Over the years there has been a shift in emphasis in research into project management, from focusing on the management of the individual project, to focusing on creating an environment in which projects can
thrive. In the 1970s, the focus of project management research was on developing tools and techniques, particularly critical path analysis, but also earned value analysis. In the 1980s, the focus was on success
factors on projects. Before you can choose appropriate tools to manage the project, you need to know what factors will influence success. In the 1990s, the focus switched to success criteria. Before you can chose appropriate success factors, and hence appropriate tools, you need to know how the project will be judged successful at the end, and have the entire team, indeed all the stakeholders, focusing on the same end objectives, both project outcomes and business benefits. This research led to a measured improvement in project performance, with success rates doubling for one third of projects to two thirds of projects, (and failure rates halving from two thirds to one third). Clearly the research of the last three decades of the 20th century made an important contribution to project performance, but it was not enough, it was not the whole story. Another part of the story is the context in which the project takes place. Senior management in the parent organization must ensure that they create an environment in which projects can thrive. They must govern the set of relationships between the management of projects taking place in the organization, the organization itself, themselves as client, and other stakeholders to ensure that projects can successfully deliver business benefit and help achieve corporate strategy. Project governance, governing that set of relationships, is not
just the role of projects management; their role is primarily to successfully deliver project outputs. Senior management must create and govern the supportive project environment. Part of that environment is the management of knowledge. Many project-based organizations from both the high-tech and engineering
industries recognize that their ability to deliver projects successfully gives them a competitive advantage. So being able to manage project management knowledge, to be able to remember how to deliver projects
successfully and to improve that knowledge, is key to the organization’s success. But in project-based organizations, knowledge management is problematic, with new knowledge created on temporary
projects and used on other projects. In the functional organization there is a classic three-step process of knowledge management: variation, selection, retention. New ideas are created in the function, successful
ideas are chosen for reuse, and the knowledge stored within the function where it can be reused. In project-based organizations, new ideas are created on temporary projects, but the project cannot select and retain new ideas. Further, wherever those new ideas are stored, they are not immediately available to new projects. The project-based organization needs to think about how it is going to select new knowledge, where it is going to store it, and it needs to create a fourth step of knowledge management, distribution of knowledge to
new projects. A book on knowledge management within project-based organizations is therefore a welcome addition to the literature. The book contains chapters by many recognized experts from the project
management literature. It builds on a special issue of The International Journal of Project Management (Volume 21, Number 3, April 2003), which was edited by Peter Love. The book contains some revised
papers, but also many new chapters by significant contributors to the field. It contains many important topics, such as the sharing of knowledge across boundaries, the creation of a learning environment in
project-based firms, and learning from project failure. The book will be a valued addition to my library.Professor J Turner