The importance of ‘process’ in Rethinking Project Management: The story of a UK Government-funded research network

Abstract This paper tells the story of a UK Government-funded research network called Rethinking Project Management, funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council between 2004 and 2006. The story is significant because of the considerable attention given to the process of the Network, both the inquiry process of ‘rethinking’ project management, and the broader social process in which the rethinking activity was carried out. In telling this story, the lead organisers explain how the inquiry process was organised as a learning system to enable the Network to ‘learn’ its way to relevant directions for future research, and secondly, how the broader social process was organised and facilitated to create a context for effective interaction between the people involved. A significant challenge in managing the research programme was how to engage the participants in purposeful inquiry, which would serve not only the primary aims of the Network, but would also yield new and interesting insights for the people involved. This paper seeks to explain how the lead organisers addressed this challenge, through a detailed and reflective discussion of how the research programme was organised and facilitated to achieve the Network’s primary aims. In summary, the principal aim in telling this story is to highlight the importance of process in collaborative research activity involving academics and practitioners, in order that other researchers might draw on the experience of this Network.

[1]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology: a 30-year retrospective , 1999 .

[2]  M. Wood.  Mind the Gap? A Processual Reconsideration of Organizational Knowledge , 2002 .

[3]  Robert Cheng Huat Chia.  Essai: Time, Duration and Simultaneity: Rethinking Process and Change in Organizational Analysis , 2002 .

[4]  Lucas D. Introna.  Management, Information and Power , 1997 .

[5]  John Garrick,et al.  The Moral "Technologies' of Knowledge Management , 2003 .

[6]  Svetlana. Cicmil,et al.  Insights into collaboration at the project level: complexity, social interaction and procurement mechanisms , 2005 .

[7]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology in Action , 1990 .

[8]  T. Das,et al.  Between Trust and Control: Developing Confidence in Partner Cooperation in Alliances , 1998 .

[9]  Stewart Clegg,et al.  Revising the Boundaries: Management Education and Learning in a Postpositivist World , 2003 .

[10]  Ralph Stacey,et al.  Complex Responsive Processes in Organizations: Learning and Knowledge Creation , 2001 .

[11]  K. Weick.  Essai: Real-Time Reflexivity: Prods to Reflection , 2002 .

[12]  Tony Hindle,et al.  Rational Analysis for a Problematic World , 1990 .

[13]  Mark Winter,et al.  Directions for future research in project management: The main findings of a UK government-funded research network , 2006 .

[14]  J. Raelin.  Public Reflection as the Basis of Learning , 2001 .

[15]  K. Weick.  Making Sense of the Organization , 2000 .

[16]  Peter Checkland,et al.  From Optimizing to Learning: A Development of Systems Thinking for the 1990s , 1985 .

[17]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology , 2020, Systems Approaches to Making Change: A Practical Guide.