Human Resource Development

and Project Management: Key

Connections
LILA LENORIA CARDEN
Houston Baptist University
TOBY MARSHALL EGAN
Texas A&M University

As human resource development (HRD) efforts increase in scope, complex-

ity and link to increasing numbers of key stakeholders, so do demands for
careful and systematic execution of HRD implementation. Use of project
management strategies and tools is an emerging solution for HRD imple-
mentation. Using a systematic literature search, intersections between pro-
ject management and HRD literature are outlined. Key findings are
presented for both articles that explore project management– and HRD-
related issues explicitly as well as emerging HRD literature that may have
import for HRD-related concerns. A summative figure, conceptual frame-
work, propositions for HRD project management, and implications for
research, theory, and practice are discussed.

Keywords: project management; management; human resource development

For as long as humans have been undertaking complex tasks, project-oriented

approaches toward getting work done have been central to individual and col-
lective success. Historical accounts regarding the origins of human resource
development (HRD) often involve recounting of apprenticeship relationships,
craft guilds, and networks of “franchises” whereby skilled individuals could
manage projects that coordinated the production of goods important for the
basic functioning of societies and (later on) industries (Werner & DeSimone,
2006). Such project-related practices date back hundreds, if not thousands of
years. These accounts, along with more narrow perspectives regarding the U.S.

AUTHORS’ NOTE: Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Lila Lenoria
Carden, Assistant Professor, Management, College of Business and Economics, Houston Baptist
University, 7502 Fondren Road, Houston, TX 77074-3298; e-mail: lcarden@hbu.edu.
Human Resource Development Review Vol. 7, No. 3 September 2008 309-338
DOI: 10.1177/1534484308320577
© 2008 SAGE Publications
310 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

and European education for work efforts beginning in the mid-1800s, are asso-
ciated with industrialization and modernization, which strongly influenced the
manner in which work was completed. Other accounts have emphasized
the U.S. Training Within Industry Project (Dooley, 1945) in which the name
of the massive undertaking to train the World War II era industrial workforce
itself emphasized HRD-related efforts as projects. More recently, several HRD
scholars highlighted the importance of project management for HRD.
Whether developing a system-wide strategic plan, enacting an organization
development (OD) intervention, producing a new training curriculum, or sup-
porting individual on-the-job learning, HRD activities are most often orga-
nized into projects. Project work has become an increasingly prevalent in
organizations worldwide and is an important consideration for organizational
success (Packendorff, 1995). Project management has become an essential
organizational competency (Fuller, 1997). As project management research,
methodology, and theory development have increased so has organizational
and individual investment in project management knowledge and personnel
(Kerzner, 2001).
Although HRD project management connections are implicit in HRD prac-
tice and practice literature, and project management has been included in uni-
versity HRD curricula, research and theory linking project management and
HRD is limited. HRD approaches and processes have been examined in terms
of implementation of necessary steps to achieve a HRD-related outcome, but
the management of the HRD process itself has been rarely explored. We have
spent a lot of time talking about how to conceptualize and implement OD,
training and career development (CD), but little time examining the manage-
ment of implementation or the impact of efficient or inefficient execution of
HRD interventions themselves on desired outcomes. Although project man-
agement is a field with its own professional associations, journals, interna-
tional certification programs, and increasing number of professionals, the
direct examination of the important intersection between HRD and project
management has been uncommon. Contrary to the limited accessibility of
related literature, anecdotal evidence from HRD practice and support from
HRD scholars (Fuller, 1997; Gilley, Eggland, & Gilley, 2002; Henderson,
2005; Krempl & Pace, 2001; McLagan, 1989; McLean, 2006) suggest investi-
gation of project management in HRD to be of importance for HRD imple-
mentation, learning, and performance.

Problem Statement
This examination of HRD-project management connections emphasizes two
contexts—literature exploring HRD-related areas with explicit connections to
project management and an emerging “nontraditional” project management liter-
ature that has implications for HRD-project management. While practice
advanced well ahead of theory during the early to mid-1900s, the general project
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 311

management literature has also steadily progressed during the past few decades.
As the importance of project management has emerged, key terms such as learn-
ing, participation, renewal, and innovation have become associated with the pro-
ject management practices (Packendorff, 1995). Despite the importance of
project management for HRD success having been frequently highlighted (Fuller,
1997; Gilley et al., 2002; Henderson, 2005; Krempl & Pace, 2001; McLagan,
1989; McLean, 2006), there have been few theoretical or empirical investigations
conducted, examining the impact of effective project management for HRD.
Although project management has been proposed to support HRD practitioners
and organizations, the absence of research and theory associated with project
management–HRD connections means that we have little understanding regard-
ing project management practices in HRD contexts. This lack of research leaves
open questions as to how project management is and can be approached in HRD
contexts, the types of systematic approaches to project management that are actu-
ally used in HRD implementation, and what approaches are effective or ineffec-
tive.
Different from many other understudied HRD-related areas, there is an
established project management literature outside of the scope of HRD that,
similar to HRD literature overall, has been steadily growing and making con-
tributions to theory, research, and practice. This literature has formed to
improve understanding regarding project management outcomes and
processes (Jugdev & Müller, 2005). However, until recently, project manage-
ment literature focused almost exclusively on traditional project management
contexts (construction, engineering, manufacturing, utilities, and information
technology; Kloppenborg & Opfer, 2002). Although some theoretical perspec-
tives may overlap, the specific nature of literature in these traditional areas of
project management makes transfer to HRD contexts difficult in most cases.
Within recent years, as it became clear that a variety of industries beyond the
aforementioned traditional areas were benefiting from project management
approaches, project management literature has begun to expand into a wide
assortment of contexts, including HRD-related areas. Because of the newness
of this expansion, the literature in any one nontraditional area associated with
HRD or other industries and contexts is relatively thin. However, understand-
ing the foci and directions of these emerging studies, including those beyond
specific HRD emphases, will be beneficial to early efforts to frame theory and
research with HRD–project management connections (Kloppenborg & Opfer,
2002). Thus, despite established practical implications, little energy has been
dedicated to HRD–project management connections by HRD scholars, and no
efforts to frame future theory building have been published.

Purpose and Central Questions

Based upon the both practical and scholarly significance of project manage-
ment and HRD intersections. We formulated two central purposes for our
312 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

investigation. First, we wanted to better understand the landscape of literature

that overtly examined HRD-project management connections. Project manage-
ment has been identified as important to HRD in textbooks, is featured particu-
larly in OD and training and development, and is included in core or support
coursework in several HRD graduate and undergraduate curricula, but project
management– HRD intersections are not frequently elaborated in the context of
scholarly inquiry. Second, because the project management field has begun to
explore emerging areas and programs beyond the relatively narrow project man-
agement literature that has, historically, focused on “traditional” areas such as
engineering and construction (Kerzner, 2001), we were interested in how emerg-
ing project management research and scholarship, beyond the limited literature
related to project management–HRD connections, had developed in recent years
and the potential associations with HRD-related interests. Our specific questions
were: (a) what scholarly literature integrating project management and HRD
exists currently? (b) what is contained in the current scholarly literature focused
on emerging (or nontraditional) project management topics? (c) what are the
themes that surface from the overall literature identified in #1 and #2 above? and
(d) what are the implications of the current state of the identified literature for
HRD and for future project management–HRD research?

Method
To enact the purpose identified, we conducted two systematic reviews of
literature. The first search of literature involving connections between HRD
and project management and a second search for emerging project manage-
ment literature (defined in the following sections). Articles identified in the
search of HRD-related journals were selected based on their connections to
OD, training and development, CD, HRD, or related areas.

Search for Articles Focusing on Project

Management and HRD Connections

Based on our purpose and focus questions, we reviewed refereed journal

articles only. The literature identification process for selection of articles that
focused on HRD and project management included a subject/keyword search
for project management in 29 HRD-related journals in August 2006. The first
search involved only those works published by Dooley (2002) and Sleezer and
Sleezer (1998).

Search for Nontraditional Project Management Literature

The second literature identification process included a keyword search for

project management (a) in Emerald database during February 2005 returning
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 313

304 articles, (b) International Journal of Project in EBSCO database on October

2005 returning 277 articles, (c) Project Management Journal in EBSCO data-
base returning 240 articles, (d) Project Management Journal in EBSCO in
March 2006 returning 24 articles, (e) International Journal of Project
Management in March, 2006 returning 14 articles, and (f) Emerald database in
March 2006 returning 21 articles. The 880 articles were distilled further based
on the following four criteria (a) date range from 1968 to 2004; (b) scholarly
publications defined as articles with seven or more pages, more than four schol-
arly references, and blind reviewed; and (c) data related to nontraditional con-
texts that (with support from Kloppenborg & Opfer, 2002) were defined as
research in industries other than engineering, electrical, utility, manufacturing,
and construction. The total number of journal articles identified from the 37 total
journals (listed in Table 1) from both searches outlined above was 103.
In addition, following thematic analysis of article topics, the remaining arti-
cles were categorized (a) as theory if a theory was identified as a focus or sup-
port in the framing of the article; (b) as a model if a model, cycle, or process
was emphasized in the article; (c) as tools if any word such as tool, technique,
software, schedule, financial, technology, network, or resource, was high-
lighted in the article; and (d) as research if data in the article were collected
from participants to the research/study. Summaries of literature identified in
both searches discussed above are below. Themes and summaries from the
search identified above (project management and HRD) are followed by a dis-
cussion of the emerging project management literature.

Project Management Overview

According to Packendorff (1995), a project can be defined as “a given,
plannable and unique task, limited in time, complex in its implementation and
subject to evaluation” (p. 320). Project management was originally focused in con-
struction and engineering industries and has expanded, over time, to other indus-
tries and contexts (Betts & Lansley, 1995). The utilization of project management
has grown into academic, industrial, service, and professional contexts. Based on
analysis of articles outlining historical perspectives of project management,
we developed four key periods in the general history of project management—
emergence, refinement, human resource, and performance. In addition, an
overview regarding HRD–project management connections is discussed.
During the emergence period of the early 1900s, project management was
established as an orderly work-related framework and was provided as a tactical
and strategic approach to chart and implement projects. In 1910, Henry L. Gantt
established the Gantt chart and two decades later, Karol Adamiecki formed the
network-based harmonogram (Packendorff, 1995). According to Packendorff,
project management moved to a stage of refinement in the mid-1900s. During
the 1950s, project management became more theoretically and mathematically
oriented, adding refined algorithms and project-planning techniques. Program
314 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

TABLE 1: Journals Featuring Project Management Articles

Academy of Management Journal

Academy of Management Review
Benchmarking
College and Univ. Personnel Assoc. Journal
European Journal of Operational Research
Group and Organization Studies
Human Relations
Human Resource Development Quarterly
Industrial Management & Data Systems
International Journal of Project Management
International Journal of Public Administration
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management
International Journal of Technology Management
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
Journal of Applied Psychology
Journal of Enterprise Information Management
Journal of European Industrial Training
Journal of Industrial Teacher Education
Journal of Knowledge Management
Journal of Management Development
Journal or Organizational Behavior
Journal for Vocational and Teacher Education
Journal of Workplace Learning
Logistics Information Management
Management Decision
Management Education and Development
New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education
Organization Development Journal
Performance Improvement Quarterly
Personnel Psychology
Personnel Review
Project Management Journal
Public Administration Quarterly
Public Personnel Management
R&D Management
Team Performance Management
The Learning Organization

evaluation and review techniques (PERT) and critical path methods (CPM) and
other techniques were presented, utilized broadly and, in some cases, the tools
or approaches themselves were closely researched or evaluated (Pinto, 1998).
During the 1960s, project management scholarship grew and transformed to
human resource period. This period emphasized project management effective-
ness at the individual, team, and organizational levels (Packendorff, 1995). The
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 315

human resource period emphasized resources and managerial concerns in the

context of organizational projects. The human resource aspects of project man-
agement emphasized during this period included: (a) resource allocation
(Archibald, 1976; Butler, 1973; Kerzner, 2001; Wilemon & Ciero, 1970); (b)
project team issues (Butler, 1973; Hodgetts, 1968); (c) project manager compe-
tencies (Casey, 1978; Gullett, 1972; Kerzner, 2001); and (d) project management
alignment of human resources, authority, and leadership (Baker, Murphy, &
Fisher, 1983; Butler, 1973; Gullett, 1972; Hodgetts, 1968).
The performance period is an emphasis for project management today.
During 1990s, project management success and failures were focused upon in
the literature. Key emphases were project quality, timeliness, and budgeting.
Performance and resource-based publications identified include: (a) organiza-
tional structures and project performance (PMI Global Standard, 2004;
Shenhar, 2001), (b) alignment and synergy across business units and senior
management (Cash & Fox, 1992; Jiang, Klein, & Means, 2000), (c) project-
related negotiation and communication (Archibald, 1992; Fabi & Pettersen,
1992; Zimmer & Yasin, 1998); and (d) project leadership competencies.
More recent years of project management have involved a focus on the
increasingly dynamic contexts that are often technology driven and involve
sophisticated support tools. More current literature also focuses on greater
emphases on performance improvement, demands for immediate results, and
a dramatic pace of change. Project management has evolved into complex,
global, and mutually dependent contexts whereby calls for systematic
approaches to project management research have paralleled recent claims
regarding the influence of some research on project management outcomes
(Kloppenborg & Opfer, 2002). The expanding appeal of project management
today is consistent with workplaces commonly focused on performance and
which rely on ongoing growth whereby project management is utilized as an
essential element for organizational success.

HRD and Project Management

Gilley et al. (2002) declared that, “all too often, many HRD leaders do not rec-
ognize this as an essential responsibility and thus fail to provide a practical
approach and techniques to planning and managing projects” (p. 231). HRD is
defined in a variety of ways including as the “integrated use of training and devel-
opment, career development, and organization development to improve individ-
ual effectiveness” (McLagan, 1989, p. 7). Findings from large-scale studies have
led to the identification of a number of HRD-related roles by McLagan (1996)
including HRD strategic advisor, HR systems designer and developer, organiza-
tion change consultant, organization design consultant, learning program special-
ist, instructor/facilitator, individual development and career consultant,
performance consultant, and researcher. Project management has been identified
as an important element for success in each of these roles (Gilley et al., 2002).
316 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

The need to better understand and execute project undertakings led to the
development of the field of project management which, similar to HRD, often
engages at the point of intersection between scholars and practitioners. The
Project Management Institute (PMI) defines project management as “the art of
directing and coordinating human and material resources throughout the life
of the project by using modern management techniques to achieve predeter-
mined objectives of scope, cost, time, quality, and participant satisfaction”
(PMI Standards Committee, 1987, p. 4-1). Many definitions of HRD (see
Weinberger, 1998; Woodall, 2001) and even more HRD texts and articles
frame HRD interventions as projects or emphasize processes and outcomes in
a manner that aligns with project management (Swanson & Holton, 2001;
Werner & DeSimone, 2006).
There are numerous HRD activities and interventions requiring project man-
agers and appropriate project management approaches (Fuller, 1997). A project
management system is a key element to HRD and OD interventions (McLean,
2006). According to McLean (2006), establishing an effective approach to project
management is essential in the early stages of action research and OD and
throughout implementation of HRD-related interventions. Although HRD and
project management practice and literature have greatly expanded over recent
decades, the intersection of these two areas has not been comprehensively exam-
ined. Gilley et al. (2002) positioned project management as central for the suc-
cess of HRD implementation. Understanding the scope of literature exploring
project management and HRD connections is important for HRD and organiza-
tional success and project management itself is an essential frame through which
organizational action can be examined.

Summary of Literature
Researchers suggest that projects fail to deliver quality products because of
inadequate planning, lack of alignment with resources and deliverables, inad-
equate change management, and insufficient feedback processes (Cicmil,
2000). To that end, project management and HRD connections and emerging
project management are operationalized in organizational settings because of
the need to ensure that project planning and execution are aligned with strategic
goals to support resource requirements and to assist in successful change manage-
ment deliverables. The literature integrating project management and HRD
provides a means for planning, controlling, and executing project initiatives.
A thematic review of the literature noting project management and HRD connections
included articles divided into several sections, and particularly (a) failure statistics,
(b) OD, (c) CD, (d) leadership, and (e) organization theory. These sections
summarize each of the systematically selected articles for project management
and HRD literature connections.
A review of the emerging project management literature included research
that was related to broad areas of industries including banking, pharmaceutical,
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 317

Neo- Action
Institutional In Project
Queuing
Temporary
Organization Knowledge
Flow
Signaling
Detection Resource
Theory Based
Theories
Human Resource
Management
Project Planning
and Controlling
Project
Scheduling
Management
Models

Tools
and
HRD
Performance
Literature
Human Resource
Management Communication
and Technology

Research
Quality Human
Management Resources

Project Leadership
Outcomes Organization Career
Development Development

FIGURE 1: Project Management and HRD Literature: Key Themes

consulting, advertising, legal, healthcare, safety, and emerging manufacturing

and industrial sectors (Kerzner, 2001). Figure 1 includes the related articles
divided into several sections including: (a) project management related models,
(b) project management–related theories, (c) project management– specific
research and findings, and (d) a discussion of related project management tools.
These sections summarize each of the systematically selected articles from
emerging project management literature.

HRD and Project Management

Five HRD–project management intersections were identified in the

review—failure statistics, OD, CD, leadership, and organization theory. Of the
aforementioned articles, those publications associated with intersections
between project management and HRD are reported as follows.
318 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

Failure statistics. By analyzing project success data made available to the

15th International Project Management Association (IPMA) World Congress,
reasons for project failures and the results were assessed. In the early 1990s,
77% of U.K. projects failed and 83% of U.S. projects failed. The reasons for
project failure identified include: “inadequate definition; poor or no planning;
wrong leader; scope not defined; inappropriate team; ineffective controls; poor
communication; unrealistic timescale” (IPMA, 2001, p. 866). In addition, 80%
of the U.K. projects had no project management conceptual framework and
U.S. experts cited poor project scope definition and loss of control during the
design and implementation phases as the explanation for cost overruns (IPMA,
2001). There was an identified need to more clearly identify critical success
factors (CSFs) in the early stages of projects so that project success and fail-
ure could be better understood. Because the central reason for project failures
identified points to the potential impact of project management learning and
development on project management success, HRD-related efforts are identi-
fied as clear solutions to project management improvement.
Organization development. Henderson (2005) reported the findings of a sur-
vey of members within the OD and Change Division of the Academy of
Management. The survey findings reported that the top seven foundational skills
within OD include: project management, communication, collaborative work,
problem solving, use of new technology, conceptualizing, presentation and edu-
cation, and coaching skills. According to Henderson, “project professionals are
significantly trained to use logical and systematic methods to plan and control
projects” (p. 14); therefore, based on the findings from this study, “co-creating
strategic OD engagements with project managers who know its genesis can be a
boon for OD consultants in affecting significant change” (p. 17).
Project management provides a framework in which to define OD engage-
ment requirements. More specifically, OD consultants work with project man-
agers to develop activities including visioning, reflecting, and safeguarding to
alleviate time constraint pressures. Project management and OD activities are
geared toward a systematic execution of activities with the end goal of suc-
cessful integration and participation from all work streams within an organi-
zation (Henderson, 2005).
Career development. Gutteridge (1986) reported “career development rep-
resents the outcomes created by the integration of individual career-planning
activities with institutional career management processes” (p. 54). The sub-
processes of career planning include job choice, organization choice, job
assignment, and self-development. In addition, career planning includes
the identification and selection of individuals to align job skills with job
assignments.
CD in the identified literature focused both on CD for those in project man-
agement roles and organizational decision making about individuals associ-
ated with project management initiatives. The latter has clear implications for
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 319

the CD of employees selected for organizational projects as involvement in

successful project management initiatives are not only important individual
CD experiences but also often lead to new career opportunities. There is often
not a clear career path for moving from a management position to a temporary
project management position. For instance, as an increasing number of orga-
nizations expand their global operations, there is a need to identify and select
qualified managerial candidates for oversees projects. There is also a need to
implement a systematic method to organize identification and selection of
expatriates (Harvey & Novicevic, 2001). The systematic method identified
includes (a) identification of expatriate candidates, (b) analysis of candidate
competencies, (c) determining learning methods for candidates, and (d) iden-
tifying thinking styles of candidates.
According to Tsai, Moskowitz, and Lee (2003), resource selection is impor-
tant to project management because resources drive project completion, reduc-
ing project costs, project duration, and project risks. The authors suggest the use
of computational approaches applying their resource-based view of project
management. More specifically, “an integrated, efficient computational method
based on design of experiments to solve the software resource selection prob-
lem, in which a critical resource diagram (CRD)” is recommended as an early
part of the project design (Tsai et al., 2003, p. 167). The CRD provides a
framework for selecting appropriate human resources; decisions which tie
directly to the CD opportunities for managers and employees.
Leadership. Lee-Kelley (2002) reported on a survey of project manager
leadership styles and management of changing project boundaries and related
interfaces. Findings from the study included the following conclusions:

Project managers are not overly affected by internal market mechanisms or con-
straints on face-to-face interactions. However, certain project variables such as
project objectives, team size, frequency of team changes and project duration
play significant roles in the relationship between the project leaders and his/her
perception of project difficulties (p. 461).

These research findings suggest that (a) there is no relationship between

leadership styles and perceived influence on project time frames and delegated and
selected number of projects; and (b) the longer the project time frame the larger
the team size, and the greater the perception that the manager selected the project.
According to Manley (1975), project leader efforts are integrated within the
informal organizational structure overriding formal communication requirements.
The openness presented to managers of key projects allows them to access to
stakeholders. During the enactment of the project plan, “even where the pro-
ject group is small and members have to draw upon the resources of support-
ing independent organizations, traditional chains of command tend to be
ignored” (p. 180). The project manager directs the implementation of the ini-
tiative and as such “must have a high tolerance for ambiguity, a good working
320 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

understanding of basic management principles, consummate ‘people’ skills, a

general understanding of the various technologies, and a strong desire to be
where the action is” (p. 182).
Organization theory. Temporary organization has emerged as a theory
reifying modern-day experiences of organizational life as a collection of pro-
jects and activities rather than a monolithic deployment of a whole system
strategy (Packendorff, 1995). According to Manley (1975), projects are tem-
porary initiatives and can be viewed structurally as a company within a com-
pany. Projects can be conceptualized from a systematic perspective including
“a system composed of multiple interdependent subsystems and its members
devote much of their initial effort toward gaining an understanding of the
nature of the interdependence as well as the impact of the environment”
(Manley, 1975, p. 180). One of the most important impacts of a project man-
agement structure is that it provides a framework for linking planning and
implementation functions (Manley, 1975).
Another key consideration associated with project management success is
structural support within the system or organization in which the project is being
undertaken. Because of the ways in which projects may span cross-functionally,
“project management is ideally unbounded by organizational hierarchies, struc-
tures, processes, and line-of-authority. As a practice, project management is used
to accomplish non-recurring goals bound by time, place (or situation), resources,
and particular scopes of work” (Henderson, 2005, p. 11).
The balanced matrix approach to structuring an organization has been
championed as one of the organizational frameworks that produce more effi-
cient project work. In the balanced matrix approach, functional and project
managers have equal authority and as such creates opportunities for conflict
(de Laat, 1994). Therefore, there is a need for more empirical analysis to
determine which organizational structure is more conducive for the industry
or organization type. Associated with organization structure, risk manage-
ment has been couched as one of the functions that should be planned and
managed in software development initiatives to ensure project success.
McGrew and Bilotta (2000) demonstrated that signal detection theory (SDT)
can be used to gather data in which to minimize the impacts of intervention
and response bias on risk management plan. More specifically, the unbiased
estimator enables comparisons across projects and facilitates the effective-
ness of risk management plans.
Each of the sections above summarized project management articles from
HRD-related journals. Although each contributed to the framing of HRD and
project management connections, the number of articles was limited. To iden-
tify additional areas that may inform these connections, articles identified to
be undertaking in emerging areas of project management were also examined.
The summary of these articles and a figure encapsulating themes from all iden-
tified articles is featured below.
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 321

Emerging Project Management Literature

For the most part, project management scholarship has been focused on tra-
ditional areas such as construction and engineering, but it has been broaden-
ing to cover a larger number of industries and contexts. For the purposes of this
study, emerging project management literature is defined as articles identified
in a systematic search of literature (discussed earlier) that are situated in non-
traditional project management contexts/industries. Four key themes from the
literature are reviewed (models, tools, theories, and research) are explored.
Models. Models have typically been used as a process to control, track,
and implement a series of phases, steps, or patterns. For example, a model
“provides a framework with which organizations can conduct a formal assess-
ment of their current project management capabilities and, thereby, determine
action plans (change initiatives) that need to be completed to improve project
performance” (Kendra & Taplin, 2004, p. 43). In addition, models are used by
project managers and project team members as frameworks to increase the
efficiency of project activities and resources (Kerzner, 2001). More specifi-
cally, models provide structure and organization for scheduling, performance
tracking, communication, and management activities.
Based on thematic analysis, identified models were divided into project plan-
ning and control models and human resource management models. Project plan-
ning and control models focus on strategic goal execution using quality
improvement for planning, coordinating, and executing project tasks. More
specifically, project planning and control processes and cycles include schedul-
ing, updating tasks, data management, and reporting capabilities (Kerzner, 2001).
For example, project life cycle is a construct that has developed as a model for
organizational processes including decision priorities (Smith, Mitchell, &
Summer, 1985) and productivity criteria (Cameron & Whetton, 1981). Human
resource project management includes the processes “that organize and manage
the project team” (PMI Global Standard, 2004, p. 199) including processes that
are related to human resource planning, acquiring the project team, developing
the project team, and managing the project team. More specifically, human
resource management models are focused on developing teams as well as team
members with an emphasis on enhancing and supporting performance. The arti-
cles identified provided project management– related models that examined
resource allocation, cost control, data management, project roles, reporting rela-
tionships, training, team-building activities, personality characteristics, conflict
management, and learning or knowledge development. The next section exam-
ines theoretical elements in identified literature.

Theories. Project management is considered an evolving field of study and

as such does not have a fully established theoretical background (Jugdev, 2004).
Project management often integrates theories from other well-established
322 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

disciplines/fields including management, human behavior, psychology, and

operations. For example, some project management theories have been con-
structed using basic topics including “the use of a common terminology and
frameworks, avoiding tautologies, and the merits of analogies” (Jugdev, 2004,
p. 15). Several approaches to theory development or clarification take the form
of analogies, integrated relationships, facts, or systematic procedures.
As stated by Jugdev (2004), “theories are important because they help
explain and predict events, patterns, and trends” (p. 16). Seven theoretical per-
spectives associated with project management were gleaned from identified
literature including: neoinstitutional organization theory, action in project
theory, queuing theory, knowledge flow, temporary organization, a resource-
based view, and transformational–transactional leadership.
Neoinstitutional organization theory defines projects as tasks to be accom-
plished and is based on the premise that projects are institutions that are repro-
duced based on actions implemented during previous experiences (Packendorff,
1995). More specifically, rather than viewing organizations holistically as linear
mechanistic systems, institutions are reduced to a set of projects that are consid-
ered as tasks to be accomplished. The theory was famous during the 1980s and
purports that the conceptions related to tasks are not unique and can be associated
with numerous entities.
Action in project theory focuses on the “human interaction within the pro-
ject organization leading to the outcome of the project” (Packendorff, 1995,
pp. 329-330). The premise of this theory is based on the enactment by indi-
viduals and emphasis is placed on “investigating the expectations that form the
action base, and the learning that occurs as a result of the action” (p. 330). The
studies, related to projects as action systems, target the actual individual
behavior rather than the expected behavior.
Levy and Shlomo (1997) suggested a queuing-theory approach to minimiz-
ing frequent delays and cost overruns. The interest in queuing theory is moti-
vated by the belief that the understanding of causes and interactions creating
congestion and delay is important to the effective design of congestion-control
algorithms. The authors introduce the queuing penalty to quantify the penalty
for delays and frequent cost overruns of parallel executed projects. In addition,
the authors reported that there is no practical way to totally avoid the penalty
but that the goal is to minimize the penalty. Approaches to reduce the queuing
penalty include minimizing cost by maintaining on schedule projects and to
minimize the idleness of high-capacity cost groups (Levy & Shlomo, 1997).
Snider and Nissen (2003) introduced a knowledge-flow approach to project
management. The theory is predicated on a dynamic perspective of knowledge as
a solution, as experience, and as socially created (Snider & Nissen, 2003). The
theory includes four dimensions that are focused on knowledge flow including
“explicitness, reach, life cycle, and flow time” (Snider & Nissen, 2003, p. 7).
Snider and Nissen further argued that knowledge-flow framework “provides a
more enhanced approach to project management research and theory develop-
ment that provided by project management BOK [body of knowledge]” (p. 11).
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 323

Turner and Müller (2003) framed a discussion about the project viewed
through the lens of organization theory. The authors contended that within
existing organization theory a project can be defined as “a temporary organi-
zation to which resources are assigned to undertake a unique, novel and tran-
sient endeavor managing the inherent uncertainty and need for integration in
order to deliver beneficial objectives of change” (Turner & Müller, 2003, p. 7).
In addition, the role of the project manager is flexible and includes identifying
and communicating project tasks, encouraging project team members to com-
plete project tasks, and aligning project strategies and goals with internal and
external objectives.
Jugdev (2004) created a resource-based theory of project management
based on Arnoult’s (1972) classification of theories including metaphors,
analogies, reductionist (simpler) concepts, and abstract (mathematical) rela-
tionships. She compared the genomes of humans to an organization’s tangible
resources entitled “strategic asset genome” (p. 22). Furthermore, Jugdev
(2004) focused on project management as a strategic asset that must be main-
tained and extended by using business processes, methodologies, and frame-
works to implement strategic initiatives.
Barber and Warn (2005) discussed the leadership requirements for project
managers by reviewing the literature and developing a framework to link trans-
action and transformation leadership styles. The findings report that proactive
leadership is more success driven than reactive decisions, including monitor-
ing project plans and budgets. In addition, “project managers need to pay more
attention to the progress of their project and forestall any problems rather than
just being reactive problem solvers” (Barber & Warn, 2005, p. 1032).
McGrew and Bilotta (2000) demonstrated that signal detection theory can
be used to gather data in which to minimize the impacts of intervention and
response bias on risk management plans. Furthermore, signaling theory can be
used effectively to describe success in software development initiatives. More
specifically, the unbiased estimator (or true approximations for the project
being assessed) enables comparisons across project and facilitates the effec-
tiveness of risk management plans. As outlined in Figure 1, these theories pro-
vide interesting frameworks by which to examine project management and
point to future opportunities for theory development and research. The section
that follows explores project management research as identified by the afore-
mentioned search process.
Research. Research builds on the literature, models, and theories and thus
is useful in identifying practices and applications that are useful for project ini-
tiatives. More specifically, project management uses generally accepted
knowledge and priorities to execute projects and as such there is interest in the
patterns, trends, and future directions in which to frame project planning and
execution. The literature further provides suggestions for researchers, as it
relates to advancing the maturity of the project management profession.
324 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

Project management research has focused on (a) human resource issues

including competencies, leadership, responsibilities, and incompatibility and
misalignment of authority; (b) leadership; (c) CD; (d) OD; (e) project out-
comes; and (f) quality management. These six areas have been included in
Figure 1 as research categories. Packendorff (1995) posited that research needs
to focus more on action in projects to study human resource issues. The basis
of this idea is that the combination of action and knowledge can improve the
quality of projects by focusing on integration, human resource management,
and communication. More specifically, since 1992, research has focused more
on human resource issues, teamwork and relationships, leadership, and CD.
Pinto (1998) posited that project management and politics are linked and that
the project manager’s job is not only to handle technical issues but to also
manage project team and stakeholder behaviors, including conflict resolution.
According to Kerzner (2001), “The project manager is responsible for coor-
dinating and integrating activities across multiple, functional lines. In order to
do this, the project manager needs strong communication and interpersonal
skills” (p. 9) and leadership and technical skills in which to lead the project
team and organization to implementation. The research that has focused on
leadership and CD suggest that certain leadership styles and skills are needed
to successfully drive projects to completion and that those skills can either be
learned and developed through activities.
Project management research has primarily focused on the factors that
determine project outcomes including a project’s success or failure. The
assessment of the project implementation has been evaluated from a variety of
positions and based on multiple criteria including quadruple constraint (Pinto
& Prescott, 1990). Pinto and Prescott (1990) have expanded the measures to
include criteria related to quadruple constraints and include “project mission,
top management support, schedule/plans, client consultation, personnel, tech-
nical tasks, client acceptance, monitoring and feedback, communication, and
trouble-shooting” (p. 315). Pinto and Prescott conducted a field study includ-
ing survey data from project managers from manufacturing and service indus-
tries. The findings from the study revealed that project success should be
regarded as a multiple-factor construct rather than a single construct. Pinto and
Prescott reported that project planning was the thrust for project success and
should be monitored throughout the project. Additional findings revealed that
tactics were important as CSFs only during the execution phase of the project
life cycle (Pinto & Prescott, 1990).
Project management methodology is used to strategically frame the activities
of the project manager and project team to reduce project failures and to ulti-
mately achieve quality based on continuously improving processes. The phases
of a project include task and quality activities that sequentially guide the project
from initiation to close out. Furthermore, project managers utilize tools and tech-
niques along with people to ensure quality deliverables are on time, within scope,
and within budget. Therefore, there is a connection of knowledge and action that
can be used to frame behaviors from a practical view based on a quality-control
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 325

leader actively engaging in transactions to plan, organize, monitor, and report

findings to maintain a dynamic balance with the organization, resources, tools,
and the external environment.
Tools. Tools have been developed as “some mechanisms to ensure that even
the smallest activity moves towards the ultimate goal: successful project com-
pletion” (Lai, 1997, p. 174). Therefore, some proponents of project manage-
ment methodology suggest that “disciplined management processes”
(Kerzner, 2001, p. 741) based on past experiences and internal and external
factors need to be considered as a part of the framework for project imple-
mentation (Chatzoglou & Macaulay, 1997). Tools are used throughout various
phases of the project and include planning and monitoring, scheduling, per-
formance, and communication and technology.
Planning and monitoring tools assist project teams in coping with complex
management and organizational decisions, managing masses of data, and meeting
project deliverables on time and within budget (Kerzner, 2001). Project-schedul-
ing tools are used to manage the activities, performance, and time associated with
project completion. Project-scheduling tools include: (a) program evaluation and
review techniques, (b) critical path method, (c) GANTT chart, and (d) milestone
chart (Lai, 1997). Each of the tools uses a different technique for tracing time con-
trol. Performance tools are used to assist in increasing project performance. The
tools facilitate identification of stakeholders with an emphasis on their roles and
influences. Performance tools entitled quality assurance have been developed to
control the outcomes based on limits including speed, costs, and quality.
Communication and technology tools are used to communicate the processes and
procedures to human resources and to transfer knowledge. In addition, technology
tools are used as a means to visualize, reduce, and manage project risks.
In terms of HRD-project management connections, our review points to a
number of opportunities to enhance the literature examining project manage-
ment utilization in the context of HRD. Figure 1 encapsulates 4 major themes
and 19 subthemes from our systematic review of literature. The review con-
firmed that, although limited, both HRD and project management connections
are featured in HRD literature and that emerging literature in project manage-
ment also has relevance for HRD. It is also clear that the literature reflects a
few types of interaction between project management and HRD. There are
clear examples in the literature highlighting not only the relevance of project
management in specific HRD contexts but also a need for conceptual and the-
oretical development regarding project management and project management
lifecycles in HRD.

Limitations and Implications for HRD

Several limitations regarding available studies were determined in the litera-
ture reviewed along with some clear opportunities for future HRD-related
326 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

research. In several cases, a common method to collect participant data in many

studies increased possibilities for overstated relationship between constructs. In
addition, several studies used small, nonrandom, or unclearly described sampling
techniques. Many of the studies reported used cross-sectional designs exploring
project management from a fixed point in time. The results from this systematic
search of the literature point to a clear need for longitudinal designs and more
advanced statistics such as multivariate analysis, structural equation modeling
path analysis that compliment a more complex examination of the multiple fac-
tors that may contribute to project management in HRD generally and project
success at the leadership, team member, and environmental characteristics levels
along with more specifically defined project management processes and out-
comes. Although several related theories were identified, the theory-based stud-
ies utilized needed to be repeated in many cases for utilizing the aforementioned
sampling and methodological improvements. It should also be noted that
although important to this line of investigation, there was a void of qualitative
inquiry presented. Studies using other than quantitative approaches are warranted.
From the practice perspective, there is much more that can be done to con-
tribute to the elaboration of project management in human resource contexts,
available literature is simply falling short regarding project management in HRD.
Despite the limited amount of this kind of literature, project management litera-
ture, including a large amount of project management theories, research, models
and tools, appears to be transferable to HRD contexts; however, it is important
that these transferable concepts are elaborated in the context of HRD. In addition,
there is much room for the development of project management overall and there
is an absence of conceptual or theoretical model that examines key elements asso-
ciated with HRD project management success.

A Conceptual Framework for HRD

Project Management
Although a handful of articles identified featured some elements of
HRD–project management connections and the nontraditional project man-
agement literature also provided some relevant insights, there is a need for
more narrowly organized research and theory building associated with project
management in HRD contexts. Joo (2005) and Wanberg, Welsh, and Hezlett
(2003) undertook HRD-related literature reviews and, based on their analyses,
proposed conceptual frameworks in support of future research in their respec-
tive areas of investigation. Similarly, we have concluded that the development
of a HRD project management conceptual framework would be beneficial.
Our approach was influenced by the aforementioned authors.
As Torraco (2004) expounded, opportunities for theory building in HRD are
numerous. Accordingly, the three overarching aspects needing to be addressed
in the development are: (a) the absence of a common framework and explicit
assumptions in support of HRD theory building, (b) the lack of well-tested
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 327

HRD theory-building approaches, and (c) a need for shared understanding

regarding core concepts of HRD theory and theory building (Lynham, 2000).
As examined above, although theories associated with project management
have been identified, theoretical and conceptual development regarding project
management in HRD has relevance for the field and is in need of explication.
Although there is an ongoing possibility that project management knowledge
from the general project management literature and practice can inform project
management in HRD, the unique elements associated with HRD efforts and the
interdependence between HRD intervention success and related project man-
agement are important considerations—particularly as project management
knowledge relates to HRD outcomes.
Van de Ven (2007) advanced a systematic process for engaging theoretically
based research studies: (a) analyze the situation or problem as it occurs naturalis-
tically, (b) decide upon a research question and conceptual model to address the
situation or problem, (c) utilize an appropriate theory or theory-building approach
and design a study to examine the research question, and (d) execute a research
study and analyze findings toward development of a solution. As with the afore-
mentioned examples we address the first two steps in the Van de Ven process.
The conceptual framework (Figure 2) is organized for the purposes of
focusing on key steps or issues associated with project management of HRD.
For the purposes of focus, HRD is conceptualized in terms of an intervention
which is consistent with HRD and related action research literature (McLean,
2006; Swanson & Holton, 2001; Werner & DeSimone, 2006)—HRD inter-
vention development, HRD intervention deployment, HRD intervention
implementation, and HRD intervention evaluation. The overarching factors
examined in the conceptual framework address these process steps through
consideration of relevant antecedents, process issues, outcomes proximal to
the HRD intervention project, and distal outcomes associated with the scope
of the project at the individual, group, or organizational level. Based on the
conceptual model, propositions and related rationale are presented in Table 2.
Overall, the conceptual framework and related propositions were an intro-
ductory attempt to illustrate some of the key factors associated with HRD
project management. There is more work that can be done by considering the
potential impact of general project management literature for some of the
variables and propositions outlined; however, it was important to first consider
key elements in the conceptualization of project management in HRD.

Conclusion
We reported key findings related to exploring HRD-related areas with explicit
connections to project management and an emerging nontraditional project man-
agement literature that has implications for HRD–project management connec-
tions. HRD–project management explicit connections included findings related
to failure statistics, OD, CD, leadership, and organization theory. In addition, the
(text continued on p. 335)
328
FIGURE 2: A Conceptual Framework for Successful HRD Project Management
 TABLE 2: Propositions for a Conceptual Framework for Successful HRD Project Management

Model Category Variable Propositions Rationale and Support

Antecedents Project manager P1: The greater a project P1: Although there is limited research, and no
characteristics manager's knowledge, HRD-related studies were identified, Wang,
abilities skills, Chou, and Jiang (2005) found that project manager
proactivity, responsive- experiences positively impact project outcomes.
ness, and experience, In addition, project manager qualifications and
the more positive impact attitudes likely influence project outcomes (Casey,
on HRD project 1978; Gullett, 1972; Kerzner, 2001). An important
outcomes. element needing further examination is the extent to
which successful HRD implementation is actually a
mixture of HRD practitioner's professional
judgment and project management-related skills that
extend HRD-sponsored programs/efforts to reality.
It is likely that better project management makes for
better HRD professionals, as project management
and implementation are often closely related.
Project team characteristics P2: The greater the P2: Given the scope and complexity of many HRD-
project team members’ related projects, including large-scale HRD-related
knowledge, abilities, research, it is logical that team management is a
skills, proactivity, central element for success. Although HRD-related
responsiveness, and expe- studies associated with team HRD project
rience, the more positive management, Kendra and Taplin (2004) reported the
impact on HRD project experiences and knowledge of project team
outcomes. members positively impact project outcomes. There
is much room for exploration regarding teams and
HRD project success.

329
(continued)
 TABLE 2: (continued)

Model Category Variable Propositions Rationale and Support

330
Organization stakeholder P3a: The greater the P3a: Although the HRD-related literature has
characteristics organizational suggested that readiness is essential to HRD
stake-holder readiness, interventions (Miller, Madsen, & John, 2006), most
buy-in, support, readiness-related commentary has been anecdotal,
proactivity, and readiness from the HRD project perspective has
responsiveness, and yet to be thoroughly considered. Although not
experience, the more directly associated with HRD projects, Pinto and
positive impact on HRD Prescott (1990) and Jugdev and Müller (2005)
project outcomes. reported that project success is based on stakeholder
involvement including stakeholder support,
stakeholder consultation, and stakeholder
acceptance demonstrated through readiness,
proactivity, and responsiveness.
P3b: The more aligned the P3b: According to Semler (1997), organizational
organization structure alignment is a key element for HRD success.
and environment in Although the alignment perspective may often be
support of the HRD used to describe conceptual buy-in, it is also
project, the better the important for shared participation in complex
outcome. projects involving multiple stakeholders. Available
research suggests that alignment of structure and
environment, including authority, leadership, and
responsibility, yields better project outcomes (Baker
et al., 1983; Butler, 1973; Gullett, 1972; Hodgetts,
1968). There is a need to examine alignment with
HRD project contexts.

(continued)
 TABLE 2: (continued)

Model Category Variable Propositions Rationale and Support

Process Project management P4: Utilization of P4: Although numerous models have been used to
approach and/or Practice structured project explicate key HRD concepts and practices (McLean,
models utilized management approaches 2006; Swanson & Holton, 2001) understanding the
or practice models and utilization of specific models toward effective HRD
early determination of implementation has been understudied. Utilization
critical success factors of project management approaches, including
(CSFs) will positively processes used to plan, control, and execute con-
influence HRD project tracts, positively influence project outcomes (Jiang,
outcomes. Klein, & Means, 2000; Kendra & Taplin, 2004) and
have led to initial understanding regarding appropri-
ate approaches to general project management.
Comparing and contrasting current HRD practice
models and the project management components
associated with them, or development and testing of
integrated HRD project management models, will
clearly benefit the field.
Project management tools P5: Utilization of relevant P5: According to Kendra and Taplin (2004) tools,
project management tools including performance measurement systems, posi-
will positively influence tively influence project success. The extent to which
HRD project success. project management tools outlined in the review of
literature assist in the maximization of HRD project
performance and HRD implementation have yet to
be systematically explored.
Leadership and project P6: Proactivity and low P6: Although there is some evidence that leadership
team dynamics avoidance behaviors behavior and project team behaviors positively
among team leadership influence project outcomes (Jiang et al., 2000;
and members will posi- Zimmer & Yasin, 1998), there is little beyond anec-
tively influence HRD dotal and prescriptive support in terms of the role of

331
project outcomes. leadership for HRD and HRD-related projects.

(continued)
 TABLE 2: (continued)

Model Category Variable Propositions Rationale and Support

332
Project team responsive- P7: Ongoing use of P7: Available project management literature suggests
ness to environmental environmental scanning project techniques and tools appropriately applied to
change and adaptation to changes project activities reinforce ongoing environmental
in the project scanning and adaptation to project environments to
environment, including ensure project success (Kendra & Taplin, 2004; PMI
stakeholder expectations Global Standard, 2004).
and of critical success
factors, will positively
influence HRD project
outcomes.
Proximal outcomes Project timeliness P8: On-time execution P8: There have been few researchers or practitioners
and/or appropriate time who have systematically explored the role of
adjustments for project timeliness and on-time delivery for HRD projects.
execution will positively In related project management literature, Kendra
influence HRD project and Taplin (2004) suggested that positive project
outcomes. outcomes are predicated on on-time execution of
initiatives; however, no identified studies examined
the elements/barriers contributing to HRD project
timeliness and the specific impact such timeliness or
lack of timeliness may have on HRD success.
Project alignment with P9: Alignment between P9: Pinto (1998) and PMI Global Standard (2004)
objectives HRD intervention objec- maintained the importance of alignment between
tives and project manage- project and project management execution tech-
ment execution overall niques to influence project outcomes. Because of
will influence perceptions the absence of exploration regarding HRD and pro-
of HRD project success. ject management intersections, there is currently
little to inform HRD professionals regarding these
important practice intersections.

(continued)
 TABLE 2: (continued)

Model Category Variable Propositions Rationale and Support

Quality of project P10: Project management P10: Well-executed HRD processes supported by
execution efforts that led to HRD appropriate project management logically create a
intervention implementa- better likelihood for project execution which
tion will have a positive stakeholders embrace. Christenson and Walker
impact on proximal (2004) emphasized the importance of using project
stakeholder perceptions management techniques to positively influence
and general intervention stakeholder perceptions and intervention outcomes.
outcomes. The absence of systematic studies exploring the
impact of project management implementation on
intervention outcomes points to the need for further
study of this phenomenon.
Project team learning P11: Project team learning P11: HRD literature has long emphasized team and
throughout the HRD organizational learning and the importance of these
project will have a elements for organizational performance. Although
positive impact on not examined in the context of HRD, results
perceived outcomes of reported by Thiry (2001) pointed to a relationship
the project and on between learning and performance outcomes. Thiry
future project team introduced a model that integrated team learning
performance. with performance within the project management
framework. More study is needed.
Distal outcomes Intervention success P12: Objective and subjec- P12: When an HRD project is perceived to be well
tive HRD project success executed in ways that lead to a focused HRD inter-
will have a positive vention, it is proposed that the intervention itself is
impact on HRD interven- likely to be viewed as successful. Kendra and Taplin
tion success. (2004) emphasized that project success will have a
positive influence on the organization and
perceptions of organizational efforts. HRD-related

333
examples have yet to be examined in the literature.

(continued)
 TABLE 2: (continued)

334
Model Category Variable Propositions Rationale and Support

Intervention-related P13: A successful HRD P13: Schindler and Eppler (2003) researched the use
learning intervention, aided by of lessons learned sessions after project implemen-
effective HRD project tations to positively impact organization, team, and
management, will individual learning. Organizational practices
positively impact embracing action-reflection learning cycles create
organizational/group/ opportunities for learning about HRD project
individual learning. implementation and have the potential to contribute
to future HRD project implementation strategies
and outcomes.
Intervention-related P14: A successful HRD P14: Kendra and Taplin (2004) and PMI Global
performance intervention, aided by Standard (2004) posited that project management
improvement effective HRD project can be used as a framework to impact interventions
management, will posi- including team and organizational performance.
tively impact organiza- Assuming the HRD approach aligns well with orga-
tional/group/individual nizational needs, effective project management
performance. associated with the deployment of HRD efforts is
likely to result positive performance outcomes.
Resulting organizational P15: Objective and P15: Pinto (1998) suggested that future organizational
success subjective HRD success is predicated on the use of project manage-
intervention success ment techniques to implement successful organiza-
will positively impact tional interventions. Well-implemented HRD-related
organizational success. efforts with an emphasis on the key elements identi-
fied in Figure 2 above create a greater likelihood for
related organizational success.
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 335

findings from the emerging nontraditional project management literature were

reported as four key themes: models, tools, theories, and research.
Project initiatives have become increasingly prevalent in organizations and
are important considerations for organizational success. Projects are temporary
initiatives and can be viewed structurally as a company within a company and
project management is a methodology that provides a framework to success-
fully define and execute temporary initiatives including OD engagements.
More specifically, project management helps to define CSFs in the early stages
of projects and project management defines the infrastructure for supporting the
CD and leadership styles of project mangers as well as project team members.
Researchers suggest that project success is predicated on delivering quality
products, adequate planning, alignment of resources and deliverables, ade-
quate change management processes, and sufficient feedback processes
(Cicmil, 2000). In addition, researchers suggest that project managers and pro-
ject team members utilize tools and techniques along with people to ensure
quality deliverables are on time, within scope, and efficiently managed in a
broad area of industries, including banking, pharmaceutical, consulting, adver-
tising, legal, health care, safety, and emerging manufacturing and industrial
sectors (Kerzner, 2001). Thus, an understanding of project management within
the context of HRD and the use of project management models, theories, tools,
and research, ensures project-failure statistics are minimized by emphasizing
the importance of resources and their use in supporting and implementing
organizational strategies and goals.
Finally, there is additional work that should be done to clarify the use of pro-
ject management approaches in support of HRD professionals and the use of
project management by HRD as a business practice in multiple industries and
contexts. The additional work includes the use of resources to implement orga-
nizational strategies. There is also a need to explore the converse including the
use of HRD to develop project managers. There are many opportunities to
examine HRD–project management connections, and we hope that this exami-
nation of literature and key concepts is beneficial for future research, practice
applications, and theory building.

References
Archibald, R. (1976). Managing high-technology programs and projects. New York: John Wiley.
Archibald, R. (1992). Managing high-technology programs and projects. New York: John Wiley.
Arnoult, M. D. (1972). Fundamentals of scientific method in psychology. Dubuque, IW: Brown.
Baker, G., Murphy, D., & Fisher, D. (1983). Factors affecting project management. In
D. I. Cleveland & W. R. King (Eds.), Project management handbook (pp. 669-685). New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Barber, E., & Warn, J. (2005). Leadership in project management: From firefighter to firelighter.
Management Decision, 43, 1032-1039.
Betts, M., & Lansley, P. (1995). International journal of project management: A review of the first
ten years. International Journal of Project Management, 13(4), 207-217.
336 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

Butler, A. (1973). Project management: A study in organizational conflict. Academy of

Management Journal, 16(1), 84-101.
Cameron, K. S., & Whetton, D. A. (1981). Perceptions of organizational effectiveness over orga-
nizational life cycles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 525-544.
Casey, D. (1978). Project training for managers. Journal of European Industrial Training, 2(5), 3-6.
Cash, C., & Fox, R. (1992). Elements of successful project management. Journal of Systems
Management, 43(9), 10-14.
Chatzoglou, P., & Macaulay, L. (1997). The importance of human factors in planning the require-
ments capture stage of a project. International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), 39-53.
Christenson, D., & Walker, D. (2004). Understanding the role of “vision” in project success.
Project Management Journal, 35(3), 39-52.
Cicmil, S. (2000). Quality in project environments: A non-conventional agenda. International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17, 540-570.
de Laat, P. (1994). Matrix management of projects and power struggles: A case study of an R&D
laboratory. Human Relations, 47, 1089-1119.
Dooley, C. R. (1945). The training within industry report (1940-1945): A record of the develop-
ment of supervision—Their use and results. Washington, DC: War Manpower Commission,
Bureau of Training, Training Within Industry Service.
Dooley, L. M. (2002). HRD literature: Where is it published? In T. M. Egan & S. A. Lynham
(Eds.), Proceedings of the Academy of Human Resource Development (696-702). Bowling
Green, OH: Academy of Human Resource Development.
Fabi, B., & Pettersen, N. (1992). Human resource management practices in project management.
International Journal of Project Management, 10(2), 81-88.
Fuller, J. L. (1997). Managing performance improvement projects. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gilley, J., Eggland, S., & Gilley, M. (2002). Principles of human resource development. Oxford,
UK: Perseus.
Gullett, R. (1972). Personnel management in project organization. Public Personnel Review, 1(3),
17-22.
Gutteridge, T. (1986). Organizational career development systems: The state of practice. In Hall,
D. T. and Associates (Eds.), Career development in organizations (pp. 50-94). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Harvey, M., & Novicevic, M. (2001). Selecting expatriates for increasingly complex global
assignments. Career Development International, 6(2/3), 69-88.
Henderson, L. (2005). What we can learn about modern project management from ancient
Olympian archetypes? Organizational Development Journal, 23(4), 10-18.
Hodgetts, R. (1968). Leadership techniques in the project organization. Academy of Management
Journal, 11, 211-219.
International Project Management Association. (2001). Conference report. Journal of Management
Development, 20, 865-871.
Jiang, J., Klein, G., & Means, G. (2000). Project risk impact on software development team
performance. Project Management Quarterly, 31(4), 19-27.
Joo, B. (2005). Executive coaching: A conceptual framework from an integrative review of prac-
tice and research. Human Resource Development Review, 4(4), 462-488.
Jugdev, K. (2004). Through the looking glass: Examining theory development in project manage-
ment with the resource-based view lens. Project Management Journal, 35(3), 15-26.
Jugdev, K., & Müller, R. (2005). A retrospective look at our evolving understanding of project
success. Project Management Journal, 36(4), 19-31.
Kendra, K., & Taplin, L. (2004). Project success: A cultural framework. Project management
Journal, 35(1), 30-45.
Kerzner, H. (2001). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and con-
trolling (7th ed.). New York: John Wiley.
Kloppenborg, T., & Opfer, W. (2002). The current state of project management research: Trends,
interpretations, and predictions. Project Management Journal, 33(2), 5-18.
 Carden, Egan / HRD PROJECT MANAGEMENT 337

Krempl, S. F., & Pace, R. W. (2001). Training across multiple locations: Developing a system that
works. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Lai, L. (1997). A synergistic approach to project management in information systems develop-
ment. International Journal of Project Management, 15(3), 173-179.
Lee-Kelley, L. (2002). Situational leadership: Managing the virtual project team. Journal of
Management Development, 21, 461-476.
Levy, N., & Shlomo, G. (1997). Improving a multiproject management by using a queuing theory
approach. Project Management Journal, 28(4), 40-46.
Lynham, S. A. (2000). Theory building in the human resource development profession. Human
Resource Development Quarterly, 2, 159-178.
Manley, T. (1975). Have you tried project management? Public Personnel Management, 12, 180-188.
McGrew, J., & Bilotta, J. (2000). The effectiveness of risk management: Measuring what didn’t
happen. Management Decision, 38, 293-300.
McLagan, P. (1996). Great ideas revisited. Training and Development Journal, 11(2), 60-65.
McLagan, P. A. (1989). Models for HRD practice. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training
and Development.
McLean, G. N. (2006). Organization development: Principles, processes, performance. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Miller, D., Madsen, S., & John, C. (2006). Readiness for change: Implications on employees’ rela-
tionship with management, job knowledge and skills, and job demands. Journal of Applied
Management and Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 3-16.
Packendorff, J. (1995). Inquiring into the temporary organization: New directions for project man-
agement research. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 11, 319-333.
Pinto, J. (2000). Understanding the role of politics in successful project management. International
Journal of Project Management, 18(2), 85-91.
Pinto, J., & Prescott, J. (1990). Planning and tactical factors in the project implementation process.
Journal of Management Studies, 27, 305-327.
PMI Global Standard. (2004). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (3rd ed.).
Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
PMI Standards Committee. (1987). Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK). Drexell
Hill, PA: Project Management Institute.
Schindler, M., & Eppler, M. (2003). Harvesting project knowledge: A review of project learning
methods and success factors. International Journal of Project Management, 21(12), 219-228.
Semler, S. W. (1997). Systematic agreement: A theory of organizational alignment. Human
Resource Development Quarterly, 8(1), 23-40.
Shenhar, A. J. (2001). Contingent management in temporary organizations: The comparative
analysis of projects. Journal of High Technology Management, 12, 239-271.
Sleezer, C., & Sleezer, J. (1998). The status of HRD research in the United States from 1980 to
1994. Human Resource Development International, 1(4), 451-460.
Smith, K. G., Mitchell, T. R., & Summer, C. E. (1985). Top level management priorities in differ-
ent stages of the organizational life cycle. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 799-820.
Snider, K., & Nissen, M. (2003). Beyond the body of knowledge: A knowledge-flow approach to
project management theory and practice. Project Management Journal, 34(2), 4-12.
Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F., III. (2001). Foundations of human resource development. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Thiry, M. (2001). Sensemaking in value management practice. International Journal of Project
Management, 19(2), 71-77.
Torraco, R. J. (2004). Challenges and choices for theoretical research in human resource develop-
ment. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(2), 171-188.
Tsai, H., Moskowitz, H., & Lee, L. (2003). Human resource selection for software development projects
using Taguchi’s parameter design. European Journal of Operational Research, 15(1), 167-180.
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2003). On the nature of the project as a temporary organization.
International Journal of Project Management, 21(1), 1-8.
338 Human Resource Development Review / September 2008

Van de Ven, A. H. (2007). Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social research.
London: Oxford University Press.
Wanberg, C. R., Welsh, E. T., & Hezlett, S. A. (2003). Mentoring research: A review and dynamic
process model. In J. J. Martocchio & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human
resources management (Vol. 22, pp. 39-124). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
Wang, E., Chou, H., & Jiang, J. (2005). The impacts of charismatic leadership style on team cohe-
siveness and overall performance during ERP implementation. International Journal of
Project Management, 23(3), 173-180.
Weinberger, L. A. (1998). Commonly held theories of human resource development. Human
Resource Development International, 1(1), 75-93.
Werner, J. M., & DeSimone, R. L. (2006). Human resource development (4th ed.). Mason, OH:
Thomson South-Western.
Wilemon, D., & Ciero, J. (1970). The project manager: Anomalies and ambiguities. Academy of
Management Journal, 13, 269-282.
Woodall, J. (Ed.). (2001). Special issue on defining HRD. Human Resource Development
International, 4(3).
Zimmer, T., & Yasin, M. (1998). The leadership profile of American project managers. Project
Management Journal, 29(1), 31-38.

Lila Lenoria Carden is assistant professor and director of MS-HRM at Houston

Baptist University. She conducts research in human resource development, pro-
ject management, and leadership. Prior to becoming a university faculty member,
Carden was a program/project manager for software development programs.

Toby Marshall Egan is assistant professor and managing director of inter-

national HRD programs at Texas A&M University. He is currently vice president
of research for the Academy of Human Resource Development. Prior to becom-
ing a university faculty member, Egan managed large-scale HRD projects as
vice president of a U.S.-based consulting firm.