Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889 – 902

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman

Project managers and career models: An exploratory

comparative study
Karin Bredin a , Jonas Söderlund b,⁎
a
Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, Sweden
b
BI Norwegian Business School, Norway

Abstract

Prior research has paid little attention to the careers and career models of project managers. This is troublesome for at least two reasons. First, project
managers are becoming an increasingly important category of managers and today they constitute a major part of many organizations' leadership capability.
Second, traditional literature on careers generally does not address project-based careers as a specific case in point, although this kind of career is unique in
the sense that it is based on temporary assignments and lack of formal positions. The research presented in this paper identifies and explains patterns of
similarities and differences among applied career models in ten large, mature project-intensive firms in Sweden. The paper identifies a number of factors that
seem to be critical for the design of career models for project managers, including the number of levels, the complexity of assignments, and the degree of
formal requirements. The paper also outlines two archetypes of career models applied by the firms under study: the competence strategy model and the
talent management model.
© 2012 Elsevier Ltd. APM and IPMA. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Career; Career model; Project manager

1. Introduction of project managers is explained by the growing importance and

1.1. Project-based work, project-based careers
Already in the mid 1990s, former CEO of world electrical giant
Asea Brown Boveri (ABB) Mr. Percy Barnevik addressed the
importance of project managers to build successful project
businesses. He argued that the company was in need of more
than 350 global project managers who were able to run large-scale
projects. Barnevik stressed the fact that being a manager of such a
large endeavor is like being president of a major company or
division, and, in addition, “these managers have to squarely focus
the interest of the group, and have the power to override objections
from seven national ABB companies, if it is necessary for the
project” (Percy Barnevik, lecture at Linköping University, 1995,
quoted in Berggren, 1996: 135). In his analysis of ABB and its
project operations, Berggren argues that the increasing importance
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jonas.soderlund@liu.se (J. Söderlund).
0263-7863/$36.00 © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. APM and IPMA. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.11.010
size of projects — in some cases making projects more or less
separate organizational units with their own balance sheets and
profit statements. As Berggren puts it:
“ABB and its parents have always been involved in large
projects, of course, but during the 1990s there has been an
enormous expansion in the scale, scope and complexity of such
projects… Large projects, responsible for orders values of
several billion dollars, generate organizational dynamics that
are very different from a regular structure. A project means a
strong focus and a concentrated effort during a limited period
of time. Horizontal communication and cooperation are very
important” (Berggren, 1996: 134–135).
This development has spurred the interest in the study of the
role and practice of the project manager. Indeed, it should be noted
that this is not a new area of inquiry. Paul Gaddis, more than
50 years ago in his classic article about the project manager, called
for more knowledge about these matters. He argued that “if we are
to grow as advanced technology grows, we must realize the
importance of the project manager” (Gaddis, 1959: 89). His article
890 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
revolved around the following three questions: What does a
project manager in advanced technology industry do? What kind
of man must he be? What training is prerequisite for success?
Given the technological development in a wide range of fields,
Gaddis (1959) emphasized:
“In view of this, the project manager needs a different attitude
regarding the classic functions of control, coordination,
communication, and setting of performance standards. More-
over, the professional attitude and approach is steadily gaining
emphasis and more widespread acceptance throughout all of the
engineering industries”(Gaddis, 1959: 90).
The article by Gaddis was followed up by a series of papers in
top-tier management journals in the 1960s and the first years of the
1970s (see Söderlund, 2011). A fine example is the paper by
Wilemon and Cicero (1970) which argues that project managers
struggle with rather unique kinds of anomalies and ambiguities.
According to the authors, this requires development in four
principle areas: managing human inter-relationships, maintaining
a balance between the technical and managerial project functions,
coping with the risk associated with project management, and
surviving organizational restraints. During most of the 1970s,
1980s and 1990s, there was a remarkable silence about the role
and qualifications of the project manager, but in the last ten years,
we have seen considerable advancement in the study of project
leadership, in particular attempts to link context/project type with
leadership orientation and competence (Müller and Turner, 2010;
see also for example Shenhar and Dvir, 2007; De Meyer et al.,
2002). These are all valuable insights that add important
knowledge of the role, value and practice of the project manager.
Most notably, Shenhar and Dvir (2007) underline the importance
of developing training programs for project managers and career
models to ensure that project managers are motivated to develop
their competencies and consider it worthwhile to continue taking
on assignments as project managers. Hölzle (2010) relates this to
the importance of well-designed incentive systems for project
managers, and focuses especially on the implementation of career
paths for project managers. The author argues that the qualifica-
tion of the project manager has to be aligned with the formal career
levels and that career models are important to engage and provide
continuity to their project managers: “The project managers need
to trust that project management is a true career booster” (p. 785).
As the above literature review indicates, there are several things
that make the role, career and skills of project managers of key
importance; not only for research but also for practice. First, project
management is one of the most common management assignments
amongst professionals in contemporary organizations. More and
more people assume the role of project managers, and for many
people in a wide range of industries it is typically their first
assignment in a leader role. Second, it is a management role that is
often not based on a formal managerial position, but rather a
temporary assignment where responsibilities tend to exceed
authority. Thus, this role has a set of unique challenges and
problems that are different from other management duties (Bredin
and Söderlund, 2006). Third, “many project leaders express
feelings of stress, overload and a lack of control” (Lindgren and
Packendorff, 2009: 286). Fourth, project managers tend to leave
the role of project manager due to high work pressure and move
into other managerial positions, despite their interest in continuing
with project management assignments (see e.g., Ricciardi, 2001).
Fifth, project management is rapidly undergoing a formal
process of professionalization through the standardization of
bodies of knowledge and certification (Morris et al., 2006), which
makes career models for project managers an interesting part of
management professionalization.
The points above indicate a need to explore in further depth the
specificities and characteristics of the project manager career, since
it might give unique insights into a particular kind of profession-
alization of management work and the mutual interest of laying out
career ladders in fields previously unknown to both individuals and
firms. Despite the obvious importance of project managers, there
are, as mentioned above, both problems pertaining to the
preparedness of leadership and the sustainability of leadership.
Perhaps this is the area where career models have their most
important part to play. This paper aims at increasing our
understanding of the design of formalized project manager career
models. The purpose is to describe the characteristics of formalized
project management career models in use and identify patterns of
similarities and differences across career models. We will also
suggest explanations to our observations — the similarities and
differences observed among the firms, and discuss these patterns in
relation to previous research on career models in general and
careers in project-based organizations in particular. Before
presenting the empirical findings and results of this study, in the
following we will first make a comment on the definition of career
and career models applied in this paper. Then follows a note on the
changes in careers in the modern occupational world, which leads
over to a discussion on how career models in project-based
organizations can be framed and analyzed. Finally, the role and
career of project managers are discussed.
1.2. Career and career models
The concept of career is often defined as “the evolving sequence
of a person's work experience over time” (Arthur et al., 1989: 8).
As such, it has different meanings to people, professionally as well
as personally. Careers generally provide linkages between the inner
world of self and the outer world of society. This link, Parker
(2002) argues, is an important one because it is through their
careers that people tend to seek meaning in their work lives as well
as in their personal lives. As human beings, careers and the jobs we
carry out within them provide meaning and as Wheatley and
Kellner-Rogers (1996:63) put it, somewhat poetically: “As we go
through life, we don't want to become less. We need places to
nurture our passions, places where we can become more. Work is
one of those places”.
Conventional markets that used to guide careers and career
paths are, Parker (2002) argues, becoming increasingly blurred. In
recent years, research has stressed that careers often involve
moving across organizations. For instance, Baruch and Rosenstein
(1992: 478) point out that a career is a “process of development of
the employee along a path of experience and jobs in one or more
organizations”. Recent research has built further on this idea and
stated that careers have become more “open, more diverse, and
 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
less structured and controlled by employers” (Baruch, 2004: 59),
which also indicates a change of the psychological contract
(Rousseau, 1995) with an increased focus on employability and
“opportunities for development”. Some effects of those changes
are convincingly described in Schein's (1996) longitudinal study
of career anchors which shows dramatic shifts towards employ-
ability and increased self-reliance. In a world of temporary
projects, people would then need to be more self-reliant and their
careers become critical for self-development (see for instance
Castells, 1996; Boltanski and Chiapello, 1999). Among other
things, this has led scholars to discuss the nature and possibilities
of the so-called “boundaryless career” where the challenges
involve uncertainty, mastering relationships, and timing in which
the significance of building one's reputation and social capital are
singled out as critical elements (Jones and DeFillippi, 1996: 91).
At the same time, carving out a career might be decisive for the
functioning of markets in the new economy. This could have
profound implications, which Whitley (2006) shows in his
analysis of project-based industries. The author stresses the
value of stability and separation of work roles for the possibilities
of creating sustainable project-based firms and successful project
collaboration. Thus, the evolution of careers within project
management might be viewed as a way to improve the rotation,
mobility, and use of human resources in increasingly dynamic
economies, having implications both on the internal and external
labor markets.
Prior research has made the distinction between subjective and
objective careers, where the subjective career is the individually
perceived career experience while the objective career is a
description of an individual's sequence of jobs (see e.g. Hall,
2002; Walker, 1976). Based on this distinction, Walker separates
the term “career” from the term “career path”, arguing that “career
paths are objective descriptions of sequential work experiences, as
opposed to subjective individual feelings about career progress,
personal development, status or satisfaction” (Walker, 1976: 2).
The need for new ways of understanding the career concept has
been addressed primarily in terms of subjective careers and
changes in people's career paths in relation to the changing labor
market in general. However, those changes also have important
implications for the internal organizations of firms that need to
meet the growing requirements to attract, retain, and develop
talent by offering employability-strengthening job opportunities.
This paper draws the attention to formalized career paths as one
important tool for project-intensive firms to meet the needs for
establishing project management capabilities. In that sense, this
paper is chiefly concerned with careers in the objective meaning,
rather than project managers' subjective perception of their
careers. Moreover, the phenomenon under study here is not the
actual career paths of project managers as they unfold over the
working-life of a project manager. Instead, the matter of interest
here is formalized career models for project managers, that is, “a
generalized or idealized route for advancement within the unit or
function” (Walker, 1976: 3), and an “organizational frame for the
creation of career opportunities” (Hölzle, 2010: 781). To clarify
this distinction, in this paper we will use the term “career model”
to refer to a formalized model for the advancement along a
particular career path (see also Tremblay et al., 2002). One
891
important reason for drawing the attention to such formalized
career models for project managers is the inherent relationship
between subjective and objective careers. Walker expresses the
significance of this relationship, arguing that career models:
“…provide a link between the individual's own career aims and
the organization's actual talent requirements. The net result can
only be positive: improved utilization of talent and less
ambiguity in employee views of the employment relationship.”
(Walker, 1976:6).
This means that career models that successfully motivate and
develop people in the direction that fits with the organization's
requirements, also need to be aligned with people's subjective
perceptions of their careers. The implementation of a new type of
career model that is aligned with the goals of the employees
and the organization can be seen as one way of meeting those
requirements. In an organization that relies mainly on projects to
carry out its strategic and operational activities, career models
will need to take different forms compared to those in, for
example, a more traditional functional organization. In the
following, we will outline this argument in further detail.
1.3. The career of the project manager
Project management is increasingly seen as a profession with
specific competence requirements, rather than merely a temporary
managerial assignment (see e.g. Hodgson and Muzio, 2011;
Morris et al., 2006; Wang and Armstrong, 2004) — project
management is then singled out as a particular career path next to
experts and general managers. El-Sabaa (2001) points out that one
of the key elements to understanding the meaning of a career is
that it provides occupational identity. In a similar vein, Hall (2002)
argues that one distinct meaning applied to the concept career is
“career as profession”, which implies a pattern of systematic
advancement that a person needs to follow to make progress in
his/her profession (for example, legal and medical professions).
Hence, the development of career models for project managers can
be seen as a step in acknowledging and strengthening project
management as a profession in its own rights.
Pursuing a project manager career might, without a doubt, be
challenging since it involves high levels of mobility and a
continuous deadline pressure. El-Sabaa (2001) identifies a number
of important differences compared to the conventional functional
managerial career. For instance, project managers are younger,
their average number of movements from one organization to
another is higher, the average number of lateral movements across
projects and firms is higher, and the average number of vertical
movements along the hierarchy of firms and projects is higher. In
addition, the duration that people stay in one field is shorter
for project managers compared to other managerial roles. As
mentioned earlier, prior research has indicated that the role of the
project manager creates so much pressure that people tend to
choose other career paths, despite the fact that they might favor the
action-orientation, temporary engagements, and dynamic work
environment typical for project-based work. One problem could
be that project managers are not trained to fulfill the role.
892 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
According to Carbone and Gholston (2004), less than half of the
organizations in their survey had any type of project management
training program and only 41% of the project managers felt their
organizations prepared them for the project manager role.
Interestingly, from those project managers who had been trained,
73% felt the training prepared them for their leadership assignment.
In that respect, training could do a lot, and it should be the initial
obvious step. However, one still has to realize that training is not
the complete answer. Shenhar and Dvir (2007: 209) suggest that
the main problem is the uneven distribution of leadership
capabilities pointing out that the best leaders typically do not
become project managers, despite their criticality for their
organizations relative to other leadership assignments, such as in
operational production or support units. According to the authors,
this, to a great extent, is explained by the failure of career models to
provide guidance to leaders, in combination with the lack of
development opportunities, training and status within the organi-
zation. The authors therefore stress the importance of instituting
adequate career models to solve the problem and thus to achieve
better results for both firms and individuals.
As noted earlier, previous research has identified the importance
of studies on project management as a discipline and profession,
and also on the project management role, related competencies and
leadership skills, and strains that come with the role. Research
within this area has grown considerably over the past decades, but
so far only limited attention has been paid to formalized career
models of project managers. However, as our review above
indicates, such models should be of vital importance for providing
a sense of occupational identity and for creating linkages between
project managers' career aspirations and organizations' need for
project management capabilities. There is a need for more
empirical studies on applied career models for project managers
to arrive at a better understanding arrive at a better understanding of
how such models are designed and how the differences in applied
career models can be understood. As a response, the present paper
aims at comparing career models in large, project-intensive firms.
Moreover, the paper discusses the identified empirical patterns in
light of previous research on careers and project-based organizing
in order to offer a theoretical interpretation of the findings.
2. Research methodology
To enhance our understanding of what firms do to develop
project managers and project management careers, by the
means of formalized career models, we conducted a multiple
case study involving ten firms. The firms were chosen to
constitute an empirical base that fulfilled the following
requirements:
(1) Large and mature firms. The size, as such, would increase
the probability of having formalized HR practices, such as
career models, since size in general tends to promote the
degree of formalization within an organization (Gooderham
et al., 1999). Notably, the companies are mature, which
increases the likelihood of formalized models since age is
another factor typically contributing to an organization's
degree of formalization (Mintzberg, 1979).
(2) Firms that rely on projects to organize integration (business
projects, development projects, change projects, see
Söderlund, 2005). The reason for selecting them was
primarily because we expected these companies to have
singled out project competence as critical for the company's
success. Given the latter, the companies would then also be
expected to have implemented some kind of formal career
model for project managers.
(3) Firms that represent various industries and sectors. Given
the exploratory stage of this research, the empirical data
needed to cover more than one sector in order to avoid the
risk of getting a very limited or at least narrow view on the
current status of career models. Although the subject area
investigated has developed rapidly in recent years, many of
the companies have been project-based for several decades,
for example, within the construction and engineering
sectors. In other sectors, though, the experience of project
organizing and project management could be less devel-
oped, and the distinctive features of the sector could also
influence the career models in use.
(4) Firms that are primarily based, or at least, have a large part
of their activities in Sweden (although most of them are
large multinationals). One reason for this is simply
accessibility — it is much easier for us to get an inside
view and access to reports, data and interviews for these
companies. A second important reason is previous knowl-
edge within the research team. Over the years, several of the
companies have participated in other related research
projects within our research group. Hence, even before
starting this particular study, we had already a relatively
good understanding of the organizational context, industry
specifics, organizational structure and management philos-
ophy, in addition to having several reliable and helpful
contacts within the companies. However, as indicated
earlier, the sample was not a convenience sample in the
ordinary sense. The previous three requirements were in all
regards treated as the most important ones.
Our ambition was, then, to study the largest project-intensive
companies in Sweden and their work with regard to project
management career models. We obtained a list of the major
companies on the Stockholm Stock Exchange and from this list,
identified and selected those companies that the research team
defined as project-led or project-based (Hobday, 2000). Some
companies on the original list were hence ‘deselected’, since we
considered them only to a lesser extent relying on projects for their
everyday operations, or at least would not fully see the reasons for
them to employ project managers working in engineering-
intensive projects on a large scale (such as the fashion chain
store H&M). As seen from our dataset, the companies vary in
terms of industry, size, and primary type of projects.
Table 1 gives an overview of the companies in our sample
with regard to industry, size and a general note about their
status and reputation as a project-oriented company and
employer. The information is taken from interviews and public
records from the time when the empirical data were gathered,
2009–2010.
 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902 893

Table 1
Sample companies: an overview.
Company Type of industry Number of Reputation as project-oriented company and employer
employees
worldwide
ABB Engineering 120,000 One of Sweden's largest companies, considered to be a good place to work. Generally recognized for having
good project managers and project management routines.
AstraZeneca Pharmaceutical 60,000 One of the most research-intensive organizations that has become more and more international. Considered
to be a good place to work and average in terms of project management compared to similar companies.
Ericsson Telecom 70,000 One of the leaders in the telecom industry. Well-known for its capabilities in systems integration and systems
engineering. The company is considered to be leading in project management.
TeliaSonera Telecom 30,000 The company has changed fundamentally in recent years, hiring more and more engineers. It is one of the
largest companies and has invested considerably in improving its project management capability.
Volvo Transportation products 90,000 The leader within its primary branch of industry. The company is, on the whole, considered to be a good
and systems place to work and has grown considerably in recent years. For the past decade it has appeared regularly on
the list of most popular employers within engineering.
Saab Defense and security 10,000 The company is one of the most knowledge- and engineering-intensive companies in Scandinavia. It is
well-known internationally for its ability to handle complex systems and development projects.
Scania Automotive 30,000 One of Sweden's most popular employers with a unique track record with regard to profits and development.
For the past decade it has appeared regularly on the list of most popular employers within engineering. The
company is internationally known for its project management capabilities.
Sandvik High-tech, engineering 40,000 A niche player within its line of business. Generally considered to be a good company, although perhaps not
as well-known as many of the other companies in the sample.
Skanska Construction 60,000 One of the leading construction companies in the world. Within construction often viewed as the best when it
comes to managing large-scale projects. The company has also a long-standing reputation as a popular employer.
Posten Logistics 30,000 A company that has changed considerably in recent years. The company is not ranked as the most popular
employer within its type of business; however, it is one of the players that invest most in human resources,
career development and training.

The data collection was conducted in two stages. In the first
stage, we relied on secondary sources and documentation, both
public and internal. Initially, we studied public documents and
written reports to get a first understanding of the companies'
project operations and publically reported initiatives to promote
project management. Thereafter, we studied internal documents,
such as power point presentations, guidebooks, project manage-
ment templates, and course information, all of which added to our
understanding of the activities performed within the participating
companies. In the second stage, we conducted interviews with
informants that had particular knowledge about the project
operations and the design and development of career models.
We carried out at least two interviews (approx. 1.5 h per
interview) at each company. We also had the chance to conduct
shorter telephone interviews if necessary to supplement our data.
At each company, we interviewed representatives from the HR
department, often the individual in charge of project management
training, career paths, etc. to get an inside view of the model, how
the model was developed and the ideas underlying its design. In
addition, we interviewed either a line manager, project director or
senior project manager to get a user view of the model, how it was
perceived by people who climbed the project manager ladder and
took part in the training programs.
The data analysis was guided by the multiple case–study
approach as suggested by Eisenhardt (1989), with the intention to
understand each company in depth, and to be able to make
cross-case comparisons. We compiled a brief case transcript from
each case–study firm which summarized key data and figures
about the number of employees, project characteristics, etc. In
addition, we produced a detailed story about the implementation
which was subsequently discussed with the contact person at each
company. After the within-case analyses, we continued with
cross-case comparisons in order to search for patterns across
the cases to identify similarities and differences across career
models.
3. Empirical observations: an overview
Since this is exploratory research, we will begin by emphasizing
the empirical observations. In the final part of the paper, we will
suggest some possible theoretical interpretations to make sense of
our observations. The first part of our investigation relates to the
type of projects within the firm, the number of project managers,
and the size and nature of the projects. This part of the investigation
aimed at understanding the context for the development of career
models. Table 2 presents a summary of these observations. As
seen, the companies vary in terms of their types of projects, the
approximate size of projects, duration and number of project
managers. Most interesting is that some companies have an
emphasis on business projects (external projects), which presum-
ably has implications on the company's inclination to implement
formal career models. One might also assume that project size
could signal the importance of general project management
competence (see for instance Shenhar and Dvir, 2007), which
also would promote the use of formal career models. In addition,
the number of project managers is another factor brought up as a
possible factor contributing to the degree of formalization in career
models, indicating the need to stratify skills and levels within the
group in a way that cannot rely only on subjective and social
measures.
894 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902

Table 2
Project types and project managers.
Primary project types Average size of projects Average project Number of project managers (formal)
(Söderlund, 2005) (number of participants) duration
ABB Business projects, development 50–100 in the typical 3–4 years for major 400, plus a number of R&D project
projects in R&D organizations business project contracts managers
AstraZeneca Development projects, some 20–30 plus in many 3–4 years, although 350 world-wide in R&D, but approx.
change projects cases a range of in different phases of 250 more if including investment
external partners. development. projects and change projects.
Ericsson Business projects, development 5–500 3 months–4 years More than 2000 within the two
projects, some change projects primary business areas
TeliaSonera Development projects, business 2–50 3 months–3 years Employed at project offices in
projects, change projects Sweden: approx. 80
Volvo Development projects, change 5–150 3–5 years The investigated subsidiary has 35
projects, a few business projects project managers
Saab Business projects, development 5–500 6 months–3 years 500–600 in the entire company, although
projects, a few change projects an additional 1500 manage projects on
a continuous basis as part of their jobs.
Sandvik Development projects, change 10–100, typically 4 months–3 years Approx. 700 have the formal role as
projects, investment projects around 20 project manager or work as
sub-project manager
Scania Development projects, change 10–1000 2–6 years Approx. 50 at relatively ‘senior’ level
projects, a few business projects
Skanska Business projects, change projects, 50–200, depends 1 year, but Approx. 250 in Sweden
a few development projects on sub-contractors occasionally up to
and region 3 years
Posten Change projects, development Many different kinds of Many different Approx. 15 senior project managers
projects, business projects projects, ranging from 5 lengths of projects, at the corporate level
to 100 ranging from
6 months to 2 years

Table 3 summarizes the findings concerning the details
about the career models applied in the studied companies. The
existence of formal career models is apparent in most of the
studied firms, however, not in all of them. The table displays
the applied levels in the career models, the relation to levels of
project complexity, and the set requirements and relation to
competence/leadership training programs (cf. El-Sabaa, 2001).
As seen in Table 3, seven out of the ten studied firms have
implemented career models for project managers. Some of them
have used their model for more than ten years, while many of them
have developed their models only recently and one of them was, at
the time for the study, still in the process of implementing the new
career model. To complement this descriptive empirical account
of the career models, in the following we outline the main
empirical patterns concerning the respondent's viewpoints on the
reasons behind implementing a model, what they aimed at
achieving, and explanations to their respective designs.
4. Empirical patterns I: reasons for implementing career
models for project management
In all studied firms, including those who have not implemented
career models for project managers, project managers have been
singled out as an increasingly important manager category. The
initiative to discuss project managers as a separate pool of
managers is of relative recent date within most of the studied firms.
Although, projects and project managers have been critical for
decades, there is a rather distinct change to push this even further.
The companies report various reasons for this change. One is the
increasing internationalization, that they are now part of a larger,
global group and thus need to respond to international
requirements. Among such requirements are career models,
certification and formalization to implement a global and
transparent system of expertise.
Among the seven firms who have implemented career
models for project managers, the respondents tend to refer to
four main reasons behind the decision to implement a career
model. 1) Build and attract project management competencies,
2) Achieve commonality to enhance communication, 3) Create
transparency in development opportunities, and 4) Get recognition
for project management as a profession. Below we deal with them
in further detail.
4.1. Build and attract project management competencies
All the companies that have implemented career models for
project managers refer to the importance of the models in
building and sustaining project management competencies. The
respondents refer to the increased importance of project
management competence in order to shorten lead-times and
time-to-market, and to manage ever-more complex and costly
projects. They also emphasize the importance of career models to
 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
Table 3
Project manager careers in ten companies: levels and requirements.
Existence of formal career
model
Saab Yes
A company-wide career model
was developed and implemented
about four years ago. Inspired
by IPMA and PMI.
Ericsson Yes
The company has recently
developed two separate career
models for project managers.
One for development projects
within R&D and one for
business projects.
Sandvik Yes
The studied business unit
has recently developed a
career model for project
managers.
ABB Yes
Project management is one
of the key competence models
AstraZeneca Yes
A detailed model exists
for development project
managers
TeliaSonera Yes
The company has recently
developed a career model
according to IPMA. The
model was intended for the
whole company, but has
not been fully implemented.
Two business units use it
actively.
Levels in the career
model
Three levels:
1. Basic
2. Senior
3. Master
Development projects: five levels
1. Project manager
2. Advanced project manager
3. Senior project manager
4. Master project manager
5. Principal project manager
Business projects: four levels
1. Assessed customer project
manager
2. Experienced customer project
manager
3. Senior customer project manager
4. Principal customer project
manager
Three levels:
1. Project manager
2. Senior project manager
3. Program manager
Four levels:
1. Associate project manager
2. Project manager
3. Senior project manager
4. Company senior project
manager
Four levels:
1. Associate project manager
2. Project manager
3. Project manager director
4. Senior project management
director
Four levels:
1. Project management associates
2. Project manager
3. Senior project manager
4. Senior project director
Relation to levels of project
complexity
Formalized
There is a system for
classification of projects into
three levels: 1) limited complexity,
2) complex projects with sub-
projects, and 3) multi-project/
program. These levels are linked
to the three levels in the career
model, but in practice this link
is hard to implement.
Formalized
Projects are classified into
complexity levels depending on
several dimensions such as
dependence on internal/external
stakeholders, organizational impact,
novelty in technology, novelty
in methods and processes applied,
level of physical dispersion, and
size. A project manager's experience
of projects on a certain complexity
level is assessed before advancement
to the next level in the career model.
Formalized
Projects are classified as small,
medium, or large, based on budget,
size, and complexity. These project
levels are directly linked to the
three levels in the career model.
Not formalized
No systematic classification of
projects into complexity levels.
However. Large-scale projects and
global projects are more formalized
and typically managed by either
senior project managers or company
senior project managers.
Not formalized
No systematic classification of
projects into complexity levels.
However, global projects are in
most cases managed by project
manager directors.
Not formalized
No systematic classification of
projects into complexity levels,
but larger and more complex
projects are assigned to more
experienced project managers.
895
Set requirements and relation
to competence/leadership
training programs
Yes
There are three levels of project
management training programs,
aimed at preparing people for
project management assignments
on more complex levels.
Certification levels according to
IPMA are linked to the levels in
the career model.
Not formalized
There are set competence
requirements concerning
project management tools and
models, as well as for leadership
skills for each level in the model.
Extensive training programs
available, but they are not formal
requirements for reaching higher
levels in the career model.
No formal certification program
implemented, the internal career
and competence models are regarded
to be enough quality assurance.
Not formalized
A formal role description which
states required experience and
competence.
There are project management
training programs, but they are not
explicitly linked to the career model.
Ongoing discussions about
certification, although no
decisions have been taken.
To some extent
Eight functional competencies
have been identified as critical,
plus three leadership competencies.
All project managers have to
attend a specific training program
ranging from basic project
management to more advanced
courses. An internal certification
framework exists.
To some extent.
Not formalized
Specific competence, leadership,
and experience requirements are
set for each level according to
IPMA. There are training programs
for project management, but these
do not explicitly correspond to the
levels in the career model.
Certification programs have been
launched according to IPMA and
PMI (in some units).
(continued on next page)
896 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
Table 3 (continued)
Existence of formal career
model
Skanska Yes
The company has a well-
established career model
for project managers.
Posten To some extent
There is no formal career
model, although there are
positions called “project
manager” and “senior project
manager” within the
organizational structure. In the
past, a lot of attention was
been paid to the senior project
managers, including a formal
organization, certification
programs and training programs.
Volvo Aero No
No formalized career model
with multiple levels.
However, there is a
formalized unit with senior
project managers on permanent
positions to manage strategic,
company-wide projects.
Scania No
Top management has decided
not to implement a formal
career model, but has instead
emphasized the importance
of moving across assignments
as line manager and project
manager.
attract and keep talented project managers, to keep people in the
project management role, and to drive the development of project
management competencies on various levels, in order to build
competencies to meet future competition.
Levels in the career
model
Four levels:
1. Project manager Level 1
2. Project manager Level 2
3. Project manager Level 3
4. Project manager Level 4
The company had before the
re-organization set up a project
management center that identified
all project managers in the company
and divided them into three primary
levels. A small group of senior
project managers were organized in
a separate project manager pool that
division and top managers could
call upon when needed.
A small group of senior project
managers has been identified.
They have participated in
advanced training programs and
extensive project management
programs.
No formalized levels, although
senior management and HR have
recently discussed the need of
making it more formalized.
Relation to levels of project
complexity
Not formalized
The projects are not classified
in levels that explicitly correspond
with the levels of project management.
Projects are assessed primarily based
on their size in terms of budget, and
project managers are assigned based
on level of experience and availability.
The projects are classified into
three levels: 0) Strategic change
projects on a company level,
1) Strategic change projects on a
business unit level, and 2) Project
activities within a business unit.
There is no formal procedure for
assigning project managers to the
different project levels, even though
the senior project managers mostly
work with projects on level 0 and 1.
No systematic classification of
projects into complexity levels, but
larger and more complex projects
are assigned to more experienced
project managers.
Projects are classified depending
on product development phase and
scope of the project.
Project managers are assigned
projects based on their known
competence and experience.
“We started to work more focused with project management as
a profession within the organization about three years ago. And
the main reason for this is that we need to shorten the lead time
of our projects, so that we can get the products out there at a
Set requirements and relation
to competence/leadership
training programs
To some extent
A 1-week training module in
which all project managers must
participate once a year.
Besides that, there are other
available training programs, but
they do not explicitly correspond
to the project management career
model.
Requirements in terms of
experience from project work
and production manager. The
company is very project-intensive
so most management tasks and
education involve a great deal of
project management.
There is a basic training program
in project management, which is
highly recommended for project
managers, project members and
other stakeholders.
Formal requirements only set for
those that have permanent
positions as project manager or
senior project manager.
More than 25 project managers
have taken some kind of
certificate either the PMI or
the IPMA.
A comprehensive four-step
training program in 1) being
a project member, 2) tools and
methods for junior project
managers, 3) project management
in larger projects, and 4) advanced
project management for the
most experienced. Individual
development plans are in place
to secure the development of
project managers. Certification
programs have been discussed
and are considered to be
important to further develop
project managers.
There is a role description with
recommended requirements for
project managers.
There are also internal training
programs for project management,
but these are not formal requirements
for taking on project management
assignments.
Certification is not considered
important at the moment.
 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
higher pace. We need to invest in this so that we/…/meet the
competition in the future — we need to be one step ahead”
(R&D manager, Sandvik).
“Firstly, we clarify that we develop our employees, which is
very important to get the competencies we need, and secondly
we do this in order to be an attractive employer — to get the
best talents out there into our business. We want to show that
‘you can make your career with us’. We want the talents out
there, and the talents want a career. They want to feel that they
can grow and develop in an organization” (HR manager,
Skanska).
4.2. Commonality for communication
The respondents emphasize the usefulness of career models to
achieve clarity and a common language throughout the organiza-
tion, nationally and internationally, concerning different levels of
project managers. This would, they argue, facilitate the commu-
nication in processes of assigning project managers and comparing
project managers, and it would also clarify what a project manager
is and is not. The following two quotes show how an HR manager
and project management director express their concerns:
“The career model makes it easier to understand what persons
you talk about, since you have a common nomenclature. We
have global projects that include many different organizations,
and these organizations needed to understand the competence
and level of the person that all of a sudden turned up as the
project manager for a certain project. So there was definitely a
need for a model.” (HR director, Ericsson).
“Someone has to decide that everyone who is a project
manager acts in a formal position, and that they are working at
a certain level, which is the same in the entire company. This is
important to compare project managers across the firm. Many
are saying that they are project managers when they in fact only
are responsible for some small activity. This causes the
word ‘project manager’ to be watered down, and the same
goes for the word ‘project’.” (Project management director,
TeliaSonera).
Many respondents also stress that the career model makes it
easier to explain to outside partners how the firm is working in
terms of project management and to assure clients and partners
that the person in charge of the project has a certain level of
experience and qualification.
4.3. Transparency in development opportunities
A common argument in favor of implementing career models
for project management is the transparency in career- and
competence development opportunities that they provide. The
respondents stress the importance for employees to know how
they can advance within the company and what requirements
they need to fulfill on different levels. This is considered
to enhance motivation, to clarify project management as a
897
development opportunity, and also to enhance the employer's
image as an attractive employer.
“It's a great advantage to get transparency, both for the
company and for the employees. It becomes clearer which
requirements we set for different levels, and since the levels
correspond to the salary level, it is in the interest of both
employees and the company to get this right and that we
apply this in the same way across the entire organization. … For
the individual and her competence development plans, it is also
important to understand what she should do and which the
requirements are. If I want to become advanced project
manager, what should I do?” (HR manager, Ericsson).
“It's important to feel that you develop and expand your role
in the organization. … You need to see that there is a path to
follow, either as a specialist or within management, and I
think that it's important to know one's opportunities in order
to decide what one wants to do. … It's obvious that it makes
the organization more attractive to show that there are a
number of steps to follow, and normally steps also include
some kind of ‘compensation and benefits’. I think it's
important to clarify all this to get people to stay, to be
explicit right from the start: these are the development
opportunities” (HR manager, Skanska).
4.4. Recognition for the profession
Some of the respondents underline the importance of the
career models to strengthen project management as a profes-
sion, moving away from previous designations of project
management as a temporary managerial position. This is
particularly apparent at TeliaSonera and Sandvik, where the
individuals behind the development of the career models can be
seen as internal champions for project management, with a
passion for identifying and developing the project management
profession and getting recognition for the particular skills and
competencies that this profession entails.
“Well, for us – at least that's my opinion – it's important to
get recognition for the project manager profession. It's a
profession, not merely a role. You need professional project
managers, and the project managers need recognition in the
company. There is no doubt about that. (Project manage-
ment director, TeliaSonera).
“In the past few years, our company has worked a lot with
the general concept of the ‘manager’ as a career within the
company, and invested quite a lot in it. And there has been a
lot of work on the role of ‘specialist’, R&D has taken a lead
on this development. The reason for this was to avoid that
people would have to become a general manager to get a
career, which used to be the case in the past. … By creating
project offices, networks and careers, we are now trying to
boost the status for project management as a profession —
to make it into a real profession. Some people work with
898 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
project management only part time, but if you are really
skilled, you should focus on project management. You
shouldn't do it five percent of your time and do the rest of
your work in the line, which sometimes happens. Those who
have the right qualities and want to do this, those who have
the passion, should get the opportunity to do it in the right
way” (HR manager, Sandvik).
4.5. Reasons for not implementing career models for project
managers
Three of the studied companies have chosen not to implement
formalized project management career models, although, two of
them have formalized project management positions and groups
for project managers on senior levels. For example, at Volvo Aero,
a group was recently created, hosting 30 of the company's most
senior project managers who hold formal positions as project
managers. Posten has a similar solution. The main reasons for
creating this group was to achieve focus on project management,
to receive top management attention, to enhance cooperation and
knowledge sharing among project managers, and to develop an
overall idea of what the project management role should look like.
In order to be part of the project management group, a candidate
needs to fulfill extensive requirements concerning project
management experience and leadership training. Apart from this
group, there is no formal career model for project managers, even
though discussions have begun concerning the need for such a
model:
“Looking back in time, we have had a development ladder for
general management for quite some time, but now we have
started to talk about a ladder for project managers as well. You
can say that it's still in its cradle. But I'm sure that managers
and co-workers have this ‘invisible ladder’ in mind when they
talk about career opportunities (HR manager, Volvo Aero).
Scania has taken an even stronger stand against the implemen-
tation of project manager career models. Project management is
considered to be a key competence and in the most project-
intensive parts of the company, project management is defined as a
possible development path. There are role descriptions for different
types to project management roles, but these are not considered to
form part of any career model. One main argument is that the
company wishes to maintain a certain level of flexibility across
different categories of managers:
“I know that many companies have a very strict framework
when it comes to project work. They have a project model and
they also have a clear structure for the career path of project
managers. We don't really have that. I would claim that we
have a more pragmatic and flexible idea of how to run
projects, from what I understand, since we allow for various
models. And we also have a more flexible view of the role and
career development for project managers. It looks different
depending on where in the company you look. There is no
central regulation or policy it” (HR manager, Scania).
One example of the flexibility strived for is that the
company does not wish to ‘lock’ people into certain careers,
but instead encourages mobility across different types of
management positions and assignments. Moving across line
management roles and project management roles is consid-
ered to be valuable for the overall understanding of the firm's
operations, and something that creates better project man-
agers as well as better line managers. Also, there is a general
skepticism in the company towards central concepts being
“pushed out in the organization”, and the HR manager
explains that their approach is instead to let people take part
in developing such models locally, to enhance commitment in
their application.
The three companies that have not implemented formal career
models for project managers do have rigorous training programs
for project managers, Scania and Volvo Aero in particular, and it is
clear that project management is considered to be a strategically
crucial competence, even though the companies do not single out
project management as a separate profession.
5. Empirical patterns II: the design of project management
career models
In the following, we present the empirical patterns observed
across the studied firms concerning the actual design of the
applied career models and how the design choices are explained
by the respondents. As explained earlier, the design of the career
models is in this paper discussed in terms of 1) levels (number of
levels, and what they are called), 2) the relation between the levels
in the career models and levels in project complexity when
assigning project managers, and 3) set competence requirements
and training programs.
5.1. Levels in the career models
Although the studied companies operate in different types of
industries, and their projects vary in type and size, the applied
career models for project management are strikingly similar. Most
of the applied career models consist of three or four different levels
(ranging from junior project manager, project manager, senior
project manager, to program/project director), and they are
typically based on general guidelines from IPMA or PMI. On a
direct question to one of the respondents if they ever considered
developing something different, finding their own adapted model,
the answer was:
“Heavens no! Never invent the wheel when there is so much
material already developed. It's much better to follow the
standards. We cannot do this any better than PMI or IPMA”
(HR manager, TeliaSonera).
Ericsson has chosen to expand the number of levels to five in
their project management career model for development projects.
One important reason for this was that a larger number of levels,
 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
with shorter distance between them, would create a sense of
achievable development and hence be more motivating:
“We have compared a couple of different career models, and
normally, they end up in five or six levels. It seems as if six
levels is common, and that is because you want to achieve a
broad spectrum, from team leaders with relatively little
experience to principals with very much experience. It's a
very broad dynamic, and maybe you actually need even more
levels. It's also an issue about giving the project managers a
possibility to move up in their careers. It must be achievable to
advance to the next level, if it is too hard so that only very few
succeed in moving up, it's not attractive for the employees”
(HR director, Ericsson).
5.2. Careers and project complexity
Even though the design in terms of vertical levels applied in the
career models for project management is very similar across the
studied firms, the integration and application of the models prove
to be quite different. In three of the seven firms that have
implemented career models for project management — Ericsson,
Saab, and Sandvik, there is a formalized relation between the
levels in the career models and the level of project complexity.
This relation can work in both directions: on the one hand the
career level is often a formal requirement for being assigned to
projects on a certain complexity level and, on the other hand,
experience from projects on a certain complexity level is often
formally required to reach a higher level in the career model.
“We classify the projects into five categories, and in order for a
project manager to reach a certain level [in the career model],
the project manager needs to have experience from having
managed at least two projects at that level. Apart from that he
needs to fulfill our set leadership requirements for that level”
(HR director, Ericsson).
In the remaining four firms that apply career models for project
managers, there is no formalized relation between levels of project
complexity and levels in the career models. Of course, more
complex projects are assigned to more experienced project
managers, but the career models are not explicitly integrated in
this process. In three of these firms — ABB, AstraZeneca, and
TeliaSonera, there is no systematic classification of projects into
complexity levels. The assessment of projects' complexity is
instead a qualitative analysis made by managers at project offices,
or the like. Some firms refer to a skill that people develop over
time in assessing project complexity — a “gut feeling” that
experienced project managers develop.
“…there is no model for defining a project's level of
complexity. You just know that ‘this is huge, it will be a very
complicated project’. You kind of know that when you scope
the project. But we don't work with explicit levels of projects
in that sense.” (Project management director, TeliaSonera).
Skanska, on the other hand, apply a systematic classification of
the projects primarily in terms of size and budget. However, the
899
levels are not linked to the project classification; the career model
is not integrated in the process of assigning project managers.
“We look at the size of the project, and assess what kind of
competence is needed to manage that project. It's not like the
project managers have hats with level one, two, or three written
on them. Instead we discuss what experience and competence
is required to manage this large project, and then you need to
see who's available” (HR manager, Skanska).
5.3. Competence requirements and training programs
The applied career models typically include formal competence,
experience and leadership requirements for each level. There are
also extensive project management training programs in all of the
studied firms. However, only at one company – Saab – there are
training programs that specifically correspond to each level in the
career model, which in its turn linked to the IPMA levels.
“When they have done the basic project management training
program, they will normally work in the ‘sub-projects’ or
‘limited complexity’ levels. After a couple of years, they can be
certified on IPMA level C. If we look at the career model, they
are on the basic level. The next step will be in 2–3 years' time,
when they can take the course ‘Development for project
managers’. That's a ten day's training program, and they [the
project managers] already work in, or will work in, complex
projects, which include subprojects. … Then you can call
yourself senior project manager, and be certified at the C or B
level” (HR manager, Saab).
The remaining companies all have invested heavily in project
management training on different levels, and they are seen as
important for building project management competencies. How-
ever, there is no explicit link between training programs and the
levels in the career models applied. Instead, the respondents refer to
the importance of performance and competence review meetings in
which employees can discuss their competence level with their
manager, and agree on what type of assignments they need to do
and which courses they need to take in order to move up to the next
level in the career model. Several of the firms have implemented
certification programs according to the frameworks by IPMA or
PMI to clarify the requirements needed for each level, and support
the careers and development of the individual project managers.
Interestingly, the development of project manager career models
also seems to trigger the development of other models, besides the
traditional manager career ladder. In particular, the companies
investigated have emphasized the need for clarifying the specialist
engineer career, such as chief systems engineer, in combination
with an increased focus on project manager careers. In that
respect, the companies did not only promote the creation of
careers within the management area, since this would perhaps
lead talented specialists to opt for a management career although
their comparative talent would be in a more traditional
engineering role. Hence, multiple career directions for engineers
seem to be critical to establish a balance in the development of
900 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
general and specific knowledge, expert careers and different
kinds of management careers.
6. Theoretical interpretation
We have divided the theoretical interpretation and analysis into
two separate parts. The first part seeks to develop the idea that the
firms in our study largely develop career models for two different
reasons and based on this observation may be seen as relying on
one of two archetypical career models. The second part seeks to
discuss in theoretical light the observations in our study primarily
be relating to extant career research. We believe that some of the
observations in our study are particularly important for further
scholarly attention.
From this study, it is possible to distill two archetypes for the
development of career models targeting project management.
The first archetype which might be referred to as the ‘competence
strategy model’ is observed in Saab, Ericsson and Sandvik. Here
the models are not primarily discussed as a way to provide
development opportunities for individuals, but more as a way to
implement strategy and identify ways to better manage and
handle the linkages between strategy formation and competence
strategy. The primary focus and discussions are linked to the
needs of the organization, the strategic evolution and growth
areas and what requirements these developments have on the
pool of project managers. At Saab, Ericsson, and Sandvik, the
career models are frequently discussed as an integrated tool to
facilitate resource allocation and project assignment processes. At
ABB, AstraZeneca, TeliaSonera and Skanska, the emphasis lies
rather on the career model as providing development opportuni-
ties for individual project managers. In these firms the career
model is to a greater extent following a talent management
model. The focus is less on the strategic evolution of the firm and
more on the individual needs and individual requirements. The
models primarily provide the individual project managers with
career opportunities within project management, to support the
individual development process. Hence this kind of career model
might be better referred to as the ‘talent management model’.
Career models are aimed to handle primarily one stream of
capabilities, namely those capabilities that are established to ensure
the continuous supply and development of human resources
(Hedlund, 1994).
As cases in point, project-oriented companies are interesting
examples for empirical investigations into the career models
operating in project-based economies. The models are obviously
intended to ensure the continuous supply and development of
project managers. At the same time, several authors have pointed
out that doing a career in a project setting is very different from
careers elsewhere (Heimer, 1984; Midler, 1995). Some authors
have pointed out the inherent difficulties in making a project-
oriented career (Allen and Katz, 1995), which would then possibly,
on the one hand, contribute to the emergence of formalized career
models, and on the other hand, delimit its chances of sustainable
success.
The case of the project manager is interesting for several reasons
since it presents a particular kind of management career that has
been developed in a number of sectors in recent years. However,
we also know that the role of the project manager was formalized in
several companies and industries, in particular aerospace and
defense, as early as in the 1950s (Gaddis, 1959). The associations
of project management have worked hard to formalize the role of
the project manager — and to professionalize the discipline of
project management. For many years, their efforts had little impact
on career models in firms but today their certification frameworks
have become integral parts in many companies' efforts to promote
the role of the project manager. In that respect, there is a tight
linkage between professionalization attempts of management and
the institutionalization of career models.
Thus, contrary to conventional orthodoxy, the explorative
study presented here sheds some new light on the notion of the
boundaryless career and its connection to organizations in the
project-based economy. Generally, careers in such context
are presented as those that move across organizations to a
greater extent than elsewhere. In that respect, the increasing
projectification would be assumed to promote the existence of
boundaryless careers. However, the findings reported here
indicate that there is another side to this development. Our
findings reveal significant efforts on behalf of the firms to
bound careers, to specify career steps and formal requirements
to make sure that project managers stay with the firm. In that
respect, the firms follow a well-known principle of investing in
resources that are highly important to their competitiveness.
As said by Heimer (1984: 306):
“When an organization is interested in developing the abilities
of a group of people and in retaining them as these skills
increase, it will create hierarchies, job descriptions, and training
programs; it will pay attention to educational qualifications and
experience; and it will collect and disseminate information
about these people.” (Heimer, 1984: 306).
In that respect, the need to formalize career models seems to be
greater in situations when uncertainties and fluidity abound. One
might therefore argue that the flattening of organizations and
elimination of managerial layers actually work to promote the
institutionalization of management careers — at least in the
domain that relates to their project activities. As recent research
has emphasized, careers have become more open, diverse, less
structured and possible to control by the employer (Baruch, 2004).
However, the investments made by the studied organizations
indicate that their attempts to control and design formalized career
models are increasing, although perhaps the possibility of actually
controlling them diminishes. One sign of the latter is the tendency
to adopt external guidelines for the design of career models and
that companies seek verification from external associations to gain
legitimacy for their activities. At the same time, some firms report
the inherent problems associated with such developments.
Aligning too much with external bodies involves the risk of
making their project managers more mobile.
There is another important peculiarity with the project manager
career not immediately seen in other areas of management. This
has to do with the possibilities of arranging for career tournaments
(Rosenbaum, 1979). In functional and hierarchical careers, there is
normally a set limit for the possibility of moving upwards.
 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
However, the nature of project production is quite different. Here
there is a possibility of creating new organizations to allow for more
opportunities to assume assignments at the very upper echelon of
the project management pyramid. In that respect, there is an
interesting dynamics involved in the careers of project managers,
which not only allows firms to launch large-scale development
projects if there are excessive managerial resources, but also to bid
on external contracts. The dynamic thus resembles Penrose's
(1959) classic idea of resources as generators for company growth.
Of course, such measures are also theoretically possible in other
areas, although they tend to be involved in a completely different
resource commitment which would make them irreversible and
associated with considerable costs and lock-ins.
Another observation of some theoretical validity relates to the
paradox of instituting formalized careers in fluid organizational
settings. The drawback, according to some of our interviewees, is
that it might limit the possibilities for job rotation. Even though
project managers have unique opportunities to move across
organizational settings and pursue a cross-functional and multi-
dimensional career (cf. Baruch, 2004), there is a risk that they
become too addicted to the project logic of organization. In that
respect, the possible downside of creating separate pools of
project managers that lead their career only within the domain of
projects might produce a certain narrow-mindedness that might
be dangerous in the long run. This generally illustrates the
observation that Gaddis (1959: 94) put forth as “projectitis”, i.e.,
“a seeing of all things as though a particular project were the
center of the corporate universe”. He warns that projectitis tends
to lead to adverse results, including the reduction in efficiency
and productivity of the human resources in the project. As some
of the companies in our study reported, there is a need for a
certain job rotation at the managerial levels – between project and
line functions – to create the right kind of generalist knowledge.
Interpreted differently, this demonstrates the value of the project
managers in having an understanding of the various units whose
activities are to be integrated in the project, an idea already put
forward by Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) in their classic research
on the role of the project manager as “the integrator”. Too rigid
formalizations and lock-ins of project manager careers might thus
delimit the development of absorptive capacity among managers
and the development of the capabilities with a particular focus on
complex problem-solving and knowledge/technology integration
(Hedlund, 1994).
7. Conclusions
This paper has identified some patterns and offered new ideas
about the emergence of career models to promote management
careers in project-based work settings. The study reported on a
series of dilemmas and paradoxes that, while supporting previous
research, also added new perspectives on previous findings which,
to some extent, challenge mainstream orthodoxy within the area of
career theory. In this section we pinpoint the dilemmas observed in
our empirical study.
1. Bounded boundaryless careers. The role of the project
manager, to a great extent, is a work role very much in line
901
with the idea of the boundaryless career. However, companies
recently seem to have invested heavily in the formalization of
career models to make sure that project managers refrain from
the boundaryless, market-based career model, but instead,
decide to pursue their career following a rather traditional
organizational career path.
2. Multidimensional careers. The development of career models
is multidimensional. For instance, it is affected by the external
labor market (to attract external talent), clients (to guarantee
quality in deliveries/output), and outside institutions (through
professionalization attempts and certification initiatives). It is
also affected by the nature of production as such, most notably
in the sense that projects differ (business projects, development
projects, etc.), and projects, as such, differ in their degrees of
clarity (definition of projects as temporary organizations).
These conditions generally speak in favor of a stratification of
career models in terms of different career models for different
kinds of project managers.
3. Career models and the formalization of psychological
contracts. Career models, such as the ones studied here,
seem to be tied to the new psychological contract (Rousseau,
1995) and they are typically the result of a collaboration
between employers and employees. Many of the initiatives
to create formalized models came from individual project
managers who wanted to have a more specified path to
better steer their career. In that respect, the models clarify
what the employee might expect from the employer with
regard to promotion, status, payment, training, feedback,
and most important, assignments. The latter centers on
the fact that career models, to a great extent, produce
expectations with regards to the difficulty and challenge
associated with the management assignment. Similarly, it
creates expectations on the employee who agrees on certain
kinds of aptitude tests, competence development initiatives,
studying at leisure time to pass certification, willingness to
stay current and take part in certification programs, and the
general expectation to “be prepared” for assignments at the
most advanced project levels.
These three areas would then also be important for future
research. The current paper, limited in scope and theoretical
analysis, is a preliminary analysis in terms of comparing career
models across firms. However, we believe that the empirical
context as such – career models for project managers – is generally
of interest to better understand the changes of managerial careers in
a modern economy.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful for the research assistance from Elisabeth
Borg and Elin Hällgren. We would also like to thank the
companies that participated in this study. It should be noted that
most of the empirical work was performed in 2010 and the
findings presented here do not necessarily reflect the companies'
current career models and leadership development programs. We
would also like to express our gratitude to the special issue editor
902 K. Bredin, J. Söderlund / International Journal of Project Management 31 (2013) 889–902
and the reviewers for comments on earlier version of the paper.
Any remaining errors are the sole responsibility of the authors.
References
Allen, T.J., Katz, R., 1995. The project-oriented engineer: a dilemma for human
resource management. R&D Management 25 (2), 129–140.
Arthur, M.B., Hall, D.T., Lawrence, B.S., 1989. Generating new directions in
career theory: the case for a transdisciplinary approach. In: Arthur, M.B.,
Hall, D.T., Lawrence, B.S. (Eds.), Handbook of Career Teory. Cambridge
University, Cambridge.
Baruch, Y., 2004. Transforming careers: from linear to multidirectional career
parthe: organizational and individual perspectives. Career Development
International 9 (1), 58–73.
Baruch, Y., Rosenstein, E., 1992. Human resource management in Israeli firms:
planning and managing careers in high-technology organizations. International
Journal of Human Resource Management 3 (3), 477–495.
Berggren, C., 1996. Building a truly global organization? ABB and the problems of
integrating a multi-domestic enterprise. Scandinavian Journal of Management
12 (2), 123–137.
Boltanski, L., Chiapello, E., 1999. Le novel esprit du capitalisme. Gallimard,
Paris.
Bredin, K., Söderlund, J., 2006. HRM and project intensification in R&D-based
companies: a study of Volvo Car Corporation and AstraZeneca. R&D
Management 36 (5), 467–485.
Carbone, T.A., Gholston, S., 2004. Project manager skill development: a survey
of programs and practitioners. Engineering Management Journal 16 (3),
10–16.
Castells, 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Blackwell, Oxford.
De Meyer, A., Loch, C.H., Pich, M.T., 2002. Managing project uncertainty:
from variation to chaos. MIT Sloan Management Review 43 (2), 60–67.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy
of Management Review 14 (4), 532–550.
El-Sabaa, S., 2001. The skills and career path of an effective project manager.
International Journal of Project Management 19, 1–7.
Gaddis, P.O., 1959. The project manager. Harvard Business Review 37 (3), 89–97.
Gooderham, P.N., Nordhaug, O., Ringdal, K., 1999. Institutional and rational
determinants of organizational practices: human resource management in
European firms. Administrative Science Quarterly 44 (3), 507–531.
Hall, D.T., 2002. Careers In and Out of Organizations. Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks.
Hedlund, G., 1994. A model of knowledge management and the N-form
corporation. Strategic Management Journal 15 (Special Issue), 73–90
(Strategy: Search for New Paradigms).
Heimer, C.A., 1984. Organizational and individual control of career development in
engineering project work. Acta Sociologica 27 (4), 283–310.
Hobday, M., 2000. The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing
complex products and systems? Research Policy 29 (7/8), 871–894.
Hodgson, D., Muzio, D., 2011. Prospects for the professionalism in project
management. In: Morris, P., Pinto, J., Söderlund, J. (Eds.), Oxford
Handbook of Project Management. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Hölzle, K., 2010. Designing and implementing a career path for project managers.
International Journal of Project Management 28 (8), 779–786.
Jones, C., DeFillippi, R.J., 1996. Back to the future in film: combining industry
and self-knowledge to meet the career challenges of the 21st century. The
Academy of Management Executive 10 (4), 89–103.
Lawrence, P., Lorsch, J., 1967. Organization and Environment. Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Lindgren, M., Packendorff, J., 2009. Project leadership revisited: towards
distributed leadership perspectives in project research. International Journal
of Project Organisation and Management 1 (3), 285–308.
Midler, C., 1995. ‘Projectification’ of the firm: the Renault case. Scandinavian
Journal of Management 11 (4), 363–375.
Mintzberg, H., 1979. The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the
Research. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Morris, P.W.G., Crawford, L., Hodgson, D., Shepherd, M.M., Thomas, J.,
2006. Exploring the role of formal bodies of knowledge in defining a
profession — the case of project management. International Journal of
Project Management 24 (8), 710–721.
Müller, R., Turner, R., 2010. Leadership competency profiles of successful project
managers. International Journal of Project Management 28 (5), 437–448.
Parker, P., 2002. Working with the intelligent career model. Journal of Employment
Counseling 39, 83–96.
Penrose, E., 1959. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Blackwell, London.
Ricciardi, M. 2001. Projektpsykologi: produktutveckling ur människans perspektiv.
Doctoral dissertation, Psykologiska institutionen, Göteborgs universitet.
Rosenbaum, J., 1979. Tournament mobility: career patterns in a corporation.
Administrative Science Quarterly 24, 221–241.
Rousseau, D., 1995. Psychological Contracts in Organizations. Sage, Thousand
Oaks.
Schein, E.H., 1996. Career anchors revisited: implications for career
development in the 21st century. The Academy of Management Executive
10 (4), 80–88.
Shenhar, A.J., Dvir, D., 2007. Reinventing Project Management: The Diamond
Approach to Successful Growth and Innovation. Harvard Business School
Press, Boston.
Söderlund, J., 2005. Developing project competence: empirical regularities in
competitive project operations. International Journal of Innovation Man-
agement 9 (4), 451–480.
Söderlund, J., 2011. Pluralism in project management: research at the crossroad of
specialization and fragmentation. International Journal of Management Reviews
13, 153–176.
Tremblay, M., Wils, T., Proulx, C., 2002. Determinants of career path preferences
among Canadian engineers. Journal of Engineering and Technology Manage-
ment 19 (1), 1–23.
Walker, J.W., 1976. Let's get realistic about career paths. Human Resource
Management 15 (3), 1–7.
Wang, X.S., Armstrong, A., 2004. An empirical study of PM's professional
commitment to their profession and employing organization. International
Journal of Project Management 22 (5), 377–386.
Wheatley, M.J., Kellner-Rogers, M., 1996. A Simpler Way. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers, San Francisco.
Whitley, R., 2006. Project-based firms: new organizational form or variations
on a theme. Industrial and Corporate Change 15 (1), 77–99.
Wilemon, D.L., Cicero, J.P., 1970. The project manager—anomalies and
ambiguities. Academy of Management Journal 13 (3), 269–282.