Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Project Management Methodologies in the Fourth Technological Revolution

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Advances in Management Engineering

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Management and Industrial Engineering ((LNMIE))

Abstract

We are at the beginning of a new technological revolution, propelled by the development of cyber-physical systems and technologies like Internet of Things, Bid Data, Cloud Computing, 3D Printing, etc. Therefore, we will see an avalanche of projects to implement new business models, products, services and companies. In this paper, we analyse the main characteristics of these projects and we wonder about the appropriate methodologies and managerial styles to lead them. We argue that these projects are complex in nature, according to the current literature on project complexity and thus, classical project management approaches might be unsuitable for managing them. We suggest some clues to seek for new managerial styles, mainly in the literature concerning innovation and new product development and within the “Agile” approach.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Al-Fuqaha, A., Guizani, M., Mohammadi, M., Aledhari, M., & Ayyash, M. (2015). Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 17(4), 2347–2376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabito, G. (2010). The internet of things: A survey. Computer Networks, 54(15), 2787–2805.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Baccarini, D. (1996). The concept of project complexity—A review. International Journal of Project Management, 14(4), 201–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakhsheshi, H. A., & Nejad, R. S. (2011). ‘Impact of Project Managers’ personalities on project success in four types of project. International Conference on Construction and Project Management, 15(2), 181–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandyopadhyay, D., & Sen, J. (2011). Internet of things: Applications and challenges in technology and standardization. Wireless Personal Communications, 58(1), 49–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barczak, G., & Kahn, K. B. (2012). Identifying new product development best practice. Business Horizons, 55(3), 293–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blank, S. G., & Dorf, B. (2012). The startup owner’s manual: The step-by-step guide for build-ing a great company. Incorporated: K&S Ranch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, B., & Turner, R. (2005). Management challenges to implementing agile processes in traditional development organizations. IEEE Software, 22(5), 30–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosch-Rekveldt, M., Jongkind, Y., Mooi, H., Bakker, H., & Verbraeck, A. (2011). Grasping project complexity in large engineering projects: The TOE (Technical, Organizational and Environmental) framework. International Journal of Project Management, 29(6), 728–739,

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleland, D. I., & King, W. R. (1967). Systems analysis and project management. NY: McGraw-HillNew York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleland, D. I., & King, W. R. (1983). Project management handbook, New York: Van Nostrand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, L., Hobbs, J. B., & Turner, J. R. (2005). Project categorization systems: Aligning capability with strategy for better results. Project Management Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, L. (2007). Developing the project management competence of individuals. In L. Crawford (Ed.), Gower handbook of project management. UK: Gower, Aldershot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., Edgett, S. J., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2004a). Benchmarking best NPD practices—I. Research-Technology Management, 47(1), 31–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., Edgett, S. J., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2004b). Benchmarking best NPD practices—II. Research-Technology Management, 47(3), 50–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., Edgett, S. J., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2004c). Benchmarking best NPD practices—III. Research-Technology Management, 47(6), 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M.J. (2003). Design of a new instrument to assess leadership dimensions and styles. Henley Working Paper Series HWP 0311. Henley-on-Thames, UK: Henley Management College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. J. (2005). Assessing leadership styles and organizational context. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 105–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elonen, S., & Artto, K. A. (2003). Problems in managing internal development projects in multi-project environments. International Journal of Project Management, 21(6), 395–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, D. J., & Fernandez, J. D. (2008). Agile project management—Agilism versus traditional approaches. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 49(2), 10–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geraldi, J., Maylor, H., & Williams, T. (2011). Now, let’s make it really complex (complicated) A systematic review of the complexities of projects. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(9), 966–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobday, M. (2000). The project-based organisation: An ideal form for managing complex products and systems? Research Policy, 29(7), 871–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, H. F., & Lehner, F. (2001). Requirements engineering as a success factor in software projects. IEEE Software, 18(4), 58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huizingh, E. K. (2011). Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives. Technovation, 31(1), 2–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Project Management Association (IPMA) (2006). IPMA Competence Baseline, version 3.0. Nijkerk, the Netherlands: International Project Management Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization for Standardization (2012). ISO 21500:2012. Guidance on project management. Geneva: ISO.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Project Management Association (IPMA) (2015). The Individual Competence Baseline for Project, Program and Portfolio Management. International Project Management Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, K. B., Barczak, G., & Moss, R. (2006). Establishing a NPD best practices framework. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(2), 106–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaur, R., & Sengupta, J. (2013). Software process models and analysis on failure of software development projects. arXiv preprint arXiv:1306.1068

  • Keegan, A., & Turner, J. R. (2002). The management of innovation in project-based firms. Long Range Planning, 35(4), 367–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerzner, H. R. (2013). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling, Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiel, D., Arnold, C., Collisi, M., & Voigt, K. I. (2016). The impact of the industrial internet of things on established business models. In Proceedings of the 25th international association for management of technology (IAMOT) conference, Orlando, FL.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskela, L., & Howell, G. (2002b). The theory of project management: Explanation to novel methods. In Proceedings IGLC (Vol. 10, pp. 1–11).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, I., & Lee, K. (2015). The internet of things (IoT): Applications, investments, and challenges for enterprises. Business Horizons, 58(4), 431–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindvall, M., Basili, V., Boehm, B., Costa, P., Dangle, K., Shull, F., et al. (2002). Empirical findings in agile methods. In Conference on extreme programming and agile methods (pp. 197–207). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B. Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy, 31(2), 213–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manifesto (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. http://www.agilemanifesto.org. 12 November 2016.

  • McKinsey Global Institute. (2015). The internet of things: Mapping the value beyond the hype. McKinsey Global Institute: McKinsey&Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, P. (2004). Current trends in project and programme management. Association for Project Management Yearbook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, P. W. G., Pinto, J. K., & Söderlund, J. (2011). Introduction: Towards the third wave of project management. In P. W. G. Morris, J. K. Pinto, & J. Söderlund (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of project management (pp. 1–11). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2007). Matching the project manager’s leadership style to project type. International Journal of Project Management, 25(1), 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437−448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, J., López-Paredes, A., & Hernández, C. (2016). Technology start-up firms as a portfolio of projects: The case of DIMA 3D. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 226, 59–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pich, M. T., Loch, C. H., & Meyer, A. D. (2002). On uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity in project management. Management Science, 48(8), 1008–1023.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • PMI (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBoK® Guide) (5th ed.), Newtown Square, USA: Project Management Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Heppelmann, J. E. (2014). How smart, connected products are transforming competition. Harvard Business Review, 92(11), 64–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price WaterHouse Coopers, PwC (2016). The industrial internet of things why it demands not only new technology—but also a new operational blueprint for your business. Price WaterHouse Coopers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to cre-ate radically successful businesses. Random House LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roblek, V., Meško, M., & Krapež, A. (2016). A complex view of industry 4.0. SAGE Open, 6(2), 2158244016653987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahlin-Andersson, K., & Söderholm A., A. (2002). Beyond project management—New perspectives on the temporary–permanent dilemma. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarma, A. C., & Girão, J. (2009). Identities in the future internet of things. Wireless Personal Communications, 49(3), 353–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauser, B. J., Reilly, R. R., & Shenhar, A. J. (2009). Why projects fail? How contingency theory can provide new insights—A comparative analysis of NASA’s mars climate orbiter loss. International Journal of Project Management, 27(7), 665–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, K. (2016). The fourth industrial revolution. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serrador, P., & Pinto, J. K. (2015). Does Agile work?—A quantitative analysis of agile project success. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1040–1051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenhar, A. J., & Dvir, D. (2007a, August). The lost link: Why successful innovation needs sound project management. In PICMET’07–2007 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology (pp. 597–610). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenhar, A. J., & Dvir, D. (2007b). Reinventing project management: The diamond approach to successful growth and innovation. Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenhar, A. J., Dvir, D., Levy, O., & Maltz, A. C. (2001). Project success: A multidimensional strategic concept. Long Range Planning, 34(6), 699–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenhar, A. J., Levy, O., & Dvir, D. (1997). Mapping the dimensions of project success. Project management journal, 28(2), 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1991). The architecture of complexity. In Facets of systems science (pp. 457–476). US: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommerville, I., & Sawyer, P. (1997). Requirements engineering: A good practice guide. New York, NY., USA: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Standish Group (2015). Chaos Report. Standish Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stellingwerf, R., & Zandhuis, A. (2013). ISO 21500 Guidance on project management-A Pocket Guide. Van Haren.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. R., & Cochrane, R. A. (1993). Goals-and-methods matrix: Coping with projects with ill defined goals and/or methods of achieving them. International Journal of Project Management, 11(2), 93–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verner, J., Sampson, J., & Cerpa, N. (2008). What factors lead to software project failure?. In 2008 Second International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (pp. 71–80). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, R. H. (2010). Internet of things-new security and privacy challenges. Computer Law & Security Review, 26(1), 23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, R. H. (2009). Internet of things–Need for a new legal environment? Computer law & security review, 25(6), 522–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitmore, A., Agarwal, A., & Xu Da, L. (2015). The internet of things—A survey of topics and trends. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(2), 261–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T. (2005). Assessing and moving on from the dominant project management discourse in the light of project overruns. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(4), 497–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T. M. (1999). The need for new paradigms for complex projects. International Journal of Project Management, 17(5), 269–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Economic Forum (2016). The Future of Jobs: Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. January 2016. World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INSISOC. Social Systems Engineering Center, University of Valladolid, Pso del Cauce 59, 47011, Valladolid, Spain

    Javier Pajares, David Poza, Felix Villafañez & Adolfo López-Paredes

Authors
  1. Javier Pajares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Poza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Felix Villafañez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adolfo López-Paredes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier Pajares .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Management and Business Administration, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain

    Cesáreo Hernández

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pajares, J., Poza, D., Villafañez, F., López-Paredes, A. (2017). Project Management Methodologies in the Fourth Technological Revolution. In: Hernández, C. (eds) Advances in Management Engineering. Lecture Notes in Management and Industrial Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55889-9_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55889-9_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-55888-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-55889-9

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation