Project based organisations

Revision as of 11:58, 8 May 2023

Introduction

In recent years more and more industries are moving towards project based approaches ^[1]. The traditional way of organizing development is rigid in its structures leading to problems in execution of new and innovative initiatives. This is because the organizational structures inhibits the flexibility necessary to develop in a dynamic environment, and inhibits the flexible nature of projects ^[2]. This has lead researchers and practitioners to looking at ways of organizing in a more flexible manner; projects. The film industry is a classic example of an industry that has historically been working more of less purely project based; a Project Based Organization ^{[1] [3] [4]}. This way of working has reached increased attention in other industries in the last couple of decades, where Michael Hobday's work on Project based organisations^[5] has been a key source of inspiration for many researchers to build on ^{[3] [6] [7][8][9][10]}. This article will focus the Project Based Organisation5 comparing it to the traditional functional organization.

This article will give an overview of Project Based Organizations (PBO's), mainly focusing on the engineering industry. The article will first present the big idea; the characteristics of PBO's and how they solve the problems that occur in the traditional organizational structures, including an overview of the PBO and traditional functional organization structures and perspectives on how Project, Program and Portfolio management relates to the PBO. It will present an application of the PBO; what strategies exist for transforming organizations and which steps to take to enhance the specific values that a PBO structure brings. lastly the article will present the limitations of PBO's, both giving an overview of the limitations inherent to the PBO, as well as limitations in application.

Big Idea

What are Project based organizations?

The Project Based Organization is an organizational form that attempts to create a structure that favors the dynamic and flexible environment of projects.^{[2] [4]} To better be able to understand the project based organization an introduction of its opposite; the traditional functional organization, is necessary.

The functional organization

The traditional functional organization, is structured in departments or functional units each specialized within a certain domain. Classical examples of these functional units or departments are; R&D, Finance, Marketing etc.. ^[11] The structure of the functional organization is illustrated in figure X, where it can be seen that the departments all run parallel to each other with no links in between. Each department refers to the Senior management, who are in charge of creating the objectives of the organizations vision and strategy. ^{[2] [11]} The functional managers thus have to make sure that initiatives within their department align with these to keep the support of Senior Management.^[12] This is done through structured documenting practices and well defined formal procedures, such as reporting.

The structure of parallel running departments in the traditional organizations creates silo systems, that makes this type of organization well suited for repetitive operations with small incremental changes. However the structure becomes problematic if the organization introduces a higher rate of projects.^[4] This is because there is little range for flexibility or cross domain collaboration in such silo structures. A project manager in such an organizational structure would in the hierarchy be under a head of department. If the project needs collaboration across departments, the manager would have to refer to, and ask permission from all department managers when making decisions. This creates high control for the head of departments yet low control for the project manager, leading to problems in project progress due to low flexibility and authority. It leads to poor communication for the project manager internally with their team and with external partners, because the PM can rarely answer questions without having the decision accepted by each department manager. For the above mentioned reasons it becomes difficult to execute innovative and experimenting initiatives or projects that need competences across specializations in a functional organization.

The Project based organization, attempts to solve these issues of cross collaboration and flexibility, which have arisen in the last decades with the higher project focus that has also entered industries that traditionally were in functional organizations. ^{[13] [4]}

The project based organization

The Project Based organization attempts to create a structure that favors the dynamic and flexible environment of projects. The Project Based Organization (PBO) is an organizational structure where^[4][2][13];

1. projects are the main driver of business
2. the project manager has high control over all functions and
3. flexibility enhances the ability to be proactive towards uncertainty
4. openness enhances collaboration with external partners making it easier to be proactive toward e.g. client uncertainty

1. Project based organizations are driven projects.^[4] Figure X, illustrates how projects run parallel to each other and are the main driver of the business instead of the domain specializations being main drivers as seen in the functional organization. In the PBO the specialized domains are integrated into each project by gathering a team of employees with different specializations. Furthermore, when working project based contrary to function based the knowledge and capabilities are created and build throughout the project. ^[14] This means that project based organizations requires that the employees not only know their specializations but also have the competences to acquire new knowledge and capabilities ^[9]. However, employees will only have the project to work, and therefore do not have to prioritize between operational and project work. This frees up time and mental space for building these capabilities. ^[2]

2. The project manager is the main responsible for the projects in. This means they have high control over all functions of the projects including resources, with only senior management to refer to, as seen in figure X. The functional units, i.e. R&D, finance, marketing etc. are integrated in each project in the PBO instead of a project manager having to try to build collaboration across rigid departments as seen in the functional organization. Furthermore, because the project manager (PM) only refers to senior management and not several other departments first, the PM is given high authority over the project. This is the key to agility and flexibility that is inherent to PBO's.

3. Due to these structures and the authority that lies with the PM, the PBO has the ability to deal with fast change as well as being proactive to uncertainty and project risk.^{[13] [2]} The project manager, has the power to make fast decisions that fits with the problem at hand. This characteristic of the PBO stands in contrast to the functional organization where the project manager would not have the authority over resource distribution to make proactive decisions.

4. One of the ways of dealing with complexity is stakeholder engagement.^[15] The authority of the PM is advantage when working with external partners and working across several organizations, because it leads to an organizational openness.^[13] This is because the point of contact is reduced to just the PM, instead of the PM and a number of other departments. ^[2] This organizational openness makes it easier to include external stakeholders and bring them close to the project process. ^[13] The enhancement of communication this brings leads to a PM that can ensure that external partners are properly informed, and even part of decision-making processes throughout the project, often leading to higher satisfaction with the client. Thus the PBO becomes an enabler for co-creation in projects. PBO's are therefore beneficial when dealing with complex project where the clients' needs may change through the progression of the project as they gain more knowledge. ^[2]

The context of the PBO The project based organizations are build on project as the main driver for business. According to the PMBOK Guide 2021 a project is " [...]a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result."^[16] The definition refers to uniqueness, and even though not all standards agree on this factor, it can still be concluded that projects are often different and need different types of structures to support them, to get the best result. Thus, because PBO's are driven by projects the organization can look very different both from organization to organization, but also from project to project within an organization.

The PBO creates temporary organizations each time a new project is initiated. This means that the objectives of the project will partly define the organizational structure within that project. For example; the level of complexity or innovation of the project will have an impact on; the size of the project, the amount of stakeholders involved, the uncertainty of the project etc. These are all factors that will influence the temporary organization that is created with initiating a project.

Another factor that will influence the organization is the contractor or client of the given project. These will often have different need and requirements for the project and its collaboration or partnership structures, thus shaping the communication structures of the project. This is exactly the benefit of PBO, they are so flexible that they can adapt to the given context of the project; they can adapt to the best possible way of operating with the specific client, project team, project content, project complexity etc.

The PBO can as mentioned also look different from organization to organization. The "pureness" of the PBO can be altered, to fit the need of the organisations' needs. In some industries it is possible to create more or less pure PBO's. The example here could be the film industry. ^{[1] [3]} However, a PBO can also exist within a functional organization as a sub organization as shown in figure X. ^{[13] [4]} Lastly, the PBO can exist as a so called Project Led Organisation. This is the most common form of the PBO in practice, it has weakly linked functional units that run across the projects, helping to create some structure and coherence between the individual project in the organization, but keeping the main decision authority with the PM.^{[3] [2] [13]}This structure is shown in figure X.

Summing up, the PBO is a project driven business and therefore changes with its environment. It is capable of doing so because of its flexibility and the authority that lies with the PM, creating an open organizational structure and a proactive approach towards uncertainty and risk. The authority that lies with the PM is thus a positive characteristic of the PBO. However, with the authority follows a responsibility. Therefore good management, and especially good Project, Program and Portfolio management, is of vital importance for success in such organizations.

Project, program and portfolio management theory in the PBO domain

The following paragraph will help give an overview of the relationship between the PBO and Project, program and portfolio management.

PBO's operate in two distinct levels of activities; the organizational level and the project level. ^[9] These levels are represented in figure X; The strategy and business models are developed on the organizational level (green), and the project program and portfolio levels should support that strategy (purple). ^[17] This relationship between the organizational level and project level is further described in the PMI stanard for portfolio and program management, where strategy implementation is one of the main activities of portfolio management and defining program outputs that support organizational strategy is one of the main activities of program management. ^[18]

In the context of the PBO, the project manager becomes the link and enabler of the strategies developed on organizational level, to integrate them on project, program and portfolio level. Petro and Gardiner, 2015 suggest that the PBO framework even enhances the effectiveness of project portfolio management, because of the authority of the PM. This shows the importance of both the PBO structure and project, program and portfolio management. It shows the reciprocal support which is found between the two levels, where one cannot succeed without the other, and where the project, program and portfolio management practices are the tools that support and drive the effectiveness and thus success of the projects. ^{[4] [7]} It has now been established that project, program and portfolio management is important for organizational success in PBO's.

Application

The context of Project based organizations

It has been explained how the context and "pureness" of the PBO, can vary greatly. The application of the PBO structure will vary depending on this pureness and the context of the organization. Furthermore, to be able to apply this organizational model, an organizational change is necessary, meaning one should be familiar with the good practices and theories of organizational change management. Transforming organizational structures is a big task that needs to be planned carefully, as it involves not only structures but people and the mindset of those.

Theories on change management is vast. This paragraph will present one change theory and elaborating on it in the context of the PBO. This gives the reader an overview of the steps in a change process and can help to make a small test of the PBO structure, by applying it in small scale on one or two teams. For full application the reader is referred to the annotated bibliography, to further reading on organizational change, as there is a manifold of theories that could potentially be used for transitioning to a PBO form, depending on the organizational form one wants to transform from. The PBO specific considerations should be adaptable in some form to most change theories.

Example of strategy to transform to a PBO

An existing and well known strategy of change is Lewin, K.'s three step model (1952). ^[19] Here it is presented with the expansion made by Lippet, R. et. al. 1958. ^[20]

The model divides change into 3 stages^[19], with 3 subphases in step 2 ^[20]:

1. unfreezing status quo
2. moving to a new status
   1. clarification of the problem
   2. examining alternatives
   3. defining and performing change initiatives
3. refreezing new status quo

Initially the change agent needs to realize that a change is needed and prepare for moving to a new status quo. The change agent firstly need to understand the given problem and root cause for why the change is needed. When this stage has been fully investigated it is possible to start understanding if the PBO would be a fitting structure, by analysing if the problems fit with those that a PBO structure can help solve.

Based on the theory on PBO's one needs to consider the following questions, to understand if the PBO structure can help solve the problem.

• Do you need a project oriented business;
  • Are projects becoming more and more important in your organization and can you see them becoming main drivers? Would it be beneficial and in what way?
  • Is flexibility and authority of the project manager the problem you are facing when project fail or in organizational effectiveness challenges?
  • Are the projects complex and uncertain and therefore need high flexibility to have a proactive approach or are you rather handling projects with high predictability?
  • Are the projects often collaborating across other organizations and need to be able to quickly adapt to client/partner needs?

If these questions have all been answered with a yes, one needs to take a little step back again. These characteristics are namely similar to that of other organizational structures. This follows Lippet's 2nd subphase in the change model. Examining alternatives;

• Are there other organizational structures that fit better? e.g. the matrix organization has similar characteristics yet focus on the combination of the functional and project oriented work. The personnel refer to 2 bosses to keep equal importance on project and functional units. ^[21] Research other organizational structures that may better fit with your detailed and contextual answers to the questions above.
  • Could the matrix form be more suited for the organization?
  • How important is the functional parts vs. the project manager - who should be in charge?
  • Do you need a pure PBO or a project led organization with weak links of functional management, where project manager still has the highest authority and is the main referee for employees?

The change agent has now analyzed if the PBO could potentially solve the root cause of the problem underlying the need for change. If the PBO is assessed as a possibly solution the next step is implementing the structure. The 8 step model, introduced by John Kutter and presented in the PMBOK guide is here utilized in a combination with the theory on adaptive approaches in the PMI portfolio guide.^{[22] [23]}

1. Create urgency; In the steps above one should have defined the problem. This will help create urgency, by defining the threats if not changing to a the PBO structure.
2. Form a powerful coalition; Adaptive approaches needs a culture in which self management is highly value. Identify the people in your organization that practice this already, and make them your co-change agents.
3. Create a vision for change; Your vision should build on your initial analysis of the status quo. What values does a change to a PBO bring; flexibility in projects etc.
4. Communicate the vision; The change should be communicated throughout the entire organization; Why is it happening and what are the benefits.
5. Remove obstacles; Adaptive approaches often need change in the way of working, reporting structures and mindset. In the adaptive approach i.e. PBO, reporting structures are important as these often become lost because of the high flexibility. Create the habit of reporting in a learning database from the beginning of the change. ^{[24] [10]}
6. Create short term wins; Make a test with a small team and a smaller project. Remember to follow the characteristics of the PBO. Create a team that is free of the organizational structures, with a PM that has the flexibility to make decisions.
7. Build on the change; If the above experiment was a success then build on that with more teams.
8. Anchor the changes in corporate culture; Acknowledge the people in your organization that are practicing self management and are adopting the new ways of working.

Performing the steps above would lead to an incremental change of the organization. The last step would be a refreezing of the new status quo; The project based organizational structure. This entails sustaining the change. ^[19]

Limitations

Limitations inherent to the PBO

This article has shown how the PBO has many advantages, when working in dynamic and flexible environments, with high uncertainty and risk. However, in the pursiut of a flexible organizational structure the PBO also loses some of the advantages that the functional organization has. The lack of structure means that PBO’s often have a hard time sharing knowledge within the organisation and across the projects within it. ^{[10] [3]} Organizational learning instead often only happens within the projects and the temporary organizations they create. ^[9]. Sharing learnings across the organization is an important practice as it sets important values into play and helps realize benefits. Valuable benefits may be missed if these are not shared to other projects to adapt and integrate them. ^[10] Furthermore, if the PBO is integrated in a functional organization (or other organization with similar structures), the projects within the PBO often have a hard time communicating with the static part of that organization. ^[10] This internal organizational communication problem, can also happen in the pure PBO, between the projects and the senior management (and additional entities that may be part of the static part of the PBO), thereby losing support and creating tensions within the organization. ^[2]

The PMI standards for project, program and portfolio management, addresses some of the above mentioned limitations of the PBO. However, as presented in the paragraph XXX these management practices and standards relates to the management of project, program and portfolio and are often generic in how they address the standard in relation organizational structures and theories. ^[25] The following will present how the standards address the organizational learning and capability building and relate it to the theory on PBO.

The PMBOK guide presents a short paragraph on knowledge management. It states how learning can both be contextual and general, and that the general knowledge should be shared across the organization. ^[26] Furthermore, the guide explains that a project should be adapted to the given organizational contexts. It presents the Value Delivery Office (VDO) and the Project Management Office (PMO), whose roles amongst other include building capabilities throughout the organization and delivering value across portfolios and programs. respectivly. The offices are often present in organizations that follow ‘’’“adaptive delivery approaches”’’’, which is the PBO approach. ^[27] However, the standard lacks to present a practical guide on how the these initiatives of sharing knowledge can be integrated in an entire organization. These steps would be crucial in the PBO context, where the projects are weakly if at all linked to each other. ^[2] This lack of development in the organizational domain is recognized by Michel Thiry, who challenges the implementation of the PMO. The article suggest that the PMO is merely a mimic of the functional organizational structures, put in a project management terminology. It suggest to integrate the structure of the PMO further into the PBO.

In the PMI program management standard, a roadmap for integrating learnings and capabilities is presented ^[28]. However, the roadmap is generic, and neither presents a step by step guide or good practices. The same pattern is present in the portfolio management standard; it acknowledge that capability building and targets the entire organization in it presentation, however the practical steps still lack. The program management standard, however presents one crucial practical initiative; a learning database. ^[24] Anna Mahura and Gustavo Birollo, present a manifold of researchers who study this formal knowledge sharing initiative, showing that it is in practice a common used and applicable tool. ^[10] Summarizing, the PMI project, program, portfolio standards puts a focus on the problem of lack of knowledge sharing and capability building across the wider organization, as well as present the learning database practice and frameworks for integrating capabilities. However, the PBO limitations go beyond the initiatives and practices presented within the PMI standard.

Limitations in application

Transforming to a Project based organization in practice can be difficult and will take a long time. This is because it is not merely a tool, yet an entire restructuring of an organization or part of it. As explained in the application paragraph, the people in the organization need to go through large changes. Change management in itself is already a major management topic, that needs training, time and resources to practice. Furthermore, the theory of PBO's can be a difficult and complex field to understand. The theory expands across several domains; organizational theories, management, project management. Additionally in PBO literature and research the definition and the terminology varies and has evolved over time. Additionally not all researchers define and explain the PBO in their work, as the definition is implicit in the work they do. ^{[1] [3] [9]} To show this great variance as well as the help the reader search for further information on the topic, and overview of some of the terms that can refer to the PBO or similar organizational forms ^{[1] [3][9][29]}:

• Project based organisations
• Project led organisations
• Project based enterprises
• Project based industry
• Project based firms
• Multiple project organisation
• Temporary organisations
• Projectized organizations

The different terms are often used in different contexts and highlight a specific field of study, eg. temporary organizations are often PBO's but refer to the study of the organizational structures whereas literature using the term project based organization is often in the crossing between the two fields of study; project management and organizational structures ^[1]. This shows how vast and complex it may be to gain the necessary knowledge for successfully transforming and organization to a PBO.

Therefore going to a project based organizational form there is both a large task in understanding the theory to know the good practices etc. but also the task of organizational change which need expertise and experience, which may be characterized as a major limitation of applying the PBO.

The paradox of flexibility and structure ___________________________________________________________________-

• • What does the PBO look like when embeeded in a static organisation - describing the mechanisms between the flexibility of the PBO and the static nature of the parent organisation (Mahura og Birillo) (læs op på denne)

• how the framework has flexibility as a core, and this can also be a limitation because project-based organisation can differ so much it becomes more difficult to understand and generalise across project based organisations ^[8]

• Pure PBO may be risky - it depends on project which means you always need to be moving to the next project to keep being in business ^[2].

• For employees PBO's can create anxiety and uncertainty because they do not know where to go next ^{[2] [1]}.

• The domain specific leadership is dispersed - this means two things:

1. The project is dependent on a project manager who is highly skillfull in project management
2. becasue there are no functional units - it is hard to divide in domains - everybody needs to know a little bit of everything - you do not utilise specialities as much

One of the key opportunities that arise from the limitations found in the litterature is that project and programme management are of vital importance to target some of the limitations of the PBO. The PBO has a lot of valuable characteristics and advantages. By targeting some of the limitations

• organisational structures instead of operational project management – the framework and context of the project management has an influence on the management and the success of the project ^[9]
• how PBO's can help stabilize specific factors whilst keeping flexibility for the changing nature of projects. ^{[30] [31] [6]}

• • Some of the weaknesses of PBO can be lessened or converted to strengths by "diluting" the pure PBO ^[10] Yacoub Petro a,⁎, Paul Gardiner b

ikke alle forklarer den organisatoriske struktur som ligger bag ^{[1] [3] [9]}

Annotated bibliography

Davies, A., Hobday, M., 2005. The project-based organisation, in: The Business of Projects: Managing Innovation in Complex Products and Systems. Cambridge University Press, pp. 117–147. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493294.007

This book is a great resource for understanding the core principles of project based organisations. The book is about projects and complex products and systems and suggests a form of PBO for the development of such complex and uncertain systems. In it you will find project management and organisational theories in general with a specific chapter dedicated to project based organisations. Here a case study compares the PBO to a functional organisation.

Kroon, J., 1995. General Management, Second. ed.

This book is about management, and has here been used mainly to get an understanding of different organizational structures. The book has an entire chapter devoted to organizing presenting organisatiional types in detail also displayed through graphical tools; organizational charts.

Organizational change for application

Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide) – 7th Edition and The Standard for Project Management - 4.2.4 Change Models. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012LZKN2/guide-project-management/change-models

This section in the PMBOK Guide gives an overview of change management models, including Change in Organizations, ADKAR model, the 8-step process for leading change, Virginia Satir Change Model and Transition model.

- Beckhard, R., and R. Harris. 1987. Organizational Transitions: Managing Complex Change. 2nd ed. Reading, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley. - Dawson, P. 2003. Organisational Change: A Processual Approach. London, UK: Chapman & Hall. - Elving, W. 2005. “The Role of Communication in Organisational Change.” Corporate Communications 10 (2): 129–38. - Hayes, J. (2018) The theory and practice of change management, 5th ed, Palgrave, London, UK

References

1. ↑ ^{1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7} Bakker, R.M., 2010. Taking Stock of Temporary Organizational Forms: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 12, 466–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00281.x
2. ↑ ^{2.00 2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 2.11 2.12} Davies, A., Hobday, M., 2005. The project-based organisation, in: The Business of Projects: Managing Innovation in Complex Products and Systems. Cambridge University Press, pp. 117–147. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493294.007
3. ↑ ^{3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7} Thiry, M., Deguire, M., 2007. Recent developments in project-based organisations. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 25, 649–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.02.001
4. ↑ ^{4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7} Thiry, M. (2007). Creating project-based organizations to deliver value. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2007—EMEA, Budapest, Hungary. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
5. ↑ Hobday, M., 2000. The project-based organisation: An ideal form for managing complex products and systems? Res. Policy 29, 871–893. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(00)00110-4
6. ↑ ^{6.0 6.1} Pryke, S., 2017. Managing Networks in Project‐Based Organisations, Managing Networks in Project‐based Organisations. Wiley-Blackwell.
7. ↑ ^{7.0 7.1} Petro, Y., Gardiner, P., 2015. An investigation of the influence of organizational design on project portfolio success, effectiveness and business efficiency for project-based organizations. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 33, 1717–1729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.08.004
8. ↑ ^{8.0 8.1} Turner, R., Miterev, M., 2019. The Organizational Design of the Project-Based Organization. Proj. Manag. J. 50, 487–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819859746
9. ↑ ^{9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7} Leiringer, R., Zhang, S., 2021. Organisational capabilities and project organising research. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 39, 422–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.02.003
10. ↑ ^{10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6} Mahura, A., Birollo, G., 2021. Organizational practices that enable and disable knowledge transfer: The case of a public sector project-based organization. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 39, 270–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.12.002
11. ↑ ^{11.0 11.1} Kroon, J., 1995. General Management, Second. ed.
12. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2017). Standard for Portfolio Management (4th Edition) - 1.8 Relationships among Portfolio Management, Organizational Strategy, Strategic Business Execution, and Organizational Project Management. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012S0XW1/standard-portfolio-management/introducti-relationships
13. ↑ ^{13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6} Sydow, J., Lindkvist, L., & DeFillippi, R. (2004). Project-Based Organizations, Embeddedness and Repositories of Knowledge: Editorial. Organization Studies, 25(9), 1475–1489. https://doi-org.proxy.findit.cvt.dk/10.1177/0170840604048162
14. ↑ Dosi, G., Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (2000). The nature and dynamics of organizational capabilities. Oxford: OUP
15. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide) – 7th Edition and The Standard for Project Management - 2.8.3.3 Process-Based. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012LZJ73/guide-project-management/process-based
16. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide) – 7th Edition and The Standard for Project Management. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpSPMAGPMP/guide-project-management/guide-project-management
17. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2017). Standard for Portfolio Management (4th Edition) - 1.4 Relationships among Portfolios, Programs, Projects, and Operations. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012S0XS2/standard-portfolio-management/relationships-among-portfolios
18. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2017). Standard for Program Management (4th Edition) - 1.5 The Relationships among Organizational Strategy, Program Management, and Operations Management. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012S0S2J/standard-program-management/relationships-among-organizational
19. ↑ ^{19.0 19.1 19.2} Lewin, K. 1952. Field Theory in Social Science - Selected Theoretical Papers. Edited by Dorwin Cartwright. London, UK: Tavistock Publications Ldt.
20. ↑ ^{20.0 20.1} Lippet, R., J. Watson, and B. Wesley. 1958. The Dynamics of Planned Change. New York , NY, USA: Harcourt Brace, Jovanovich
21. ↑ Stuckenbruck, L. C. (1979). The Matrix Organization. Project Management Quarterly, 10(3), 21–33.
22. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide) – 7th Edition and The Standard for Project Management - 4.2.4.3 The 8-Step Process for Leading Change. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012LZKQ1/guide-project-management/8-step-process-leading
23. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide) – 7th Edition and The Standard for Project Management - 2.3.4.3 Organization. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012LZH42/guide-project-management/organization
24. ↑ ^{24.0 24.1} Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2017). Standard for Program Management (4th Edition) - 8.2.4.1 Lessons Learned Database. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012S0VO1/standard-program-management/lessons-learned-database
25. ↑ Thiry, M. (2006). A paradoxism for project-based organizations. Paper presented at PMI® Research Conference: New Directions in Project Management, Montréal, Québec, Canada. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
26. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide) – 7th Edition and The Standard for Project Management - 2.5.8.2 Explicit and Tacit Knowledge. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012LZI11/guide-project-management/explicit-tacit-knowledge
27. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide) – 7th Edition and The Standard for Project Management - 3.4.2 Tailor for the Organization. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012LZJR1/guide-project-management/tailor-organization
28. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2017). Standard for Program Management (4th Edition) - 3.3 Program Roadmap. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012S0SK8/standard-program-management/program-roadmap
29. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2017). Standard for Portfolio Management (4th Edition) - 5.5.2 Supply and Demand Allocations. Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/pdf/id:kt012S0ZO3/standard-portfolio-management/supply-demand-allocations
30. ↑ Jerbrant, A., 2013. Organising project-based companies: Management, control and execution of project-based industrial operations. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 6, 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538371311319070
31. ↑ Jerbrant, A., Karrbom Gustavsson, T., 2013. Managing project portfolios: balancing flexibility and structure by improvising. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 6, 152–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538371311291071

Cite error: <ref> tag with name "PMI" defined in <references> is not used in prior text.
Cite error: <ref> tag with name "S.C3.B6derlund" defined in <references> is not used in prior text.
Cite error: <ref> tag with name "Sundqvist" defined in <references> is not used in prior text.
Cite error: <ref> tag defined in <references> with name "" has no content.
Cite error: <ref> tag defined in <references> with name "" has no content.
Cite error: <ref> tag defined in <references> with name "" has no content.
Cite error: <ref> tag defined in <references> with name "" has no content.