Skip to main content

Renovating Project Management: Knowledge Personalization and Sharing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning ((IAKM,volume 5))

Abstract

Purpose. Complex research projects, such as those regarding flight missions, are characterized by advanced technical-scientific goals, interactive teamwork, and financial or temporal constraints. Their management is based on formal project management (PM) methodologies, that offer the advantage that tasks are assigned and monitored with precision but the burden of formal duties can make interactions between researchers less effective. As the studies of Knowledge Management (KM) show, researchers need a rich exchange of knowledge and a process of mutual learning to find innovative solutions in areas of scientific forefront. In addition, new web 2.0 technologies give the opportunity to interact and exchange complex contents. Consequently, while PM methodologies remain an essential tool for researchers, there is the need to identify novel approaches that enable more effective knowledge exchanges for technical/scientific purposes. To contribute to a better understanding of these issues, this study examines if traditional PM approaches are an “automatic” solution adopted by any research team, or if researchers would spontaneously prefer more flexible ways to manage knowledge exchanges and interactions.

Design/methodology/approach. The paper investigates the “basic KM needs” that emerge from inexpert researchers working in complex projects. These researchers, being less conditioned by standard PM methodologies used in complex organizations, can have more propensity for the exploration of new ways to interact. At the same time, this analysis can point out the real perceptions of novice researchers about the necessity of a structured PM approach. In detail, the case study of a research team of Engineering post-graduate students, competing in an ESA (European Space Agency) student challenge, is presented. The way team members perceived the problems of KM and PM, and the way they decided to organize themselves to face these problems was systematically examined by means of direct observations, surveys, and interviews to team members. The main research questions are: How would a novice research team organize a complex research project, for combining formal management efficiency with effective and flexible knowledge exchanges? What approaches, methods or communication tools would they tend to adopt?

Implications for research and practice. In terms of research, the study contributes to the debate on the needs for new PM concepts and methods. In practical terms, it allows to draw useful lessons that can inspire the identification and design of new PM approaches, based on KM concepts and on the use of web 2.0 applications. In addition, it can provide elements for a definition of courses of PM and KM to novice researchers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berggren, C., & Söderlund, J. (2008). Rethinking project management education: Social twists and knowledge co-production. International Journal of Project Management, 26(3), 286–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolisani, E., & Scarso, E. (2014). The place of communities of practice in knowledge management studies: A critical review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(2), 366–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolisani, E., Scarso, E., & Padova, A. (2016, June 15–17). Cognitive overload and related risks of social media in knowledge management programs. 11th IFKADInternational Forum on Knowledge Asset Dynamics, Dresden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresnen, M., Edelman, L., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2003). Social practices and the management of knowledge in project environments. International Journal of Project Management, 21(3), 157–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cicmil, S., & Hodgson, D. (2006). New possibilities for project management theory: A critical engagement. Project Management Journal, 37(3), 111–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coccia, M., & Rolfo, S. (2009). Project management in public research organisations: Strategic change in complex scenarios. International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, 1(3), 235–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Disterer, G. (2002). Management of project knowledge and experiences. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(5), 512–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egan, B. D. (2009). What is formal project management and who needs it? Expert Reference Series of White Papers, 1–800, Global Knowledge Network Training, Ireland. Retreived from http://www.globalknowledge.ie/content/files/documents/white-papers/pm/231458

  • ESA. (1996). Space project management. Project phasing and planning [online]. European Space Agency. Retreived from http://www.lr.tudelft.nl/fileadmin/Faculteit/LR/Organisatie/Afdelingen_en_Leerstoelen/Afdeling_SpE/Space_Systems_Eng./Expertise_areas/Systems_engineering/References/doc/ecss-m-30a.pdf

  • Farrall, S. (1996). What is qualitative longitudinal research? [online]. Papers in Social Research Methods—Qualitative Series n. 11, London School of Economics and Political Science. Retreived from http://www.lse.ac.uk/methodology/pdf/QualPapers/Stephen-Farrall-Qual%20Longitudinal%20Res.pdf

  • Handzic, M., & Durmic, N. (2015, September 3–4). Realizing value from knowledge assets: Empirical study in project environment. Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Knowledge Management, Udine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, F. L. (1981). Advanced project management. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Highsmith, J. (2009). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, D. (2002). Disciplining the professional: The case of project management. Journal of Management Studies, 39(6), 803–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koskela, L., & Howell, G. (2002). The underlying theory of project management is obsolete. In Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Research Conference, Seattle, pp. 293–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, J. A., & Ganesh, L. S. (2011). Balancing knowledge strategy: Codification and personalization during product development. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(1), 118–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leseure, M. J., & Brookes, N. J. (2004). Knowledge management benchmarks for project management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(1), 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, M. (2009). WEB 2.0 implications on knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(1), 120–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebowitz, J., & Megbolugbe, I. (2003). A set of frameworks to aid the project manager in conceptualizing and implementing knowledge management initiatives. International Journal of Project Management, 21(3), 189–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NASA. (2014). NASA space flight program and project management handbook [online]. National Areonautics and Space Administration. Retreived from ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150000400.pdf

  • Nonaka, I., & Zhu, Z. (2012). Pragmatic strategy. Eastern wisdom, global success. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ortloff, D., Popp, J., Schmidt, T., & Mielke, M. (2009). A customer-driven approach to product engineering of micro and nano devices—Requirement analysis. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the Commercialization of Micro and Nano Systems, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • PMI. (2013). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK Guide (5th ed.). Newton Square, PA: The Project Management Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, J. (2007). The changing paradigms of project management. International Journal of Project Management, 25, 266–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remidez, H., & Jones, N. B. (2012). Developing a model for social media in project management communications. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(3), 33–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R. G. (2010). Systems thinking for project management: Implications for practice and education. Acta Structilia, 17(1), 79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J., & Mengel, T. (2008). Preparing project managers to deal with complexity–Advanced project management education. International Journal of Project Management, 26(3), 304–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turban, E., Bolloju, N., & Liang, T. P. (2011). Enterprise social networking: Opportunities, adoption, and risk mitigation. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 21(3), 202–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. R., & Huemann, M. (2001). Project management education in project-oriented societies. Project Management, 7(1), 7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. (2006). Breaking the knowledge acquisition bottleneck through conversational knowledge management. Information Resources Management Journal, 19(1), 70–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeong, A. (2010). Integrating knowledge management with project management for project success. Journal of Project Program and Portfolio Management, 1(2), 8–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ettore Bolisani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bolisani, E., Debei, S., Savino, N. (2017). Renovating Project Management: Knowledge Personalization and Sharing. In: Handzic, M., Bassi, A. (eds) Knowledge and Project Management. Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51067-5_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics