project that were explored using semi-structured focus groups. While this paper investigates a somewhat non-typical PM sector case study, a project alliance in a large construction infrastructure project, it does present valuable general insights into how a key risk element in any project (the project team members) may react to workload pressures and demands. This also occurs across many PM sectors. Practical implications of this paper include providing project managers with a better understanding of work-life experiences of project teams and highlighting the barriers and facilitating factors for WLB.

Paper 6 links to the above in an interesting way. Essentially this paper, entitled “The Delphi Technique: A Method for Testing Complex and Multifaceted Topics” by Tom Grisham is a paper that provides valuable discussion and insights into the use of a research design technique (the Delphi technique) that is gaining popularity as a project management research approach. However, the focus of the research related to cross cultural leadership and so it does share a common thread with the other five papers in this issue in terms of people-issue risks. This paper should be an invaluable resource for those that are searching for research methodologies that can leverage the knowledge that expert practitioners can offer in our extending PM knowledge. The paper also provides a solid literature review about the use of the Delphi technique that may be applied by researchers wishing to adopt this research approach. It also describes the protocols and processes adopted in his doctoral study that can also be applied by practitioners. This paper provides the opportunity for PM researchers (academic or consultant) to expand their repertoire of research tools. Practitioners may also benefit from this paper as it provides a useful approach to assess and validate expert knowledge that could be contestable in a range of practice situations.

The two research Thesis Research Notes extend our appreciation of the interesting and valuable areas of PM research being undertaken as well as where such research may be undertaken. In this case the University of Siegen, Germany and the University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM). Readers interested in undertaking a doctorate and acquainting themselves of relevant institutions offering such programs and the kind of topics that candidates can take and be supervised on will find this issue a useful extension to those offered in Volume 1.

The first of the two Research Thesis Notes entitled “Reconciling Order and Chaos in Multi-Project Firms” is presented by Dr Joana Geraldi who is now teaching and researching at Cranfield School of Management in the UK. She completed her PhD with the PM group (Management Internationale Projekte) in the mechanical engineering department in the University of Siegen, Germany. She provides key findings of her doctoral thesis that are aimed at exploring how multi-project companies reconcile order (efficiency, control, clarity) and chaos (creativity, trust, uncertainty and ambiguity). This work has generated significant interest and won her the International Project Management Association Young Researcher Award for 2008. Her thesis is published as a book rather than electronically available but she provides her email contact where interested readers can reach her for further details.

The second thesis research note entitled “The Contribution of the Project Management Office to Organisational Performance” is presented by Dr Monique Aubry and her supervisors Brian Hobbs and Denis Thuillier. This research summarises a doctoral thesis that was defended in 2007. The purpose of this paper is to share scientific results on a recent organisational phenomenon, the Project Management Office (PMO), in a context where most of the literature currently comes from consultants. The focus of this research bears more on the PMO transformation process rather than on the description of their great variety. Results bring into question some establish paradigms on PMOs. From an academic perspective, the originality of this research rests primarily on its non-positivist epistemology to the study of PMOs and particularly with the mobilisation of a social conceptual framework. From the professional perspective, it provides PMO managers with a fresh look at their own configuration and it gives them means to understand their evolution through their particular history. Managers making decisions on structural dimensions are more critical of the advices from outsiders by being able to undertake this type of reflection. This issue is particularly topical and is subject to a major study undertaken by the UQAM under the umbrella of the Research Chair in Project Management with Professor Brian Hobbs PhD as director – see URL: www.pmchair.uqam.ca

This Volume 2 issue 1 also provides an interested practice note entitled “The Model Client Framework: Resources to help Australian Government agencies to promote safe construction” by Helen Lingard, Nick Blismas, Tracy Cooke and Helen Cooper. This is an important aspect of project risk management and neatly links with the prevailing theme of this issue. This is the second research practice note and we expect to be able to feature many cutting edge practice developments in the future.

Two books are reviewed. The first is Turner, J.R. (2007), Gower Handbook of Project Management, 4th ed., Gower Publishing Company, Aldershot, UK, reviewed by Professor Jennie Carroll. This is a book with a pedigree that many readers will be familiar with. The second book entitled Global project Management: Communication, Collaboration and Management Across Borders is reviewed by Professor Derek Walker and explores interesting aspects of the global PM world.

Finally the regular forthcoming events section keeps us aware of useful conferences, meetings and links that readers can take advantage of to improve their PM practice and research. It has been a pleasure to edit this issue.

Derek H.T. Walker