In the 21st century, there is a clear swift from hard systems approach of

project management to soft factors, a demand for strategic thinking in project

management (Buttrick, 2000), new success factors (Atkinson, 1999) and
project uncertainty management (Ward & Chapman, 2003). Broader project
management theory and more intense research efforts are also a trend in the
field (Winter & Smith, 2005).

Human beings have been executing projects from ancient times (Kwak,
2003). From relocating a tribe to constructing enormous buildings such as the
pyramids, projects were a dominant element of history. Not long ago, those
involved in projects understood that they needed methods and processes to
help them manage these projects more efficiently. To meet this need,
scientists and practitioners worked together to form a new concept which was
called «project management». According to the PMBOK’s definition "project
management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to
project activities to meet project requirements". (A Guide to Project
Management Body of Knowledge, 2004). There are many different views in
the literature concerning the birth of project management. Maylor (2005)
mentions that "project management in the way that we would understand it
today did not exist until the 1950s" and Wideman (2001) tracks the first use of
project management in the UK’s Institution of Civil Engineers report on UK
post war national development first published in 1944.

Since then, there have been a lot of changes. "The hard systems approach,
which treated the project as a mechanical activity, has been shown to be
flawed" (Maylor, 2005). The soft skills of project management are getting more
attention because it is now clear that "the ability to apply these skills
effectively throughout the life cycle of a project will enhance the success of a
project exponentially" (Belzer). In spite of the perfect understanding of
planning, scheduling and controlling, projects have still a high rate of failure.
Belzer points out that "more often they fail because of a project manager’s
inability to communicate effectively, work within the organization’s culture,
motivate the project team, manage stakeholder expectations, understand the
business objectives, solve problems effectively, and make clear and
knowledgeable decisions". To address these problems in the 21st century, a
project team needs to develop a series of soft skills such as "communication,
team building, flexibility and creativity, leadership and the ability to manage
stress and conflict". (Sukhoo et. al, 2005).

In addition, project management requires a stronger strategy orientation.

"More than 80 per cent of all problems at the project level are caused by
failures at a board level in firms to provide clear policy and priorities" (Maylor,
2001). The approach that Maylor suggests is very different from the traditional
link between strategy and projects, as he proposes a "coherent, co-ordinated,
focused, strategic competence in project management which eventually
provides source of competitive advantage". This two-way methodology that
relates organisational and project strategy is illustrated in figure 1. To better
understand the project’s strategy, there is also a need to analyse "the
experiences from past activities, politics during the pre-project phases,
parallel courses of events happening during project execution and ideas about
the post-project future" (Mats Engwall, 2002).

Moreover, Maylor highlights a change in project’s success criteria, from

conformance to performance. In 1960s project managers seek to comply only
with the documented specifications of the project, while current projects
require real performance. In other words, the success criteria of the 21st
century as indicated by Maylor have changed to as short time as possible, as
cheaply as possible and towards a maximum customer delight. Other
academics imply nowadays a much simpler view of success criteria which is
focused only in keeping the client happy (Ferguson, 2005) in contrast with the
90s view of just finishing the project on time and on budget.

Changes in risk management are also one of the hot topics of project
management in the new century. Ward (2003) propose the term «uncertainty
management» and recommends that a "focus on «uncertainty» rather than
risk could enhance project risk management". Adams has an interesting view
of risk as he describes it as "a reflexive phenomenon – we respond to
perceived probabilities and magnitudes, thereby altering them", a definition
that differs from the traditional quantitive analysis of risk. Green broads even
more the scope of risk management and includes the clients. He thinks that
"the process of risk management only becomes meaningful through the active
participation of the client’s project stakeholders". In his point of view there is a
new way of assessing risk management that "depends less upon probabilistic
forecasting and more upon the need to maintain a viable political consistency
within the client organisation".

The conventional theory of project management consists of a narrow focus on

projects as unique and totally separated units of work. But current projects
tend to be integrated smoothly in the general context of organizations in order
to "develop the «management of project portfolios» and «programme
management» which are more strategically orientated towards «doing the
right projects»" (Winter & Smith, 2005).
It is common ground in the literature that the theory of project management
needs more research. Koskela and Howell (2002) suggest that the theoretical
base "has been implicit and it rests on a faulty understanding of the nature of
work in projects, and deficient definitions of planning, execution and control".
From their point of view, enrichment of project management with new
methods and techniques cannot be done with any stable theoretical
background. As a result, there is a trend of putting more effort in research and
rethinking the way which «bodies of knowledge» is written so that complex
projects’ actions will be better documented.

As a conclusion, we could use the words of D.T. Jones (2005) who writes that
"project management is no longer about managing the sequence of steps
required to complete the project on time". He adds that "it is about
systematically incorporating the voice of the customer, creating a disciplined
way of prioritising effort and resolving trade-offs, working concurrently on all
aspects of the projects in multi-functional teams".
References

1. A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge, 2004, 3rd Edition,

Project Management Institute

2. Adams, Review for THES Risk Decision and Policy, Cambridge University
Press, [Electronic]

3. Atkinson, 1999, Project management: cost, time and quality, two best
guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria,
International Journal of Project Management Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 337±342,
[Electronic]

4. Belzer, Project Management : Still More Art than Science, [Electronic]

5. Buttrick, 2000, The project workout, 2nd edition

6. Engwall, 2003, No project is an island: linking projects to history and

context, Research Policy 32, pp. 789–808, [Electronic]

7. Ferguson, 2005, First Tutorial on Strategic Management, Full Time MSc in

Project Management, Lancaster University

8. Green, Towards an integrated script for risk and value management,

Department of Construction Management & Engineering, The University of
Reading, UK

9. Jones, 2005, Foreward to Maylor’s book Project Management, FT Prentice

Hall, UK

10. Koskela & Howell, 2002, The underlying theory of project management is
obsolete, Project Management Institute, [Electronic]

11. Kwak, 2003, The Story of Managing Projects, Quorum Books, [Electronic]

12. Maylor, 2005, Project Management, FT Prentice Hall, UK

13. Maylor, 2001, Beyond the Gantt Chart:: Project Management Moving on,
European Management Journal Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 92–100, 2001, UK,
[Electronic]

14. Sukhoo, Barnard, Eloff, Van der Poll Accommodating Soft Skills in
Software Project Management, Issues in Informing Science and Information
Technology, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa, [Electronic]

15. Ward, 2003, Transforming project risk management into project

uncertainty management, International Journal of Project Management vol.21,
pp. 97–105, [Electronic]
16. Wideman, 2001, Criteria for a Project Management body of knowledge,
[Electronic]

17. Winter & Smith, 2005, ‘Rethinking Project Management, Making Sense So
Far: Emerging Directions and Future Research’, Rethinking Project
Management (EPSRC Network 2004-2006), [Electronic]