Content uploaded by Udechukwu Ojiako
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Udechukwu Ojiako on Jan 23, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Facilitating the Development
of Project Managers as
Reflective and Creative
Practitioners
Udechukwu Ojiako
1
, Eric Johansen
2
, Francis Edum
-
Fotwe
3
and David Greenwood
4
ABSTRACT
The need for a major re
-
think of our approach to project management education has
begun to
emerge. This re
-
think is being driven by the growing dominance of project
management as the model of
delivery in many private and public sector organisation across a wide range of requirements and its
limited success in achieving all objectives.
Sustained development of project managers is here considered to depend on adopting
a
radical
approach to their education which focuses on encouraging their development
as competent reflective
and creative professionals.
The initial indication is that the profession is still too concerned with the day to day
application of
standard framewo
rks and methodologies to be able to reflect and learn in the sort of dynamic,
immediate ways which will produce a breakthrough.
Keywords: Project Management, Education, Reflectiv
e Practice
1 Division of Project Management, University of Northumbria, Newcastle upon Tyne. NE1
8ST.
E
-
mail:udechukwu.ojiako@northumbria.ac.uk
2 Director of Construction, University of Northumbria, Newcastle upon Tyne. NE1
8ST. E
-
mail:eric.johansen@northumbria.ac.uk
3 Department of Building and Civil Engineering, Loughborough University. LE1 1 3TU.
E
-
mail: F.T.Edum
-
fotwe@lboro.ac.uk
4 Professor
-
Construction Management, University of Northumbria, Newcastle upon Tyne.NE1
8ST.
E
-
mail:david.greenwood@northumbria.ac.uk
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Project Management [PM] as a recognised discipline has been around for a few decades in its present
form [Newton, 2005].
However, there have been a number of challenges to its efficacy. These include; th
e
disappointing performance of some project
managers [Tampoe and Thurloway, 1993] and the failure of
the philosophical framework that guides project management to
respond to highly dynamic and complex
projects [Jaafari, 2003]. There is a generally accepted
view that learning is a key strategic
variable for project management success [Ayas, 1996] but limited studies have been conducted on learning [Sense,
2007] and
the there is little research into the more specific concept of reflection in project managemen
t
practice. This is despite the
widening literature on project management techniques, education and
application. To address the emergence of possible
shortcomings, scholars such as Packendorff [1995],
Smith and Winter [2004; 2005], Winter et al [2006a; 200
6b] are challenging
current thinking on project
management practice, and in the process recommending that projects should be re
-
conceived in a way
that
enhances the reconstruction of project managers from
trained technicians to reflective practitioners
.
Despite opportunities being available for project managers to engage in significant personal learning and
reflection, a review of
papers published in the International Journal of Project Management and the Project
Management Journal over the last seven yea
rs
suggests that, while there appears to be a clearly defined
training and education agenda and a maturing learning agenda there is
very little evidence of reflective practice apart from studies conducted by Jaafari [2003], Gustafsson and Wikstrom [2004] a
nd
Hellstrom
and Wikstrom [2005].
Further evidence of the lack of an agenda to examine reflective practice in project management is
demonstrated by the fact that
although the APM [APM, 2006] discusses 52 areas of knowledge such as
people and the profession, leadership and behavioural
characteristics of successful project manager’s in
its Book of Knowledge [BoK], no reference was made to reflective practice,
although it does discuss the
need for project managers to provide and receiv
e feedback as a means of continual improvement.
Two objectives have been identified in this paper. The first objective is to establish the competencies of a
reflective practising
project manager. Once this is achieved, the paper will attempt to establish t
he knowledge development of a reflective
practising project manager in an educational context. This paper is an attempt to engage in this rethinking process.
2.0 THINKING ABOUT P
ROJECTS AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Business needs change and in order to support these changes, projects are conceived. For this reason,
organisations that are
seeking to maximise output are expected to continue to initiate and implement
requirements that are
difficult and expensive.
This is because such projects are innovative and radical in
approach. To deliver these innovative and radical projects, most
organisations have adopted project based
management techniques [Martinsuo et al, 2006]. Unfortunately the
need to develop
and deliver such
innovative projects will be seriously limited by the fact that organizations are facing a shortage of
effective
project managers [Cooper and Burke, 2002], who can understand, learn, interpret and deliver customer
and stakeholder
requirements within a constantly evolving project environment. As a result of these
anticipated shortages, Winter et al [2006a],
calls for a new direction in research to be explored. This new
research direction will involve a complete re
-
th
ink of how
practitioners learn by using relevant theory that
is emerging from research. To support this re
-
think, there is a need to initiate a
transformation of project
management practitioners from
trained technicians to reflective and creative practitio
ners
, who can learn,
innovate, operate and adapt effectively in complex project environments, through experience, intuition and the pragmatic
application of theory in practice.
In this paper, projects are regarded as a temporary and ambiguous articulation
of needs which can be
measured. This
measurement however separates performance and progress while taking into consideration
timeline perceptions of measurement
criteria.
Project Management can be seen as a discipline, profession or conceptual state. As a discipline, it was
developed in the 1950’
s
from several different fields including construction, mechanical engineering and
military engineering. With a well developed
discipline and professional expertise [Cooke
-
Davies and
Arzymanow, 2003; Kolltveit et al, 2007; Newton, 2005], it is also
support
ed with numerous clearly articulated methodologies.
The impact of project management discourse has been substantial, especially as relates to its practice.
Today, as a
demonstration of its success and popularity, project management is used globally by mult
i
billion
-
pound corporations,
governments, and smaller organizations. Primarily, it is used as a means of
ensuring control in order to deliver on customers
or stockholder’s requirements.
To support its global implementation, numerous approaches and methodo
logies championed by
professional bodies such
as the Association for Project Management [APM], the Project Management Institute [PMI] and the Office of Government
Commerce [OGC], have been developed to help manage
all stages of the project life cycle.
3.0 SOME DIFFICULTIES
It is important to highlight that there have been some difficulties with defining project management. Some
of these difficulties
according to Kolltveit et al
[2007] have been as a direct result of the lack of a precise and generally accepted definition of what a
project is about. With this level of vagueness, it is difficult to
bring about any adjustment of current perceptions to the role of a
project manager.
Such adjustments are
however required in order to support the transformation of project managers to become
reflective and
creative practitioners.
The need for a reconstruction of the project management concept cannot be over
-
emphasised. There are various r
easons for this.
Some of these reasons include the impacts of technology, globalisation and the
emergence of the knowledge based organisation.
Other reasons include that of the need for project
managers to ensure that the customers experience is not hamper
ed by any
transformation of the project
manager’s role. All these changes have also had major impacts on the role of the project manager.
4.0 AN ORGANISATIONAL RESOURCE
An organization’s competitive success is mainly driven and achieved through people, making their skills
and performance
critical to business and organisations [Pfeffer, 1994; APM, 2006].
Project managers occupy a central role in the structure and scope of
organizational work. By doing so, they
are able to develop and
implement successfully a specific and unique application content which is referred
to as a project. As part of this process, they
also become quasi
-
executives with high responsibility and
accou
ntability, but minimum authority [Henderson, 2004]. This role
involves the project manager taking the lead in enabling changes involved in delivering organisational strategic requirements
. As
a result, their
role can be seen to be of strategic importance f
or the organisation. This means that demand for their skills
extends
beyond the requirement to implement basic controls for a set of requirements, to a requirement to maintain the mutual
interaction of various stakeholders.
Criteria
The Trained Technician
The 21st Century Practitioner
Attitudes and Initiative
Follows rules and prescriptions
Informed by principles and
frameworks
Knowledge
Sees knowledge as graspable
and
permanent
Sees knowledge as temporary
and
dynamic
Approach to Practice
Prescriptive approach to
practice
Pragmatic approach to practice
Perception and Outlook
Embraces the known
Embraces uncertainty
Ability
Technical expertise is all
Professional judgement counts
Approach
Emphasises assessment and
accreditation
Emphasises reflection and
deliberation
Professional Development
Technical training
Professional development
Table 1.0, Characteristics, Traits and Practices relevant to 21st Century Project Managers
The Table 1.0 [above] is adapted from the Major Projects Assoc
iation [2006]. It highlights some of the
characteristics, traits and
practices relevant to 21st Century project management practitioners.
To further support the ability of project managers to conduct their role, a reflective approach will enable
the project manager to
gain a level of interpersonal understanding that enables the creation of a compelling
vision for the customer’s requirement. This is
usually achieved by demonstrating depth and creativity of
thought and also by applying intuition and
other attributes such as
feelings and instinct.
To be successful, project managers are also expected to exhibit characteristics that are closely aligned to
the dynamism of their
ever changing business world. Such characteristics include generic skills suc
h as effective leadership [APM, 2006], innovation
and a proper understanding of business objectives and
behavioural characteristics [APM, 2006]. Other skills include an ability to
demonstrate depth and creativity
of thought, an ability to galvanise action
and a sense of urgency while meeting commitments,
driving through initiatives and also an ability to create a compelling vision for the sponsoring organisation. In
order to achieve
these objectives, Hutcheson [1984], expects project managers to be multidis
ciplinary in
outlook. Project Manager’s are also
expected to consider their projects as a totality while being responsive
to the political, physical, economic and other aspects
within the environment.
5.0 THEORITICAL PERCEPTIONS OF REFLECTION
The traditional view of project management in organisations has been based on one key perception that
all projects are similar.
This has led to an assumption that a generic model of project ma
nagement exists.
As a result, methodologies such as RIM [Rapid
Implementation Management], PRINCE2 [Projects in
Controlled Environments], MSP [Managing Successful Programmes], the
APM
-
BoK [Association for
Project Management’s Body of Knowledge] and the BSI
-
BS6079 [British Standard Institute’s
Guide to Project Management] have all been specifically developed and prescribed in generic forms. As we are however aware,
contemporary approaches and views of projects discussed in recent work by Hodgson
[2002], Koskela and Howell [2002],
Newton [2005], Winter et al [2006b], Cicmil et al [2006] and Dvir
et al [2006], all demonstrate that such a traditional view of
projects is not necessarily correct and
sustainable.
Reflection has been discussed for centuries by philosophers, educationalists, practitioners and researchers
[Schon, 1983;
Campbell
et al, 2000; Sherin et al, 2004]. Although of a limited nature, its specific
application in a project management practice has
been discussed by scholars such as Jaafari [2003], who
in his study of the response of four contemporary models of projec
t
management, found that a creative
-
reflective model was best suited to complex projects being commissioned in an environment
of high
uncertainty and chaos, primarily because the model relies on competency and self
-
empowerment of project
professionals.
Ge
nerally speaking, it is geared towards finding solutions to problems by in
-
depth and creative thought.
It is also about an
attempt to improve the future by engaging in a review of past actions. These activities
include acts of meditation, contemplation,
co
nsideration, exploration and mirroring [Gustafsson and
Fagerberg, 2004]. It also involves, perhaps more importantly,
conscious rationalisation and re
consideration of previous behaviour. The process is expected to create a meaningful picture of
one’s
exper
ience of the world [Ekebergh et al, 2004], and for this reason has become very popular in the nursing
profession [Glaze,
2001; Taylor, 2000].
There is no doubt that the traditional view of the project management professional is no longer adequate.
This is
based on two
major factors. One which has been discussed is because of the lack of a precise and
generally accepted definition of what a
project actually is. The second problem is that the application of
the theory of reflection has rarely figured in discussions on
the profession of project management.
6.0 REFLECTION, LIMITING FACTORS
Unfortunately, although the intention of this p
aper was to demonstrate a need to progress the concept of
reflective practice in
project management, it has not been possible to demonstrate substantial evidence that
reconstructing project managers into this
new role will be an easy challenge to overcome.
There are a few
reasons why this might be the case.
In the first place, there is a lack of an underlying theory in project management [Koskela and Howell,
2002; Turner,
2006a; 2006b]. This situation questions how generic processes can be applied to projec
ts,
especially projects that drive
business change.
Secondly, because project management has such a large knowledge base, it cannot rely on research
-
guided
models to address
or define practice
-
based application. The expectation however is that the project
manager will be prepared to embrace
new ideas from sometimes unlikely sources. In effect, engaging in
what Williamson [2001] refers to be the re
-
framing of
practitioner perceptions.
The third problem is that projects have traditionally been goal oriented,
while emphasis in the profession was placed more
on technical competency, experience and the appropriate use of methodology. This
situation has resulted in project
managers being more focused on agreed models and methodologies of best
practice and professi
onal competency which
support consistency rather than reflection.
The fourth and final problem is the perception that reflection has ended up being regarded as too academic
and inapplicable
in project management. We are however aware that on the other hand
, it has proved very
successful and popular within the
nursing profession, which arguably operates in a more high pressure
environment.
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
One of the questions which probably will be on the mind of most project management practitioners is
whether
reflection can result in project managers becoming prisoners of their own experience. This
concept, i.e. of the
limitation in the use of past experience was explored substantially by Neustadt and May
[1988], who argue that the dynamics
of history leads people to model decisions based on the perceived
relevant or recent experience. In effect, lessons from past
experience and history are applied to current
situations, one situation too late. In ord
er to manage the possible limitation of
such past experience,
Artson [2001] suggest a radical openness to the present which is based on viewing our experiences
afresh
at each moment.
Perhaps it might be the case that the project management’s community atti
tude to reflective practice will depend on the
emphasis and assumptions that are taken into consideration when re
-
constructing the profession. However, at the moment it
is perhaps safe to suggest that the profession has been unable to
move beyond identifyi
ng limitations in approach which
suggest that such a reconstruction is desired.
Without such a reconstruction of the profession, it is doubtful whether
applying outcomes of a process
towards creating a compelling vision of for the customer’s requirement ca
n be initiated.
8.0 REFERENCES
Artson, B [2001]. The Bedside Torah: Wisdom, Visions and Dreams. McGraw
-
Hill.
Association for Project Management
[2006]. APM Body of Knowledge. 5th Edition.
Campbell, D; Melenyzer, B; Nettles, D and Wyman,
R. [2000]. Portfolio and Performance Assessment
in Teacher
Education. Pub. Allyn and Bacon.
Cicmil, S; Williams, T; Thomas, J and Hodgson, D. [2006]. Rethinking Project Management:
Researching the
actuality of projects. International
Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, Issue 8, pp.
675
–
686.
Cooke
-
Davies, T and Arzymanow, A. [2003]. The maturity of project management in different
industries: An
investigation into variations between project management models. International Journal of
Project Management,
Volume 21, Issue 6, pp. 471
–
478.
Cooper, C and Burke, R. [2002]. The new world of work, Blackwell Publishers. Pub. Oxford.
Dvir, D; Sadeh, A; Malach
-
Pines, A. [2006]. Projects and Project Managers: The Relationship between project mana
gers’
personality, project types, and project success. Project Management Journal, Vol. 37,
Issue 5, pp. 36
–
48.
Ekebergh, M; Lepp, M and Dahlberg, K. [2004]. Reflective learning with drama in nursing education
–
a Swedish
attempt to overcome the theory pra
xis gap. Nurse Education Today, Volume 24, Issue 8, pp.
622
–
628.
Glaze, J. [2001]. Reflection as a transforming process: Student advanced nurse practitioners’
experiences of
developing reflective skills as
part of an MSc programme, Journal of Advanced Nursing
Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 639
–
647.
Gustafsson, C and Fagerberg, I. [2004]. Reflection, the way to professional development? Journal of
Clinical Nursing,
Vol. 13, pp. 271
–
280.
Gustafsson, M and Wikstrom, K. [2
004]. Time to think
–
managing projects through reflection. In:
Proceedings of IRNOP
VI, Turku, Finland; August.
Hellstrom, M and Wikstrom, K. [2005]. Project business concepts based on modularity
–
improved
manoeuvrability through
unstable structures. Int
ernational Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23,
Issue 5, pp. 392
–
397
Henderson, L. [2004]. Encoding and decoding communication competencies in project management
–
an exploratory
study. International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 22, Issue 6, pp.
469
–
476.
Hodgson, D. [2002]. Disciplining the professional: The case of project management. Journal of
Management Studies. Vol.
39 Issue 6, pp. 803.
Hutcheson, J. [1984]. Educating project managers for the construction industry in Australia.
International
Journal of Project Management, Vol. 2, Issue 4, pp. 220
–
224.
Jaafari A. [2003]. Project Management in the Age of
Complexity and Change. Project Management
Journal. Vol.34,
No 4, pp 47
–
57.
Kolltveit, B. Karlsen, J and Grønhaug, K. [2007]. Perspectives on project management. International
Journal of
Project Management, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp. 3
–
9.
Koskela, L and Howell
, G. [2002]. The underlying theory of project management is obsolete, In.
Conference
Proceedings of the 2002 PMI Confedrence.
http://www.leanconstruction.org/pdf/ObsoleteTheory.pdf
Major Projects Association. [2006]. Rethinking project management
–
new directions, new practice.
Main findings
of a UK Government funded re
search network: Seminar 128 held at the Institution of
Engineering and Technology,
London18th October 2006.
http://www.majorprojects.org/pubdoc/741.pdf
Martinsuo, M; Hensman, N; Artto, K; Kujala, J and Jaafari, A. [2006]. Project
-
based management as an
organisational
innovation: drivers, changes and benefits of adopting projct based management. Proj
ect
Management Journal, Vol. 37
Issue 3, pp.87
–
97.
Neustadt, R and May, E. [1988]. Thinking in time: the uses of history for decision
-
makers. Free Press
-
New York.
Newton, R. [2005]. The Project Manager: Mastering the art of delivery. Pub. Prentice
-
Hall.
P
ackendorff, J. [1995]. Inquiring into the temporary organization: new directions for project
management research. Scandinavian Journal of Management. Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 319
–
333.
Schon, D. [1983]. The reflective practitioner, Basic Books
-
New York.
Sense,
A. [2007]. Structuring the project environment for learning. International Journal of Project
Management, Vol.
25, Issue 4, pp. 405
–
412
Sherin, B., Edelson, D., & Brown, M. [2004]. On the content of task
-
structured curricula. In L. B. Flick & N. G.
Lederma
n [Eds.], Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching , learning, and teacher education
[pp. 221
–
248]. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Smith, C and Winter, M. [2004]. Meeting 1: Context and Possible Dire
ctions Sensemaking Paper 1.
EPSRC
Network 2004
–
2006 Rethinking Project Management.
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/management/rethinkpm/pdf/papers/context.pdf,
accessed
11/02/07.
Smith, C and Winter, M
. [2005]. Meeting 6 The Profession & Practitioner Development Sensemaking
Paper 6.
EPSRC Network 2004
–
2006 Rethinking Project Management.
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/management/rethinkpm/pdf/papers/sp6.pdf,
accessed
11/02/07.
Tampoe, M and Thurloway, L. [1993]. Project management: the use and abuse of techniques and teams
[reflections from a
motivation and environment study]. International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 11, Issue 4, pp. 245
–
250.
Taylor, B. [2000]. Reflecti
ve Practice: A Guide for Nurses and Midwives, Allen & Unwin, St. Leonards,
Turner, J. [2006a]. Towards a theory of project management: The nature of the functions of project
m
anagement. International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, Issue 4, pp. 277
–
279.
Turner, J. [2006b]. Towards a theory of Project Management: The functions of Project Management.
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, Issue 3,pp. 187
–
189.
Williamson, B. [2001]. Creativity, the corporate curriculum and the future: a case study. Futures, Vol. 33,
Issue
6, pp. 541
–
555.
Winter, M; Smith, C; Morris, P and Cicmil, S. [20
06a]. Directions for future research in project
management: The main findings of a UK government
-
funded research network. International
Journal
of Project Management, Vol. 24, Issue 8, pp. 63 8
–
649.
Winter, M; Smith, C; Cooke
-
Davies, T; Morris, P and Cicmi
l, S. [2006b]. The
importance of ‘process’ in Rethinking Project Management: The story of a UK
Government
-
funded research network.
International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 24, Issue 8, pp. 650
–
662.