See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/254897363

Managing human resources in the project-based organization

Article · January 2003

CITATIONS READS

37 3,817

3 authors, including:

Anne E Keegan Martina Huemann

University College Dublin Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien
53 PUBLICATIONS   2,407 CITATIONS    93 PUBLICATIONS   1,386 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

HRM in project-oriented organisations View project

HRM and the Gig Economy View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Anne E Keegan on 03 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF

PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman

Human resource management in the project-oriented company:

A review
a,* b,1 c,2
Martina Huemann , Anne Keegan , J. Rodney Turner
a
Project Management Group, Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration, Franz Klein Gasse 1, A-1190 Vienna, Austria
b
Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 11, 1018 WB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
c
Groupe ESC Lille, Avenue WillyBrandt, F59777 Euralille, France

Received 21 March 2006; received in revised form 18 August 2006; accepted 3 October 2006

Abstract

Human resource management (HRM) can be viewed as core processes of the project-oriented company, affecting the way the orga-
nization acquires and uses human resources, and how employees experience the employment relationship. Knowledge about HRM is
produced by researchers and theorists who, through publishing their work in books and journals, construct knowledge in particular ways
and in so doing frame the way HRM debates take shape in the academic and practitioner literatures. In most of the extant literature
HRM is framed primarily in terms of large, stable organisations, while other organisational types, such as, those relying on projects
as the principle form of work design, are marginalised in discussions about what HRM is and how it should be practiced. The authors
argue that due to specific characteristics of the project-oriented company, particularly the temporary nature of the work processes and
dynamic nature of the work environment, there exist specific challenges for both organisations and employees for HRM in project-ori-
ented companies, and that these have – been neither widely acknowledged nor adequately conceptualised in the extant mainstream HRM
or project management literatures. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of past research on HRM in the context of projects,
published in the project management, general management, and HRM literatures. We develop a model of what we see as the critical
HRM aspects of project-oriented organizing, based on prior research and use it to structure the review. Finally we summarize what
we see as the major shortcomings of research in the field of HRM in the project-oriented company and outline a research agenda to
address outstanding areas of research on this topic.
Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Project-oriented company; Managing of projects; Managing by projects; Human resource management

1. Introduction fore important in any organization [6]. The project-oriented

Human Resource Management (HRM) is of strategic
importance in all organizations. It contributes to the success
of the organization [1] and creates competitive advantage
for the organization [2,3]. The way HRM practices and pol-
icies take shape also affects the employee’s experiences of
work and the employment relationship [4,5]. HRM is there-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +43 1 4277 29405; fax: +43 1 3687510.
E-mail addresses: martina.huemann@wu-wien.ac.at (M. Huemann),
a.e.keegan@uva.nl (A. Keegan), jr.turner@esc-lille.fr (J.R. Turner).
1
Tel.: +31 20 525 5499; fax: +31 20 525 5092.
2
Tel.: +33 3 2021 5972; fax: +33 3 2021 5974.
company is no different in this regard. However, we suggest
that specific features of the project-oriented company create
specific challenges for HRM in that context, which are not
widely recognized in the general management, HRM or
project management (PM) literatures. This paper reviews
literature in the project management, general management
and mainstream HRM literatures.
Our basic assumption is that project-oriented companies
do have specific requirements regarding HRM. Yet
research in this field is limited. We have examined the
extant literature in the project management, general man-
agement and HRM literatures to underpin our assump-
tions and thoroughly review the extant literature on the

0263-7863/$30.00 Ó 2006 Elsevier Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.10.001
316 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
topic of HRM in project-oriented companies. The reviewed
journals include:
 in the Project Management literature: International
Journal of Project Management, Project Management
Journal, Construction Management and Economics, Engi-
neering, Construction and Architecture Management,
IEEE Transactions in Engineering Management, Journal
of Management in Engineering;
 in the General Management literature: Administrative
Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal,
Academy of Management Review, Journal of Manage-
ment Studies, Organization Studies, Organization;
 in the HRM literature: Human Resource Management,
Human Resource Management Journal, International
Journal of Human Resource Management and Personnel
Review; Human Resource Planning. Employee Relations.
In the next section we provide arguments for why we
think that there are specific requirements regarding HRM
in the project-oriented company. We then report the gen-
eral findings of our literature search into HRM in pro-
ject-oriented companies as published in leading journals.
Then we introduce a simple model of HRM which is based
on prior research [7]. The model serves as the structure for
the remainder of the review. We finally conclude with a
future research agenda.
2. Specific requirements for HRM in the project-oriented
company
Gareis [8,9] suggests that project-oriented companies are
ones in which the people of the organization:
1. define ‘‘management by projects’’ as their organizational
strategy;
2. apply projects and programs for the performance of
complex processes;
3. manage a project portfolio of different internal and
external project types;
4. have specific permanent organizations like a project
portfolio group, or a PM office to provide integrative
functions;
5. view the organization as being project-oriented.
The ideal project-oriented company is often described as
a flat organization with a strong project management cul-
ture. In essence, what defines a company as project-ori-
ented is that these companies perceive themselves as
being project-oriented and shape their policies and prac-
tices for working, for organizational culture and for strat-
egy towards the challenge presented by managing projects.
Project-oriented companies may be found in many different
industries including the public sector. Organizations can
vary in the degree of their project-orientation, depending
for example on the size, the number and the types of pro-
jects they carry out. These impact the relation between
the stable line organization and the temporary organiza-
tions, carried out in the project-oriented company. Thus
the project-oriented company is a construct. An organiza-
tion may choose that project-orientation is the adequate
working form for them as a whole (as in a construction
company) or only for some of their organizational units
(as in the product development department of a manufac-
turing company, or the organizational development unit of
a municipality).
Some writers have identified some specifics of HRM in
companies that carry out projects [7,10]. These studies sup-
port the assumption that the project-oriented company has
specific features that in turn produce special requirements
in terms of HRM policies and practices. Some specific fea-
tures of project-oriented companies which we see relevant
for HRM are
 ‘‘Managing by projects’’ as the strategy of the project-
oriented company.
 Temporary nature of projects.
 Dynamism.
 Project-portfolio resource and multirole demands.
 Specific management paradigm.
2.1. ‘‘Managing by projects’’ as the strategy of the project
oriented company
Within the mainstream HRM literature, there is a long
tradition of research arguing that in order to make an
optimal contribution to firm performance, HRM policies
and practices should be integrated both with firm strat-
egy, so-called vertical strategic integration [11] and with
each other, so-called horizontal integration [2]. The orien-
tation of the HRM function, its goals and aims, need to
be aligned with the strategy of the organization [12]. If
we consider ‘‘managing by projects’’ as the strategy of
the project-oriented company [8] this would imply that
the HRM policies, processes, and practices in the pro-
ject-oriented company are in some way supportive of pro-
ject-oriented working and are different from more
traditional HRM processes and practices [13] which are
designed for the classically-managed organization where
the emphasis is not on projects but instead on routine
products and services and where the job requirements
are well defined and stable [14].
2.2. Temporary nature of projects
Projects and programs are temporary organizations
[9,15,16]. Thus every time a new project or program is
started, the human resource configuration of the organiza-
tion must change. This might create pressure. It certainly
impacts the work organization, and creates the need for
new processes like assigning personnel onto projects, dis-
persement from projects, and processes for linking project
assignments to careers.
 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
2.3. Dynamism
Project-oriented companies have dynamic boundaries
and contexts. The number and the sizes of the projects
performed are constantly changing, permanent and tem-
porary resources are employed, and cooperations with cli-
ents, partners and suppliers are organized in teams, some
of them are virtual [9,16]. Projects have been described as
temporary organizations to bring about change [15,17].
Thus projects and programs entail greater uncertainty,
creating a more dynamic environment with more discon-
tinuity. The degree of dynamism may also depend on
the size of the projects; industries like construction and
engineering with long project durations will be less
dynamic than IT or product development with short pro-
ject durations, where the projects create even more
dynamic. In this dynamic environment in which the HR
configuration is constantly changing, the challenges of
ensuring employee well-being and ethical treatment of
workers is important.
2.4. Project-portfolio resource and role demands
At any time a project-oriented company holds a project
portfolio of different internal and external project types
[8,18]. That means at any time more or less projects and
programs are carried out. A person has multiple roles. A
person can work in different projects at the same time,
maybe even in different project roles. In one project he or
she is a project manager, in another a project team member
or sponsor. Or a person can carry a role in a project and at
the same time carry another role in the permanent organiza-
tion, for example in the PM Office. Challenges arise from
this in many areas, including multiresource allocation
[19,20] and role conflict at an individual level [21].
2.5. Specific management paradigm
The ideal project-oriented company has a specific man-
agement culture expressed in the empowerment of employ-
ees, process orientation and teamwork, continuous and
discontinuous organizational change, customer orienta-
tion, and networking with clients and suppliers [9]. There-
fore specific competences and skills are needed by the
project personnel to successfully work together in projects.
These may be formally supported by the company or infor-
mally demanded by the nature of the project business.
Summarizing, HRM policies, practices and processes
need to be designed to meet the specific needs of the pro-
ject-oriented company [7,22].
3. Different perspectives and missing links in literature
In this section we review what has been written about
HRM in the project-oriented companies in each of the
project management, general management and HRM
literatures.
317
3.1. Shift from technical to more human project management
In the project management literature, a limited amount
of research has considered HRM [23–25]. Conceptualizing
HRM in the project context is still rudimentary [26,27]. If
HRM is considered, it is mainly at the project level
[18,28], or from a multi-project resource allocation perspec-
tive [29,30]. Langford et al. [31] and Loosemore et al.[32]
consider HRM in construction, a typical project-oriented
industry. But both take standard HRM and ask how it
applies to the construction industry, rather than ask if
the construction industry needs something extra or differ-
ent. Further we find literature on specific issues like compe-
tence development [33] or project leadership [34] but broad
theorizing on HRM in project-oriented companies is lack-
ing in the current literature, with some exceptions [14].
Along with the broader recognition of projects as tem-
porary organizations [15,17], there has lately been a shift
from technical to more human project management [35]
with particular attention to team aspects (for an overview
see: [36]). Further a critical mass of organizational and pro-
ject management research has rapidly evolved regarding
the management of projects [37], the project based com-
pany [38], or the project-oriented company [9]. Aspects of
knowledge management [39] and governance are being
researched [40,41]. However, so far, specific research on
HRM in project-oriented companies is rare. While there
is increasing interest in the maturity of project-oriented
companies and specific maturity models have been devel-
oped [42], only one considers personnel management as a
specific dimension of the project-oriented company [9,43].
This is all the more problematic when we consider issues
of employee wellbeing. In the dynamic environment that
characterise project-oriented companies, the HR configura-
tion is constantly changing, as is the relationship between
company and groups of employees. The challenges of
ensuring employee well-being and their ethical treatment
in rapidly changing organizational settings in which the
transience of work-projects and the configuration of
work-teams and even entire organizations is paramount
is both important and overlooked. Recent case studies have
indicated evidence that companies have problems in grasp-
ing the work and emotional situation of the individual [10]
and multirole assignments [20] that may lead to burn out
for younger employees that are not able to achieve an
appropriate work-life balance [7] or to manage the damag-
ing consequences of role overload and role conflict. Fur-
thermore, from an organizational and managerial
perspective, failure to address the role conflict facets of
project work may damage efforts to retain workers as both
have been shown to cause job dissatisfaction and in
extreme cases physical, psychological and behavioural job
withdrawal and voluntary turnover [21]. Failure to con-
sider the specific requirements of HRM in project-oriented
companies may mean theorists overlook these issues, fail to
consider the effects, positive and negative, of project-ori-
ented work practices in individuals.
318 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
3.2. Focus on temporary employment
To the extent that the general management literature
considers the project-oriented company as a research topic,
authors have mainly been interested in the overlap between
new organizational forms and knowledge management
[16,44,45] and, from a critical perspective, the continuities
and discontinuities between knowledge based project-ori-
ented organizing and bureaucratic forms of organizing
[46,47]. Alvesson [48] for example describes the challenge
of managing the disintegrative tendencies of complex pro-
ject-oriented work as a major challenge in the management
of knowledge intensive firms.
Typically, articles on project-oriented working and
knowledge based working refer in passing to HRM, but
do not address the HRM requirements of project-oriented
companies in depth. So for example Morgan [49] discusses
the holographic organization and mentions the ubiquity of
project-oriented working, but does not discuss the specific
requirements either flowing from or induced by the use of
projects for HRM policies and practices. In describing
knowledge intensive firms, Starbuck [50] also refers to the
customized nature of problem solving and organization
of work within projects (called task-forces) in a case study
on knowledge intensive firms, but does not explore the
more detailed aspects of the specific requirements of pro-
ject-oriented companies for human resource policies and
practices.
To conclude, the combination of research or theorising
on project-oriented companies and HRM in the project
management and general management literature is rather
rare [51] and often focuses on the temporary employment
[52].
3.3. Emerging interest in project-oriented companies
Publications in HRM journals have a powerful a effect
on the way HRM is constructed, as HRM is a social con-
struction [53]. The use of language by theorists and
researchers to describe HRM is a form of social action, cre-
ating understandings about what HRM is and the effect it
is presumed to have on social life and in structuring
employment relations [53,54]. This is relevant to our study
because, as currently constructed in mainstream journals,
HRM is strongly framed in terms of the problems of large,
stable organisations. The emphasis on big, multinational
companies dominates and produces a narrow perspective
on how we conceive of HRM and the appropriateness of
different types of HRM practices. Project-oriented compa-
nies are not the only neglected area of mainstream HRM
theorising. The literature is frequently criticised for its
neglect of small organisations [55,56] and for privileging
managerial perspectives on HRM practices, a trend
increasingly challenged by researchers from a more critical
and ethical perspective [53,4]. When it comes to project-ori-
ented companies specifically, little has been published on
the topic in mainstream HRM journals. These journals still
pay most attention to routine organizations with stable
structures, although modern flexible organizational forms
have been discussed [57]. The leading HRM literature
neglects projects as a new working form and the specific
implications of project-oriented work for HRM. The role
of the project manager is rarely discussed [58], and the role
of HRM in the project-oriented company is generally
ignored. We found some exceptions.
There are a few recent studies that explore HR issues like
career, related to project-oriented structures, but they do
not explicitly consider the project-oriented companies as
the basic context [59,60]. Söderlund and Bredin [10], and
Bredin and Söderlund [61], have carried out case studies in
R&D based companies. They mainly discuss the challenge
of linking HRM practices to the changes made in the orga-
nizational and management structures to become a project-
oriented company. Their research mainly concentrates on
Organizational Behaviour in R&D based companies.
Blair et al. [62] report on employment in the project-ori-
ented film industry. Clark and Colling [63], who have con-
ducted in depth case studies in the engineering contracting
industry, find that the role of the HRM function is chang-
ing and that these changes are not reflected in the HRM lit-
erature because there is a lack of engagement between
project management literature and HRM literature on
the role of HRM practices in project-oriented companies.
We share these observations, as for example in the litera-
ture on HRM in flexible firms such as the network organi-
zation [64], where there is no explicit mention of projects or
their impact on HRM in project-oriented companies. The
HR implications of project management as a core business
process of organizing work and the project-oriented com-
pany as such are not objects of consideration in the leading
HRM publications we have investigated which is surprising
given increasing evidence that project oriented working is
becoming increasingly important [16,65,66], and that this
is a development that need to be considered carefully and
critically in terms of the implications from non-managerial
as well as managerial perspectives [67].
4. HRM practices and processes in the project-oriented
company
Based on previous research [7] as well as our review of
the project management, general management and HRM
literatures as they deal specifically with project-oriented
companies, we have developed a simple model of HRM
processes in the project-oriented company, Fig. 1b.
Fig. 1a illustrates the processes familiar from mainstream
HRM literature such as recruitment, employment and
release. In addition, there are additional HRM processes
in project-oriented companies: assignment to projects,
engagement on projects, and dispersion after projects have
finished. What we understand by employment by the orga-
nization and engagement on projects can be expanded by
adapting the Michigan model of HRM [68], Fig. 2. This
shows appraisal, reward and development on the project
 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323 319

Selection Employment Release

2a: HRM in the classically managed company

Selection Employment Release

Dispersement
Dispersement
Dispersement
DispersementAssignment
DispersementAssignment
Assignment
Assignment
Assignment
fromfrom
project
from
project
from
project
from
projectto project
projectto project
to project
to project
to project

Engagement
Engagement
Engagement
Engagement
Employment
on project
on project
on project
on project
on project

2b: HRM in the project oriented company

Fig. 1. HRM in the project-oriented company versus HRM in the classically managed company.

contributing to appraisal, development and reward in the
organization.
Consistent with our commitment to studying the impli-
cations of HRM in the project-oriented company from
non-managerial as well as managerial perspectives, all these
processes can and should be researched from both an indi-
vidual and an organizational perspective [69], something
which is only recently an explicit focus in the mainstream
HRM literature [5].
We now discuss each of the steps in the process in turn,
starting with the three steps at the organizational level and
then the three at the project level. We use this model to
structure the remainder of the review.
4.1. Selection
Keegan and Turner [14] describe the selection processes
used by project oriented companies. They suggested that

Reward

Selection Performance Appraisal Release

Development

Employment in the organization

Reward

Assignment Performance Appraisal Dispersement

Development

Employment on the project-oriented

Fig. 2. Employment in the company and on the project.

320 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
such organizations tend to use organic selection processes.
Search and selection can be done for the company in gen-
eral or for a specific project or program. Hauschildt et al.
[70] report on the selection of project managers by identify-
ing types of project managers and their further develop-
ment in a project manager pool.
4.2. Employment
Sveiby [71] argued that a key to retaining personnel in
knowledge based organizations was ensuring that employ-
ees had the opportunities to work on interesting projects
providing interesting career challenges. In project-oriented
companies the comfortable certainty of climbing the ladder
up the functional silo does not exist and arguably such cer-
tainty is a thing of the past in most organisations. The
mainstream HRM literature has indeed begun to conceptu-
alise careers in more dynamic terms [72], describing initia-
tives such as the network-path career [73]. While it is true
that the HRM literature now recognises the necessity for
increased flexibility in career development ‘in today’s
dynamic organizational environment’ [59,74], the dyna-
mism and flexibility of career development in project-ori-
ented companies is intrinsically related to the fact that
projects, being transient, cannot provide careers. While
each project can be a learning opportunity in a career built
on successive and overlapping projects providing a broad
sweep of learning experiences, this requires careful manage-
ment and therefore the study of career management in pro-
ject-oriented companies commends critical attention.
Keegan and Turner [15] introduced the idea of the ‘‘spiral
staircase career’’ to reflect the idea that people will move
through a series of varied and wide-ranging jobs in project-
oriented companies. Turner et al. [74] reported that project
managers tend to stay longer with one organization than
other project participants, because they feel committed to
one firm as a way of achieving career development.
Project-oriented companies arguably therefore provide
the kind of varied and interesting careers to which the
HRM literature is increasingly alluding. However, to the
extent that employees rely on continuous movement from
project to project to develop their careers, the processes
linking employees to projects and project to careers should
be critically examined. For example, it is important to con-
sider the manner in which processes are put in place to
ensure outcome justice as well as procedural and interac-
tional justice in project allocation. The way these processes
are (mis)managed may have an effect on the legitimacy of
career development processes in project-oriented compa-
nies, employees perceptions of fairness, and the effective-
ness of the processes from a managerial perspective [75].
Turner et al. [74] describe development of project per-
sonnel in the project-oriented company. The objective of
personnel development is to improve the competence of
project management personnel by offering the possibility
of gaining knowledge and experience. The establishment
of the profession ‘‘project manager’’ in an organization
supports the professionalism and thus the competence
development of project management personnel [76].
4.3. Release
Next we consider release of the employees and tempo-
rary workers from the organization. There are two key ele-
ments of the release process [7]:
 Organizational learning.
 Individual review and feedback.
With the release of freelance workers it is also important
to remain in contact to maintain the organization’s net-
work and to make future cooperation possible [7].
4.4. Assignment to the project
This is the process of assigning project personnel (pro-
gram managers, project managers, and team members) to
new projects and programs. It has similarities to recruit-
ment of people to the parent organization, but also sub-
stantial differences, even when appointing external
contractors to be peripheral workers on the project. Esk-
erod and Jepsen [77] have researched new staffing proce-
dure, in which enrolment is dependent on employees
voluntarily responding to internal advertising of projects.
The assignment to the project may also be during the pro-
ject live cycle [78].
The appointment of personnel to projects takes on stra-
tegic significance and may influence the ability of organiza-
tion to retain personnel. We anticipate, based on previous
research [51] that the career dynamics of allocation to pro-
jects will be visible and that organizations consciously seek
to make project personnel allocation decisions based on an
assessment of what personnel are available and what pro-
jects may provide – for each prospective appointment –
specific development needs, expertise, experience to work
with particular clients, etc. These processes should of
course be explicitly considered from both an individual as
well as an organizational perspective.
4.5. Employment in the project
This is probably the most readily recognized of the three
additional processes. Within a project a lot of development
of personnel takes place. It is strongly linked to the leader-
ship function of the project manager [79,38]. But what is
becoming clear is that project owners and project managers
may have duties for the care of individuals not previously
recognized, such as project appraisals and support for
career development. Additionally, the project owner has
duties to care for the development of, for example, the pro-
ject manager. Methods used are training on the job, feed-
back, etc. [22]. These processes should be explicitly
considered from both an individual as well as an organiza-
tional perspective.
 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
4.6. Dispersement from the project
This is a process whose need is not widely recognized in
the literature on projects or on HRM. It has similarities to,
but also substantial differences from, the release from the
parent organization. At this point the organization needs
to decide whether the employee will be [7]:
 immediately assigned to a new project;
 assigned to a project starting sometime in the future
where their skills will be better used;
 held in abeyance because there is no project for them to
be assigned to.
It is at the end of a project that core workers are most
vulnerable to leaving the organization, especially if faced
with a period of ‘‘sitting on the bench’’. At the end of the
project, core workers should be debriefed about their expe-
riences and counselled about the future. If they do not have
another project to go to straight away, they can do many
things:
 Sitting on the bench.
 Going through training or other personal development.
 Going to the project management office to do technical
and process development.
This period is one in which we might expect project per-
sonnel to be more anxious, and having practices in place to
recognize and manage that is clearly important for both
individual and organisational wellbeing. The choices made
about what to do with project personnel at the end of the
project need to be made in consultation with them to
ensure employee well-being and procedural fairness in pro-
ject allocation decisions, and from an organizational per-
spective to avoid valued personnel leaving. Peripheral
workers also need to be counselled and debriefed. If they
have performed well, the organization may like to retain
them. The organization can advise them on training, even
involve them in training, invite them to attend social activ-
ities, and work at keeping them with the network of poten-
tial peripheral workers.
5. Conclusions and further steps
The mainstream HRM literature still gives greater atten-
tion to the management of human resources in routine
organizations. The HRM function and HRM practices in
flat and flexible project-oriented companies have generally
been neglected. We have identified a missing link between
the PM literature and HRM literature regarding the pro-
jects as a working form and the project-oriented company.
We have found that regarding some HR processes like
development of employees in the company as well as in
the project there is already research while for processes, dis-
persion of the project, very little extant research exists and
the issue has only recently been recognized as potentially
321
significant in understanding the HR dynamics of project-
oriented companies.
While most HRM research is undertaken from a mana-
gerial and prescriptive perspective, we argue that research
on HRM in project-oriented companies must take the per-
spective of the individual employee as well as the organisa-
tion. Ensuring employee well-being and ethical treatment of
workers in the project-oriented company is an issue that is
vitally important but which has not been widely studied in
the extant HRM literature. Despite the fact that there has
been a change from technical-task issues to more people-
oriented issues in project management research, the impor-
tance of HRM has not yet been widely recognized. The
HRM perspective especially as a specific function in the
project-oriented organization is still a blind spot in project
management, general management, and HRM literatures.
For reasons outlined in Sections 2 and 4, we propose that
the HRM requirements of the project-oriented company are
different than those in the classically managed organization,
and that these requirements have not been addressed in the
literature. We therefore propose to undertake further
research to identify the HRM policies, practices and pro-
cesses adopted by project-oriented companies, with the twin
objectives of:
1. exploring to what extent, the distinctive characteristics
of project-oriented companies, including the temporary
nature of the work processes and the dynamic nature
of the work environment, lead to the necessity for spe-
cific HR strategies and specific HR practices;
2. considering the implications for both organisations and
individuals of these emergent policies and practices.
Acknowledgement
This research has been sponsored by the Project Man-
agement Institute (PMIÒ), as well as the three institutions
we work for. We are grateful for their support.
References
[1] Huselid MA. The impact of human resource management practices
on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Acad
Manage J 1995;38(3):635–72.
[2] Wright P, McMahan G. Theoretical perspectives for strategic human
resource management. J Manage 1992;18(2):295–320.
[3] Amit R, Belcourt M. Human resource management processes: a
value-creating source of competitive advantage. Eur Manage J
1999;17(2):174–81.
[4] Winstanley D, Woodall J. The ethical dimension of human resource
management. Hum Resource Manage J 2000;10(2):5–20.
[5] Guest D. Human resource management, corporate performance and
employee wellbeing: building the worker into HRM. J Ind Relat
2002;44(3):335–58.
[6] Pfeffer J. The human equation: building profits by putting people first.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 1998.
[7] Huemann M, Turner JR, Keegan AE. Human resource management
in the project-oriented organization: questions for future research. In:
Slevin DP, Cleland DI, Pinto JK, editors, Innovations: project
322 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
management research 2004. Newtown Square, PA: Project Manage-
ment Institute, 2004, p. 369–84.
[8] Gareis R, editor. Management by projects. Vienna: Manz; 1990.
[9] Gareis R. Happy Projects! Vienna: Manz; 2005.
[10] Söderlund J, Bredin K. HRM in project-intensive firms: changes and
challenges. Hum Resource Manage 2006;45(2):249–65.
[11] Lengnick-Hall CA, Lengnick-Hall ML. Strategic human resources
management: a review of the literature and a proposed typology.
Acad Manage Rev 1998;13(3):454–70.
[12] Butler JE, Ferris GR, Napier NK. Strategy and human resource
management. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western; 1991.
[13] Wright PW, Boswell WR. Desegregating HRM: a review and
synthesis of micro and macro human resource management research.
J Manage 2002;28(3):247–76.
[14] Keegan AE, Turner JR. Managing human resources in the project-
based organization. In: Turner JR, editor. People in project manage-
ment. Aldershot: Gower; 2003. p. 1–12.
[15] Turner JR, Müller R. On the nature of the project as a temporary
organization. Int J Project Manage 2003;21(1):1–8.
[16] Sydow J, Lindkvist L, DeFillippi R. Editorial: project organizations,
embeddedness and repositories of knowledge. Organ Stud
2004;25:1475–89.
[17] Turner JR. Editorial: towards a theory of project management: the
nature of the project. Int J Project Manage 2006;24(1):1–3.
[18] Project Management Institute. A guide to the project management
body of knowledge (PMBoKÒ Guide). Third ed. Newtown Square,
PA: Project Management Institute; 2004.
[19] Eskerod P. The human resource allocation process when organizing
by projects. In: Lundin RA, Midler C, editors. Projects as arenas for
renewal and learning processes. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher;
1998. p. 125–31.
[20] Zika-Viktorsson A, Sundström P, Engwall M. Project overload: An
exploratory study of work and management in multi-project settings.
Int J Project Manage 2006;24(5):385–94.
[21] Rau B, Hyland M. Role conflict and flexible work arrangements: the
effects on applicant attraction. Pers Psychol 2002;55:111–36.
[22] Huemann M, Turner JR, Keegan AE. Human Resource management
in the project-oriented company. In: Pinto J, Morris PWG, editors.
The Wiley guide to managing projects. New York: Wiley; 2004. p.
1061–86.
[23] Themistocleous G, Wearne SH. Project management topic coverage
in journals. Int J Project Manage 2000;18(1):7–11.
[24] Kloppenborg T, Opfner WA. The current state of project manage-
ment research: trends, interpretations, and predictions. Project
Manage J 2002;33(2):5–18.
[25] Packendorff J. Inquiring into the temporary organization: New
directions for project management research. Scand J Manage
1995;11(4):319–33.
[26] Belout A. Effect of human resource management on project
effectiveness and success: towards a new conceptual framework. Int
J Project Manage 1998;16(1):21–6.
[27] Belout A, Gauvreau C. Factors influencing project success: the impact
of human resource management. Int J Project Manage
2004;22(1):1–11.
[28] Vadapalli A, Mone MA. Information technology project outcomes:
user participation structures and the impact of organizational
behavior and human resource management issues. J Eng Technol
Manage 2000;17(2):127–51.
[29] Engwall M, Jerbrant A. The resource allocation syndrome: the prime
challenge of multi-project management? Int J Project Manage
2003;21(6):403–9.
[30] Hendriks MHA, Voeten B, Kroep L. Human resource allocation in a
multi-project R&D environment: resource capacity allocation and
project portfolio planning in practice. Int J Project Manage
1999;17(3):181–8.
[31] Langford D, Hancock MR, Fellows R, Gale AW. Human resources
management in construction. London: Pearson Education; 1995.
[32] Loosemore M, Dainty ART, Lingard H. Human resource manage-
ment in construction projects. London: Spon; 2003.
[33] Dainty ARJ, Cheng M, Moore DR. Competency-based model for
predicting construction project managers’ performance. J Manage
Eng 2005;21(1):2–9.
[34] Turner JR, Müller M. The project manager’s leadership style as a
success factor on projects: a review. Project Manage J
2005;36(2):49–61.
[35] Turner JR, editor. People in Project Management. Aldershot: Gower;
2003.
[36] Delisle C. Contemporary views on shaping, developing and managing
teams. In: Pinto J, Morris PWG, editors. The Wiley guide to
managing projects. New York: Wiley; 2004. p. 983–1013.
[37] Morris PWG. The management of projects. London: Thomas
Telford; 1997.
[38] Turner JR. The handbook of project-based management. Second ed.
London: McGraw-Hill; 1999.
[39] Love P, Fong PSW, Irani Z, editors. Management of knowledge in
project environments. Oxford: Elsevier; 2004.
[40] Lindkvist L. Governing Project-based firms: promoting market-like
processes within hierarchies. J Manage Gov 2004;8(1):3–25.
[41] Crawford LH, Bredillet C, Turner JR. Project governance. London:
Routledge; forthcoming.
[42] Project Management Institute Organizational project management
maturity model. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Insti-
tute; 2003.
[43] Gareis R, Huemann M. Maturity-Models for the project-oriented
company. In: Turner JR, editor. The Gower handbook of project
management. fourh ed. Aldershot: Gower; forthcoming.
[44] Prencipe A, Tell F. Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of
knowledge codification in project-based firms. Res Policy
2001;30(9):1373–94.
[45] Bresnen M, Goussevskaia A, Swan J. Embedding new management
knowledge in project-based organizations. Organ Stud 2004;25(9):
1535–55.
[46] Alvesson M. Social Identity and the problem of loyalty in knowledge-
intensive companies. J Manage Stud 2000;37(8):1101–23.
[47] Robertson M. Going Public: the emergence and effects of soft
bureaucracy within a knowledge-intensive firm. Organization
2004;11(1):123–48.
[48] Alvesson M. Management of knowledge-intensive companies. Berlin/
New York: de Gruyter; 1995.
[49] Morgan G. Images of organization. New ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage;
1997.
[50] Starbuck W. Keeping an elephant and a butterfly in a house of cards:
the elements of exceptional success. J Manage Stud 1993;30(6):
885–921.
[51] Jones C, DeFillipi RJ. Back to the future in film: combining industry
and self-knowledge to meet the career challenges of the 21st century.
Acad Manage Rev 1996;10(4):89–103.
[52] Garsten C. Betwixt and between: temporary employees as limi-
nal subjects in flexible organizations. Organ Stud 1999;20(4):
601–17.
[53] Keegan A, Boselie P. The lack of impact of dissensus inspired analysis
on developments in the field of human resource management. J
Manage Stud 2006;43(7):1491–511.
[54] Francis H, Keegan A. The changing face of HR: in search of balance.
Hum Resource Manage J 2006;16(3):231–4.
[55] Kaman V, McCarthy A, Gulbro R, Tucker M. Bureaucratic and high
commitment human resource practices in small service firms. Hum
Resource Plann 2001;24(1):33–45.
[56] Wilkinson A. Employment relations in SMEs. Employee Relat
1999;21(3):206–17.
[57] Volberda HW. Building the Flexible Firm. Oxford: Oxford University
Press; 1998.
[58] Cheng M, Dainty A. What makes a good project manager? Hum
Resource Manage J 2005;15(1):25–37.
 M. Huemann et al. / International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007) 315–323
[59] Larsen HH. Oticon: unorthodox project-based management and
careers in a spaghetti organization. Hum Resource Plann
2002;25(4):30–7.
[60] Larsen HH, Brewster C. Line management responsibility for HRM:
what is happening in Europe? Employee Relat 2003;25(3):228–44.
[61] Bredin K, Söderlund J. Perspectives on human resource management:
anexplorative study of the consequences of projectification in four
firms. Int J Hum Resource Develop Manage 2006;6(1):92–113.
[62] Blair H, Gray S, Randle K. Working in film – employment in a
project based industry. Pers Rev 2002;30(2):170–86.
[63] Clark I, Colling T. The management of human resources in the
project-led organizations. Pers Rev 2005;34(2):178–91.
[64] Gugulis I, Vincent S, Hebson G. The rise of the ‘network organiza-
tion’ and the decline of discretion. Hum Resource Manage J
2003;13(2):45–59.
[65] Keegan AE, Turner JR. Quantity versus quality in project based
learning practices. Manage Learn 2001;32(1):77–98.
[66] Keegan AE, Turner JR. The management of innovation in project
based firms. Long Range Plann 2002;35(4):367–88.
[67] Garrick J, Clegg SR. Stressed-out knowledge workers in performative
times: a postmodern take on project-based learning. Manage Learn
2001;32(1):119–34.
[68] Devanna MA, Fombrun CJ, Tichy NM. In: Fombrun CJ, Tichy NM,
Devanna MA, editors. Strategic Hum Resource Manage. New York:
John Wiley; 1984.
[69] Schein E. Career dynamics: matching individual and organizational
needs. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley; 1978.
View publication stats
323
[70] Hauschildt J, Keim G, Medcof JW. Realistic criteria for project
manager selection and development. Project Manage J
2000;31(3):23–32.
[71] Sveiby KE. The new organizational wealth: managing and measuring
knowledge-based assets. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler; 1997.
[72] Mayrhofer W, Meyer M, Iellatchitch A, Schiffinger M. Careers and
human resource management – a European perspective. Hum
Resource Manage Rev 2004;14(4):473–98.
[73] Mondy R, Noe R. Human resource management. New Jersey
Pearson: Prentice-Hall; 2005.
[74] Turner JR, Keegan AE, Crawford LH. Delivering improved project
management maturity through experiential learning. In: Turner JR,
editor. People in project management. Aldershot: Gower; 2003.
[75] Simons T, Roberson Q. Why managers should care about fairness:
the affects of aggregate justice perceptions on organizational out-
comes. J Appl Psychol 2003;88:432–43.
[76] Huemann M. Managing project management personnel and its
competences in the project-oriented company. In: Cleland D, Gareis
R, editors. Global project management handbook. New York: Mc
Graw Hill; 2006.
[77] Eskerod P, Jepsen AL. Staffing renewal projects by voluntary
enrolment. Int J Project Manage 2005;23(6):445–53.
[78] Eskerod P, Blichfeldt BS. Managing team entrees and withdrawals
during the project life cycle. Int J Project Manage 2005;23(7):495–503.
[79] Raiden ABA, Dainty RJ, Neale RH. Current barriers and possible
solutions to effective team formation and deployment within large
construction organization. Int J Project Manage 2004;22(4):309–16.