How The Dutch Project Management Communi

i
How the Dutch Project Management Community’s
Needs Can Be Met Through University Education
By
Fabio A.J. Luelmo
H00014585
A Dissertation submitted to
The University of Liverpool
In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of:
Master of Science in Project Management
2013
ii
A Dissertation Entitled
How the Dutch Project Management Community’s
Needs Can Be Met Through University Education
By
Fabio A.J. Luelmo
H00014585
We hereby certify that this Dissertation submitted by Fabio A.J. Luelmo conforms to
acceptable standards, and as such is fully adequate in scope and quality. It is therefore
approved as the fulfilment of the Dissertation requirements for the degree of Masters of
Science in Project Management.
Approved:
Dissertation Advisor Date

iii
University of Liverpool
2013
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT:
I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the language of others
is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate credit is given where I have used
the language, ideas, expressions or writings of another.
Signed:
28-04-2013
Fabio Luelmo Date

iv
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank University of Liverpool for giving me this chance to put a full stop at the
end of what has been a long chapter in my education. Thanks as well to my dissertation
advisor Lee Nordgren who not only has the patience of a saint but also has given very robust
feedback, without which this study would be far less whole. Thanks to Bree van de Zuidwind,
my Student Support Manager, who helped keep my study track organized and Gerard van
Tilburg, my manager, who had to put up with me throughout my entire Masters.
Three people who may not know it should also be mentioned: Micheal and Kami Jewart for
giving me a chance in the business of higher education before I knew I loved it, and Stephen
Zemble for instilling in me a philosophy and hope which was essential in my journey.
My thanks goes to my pilot survey subjects: Rik Pennartz, Arnold Keizer, Lesley Baird and
Dan Glastetter. As well as thanks to the PMI Netherlands Chapter for helping me reach out to
the PM community. Thanks to the makers of QiqqaTM whose free software was an excellent
help.
Finally, thanks to my family. My parents, siblings and especially my wife Dea Magnusson,
for their long patience and support throughout my education. There were times when we all
thought I would not make it, but hope springs eternal.

v
Abstract
This dissertation is about project management education in Dutch universities. Specifically, a
descriptive account of what the Dutch project management community’s educational needs
are and to what degree Dutch universities are fulfilling those needs. This topic is of interest to
PM practitioners who are interested in further education, academics who which to further the
quality of PM education, and PM community leaders, certification institutions and trainers
who wish to understand the role of universities in PM.
PM is a very young science and as such it has not yet matured its own pedagogical paradigm.
That is part of the motivation for this research, to help develop project management’s
pedagogical paradigm. The other part is that PM is very important to the Dutch economy, but
Dutch universities give sporadic attention to project management. This research is an effort to
set the requirements of how a holistic project management education could be provided.
The method surveyed 90 project managers in the Netherlands on their perceptions of project
management education in the Netherlands, and what their needs are. Additionally
investigation was conducted into the study guides of prominent universities to discover the
nature of current project management education, and the results were compared with the
needs and perceptions from the survey.
The results show that Dutch universities were not up to standard in the eyes of project
managers as places of project management learning, lacking in advanced concepts and
theories and not using the most ideal of learning methods. It was also found that project
management education was not significant enough in non-technical universities to have

vi
representation in relevant faculties were project management is of importance, such as
business and IT faculties.
The implications of these findings can help universities adapt their project management
courses or programmes which relate to project management to better suit the needs of the
project management community, as well as help the project management community orientate
on education status quo. Ultimately, project management as a discipline and the education
thereof will take one more step towards maturity through this research.
vii
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................ iv
ABSTRACT ..........................................................................................................................v
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ ix
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................x
CHAPTER 1: AIMS OF THE DISSERTATION ...............................................................1
1.1 Background .....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Aims.................................................................................................................................3
1.3 Objectives and research questions .................................................................................3
1.4 Structure of the dissertation ...........................................................................................5
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................7
2.1 Pedagogical issues in project management ....................................................................7

2.1.1 Contention over teaching a profession .....................................................................7
2.1.2 Theoretical deficiencies in project management ....................................................10
2.2 Project management education components ...............................................................15
2.3 Project management education methods .....................................................................18
2.4 Project management in the Netherlands ......................................................................22
2.5 Summary of literature review ......................................................................................25
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................26
3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................26
3.2 Participants ...................................................................................................................26

3.2.1 Details of the first population of study......................................................................27
3.2.2 Details of first population sample sizes ....................................................................27
3.2.3 Details of the second population of study .................................................................28
3.2.4 Details of second population sample size .................................................................29
3.3 Data gathering ..............................................................................................................29

viii
3.3.1 First population: survey questionnaire ......................................................................29

3.3.2 Second population: external secondary data collection .............................................30
3.4 Data management .........................................................................................................31
3.5 Operational definitions and variables ..........................................................................31

3.5.1 Questionnaire for first population .............................................................................32
3.5.2 External secondary data collection of second population ..........................................34
3.6 Data analysis .................................................................................................................35

3.6.1 Quantitative data analysis.........................................................................................35
3.6.2 Qualitative data analysis...........................................................................................36
3.6.3 Triangulation analysis ..............................................................................................36
3.7 Trustworthiness ............................................................................................................37

3.7.1 Pilot study ................................................................................................................37
3.7.2 Validity ....................................................................................................................38
3.7.3 Reliability ................................................................................................................39
3.7.4 Ethics .......................................................................................................................39
3.8 Role of the researcher ...................................................................................................40
3.9 Weaknesses and assumptions .......................................................................................41
3.10 Methodology summary ...............................................................................................42
CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS ..............................................................44
4.1 Results of questionnaire................................................................................................44

4.1.1 Respondent profile ...................................................................................................44
4.1.2 Perception of PM education in the Netherlands ........................................................47
4.1.3 Project management theory and complexity .............................................................55
4.1.4 Project management practices ..................................................................................58
4.2 Results of external secondary data collection ..............................................................62
4.3 Conclusion of results .....................................................................................................68
CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS......................................................................................69
5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................69
5.2 Analysis of survey questionnaire data .........................................................................69

5.2.1 Respondent identity .................................................................................................69
5.2.2 Perception of PM education in the Netherlands ........................................................71
5.2.3 Perception of PM theory and complexity in education ..............................................74
5.2.4 Perception of PM practices in education ...................................................................75
5.2.5 Research question 1.1 ..............................................................................................76
5.3 Analysis of external secondary data .............................................................................77

5.3.1 Non-technical universities ........................................................................................77
ix
5.3.2 Non-PM specific courses .........................................................................................78

5.3.3 Technical university .................................................................................................79
5.4. Triangulation ...............................................................................................................82

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................86
6.1 Key findings ..................................................................................................................86
6.2 Limitations and future research...................................................................................86
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................88
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 104
Appendix 1: First population survey questionnaire ........................................................ 104
Appendix 2: Participation Information Statement ......................................................... 118
List of Figures
Figure 1: Methodology outline .................................................................................. 43
Figure 2: Q1 results .................................................................................................. 44
Figure 3: Q3 results .................................................................................................. 45
Figure 4: Q4 results .................................................................................................. 45
Figure 5: Q5 results .................................................................................................. 46
Figure 6: Q6 results .................................................................................................. 46

Figure 7: Q7 results .................................................................................................. 47
Figure 8: Q8 results .................................................................................................. 47
Figure 9: Q9 results .................................................................................................. 48
Figure 10: Q10 results .............................................................................................. 48
Figure 11: Q11 results .............................................................................................. 48

Figure 12: Q12 results .............................................................................................. 49
Figure 13: Q13 results .............................................................................................. 49
Figure 14: Q14 results .............................................................................................. 50
Figure 15: Q15 results .............................................................................................. 50
Figure 16: Q16 results .............................................................................................. 51

Figure 17: Q17 results .............................................................................................. 51
Figure 18:Q18 results ............................................................................................... 52
Figure 19: Q19 results .............................................................................................. 52
Figure 20: Q20 results .............................................................................................. 53
x
Figure 21: Q21 results .............................................................................................. 53

Figure 22: Q23 results .............................................................................................. 54
Figure 23: Q25 results .............................................................................................. 54
Figure 24: Q27 results .............................................................................................. 55
Figure 25: Q28 results .............................................................................................. 55
Figure 26: Q30 results .............................................................................................. 56

Figure 27: Q31 results .............................................................................................. 57
Figure 28: Q32 results .............................................................................................. 57
Figure 29: Q33 results .............................................................................................. 57
Figure 30: Q29 results .............................................................................................. 58
Figure 31: Q34 results .............................................................................................. 58

Figure 32: Q35 results .............................................................................................. 59
Figure 33: Q36 results .............................................................................................. 59
Figure 34: Q37 results .............................................................................................. 60
Figure 35: Q38 results .............................................................................................. 60
Figure 36: Q39 results .............................................................................................. 61

Figure 37: Q40 results .............................................................................................. 61
Figure 38: Q41 results .............................................................................................. 62
Figure 39: Q42 results .............................................................................................. 62
Figure 40: Education of respondents vs. seniority .................................................... 70
Figure 41: Certification of respondents vs. seniority ................................................. 70

Figure 42: Industry unique PM vs. education within industry context ....................... 72
List of Tables
Table 1: Non-technical universities with courses dedicated to PM ........................... 64

Table 2: VU University Amsterdam, non-PM courses with PM elements ................. 65
Table 3: TU Delft with courses dedicated to PM ....................................................... 68
1
Chapter 1: Aims of the Dissertation

1.1 Background
The aim of this dissertation is to assess the current state of project management (PM)
education at university level in the Netherlands with regards to fulfilling the needs of the PM
community. The results will allow the project management community to have confidence
that the appropriate PM theories and practices are taught at universities and from the
appropriate discipline, using appropriate pedagogical delivery which benefits the practitioners
of PM. Comparing to the education of accounting, which can be taught in its own right or as
additions in other fields like business or finance, there has long been broad consensus how
accounting practices fit within the needs of the business community (Sherman, 1987). This is
reflected in the professionalization of accounting through certification that has closely
followed the education of accounting through universities (Rezaee, Szendi & Elmore, 1997).
PM is also taught in its own right and as additions to other fields such as engineering,
business or IT. Unlike in accounting, PM professionalization through certification has not
matched university education (Crawford, 2005), creating confusion for businesses as to what
project management training can deliver (Crawford et al., 2006; Thomas & Mengel, 2008;
Pant & Baroudi, 2008). Professional certification may not even directly influence project
success (Starkweather & Stevenson, 2011) bringing into question its use as recognition of
effective preparation.
There is an appetite for the development of PM education which is shown by the number of
studies published in PM journals dealing with pedagogical methods and learning outcomes
(Zwikael & Gonen, 2007; Alam et al., 2008; Córdoba & Piki, 2011; Ashleigh et al., 2012).
PM is taught in the academic world in both undergraduate and postgraduate levels and
through professional certification or corporate training at various stages of maturity. PM is

2
taught both as its own profession and as an addition to other disciplines because it is of
importance to both pure project managers and PM practitioners whose main focus is another
field (Morris, 2000). There is contention on whether the purpose of PM education is to create
PM professionals or add to other disciplines like engineering, business or IT (Alam et al.,
2008; Wirth, 1992; Hodgson, 2002). There is also contention on whether there is a teachable
theory and whether that theory is necessary for the purposes of PM education (Snider &
Nissen, 2003; Koskela & Howell, 2008). Finally there is contention on whether appropriate
pedagogical techniques for PM learning are used (Alam et al., 2008; Córdoba & Piki, 2011).
Outside the Netherlands PM education has been developing for decades (Woodward, 1983;
Archibald, 1989) and still evolving as industry changes (Ashleigh, 2012; Ojiako et al., 2011a).
PM has been established in the Netherlands theoretically (Walta, 1995) and in practice
(Reijniers, 1994) for quite a while now. Research on large projects in the Netherlands shows a
need for deep PM understanding in industry (de Bony, 2010; Koppenjan et al., 2011) yet there
is very little research on the development of Dutch project managers. In similarly technical
countries like Switzerland PM education has had some attention (Knoepfel, 1989; Stoyan,
2008), as in similarly cultural countries in Scandinavia (Björnsson, Gunnarsson &
Hammarlund, 1989; Illeris, 1991). Comparatively the Dutch PM community suffers from a
lack of understanding of Dutch project manager development. While the PM in the
Netherlands seems to generally be quite advanced (Achterkamp & Vos, 2008; Edelenbos &
Teisman, 2008; Glasbergen & Driessen, 2005), the theoretical and practical needs of the
Dutch PM community have not been brought into focus.
If educational institutions understand PM practitioners’ needs regarding learning, then they
will be able to provide more effective education thereby enriching the PM community and by
extension providing better PM practitioners for industry. Conversely, if the PM community

3
understands what education institutions are providing in terms of PM learning, they will be
better able to take advantage of it which will mean better resource development planning and
an enrichment of the PM community. A healthy industry depends on the education institutions
serving it, so communication between the PM community and education institutions is vital.
Aligning the PM community and the education institutions it uses brings us to the aim of this
study.
1.2 Aims
The aim of this study is to help the Dutch PM community and the Dutch universities align
their needs for the benefit of both. Central to this research are the theories and practices which
the PM community desires to be taught by universities. Practices include both methodologies
(e.g. CCPM) or techniques (e.g. risk management plan). These theories and practices are the
needs of the PM community which is reflected in the title of this study: how the Dutch PM
community’s needs could be met through university education. To be more succinct in our
alignment of higher education with the PM community, we should also understand what the
limits and possibilities are of university education with regards to serving these theoretical
and practical needs. Therefore we will also be investigating what Dutch universities are
providing in terms of PM education to see how close the alignment currently is. The main
question of this study will take into account both the PM community and the universities to
align the two: how should project management be taught within university education to serve
the theoretical and practical needs of the project management community in the Netherlands?
1.3 Objectives and research questions
In order to answer the main question and fulfill the aim, this study will have a number of
objectives. Firstly, to take into account PM theories and practices which both the PM
community desires to be taught and the universities provide. Additionally, the reasoning for
4
their choices, if any, will be taken into account. Because project managers are developed in
diverse manners (Ashleigh et al., 2012) the second objective of this study will be to determine
how the PM community wants PM to be taught and how they are being taught at universities.
The learning outcomes of education programmes are for a large part dependent on the method
of teaching (Barros et al., 2006). The reasoning for these choices, if any, will also be taken
into account. These two objectives will be represented by the following research questions.
The first pair of research questions will cover the first objective. The first component will
investigate the PM community’s expectations from university education, giving the research
question:
1.1 What project management theories and practices are deemed necessary by the project
management community in the Netherlands for dissemination in Dutch university
education, and why?
The next component of the first objective is the current situation of Dutch university
education with regards to PM theories and practices. The second research question therefore
becomes:
1.2 What project management theories and practices are taught at Dutch universities?
The second objective is covered by the pair of research questions investigating methods of
PM education. Depending on what a project manager needs to learn, different methods can
produce different knowledge bases like tacit knowledge (Chipulu et al., 2011; Ojiako et al.,
2011) or practical experience (Dixon, 2011; Jaafar & Aziz, 2008; Hicks, 1996) which results
5
in different PM competencies which are relevant to the PM community. For this reason the
following two research questions are asked:
2.1 How does the project management community in the Netherlands want project
management theories and practices to be taught at Dutch universities, and why?
2.2 How are project management theories and practices taught at Dutch universities?
Getting an understanding of what PM practitioners and managers want future project
managers to know and comparing that to the current PM education status quo will allow us to
determine if the universities are delivering what is necessary and if not what is lacking or
superfluous. This comparison allows us to achieve the aim and answer the main question:
3.1 How should project management be taught within university education to serve the
theoretical and practical needs of the project management community in the
Netherlands?
1.4 Structure of the dissertation
This study will have five parts. This first chapter as we have seen covers the background of
the issue, introduces the topic of study and its aims and objectives.
The second chapter will review the literature on the issue of PM education in the Netherlands.
It will begin with a foundation of PM theories and practices which will let us establish a
language for which to build the needs of project managers and what is delivered by higher
education establishments. We will then review the state of PM education in general and place
it into context with PM in the Netherlands in particular. Since the purpose of this study is to
6
examine the disparities between the PM community and the higher education industry, special
attention will be given to university level education.
The third chapter will cover our methodology for collecting data and analysis. We will
introduce our participants, the operational definitions and variables. Here we will also cover
issues of trustworthiness in the study’s design, weaknesses and assumptions. In the fourth
chapter we will present our results. The results will be presented in a compiled format, but the
raw data will be available in the appendixes.
The fifth chapter will be the analysis of the results following the methods set out in chapter
three. Here we will also reflect on how the results relate to the literature in chapter two, and
fulfill the objectives by answering the research questions and set out in chapter one.
In the sixth and final chapter we conclude by presenting our key findings and discuss the
ramifications of our conclusions, addressing the limitations in this study and the opportunities
further research.
7
Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Pedagogical issues in project management
Project management (PM) has gone through different phases of evolution from technicist
prescriptions to a professional science. What PM is for has changed over the years, which also
influences the preparation of project managers (Crawford et al., 2006). PM education has
followed suit, simultaneously trying to keep up with developments while developing theory
that would be the foundation for the evolving practices. We will see how this has created
tension between practitioner (often technicist) education and scholar education which effects
what PM components are taught and how. In this section we will also review the need for
theoretical foundation of project management education, and look at the deficiency of
theoretical development and its consequences in teaching PM. We will also look at current
education methods and finally take into account the culture context of PM in the Netherlands.
2.1.1 Contention over teaching a profession
Only a couple of decades ago PM education was limited to acquiring and teaching a growing
set of tools and techniques to plan, execute and control projects, sectioned into knowledge
areas covering different facets of a project and a smattering of general management skills
thrown in for good measure. (Morris, 1994) This has been criticized as a “shopping list”
approach to teaching with no holistic theory to foster understanding, which still affects PM
education today (Ashleigh et al., 2012). The development of management education has been
heavily influenced by a “managerialist” paradigm (Grey & Mitev, 1995), and by extension
this can apply to PM education and illustrate the need for theory to drive education. In their
polemic on management education, Grey and Mitev argue that the managerialist scholars have
a functional relationship with management in industry and obsess over technique acquisition
regardless of contextual application. A Foucauldian interpretation presents this as acceptable

8
within industry as it legitimizes the political control of management. Mangers see critical
reflection as a challenge to authority, and relegate reflection to functional problem solving
(Reynolds, 1998).
The distinction between reflection and critical reflection is that the former a learner’s
individual perspective shapes the problem in the context of their own experience. Critical
reflection is emancipatory; the learner addresses the system’s power-control situation and
shapes the problem in that context. Management education should run counter to current
preoccupations with instrumentalism to question political forces and context that managers
really find themselves in rather than avoid the situation (Reynolds, 1998). Critical
management scholars challenge management practices on social, political and moral grounds;
the goal being to improve the science rather than preserve the status quo (Grey & Mitev,
1995). The critical perspective asserts that technicist pedagogy is invalid as it sustains a
suspect rationality and evades scrutiny. The competing paradigms in education spill over into
research: managerialist research aims to boost productivity and profitability by propagating
unproblematic enhancements; critical research aims to explore the nature of management and
reflect upon the rationality and desirability of the aims themselves. These authors argue that
initiatives to improve education quality through research are morally obligated to question the
validity of the managerialist paradigm, as it fails to expand the student’s minds.
Hodgson (2002) identified similar traits of instrumental rationality in PM education through
the propagation of “Bodies of Knowledge” (BoK). BoKs differ between the Project
Management Institute (PMI), the Association of Project Managers (APM) and other interested
publishers but the acquisition of techniques (e.g. project life cycles, budgeting, scheduling,
etc) and management skills (e.g. leadership, control, etc.) remains managerialist. The PM
profession is dependant on the development as a discipline both as a “field of objective

9
scientific study” and as “form of training and control”, but there is disparity between these
views. This disparity taints project failures as failures in PM implementation, leaving the
discipline itself unquestioned and implying the remedy of enforcing PM more strictly to
correct for failure (Hodgson, 2002). Research has indicated that strict enforcement can be as
detrimental to projects (Koppenjan et al., 2011; Starkweather & Stevenson, 2011). Supporting
the need for theoretical context, White and Fortune (2002) studied the use of PM techniques
and their perceived effectiveness in project success: unexpected side effects implied a lack of
contextual awareness and poor modelling of problems, highlighting the dangers of
instrumentalist rationality.
Hodgson (2002) bemoaned the inability of PM to match the professional status of
accountancy which some authors have been pressing for many years (Woordward, 1983). By
now it can be argued to be reaching such a point according to figures present in Bredillet,
Yatim and Ruiz (2010). This inability did not hinder the impression of decades of MBA
graduates, underscoring management education’s social control. There is a silver lining to this
influence in that a modern project manager without the strictures of professionalization could
be responsible enough to critically assess him/herself more rigorously than a profession
imposed norm would have (Hodgson, 2002).
Unfortunately student motivations sabotage such hope. Not only are critical scholars
competing against managerialism, but student attitudes also lean towards the technicist
because of common motivations to prepare for industry and misconceptions they have over
what constitutes a “practical” education (Grey & Mitev, 1995). Technicism indulges this by
teaching students to use commonsense rather than critique and self reflect (at best
downgrading critical theory as commonsense, at worst rejecting it); paradoxically students
lament the lack of intellectual stimulation. Regrettably, students look back on their education
10
as inapplicable since the real world defies commonsense solutions due to its uncontrollable
nature. They will ironically continue to look for technique solutions rather than critique
paradigms and retain a derogatory and prejudiced view of theory. This is happening in PM
education where approaches being taught only reinforce old paradigms, hampering
development of the field and the vision of students (Thomas & Mengel, 2008). It is difficult
to quantify the return on investment in PM education, but in order to continue generating
interest in university led PM education it remains an issue (Gale & Brown, 2003; Alam et al.,
2008). Sadly, the measures used to determine return on investment test on the easiest to verify
of competencies: hard skills and techniques. This reinforces an inadequate pedagogy. Students
and practitioners are trained to look for technique solutions, being influenced by the
dominance of BoKs and their corresponding certification while there is no correlation
between PM certification and project success (Starkweather & Stevenson, 2011).
It is unfortunate that the false dichotomy in management education persists for decades
between practical techniques and reflective theory, as discussed by Grey and Mitev (1995),
Hodgson (2002) and Ashleigh et al. (2012). These authors content that there is no need for
mutual exclusivity. An effective pedagogical framework for PM education needs to consider
higher level outcomes than what is considered sufficient in most evaluations (Todhunter,
2003) and incorporate a diversity of contextual views beyond the BoK’s (Gale & Brown,
2003). Recent developments in education show new methods can teach contextual application
of techniques and critical reflection on theory, which we will broach after assessing the state
of PM theory itself.
2.1.2 Theoretical deficiencies in project management
White and Fortune (2002) highlight the problems of instrument application in a context poor
and theoretically ungrounded field. It remains difficult to project manage within a

11
theoretically rigorous context if the theory is still under development (Koskela & Howell,
2002); ipso facto it remains difficult to teach that theory (Lalonde, Bourgault & Findeli,
2010). The plethora of relevant theoretical perspectives condensing can be interpreted as a
state of change in the PM discipline and shows a healthy discourse which implies progress
(Starkweather and Stevenson, 2011). A theory should be a logic and language infrastructure
which can prescribe and describe behaviour, support contextual application of tools, direct
and condense knowledge progress and be abstractable to broaden innovation (Koskela &
Howell, 2002). A common theme among the following is a desire of the authors to bring PM
beyond the BoK and into the realm of a true discipline.
Koskela and Howell (2002) assert that it is possible to pinpoint an elementary theory of PM in
the BoK by filtering for a theory of management and theory of projects by drawing parallels
from other theories such as operations and production. Yet they contend this foundation is by
now obsolete being based on decades old preconceptions. It is still worth taking a look at
these building blocks later theoreticians have had to contend with. The authors find that
theory of production is used to operationalize concepts of scope, time and cost management in
processes of transformation top create a theory of project, and three theories of management,
planning, dispatching and the thermostat model, make up the rest. What we see is a
bastardization of other theoretical fields to fill an incomplete language infrastructure. They
critique these theories as insufficient to produce better PM in light of being stuck in flawed
conceptualizations. For example, the planning model does not allow for contingencies and
data show that complex projects are impossible to track, the dispatching model ignores work
flow and the thermostat model ignores learning theory which is supported by data that
demonstrates organizational learning. The deficient theoretical foundation leads directly to
several kinds of problems in PM. Those problems are therefore self-inflicted, caused by the
very theories and methods we are relying on. As a result PM education suffers as lack of
12
theory slows PM diffusion and improvement. Koskela and Howell state that more modern
theories such as the theory of learning organization, the theory of flow which seeks to reduce
time uncertainty (the basis for lean production) and the theory of value generation which
seeks to generate customer value can be incorporated to produce a more accurate
understanding of projects.
As with many new sciences, new theoretical development begins with typologies. These
categorizations allow abstraction of knowledge to be transferred as lessons learned (Crawford
& Pollack, 2004). An exploratory development of typology appeared as early as 1996
(Shenhar & Dvir). At the time it was considered that all projects were basically the same
(while ironically defining projects as a unique endeavour). A two dimensional typology would
aid in predicting project success based on the degree of scope complexity and technological
uncertainty. As we shall see, complexity remains a critical dimension in the development of
theory from here on.
Another typological dimension introduced into the PM lexicon are the terms ‘hard’ and ‘soft’
projects (Crawford & Pollack, 2004). Social, subjectivist approaches are soft while scientific,
objectivist, approaches are hard. The former is based in interpretivist philosophies while that
later is rooted in positivist and realist philosophies. Crawford and Pollack’s dichotomy seems
simplistic, it actually has seven facets: Goal clarity and tangibility, success measures, project
permeability, solution quantity, participation and stakeholder expectations; in each of these
facets can be found both soft and hard approaches. PM assumes that there is a business plan
and hard objectives which is often not the case, supporting the need for a soft approach to deal
with such cases. Hard and soft projects may also require different skills sets, but in practice
projects have a combination of both elements in different quantities. In fact, arguments have
been made that soft skills are more essential to project success than hard or technical skills,
13
even in the most technical of PM environments such as IT (Stevenson & Starkweather, 2010).
This has become obvious enough that soft skills are starting to take centre stage in some PM
education programmes (Pant & Baroudi, 2008).
The maturing of PM theory starts to become evident as new abstractions are made in
contemporary disciplines such as gender studies. Paralleling the identification of hard and soft
projects and hard and soft PM skills, contemporary gender scholarship claims that specific
skill sets are based on inherently gendered logic systems. Masculine and feminine logic
systems in PM become visible and add to the discourse by underlining the importance in their
distinction (Buckle and Thomas, 2003). These authors deconstruct the PM BoK along
masculine and feminine decision making models and find that feminine logic systems which
strengthen the ability to deal with complexity, ambiguity and manage risk are not recognized
as important in PM BoK.
The merging of established dichotomies opens an opportunity for a holistic vision of PM and
new insights into what that holistic vision consist of. Bourne and Walker (2004) argue that
besides hard and soft skill sets there is a third skills set resembling a political potential which
they term tapping power lines. Specifically applicable in large organization, they argue that
the craft of techniques and the art of relations is the ability to extract hidden reserves of
potential. Political factors and the multipurpose nature of an organization can cause stress in
projects; understanding the behaviour of the power structure allows project managers to take
advantage of them. The authors add that development of this third skillset comes from
experience, which can be hastened with on-the-job mentoring or apprenticeships and the
maturity of a learning organization. If this is the case, it leaves little room for traditional
university modes to teach, although Pant and Baroudi (2008) add that the ability to “get things
done” is related to emotional intelligence and universities should be challenge to incorporate

14
it into their curriculums. While tapping power lines may acknowledge ability for some to
understand and take advantage of organizational complexity, this in itself does not help create
a theory to deal with complexity. In fact, conceptualizations which are at the core of handling
complexity, such as stakeholders and the boundaries of projects, are still not adequately
defined (Achterkamp & Vos, 2008).
The latest developments in PM theory bring in systems thinking and continue to tackle the
issue of complexity in projects. Sheffield, Sankaran and Haslett (2012) notice that systems
thinking tools have generally not been involved in PM, even though these tools provide
unique benefits. Even the Critical Chain Project Management methodology which is based on
the Theory of Constraints systems thinking processes (Špundak, Fertalj & Damir, 2008) does
not use the systems thinking tools in its application. Thomas and Mengel (2008) put forward a
PM theory of complexity which incorporates complex adaptive systems, dissipative theory
and chaos theory which create a world view where traditional linear PM approaches do not
suffice for project control. It seems to be a consensus that systems thinking may be able to
tame complexity in project management (Sheffield, Sankaran & Haslett, 2012). These authors
bring the understanding in PM full circle by presenting a two dimensional matrix similar to
Shenhar & Dvir (1996) but incorporating system thinking as their answer to high complexity.
The different perspectives, models and frameworks which have been developing in PM are
important for theory generation but do not serve as theory themselves (Jugdev, 2004). Pre-
theory constructs in PM lack connection to tactics or strategy and few PM constructs have
been empirically tested, which is the difference between hypothesis and theory. Most of these
constructs are based on anecdotal material, case studies or advocated best practices. (Jugdev
introduces a Resource-Based View of PM to make the link between PM and competitive
advantage and strategy, as a viable candidate for correcting this). Lalonde, Bourgault and
15
Findeli (2010) also argue that the epistemology of PM is incomplete without situating existing
models in theory and a connection to practice. For example, while leadership is established as
a critical PM component (Thomas & Mengel, 2008), its relevance to dealing with complexity
and chaos is not explicit theoretically or in teaching yet (Mengel, 2008; Clarke, 2010). The
relationship between practice and theory in PM has depended on models which began as
heuristic, then developed into prescriptive or descriptive models but lacked a critical
reflection of practice that could combine them. That critical reflection is now happening in
PM and as this epistemological issue expands it has pedagogical repercussions (Lalonde,
Bourgault & Findeli, 2010).
As it stands, PM theory is riddled with unmerged dichotomies, struggling to find a holistic
interpretation and still tackling problems of complexity, albeit with more advanced tools. It is
in this environment that we must find a PM pedagogy.
2.2 Project management education components
Given the difficulties in establishing a PM theory and the predominance of technicist training
it is not surprising to see disparity on what constitutes essential in PM education. If education
has the twofold goal of creating project mangers which will function effectively in industry
while at the same time critically assessing and creating new knowledge, the PM certification
régime does not suffice (Todhunter, 2003; Thomas & Mengel, 2008; Starkweather &
Stevenson, 2011). Certification is seen as at best a basic understanding and at worst a world
view to be deprogrammed during practice. The knowledge represented in certification is also
not viewed as strategically critical (Crawford, 2005; Crawford et al., 2006), even though
adherence to formal PM practices does have a positive effect to project success (Papke-
Shields, Beise, & Quan, 2010). Certification communities do add to important research in this
area (for example, Koskela & Howell, 2002) but the certification process itself is not one that
16
can be called pedagogy nor does it produce knowledge (Berggren & Sӧderlund, 2008).
Nevertheless, academia has used BoK’s that are the basis of PM certification as the backbone
of curricula rather than theory (Gale & Brown, 2003). BoK’s are insufficient for a true
pedagogy (Gale & Brown, 2003; Todhunter, 2003; Crawford et al., 2006) and unable to cope
with contemporary issues of complexity (Thomas & Mengel, 2008; Córdoba & Piki, 2011). It
is not surprising that BoK’s still form the basis of curriculums given that there is still research
being done to answer the question of what PM techniques are critical for success (White &
Fortune, 2002; Bartoška, Flégl & Jarkovská, 2012) rather than what PM world views are
necessary to teach (Thomas & Mengel, 2008).
In piecing together the components of PM most critical for its education we are compelled to
turn to such research which summates and qualifies PM techniques, which paradoxically leads
us further down the road of teaching along BoK lines. A second paradox is that standard
practices have been created for a field typified by the uniqueness of projects Crawford and
Pollack (2007). Another dichotomy appears in the form of bureaucratic (general) PM and
technical (industry specific) PM; this tension between general and industry specific manifests
in PM education (idem). However, the authors state that this tension should not be resolved
and replaced with a superficial unity, rather a contextualization should illustrate that some
knowledge area correlate with industry practices and others do not.
Papke-Shields, Beise and Quan (2010) show widely varying use of PM practices and
difference in application depending on context. Additionally, those practices which make a
difference to project success are not always the most frequently used, showing a difficulty
applying practices in the correct context. Crawford et al. (2006) also argues for the need for
project managers to apply techniques contextualised for their project, organization and the
challenges of complexity which require theoretical reflection beyond the project at hand. This
17
problem of contextual application makes creating curriculums based on PM best practices
problematic and further underscores the need for theoretical grounding in PM education.
Leadership development is especially important within PM education as an answer to the need
for contextualization and ability to navigate the uncertainty related to issues (Thomas &
Mengel, 2008). These issues relate to the cultural and social architecture of project
organizations requiring political and social awareness and high emotional intelligence. Clarke
(2010) emphasizes that project environments require a high level of emotional intelligence to
operate in effectively: their temporary nature means that leaders need to be able to cultivate
trust and commitment more so than in non-project environments, ambiguous and uncertain
circumstances require smooth communication and high potential for conflict requires
empathy. While there is disagreement in the literature over the relationship between emotional
intelligence and project outcome mostly because of the difficulty in categorizing
competencies in emotional intelligence, the effect is significant enough for organizations to
pay attention to emotional intelligence (Clarke, 2010). By extension, so should education
institutions. Learning objectives in PM education programmes should extend beyond the
shopping list of competencies that so much research is based on (Dingle, 1990; Thomas &
Mengel, 2008). These authors show that for a long time there has been a gap between what
education providers can offer and what is needed for today’s project environment, even as that
project environment has changed over the past two decades. We are left to believe that PM
education is always a step behind what is needed.
Hard skills such as project scope and cost management techniques are well covered by now in
university programmes but less emphasis are placed on soft skills such as human resource and
project communications management (Du, Johnson & Keil, 2004). Knowledge areas not
directly part of PM but affecting projects nonetheless, such as procurement management, are
18
only covered to a very small extent. These authors also show that specifically technical
organizations find their practitioners being challenged in acquiring the soft skills and the
technological risks are not considered nearly as critical as organization and communication
issues.
There seems to be consensus in the literature that PM education should have a balanced
approach of teaching hard and soft skills and tacit and explicit knowledge extending beyond
execution (Crawford et al., 2006; Pant & Baroudi, 2008), a need for theoretical mastery to
provide context (Sheffield, Sankaran & Haslett, 2012) and a responsibility of education to
deliver more than training but to help practitioners become knowledge creators (Bartoška,
Flégl & Jarkovská, 2012). Universities are challenged to incorporate lifelong learning
competencies and it is questioned whether universities have the proper tools to equip a
modern PM workforce in emotional intelligence based competencies (Pant & Baroudi, 2008).
Additionally, PM education should provide not just knowledge transfer but also contextual
knowledge creation (Berggren & Sӧderlund, 2008). In the following section we will take a
look at those methods which may provide a balanced approach.
2.3 Project management education methods
Pedagogical methods for PM exist in a range from traditional lecture and exam series to
modern game simulation and e-learning. Reflective or action learning at individual, group or
organizational level requires different education activities (Berggren & Sӧderlund, 2008).
Some PM competencies fit better with certain types of activities than others. There has been
an attempt at finding what combination of teaching activities is best designed for the different
types on PM skills which are deemed important, although no one instructional approach can
cover all competencies and student types (Ashleigh et al., 2012). In the following we will
review some of the more widely used teaching methods and their impact on PM.
19
Traditional professor centric instruction focuses on “what to learn” instead of “why to learn”
which is insufficient for contextualizing complexities in PM (Dantas, Barros & Werner,
2004). Instructors decide when, how and what is learned through lecturing, textbooks,
frequently case study based, and tests. Case studies allow students to understand cause and
effect by analysing past situations and evaluate if hypothetical decisions would change project
outcomes. These methods encourage memorization of techniques and have little to now group
work. The authors state that large-scale projects are too complex for such mental analysis and
lack group work. Group work is vital to promoting soft skills and leadership; they encourage
thinking as part of an adaptive system, which engages the complexity of projects (Córdoba &
Piki, 2011). Additionally, most PM education is aimed at adults, where content-centric
approach is not adequate as adults prefer to learn based on experience and learn better through
application to solve existing problems Dantas, Barros & Werner, 2004). Learning by doing
results in better knowledge retention then lectures (Barros et al., 2006). PM was traditionally
learned on-the-job rather than in formal education (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Hicks, 1996) so
it is natural that PM education continues to exist in this form and that education institutions
try to emulate it.
One form of experiential learning used is service learning, where students will actually take
part in real projects in their communities with the classroom as the project organization
(Dixon, 2011). This gives the advantages of both experience and reflection in the classroom.
To guide the curriculum in experiential education Mengel (2008) proposes replacing learning
objectives, which tend to measure the transfer of PM techniques, with learning outcomes
which aim at developing traits such as self knowledge, social interaction, citizenship and
leadership. Mengel found that experiential learning was very well suited to develop the
leadership skills necessary that help manage with uncertainty and complexity, as well as
develop a connection with the community which can form the basis of social responsibility in
20
a project manager. However, Gale and Brown (2003) show that in a generic PM Master
programme designed through academic-industry collaboration the results are not perfect: the
feedback loop with industry is slow and unsatisfying.
E-learning has seen a wide range of use in PM education, both in part-time distance education
and full time campus education (Stoyan, 2008). E-learning allows for intensive interaction at
low cost, for students to develop transferable skills and for them to lead the learning. While e-
learning is limited in scope, if can bring up the basics quickly. This is useful for the
development of soft skills which have a generic and mature literature. This frees up faculty
resources, which previously have either been giving lectures to large groups, to concentrate on
small groups for particularly complex training such as simulation. E-learning is especially
useful in its flexibility with part-time students (Ashleigh et al., 2012). However, students have
reported that their e-learning experience remains below expectation and does not deliver on
the transferable skills that the academics claim (Ojiako et al., 2011b). The proper deployment
of e-learning is critical as students are heavily influenced by their virtual experiences; those
experiences have not developed the interpersonal skills they have been designed to (Chipulu
et al., 2011).
Computer supported simulation and games in training PM is not new (Hutcheson, 1984;
Archibald, 1989) although older forms covered hard skills as the technical capacity required
for teaching soft skills was not feasible or affordable (Saukkonen, 1992). Simulations now
emphasize teamwork, contextual application of tools and interpersonal skills such as
negotiation and decision-making (Martin, 2000). Even with the promising results that some
simulations give, they are still not on par with experience in comparative tests. Simplifications
are imposed on the student because current models are unable to represent real world
situations, such as multiple resources working a single task, social interactions, psychological
21
and organizational issues (Dantas, Barros & Werner, 2004). Other research shows that
software simulations may not be very good for developing scoping skills as boundaries are
predetermined and soft approaches cannot easily be predesigned (Pfahl et al., 2004).
Games, textual or through software, can provide an experiential environment where student
can act as managers without the costs and risks of being involved in a real project (Dantas,
Barros & Werner, 2004; Barros et al., 2006). They give an opportunity to experiment with the
consequences of implementing or neglecting PM functions, confront complex issues and test
solutions to problems (Barros et al., 2006). Games are well suited to incorporate the
unstructured external forces that increase risk of a project into learning (Zwikael & Gonen,
2007). However, games, like simulation, can be limited in scope by their design and can
suffer from the same simplifications (Dantas, Barros & Werner, 2004).
While advancements in e-learning, simulation games and experiential learning can add to the
richness of PM education, there is still space for traditional research. The social elements of
the aforementioned methods can allow for practice of soft skills and contextual application of
hard skills but they are not designed for reflection or innovation on behalf of the practitioner.
Professional and academic educators must find how to “train students to become knowledge
creators rather than simple knowledge recipients” (Bartoška, Flégl & Jarkovská, 2012).
Berggren and Sӧderlund (2008) insist that PM research and education should happen
simultaneously: knowledge is produced by reflecting in the context of application. Crawford
et al. (2006) argue that development through reflective practices, including education that
requires research or practice dissertations, have significant impact on the development of
practitioners when coupled with experiential learning. Support for blended models of learning
which incorporate instructor led, e-learning, coaching, self-study and practice is increasing
(Carbone, 2006; Chipulu et al., 2011). As advances in PM education cover increasingly

22
diverse methods, it stands to reason that a country like the Netherlands where PM is crucial to
industry (de Bony, 2010) can benefit from this diversity.
2.4 Project management in the Netherlands
Much of Dutch project management (PM) research is focused internationally (Achterkamp &
Vos, 2008; de Bakker, Boonstra, & Wortmann, 2010), and research on the educational needs
of project managers is Anglo-focused (Wirth, 1992; Todhunter, 2003; Ojiako et al., 2011a).
PM in the Netherlands crosses many sectors as an important investment for success (Filippoy,
Mooi, & van der Weg, 2010). The development of PM in the Netherlands is similarly crucial
to the Dutch (de Bony, 2010) as to other cultures (Pant & Baroudi, 2008). Here we will take a
look at the relevance of PM education to the Netherlands, and the relevance of Dutch culture
has to PM education.
PM practices differ per country both because of culture (Hofstede, 1983; Crawford & Pollack,
2007) and because of context (de Bony, 2010). Crawford and Pollack (2007) question the
applicability of generic PM education; different PM practices are applied depending on the
industry sector, context and culture. Such differences have been acknowledged for some time
in the Netherlands generating an interest in the specificities of PM there (Reijniers, 1994;
Walta, 1995). The relevance of PM to the Netherlands is evident in the volume and modernity
of Dutch PM endeavours. Advanced practices such as project portfolio management vary in
maturity in banking, telecom, infrastructure and electronics multinationals (Filippoy, Mooi, &
van der Weg, 2010). The Netherlands is world famous for its water works projects and
remains at the cutting edge by adapting its water infrastructure to climate change
(Sokolewicza, Louters, & Otten, 2011). Glasbergen and Driessen (2005) note that the
prevalence of PM in the Netherlands has changed the political space and the mode of
infrastructure planning. As elsewhere, a hierarchic mode of planning has been replaced by

23
regulatory relationships among stakeholders. In public works, a central government actor
‘Rijkswaterstaat’ controls the budget and until recently centralizes the plans; the changing
civic environment demands increased engagement and trials in ‘interactive planning’, drawing
relevant stakeholders into the planning process at an early stage. Public-private partnership
projects have been common in the Netherlands for a while (Reijniers, 1994), but now the level
of maturity in PM prevalence in the Netherlands is intense enough that “latent networks” of
enterprises exist which are activated when similar projects arise, preventing tacit knowledge
from dissipating as happens when most project ventures disperse (Oerlemans et al., 2011).
New PM practices are being developed in the Netherlands with local and global relevance
(Edelenbos & Teisman, 2008; Glasbergen & Driessen, 2005). These studies show an interest
in Dutch PM distinctiveness to the global PM community and a vibrant Dutch PM
community. Advanced PM communities require a similarly advanced PM education (Thomas
& Mengel, 2008). However, there is little research into the education of Dutch project
managers as in countries with similar PM relevance such as the U.S. (Archibald, 1989),
Switzerland (Knoepfel, 1989), Sweden (Björnsson, Gunnarsson, & Hammarlund, 1989) and
Denmark (Illeris, 1991). Additionally these studies are old and do not take into account the
changes the PM has undergone in the last two decades. This study will help fill the gap in the
literature with regards to PM development in the Netherlands, but will also serve the global
PM community by updating the literature on modern PM education.
The degree to which the needs of the PM community dictate PM education in the Netherlands
is unclear due to the lack of published material. It can be assumed that the Dutch PM
environment may be mature enough to require unique educational or developmental needs,
such as pay more attention to inter-organizational forms of project organization (Oerlemans et
al., 2011), brokering knowledge between organization (Holzmann, 2012) or the
conceptualization of the stakeholder (Achterkamp & Vos, 2008). Unresolved issues in PM

24
theory show detrimental impact on large Dutch projects (Koppenjan et al., 2011). For PM to
be holistically trained, its practitioners need to be educated with a vision taking into account
both complexity and standardization (Thomas & Mengel, 2008). It remains to be seen if these
needs are espoused by the Dutch PM community. Comparing Dutch PM community needs
with Dutch academic programmes is a useful step in evolving PM education. It fills a gap in
understanding the uniqueness of the community’s needs which is not well researched. Dutch
PM practices and culture are distinctive enough have a measurable effect on project outcomes
in the Netherlands (de Bony, 2010). Preparing new project managers in the Netherlands with
the appropriate education will improve the performance of the Dutch PM community as a
whole.
Hoftsede (1983) argues that cultural dimensions of individualism, power distance, uncertainty
avoidance and masculinity influence how people operate within a PM environment.
Hofstede’s cultural framework puts the Netherlands in a similar profile as the US with the
exception of masculinity. He argues that this fits well within the PM paradigm as highly
individualist cultures put tasks before relationships, weak uncertainty avoidance and small
power distance which create a “village market model” where flexible rules and little hierarchy
allow for problem resolution by negotiation. Hofstede hypothesizes that the basic tenants of
PM developed in the US could be accepted without much adaptation in the Netherlands.
However, Hofstede’s work relates to data from the 70’s and the perceptions of PM have
changed since then. We have already seen in the literature how social mechanisms have
replaced task control as a critical factor in PM development, which already puts doubt to the
compatibility of an individualistic culture with modern PM. Additionally, Hofstede states that
which the Netherlands is far more feminine than the US, this dimension is not so relevant for
PM. We have also seen in the literature that feminine decision logic is finding its way into
PM. Finally, feminine cultures value relationships more than monetary gain, which contrasts
25
slightly with the individualism trait of putting tasks (often described in terms of money in
earned value analysis) before relationships. Bredillet, Yatim and Ruiz (2010) update
Hofstede’s research by investigating the role of national culture in PM deployment.
Deployment is defined by how deeply PM certification has penetrated the society. In the 30
years since Hofstede’s research it was found that PM has penetrated deeply with respect to
other cultures. Deployment of PM correlated negatively with uncertainty avoidance and
power distance, supporting part of Hofstede’s hypothesis, however not correlated with
individualism or masculinity, although more research is needed to see if masculinity could be
of third level influence.
There is also the question of multinational projects which presumably account for large
amount of projects in the Netherlands: it is home to 80 of the worlds 100 biggest
multinationals due to its favourable tax policy (I amsterdam, 2012). Hofstede (1983) argues
that international project management makes cultural differences relevant, for example a
collectivist culture may require that the project manager schedule time to build relationships
and an individualist culture may be insensitive to this action. It will be interesting to see if the
Dutch PM community and educators take this into account.
2.5 Summary of literature review
In the literature we have reviewed how PM the legacy of management education, PM
development and a deficiency in theory have influenced PM education. There is still
contention on what to teach and how to teach it. PM theory and PM education are steps
behind the practice, but there is progress in designing a pedagogy which may help improve
the situation. Additionally, we have seen that there is a uniqueness to PM in the Netherlands
which may influence the needs of PM practitioners being taught in Dutch universities. In the
following chapter we will describe how the research will be conducted.

26
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Introduction
In the last chapter we reviewed the literature regarding project management (PM) education
and PM in the Netherlands. In this chapter we will present the methods we will use in order to
add our own contribution to the existing literature on this issue. The goal of this research is to
describe the current state of PM education in the Netherlands, specifically with regards to how
university education in the Netherlands serves the needs of the Dutch PM community: this
will be a descriptive study. While descriptive studies tend to be methodologically simpler than
experimental or analytical studies to conduct, they are still important. Descriptive studies
provide the background from which other studies emerge. They help generate hypothesis
instead of testing them. This is especially useful in fields where there is little research. As a
relatively new field, the pedagogy of PM suffers from a lack of information on what to base a
holistic PM education framework. A descriptive study is necessary to take into account what
project mangers want and what is offered to them before hypothesis can be formed on what is
proper =in such a framework. There will be a combination of quantitative and qualitative data
collection, which according to Tsang (1997) adds to the usefulness of the results to both
practitioners and academics.
3.2 Participants
There are two populations in this study: the PM community in the Netherlands and PM related
masters and undergraduate education programmes of Dutch universities. From the first
population two samples were taken with one indicator and from the second population one
sample with one indicator was taken.

27
3.2.1 Details of the first population of study
The first population is the PM community. The ‘PM community’ has been a focus of research
before and is given to mean PM practitioners from various industries in charge of, working in
or working with projects (Cooke-Davies & Arzymanow, 2003). PM practitioners can be a
wide variety of people. On the one hand they may have full responsibility at senior levels for
the delivery of their projects, such as be project managers, programme managers or portfolio
managers. On the other hand they may have support roles in the PM infrastructure such as
project schedulers, project resource coordinators, project auditors, etc. Finally, practitioners
may also include project resources who are task-assigned or line-managed professionals, such
as engineers, programmers, lawyers or researchers, whose environment is so projectized that
they find PM a vital skill in their work. All these practitioners make up the PM community.
The PM community in the Netherlands is of course limited to those practitioners operating in
the Netherlands. Sampling this population requires finding practitioners which are
representative of various industries, but have a common grasp on the fundamentals of project
management.
3.2.2 Details of first population sample sizes
There were two samples of this population so as to be sufficiently representative. These
samples were taken from to similar organizations: the Project Management Institute (PMI)
Netherlands chapter and the Netherlands branch of International Project Management
Association (IPMA-NL), both of which have hundreds of members. These organizations
consist of young and experienced PM practitioners and experts from many industries. Both
organizations are actively engaging their members socially and intellectually through online
discussion on their respective forums, workshops and through regular conferences. Over 150
people attended the first PMI Netherlands summit this June (PMI Netherlands Summit, 2012)
and the most recent congress in 2011 of the IMPA-NL had 500 guests (IPMA-NL, n.d.). This
28
indicates that the members will be relatively up to date in their knowledge of PM theories and
practices as well as representing sizable communities.
There is precedent for this as these organizations commonly take part in research: the last
student research survey done of members of the PMI Netherlands Chapter dated 2011 had at
least 40 responses before a last call was made to members to participate before the deadline
(PMI Netherlands Chapter, 2011). This is an acceptable amount for our analyses, but taking
two samples not only increases the number of responses but the reliability in sampling the PM
community also increase. A sample size of over 60 respondents in total is sufficient for
analysis.
3.2.3 Details of the second population of study
The second population is PM related masters and undergraduate programmes from Dutch
universities. These can be found in the 14 research universities (wetenschappelijk onderwijs)
and 88 applied-sciences universities (hogescholen) recognized by the Accreditation
Organization of the Netherlands and Flanders (NVAO, n.d.). As the title of ‘university’ is
legally restricted in the Netherlands and our focus is on Dutch university education, the
population is limited to these institutions. The population entails only master and
undergraduate programmes because both these levels include PM classes; doctoral
programmes are not available in applied-sciences universities, nor do doctoral programmes
suit the purpose of educating project managers which is the subject of this study, rather they
expand research. The population of programmes is not limited by faculty or discipline as PM
classes may be included in various programmes.

29
3.2.4 Details of second population sample size
The sample of the population is taken from the seven research universities in the Randstad,
the commercial and industrial heartland of the Netherlands. These universities represent
diverse specialities from social sciences to engineering, allowing us to take into account a
variety of PM related courses. Purposive sampling will leave out the applied-sciences
universities; research universities are the drivers of advanced education in the Netherlands
therefore it is likely to find the most modern PM practices and theories in the research
universities. The seven research universities in the Randstad are:
Nyenrode Business University Leiden University
Delft University of Technology VU University Amsterdam
Utrecht University University of Amsterdam
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Data of this sample was gathered through external secondary data collection as the single
indicator.
3.3 Data gathering
There will be two types of data collection methods used in this study: one for the first
population measuring two samples and one for the second population measuring one sample.
3.3.1 First population: survey questionnaire
The first population, the PM community, was measured with a survey in the form of a
questionnaire. The questionnaire was self-administered per internet and consisted of 42
questions in four sections. The first section identifies the respondent, each section after will
30
separately identify PM teaching methods, theories and practices; put to the respondents for
consideration in closed quasi-filter questions (Neuman, 2000, p. 262). Each section also
includes ordinal opinion measures to determine the intensity of interest (Neuman, 2000,
p.174) in the PM theory, practice or teaching methods. The questionnaire stated the duration
(timed in pilot tests) and how it relates to the interests of the respondents to motivate them to
complete the entire questionnaire. It was also be clearly stated that no personally identifiable
information was in the questionnaire and the results would be shared with the community.
The entire questionnaire was designed to take 15 minutes. According to data from the online
survey provider SurveyMonkey, that should allow for 12 questions per section (Brent, 2011).
SurveyMonkey will be used to set up the internet questionnaire. The time that the
questionnaires were available online was period of three weeks. Additionally, the survey was
posted on the LinkedIn discussion forums of the two sample groups in the population so
project managers who were not group members but did follow PM discussion on the forums
could also participate.
The organizations’ authorities were contacted per email, with agreements of informed consent
exchanged to approach their members for study. The questionnaire was sent by the
organizations’ authorities to their members per email on the researcher’s behalf. Additionally,
on the request of the organizations the survey was posted on the LinkedIn discussion forums
of the two sample groups in the population so project managers who were not group members
but did follow PM discussion on the forums could also participate. The questionnaire is
available in Appendix 1.
3.3.2 Second population: external secondary data collection
The second population, PM related masters and undergraduate programmes in Dutch
universities were sampled from the Randstad universities using external secondary data
31
collection; the study guides of the universities are the documents that will be gathered and
analysed.
The external secondary data will be collected from public content, namely the universities’
online study guides. These study guides are publically accessible in order to help prospective
students make their educational choices. Typically they include the course title, faculty, level,
credits. As the universities have different standards in publishing their study guides, the
course learning objectives and content is not always available but was recorded when
possible. An inventory was made of undergraduate and master level courses in the seven
universities which are about PM or contain PM as a key part of a larger set of learning
objectives. The data was gathered in a spreadsheet.
3.4 Data management
All data was stored on the researcher’s home computer in a password protected file, with a
back up file held on a separate external hard drive. The results of the survey questionnaire
were downloaded from the online survey provider; data downloaded from the online survey
provider did not have any personally identifiable information as the online survey does not
record such information. External secondary data was gathered in a spreadsheet.
Back up of the all data was kept on the researcher’s external hard disk which is also password
protected. No data will be stored in other mediums or in the cloud. The data will be kept for a
period of 1 year and will be available upon request to other researchers.
3.5 Operational definitions and variables
In this section we will show how the research questions can be answered through the surveys
conducted.
32
3.5.1 Questionnaire for first population
The purpose of the questionnaire is to answer research questions 1.1 and 2.1, which are:
education, and why?
The theoretical, practical and teaching needs of the Dutch PM community with regards to
university education are brought into focus here. The order of questions was designed to flow
through topics and keeps the interest of the respondent, so they are not necessarily in the order
that would be analysed.
The first section of the questionnaire covers basic information of the respondents. Question 1
places the respondents’ PM seniority, for the chance that there may be a correlation with
seniority and an understanding PM educational needs. Question 2 checks that the respondents
are relevant to the Dutch population. Question 3 places the respondents’ education: it is
reasonable to assume that there may be a correlation between education and the perception of
educational needs. Question 4 places the respondents’ academic discipline; after the pilot
survey is was advised to check for this as there may be disparate views between project
managers coming from the technical fields and non-technical fields, which in turn can affect
how project management is taught in universities which concentrate on different fields.
Question 5 checks the respondents’ membership to see if they apply to the population.
33
Question 6 places the respondents’ certification type, as there may be a correlation between
certification and their perceptions of PM education. Finally, question 7 covers the industry of
the respondent. The list of industries was adapted from similar surveys in Oerlemans et al.
(2011) and White & Fortune (2002)
Questions 8 and 9 gauge the level of PM understanding expected at different levels of
university education, as well as the need for (industry) unique or generic PM education.
Questions 10 and 11 also check the need for unique or generic PM education, which remains a
point of contention according to Crawford and Pollack (2007). These questions give insight
into what levels of depth and differentiation the community wants PM to be taught. Questions
12 and 13 give insight into the community’s perception of national cultural influence on PM
which is discussed in Bredillet, Yatim and Ruiz (2010), and thus national cultural influence
on PM education in the Netherlands. Questions 14 through 19 gauge the perception of the
current state of PM education in Dutch universities, and give insight into what the community
thinks that university is for. A four point scale was used in questions 14 to 19 in order to force
a decision on the similarly to a yes/no question, but allowing room to gauge the intensity of
opinion. A “no opinion” option was added to minimize shirking and false reporting. All these
questions can give insight into research question 2.1: how the community wants PM to be
taught.
Question 20 weighs the importance of hard, soft and critical thinking skills in university PM
education, which gives insight into research question 1.1, what is deemed necessary for
dissemination. Questions 21 to 26 also cover hard, soft and critical thinking skills, but pertain
to research question 2.1 in that they rank methods of teaching for those skills. These methods
were adapted from Du, Johnson and Keil (2004) and Thomas and Mengel (2008). Space was
left for respondents to include their own methods in the ranking.

34
Questions 27, 28 and 30 cover the need for the theoretical understanding of techniques,
methodologies and PM related theoretical domains, which relates to research question 1.1.
PM theoretical domains were adapted from Bartoška, Flégl and Jarkovská (2012). Questions
31 to 33 weigh the importance of techniques, mythologies and theories, specifically
referencing the usefulness in tackling complexity in projects. A four point scale with no
opinion was also used in questions 27, 28, 31, 32 and 33 for the same reason as mentioned
above.
Question 29 covers what methodologies are considered important in a university PM
education and questions 34 to 42 cover what practices are considered important in a university
PM education. These relate directly to research question 1.1. The list of methodologies and
practices was adapted from White and Fortune (2002) and Papke-Shields, Beise and Quan
(2010). The final question 43 was a text area to allow for commentary by the respondents.
3.5.2 External secondary data collection of second population
The secondary data collection pertain to research questions 1.2 and 2.2:
A spreadsheet was used to collect the data from the seven universities’ study guides from all
faculties. The variables recorded per course were: university, whether the course is about PM
specifically or has some PM incidentally, the faculty which runs the course, the course code
and title, whether it is a master of bachelor level, whether it is an elective or core course, the
35
course contents, learning objectives and teaching methods, the name of the coordinator or
instructor, the web link and a miscellaneous column. All the study guides are online and have
built in search engines to facilitate students and other interested parties finding courses. To
find the relevant courses within the universities which had the information, the search option
was used. The terms used in the search option were “project management”, “project
manager”, “projectmanage”, “projectize”, as well as their Dutch equivalents.
The course contents and learning objectives relate directly to research question 1.2. The
methods, level, faculty and PM specificity related to research question 2.2. The name of the
coordinator or instructor was recorded should there be a need to interview in future research
and a miscellaneous column was used to collect any extra information which was deemed
interesting, as the study guides to not follow any single standard between universities, or even
between faculties in a singles university.
3.6 Data analysis
In this section we will describe the analytical process and rationale for choosing it.
3.6.1 Quantitative data analysis
A descriptive study such as this starts with a phase of ‘exploring the data’. (Robson, 2002, p.
450) The results where browsed to familiarize with the data, and then filters were applied to
take out unusable results (those that had no relation to the population being studies as checked
in question 2 and those who did not finish the survey). Cross tabulation and frequency
distribution was used to find correlations between responses. Questions which had space for
unique answers to be typed in by the respondents were checked for relevant information or
reoccurring concepts. If there were no reoccurring concepts these answers were discarded
36
form the analysis. Finally, the commentary section was checked for any information which
could be relevant and would be integrated into the triangulation analysis.
3.6.2 Qualitative data analysis
The immersion approach used to analyze the external secondary data. (Robson, 2002, p. 458)
This approach emphasizes research insight, intuition and creativity. The methods are not
systematized but fluid. Literary interpretation and connoisseurship is used which depends on
the expertise of the research and assumes the expertise of the target audience.
The reason for this is that the data collected does not fit well into grounded theory,
codification or matrix approaches because of the variety of language and terms used in the
documentation collected. No standard description of courses or format is shared among the
universities and there is even variety between faculties of the same university. Additionally,
many (but not all) of the descriptions are in Dutch and require the researcher to translate
uncommon words which cannot avoid interpretation. This form of analysis also fits well with
the role of the researcher established earlier as a connoisseur of the field from which the data
is collected and culturally adapted.
The PM variables found in the university documentation will inform the researcher as to what
PM theories and practices are being taught and the context that they are found in will inform
the researcher as to what PM how they are being taught.
3.6.3 Triangulation analysis
Triangulation is a strategy for dealing with threats to validity. It can reduce researcher bias
which is a threat coming from the approach chosen for the qualitative analysis, and it can
reduce respondent bias which is a threat coming from the quantitative analysis approach
37
chosen. (Robson, 2002, p. 174) Methodological triangulation combines quantitative and
qualitative approaches. The interpretability of statistical analysis of the questionnaire data can
be enhanced by the qualitative narrative account. Research question 1.1 and 1.2 will compare
the theories and practices deemed necessary to teach and actually taught, while research
questions 2.1 and 2.2 compare the education methods and contexts that are used and the
education methods and context that the community feels is appropriate. The research
question:
Netherlands?
is answered by comparing the analyses of the data sets. The comparison will reveal the
similarities or differences between the needs of the PM community and what Dutch university
education provides to answer the main question and aim of the study. This can then tell us
where the gaps are in PM education in Dutch universities, according to the PM community.
3.7 Trustworthiness
Methods to safeguard the validity and reliability of this study are discussed in this section.
3.7.1 Pilot study
One pilot study was held to test the survey questionnaire. The pilot questionnaire was given to
four professionals who fit the variety of project managers in the community: a certified
project director with a technical education, a certified project resource with a legal education,
a non-certified project manager with a humanities education with a technically educated line
manager with PM responsibilities.

38
The pilot questionnaire results were used to adjust the questions for clarity and accuracy but
the data is not included in the results of the survey questionnaire proper. The adjustments to
the questionnaire included an extra question on academic discipline, focussing the wording on
many questions to reduce confusion on the purpose of the question, presentation format of
questions for simplicity and speed of answering and the order of the questions to increase the
likelihood that respondents complete the entire questionnaire. The pilot respondents were
asked to time themselves and they all finished within 15-20 minutes.
3.7.2 Validity
Face validity of the questionnaire survey is ensured by using definitions and measures
previously used in PM education studies (Berggren & Söderlund, 2008; Pant & Baroudi,
2008; Thomas & Mengel, 2008) and PM theoretical and practical relevance studies (Clarke,
2010; Crawford, 2005; Koskela & Howell, 2008; Stevenson & Starkweather, 2010). Content
validity is improved by straightforward definitions of PM theories, practices and education
methods. Through triangulation the validity threats from the immersion approach can be
reduced by adhering to definitions in the quantitative analysis as a framework for
interpretation. By taking multiple measures of the same concept, both in the questionnaire of
two organizations for the needs of the PM community and the study guide documentation,
convergent validity will improve.
Special care of the wording of the questions and answers was taken so as not to mimic the
structure or framework of the PM BoK, but rather to interpret the concepts as laid out in the
literature. The reason for this is that studies show the PM BoK is not an ideal framework to
base higher education on as it promotes the listing of techniques without contextualization
(Gale & Brown, 2003; Todhunter, 2003; Starkweather & Stevenson, 2011), which is contrary
39
to the critical focus of this study. Additionally, respondents that did not recognize a concept
were asked to answer ‘no opinion’ in order to prevent them from answering based on a guess
of what a concept actually was.
3.7.3 Reliability
The stability reliability (Neuman, 2000, p. 163) of the PM community is preserved in these
groups because the membership is relatively stable; people do not become project managers
overnight and there is a membership fee ensuring commitment to the group. Representative
reliability is preserved by sampling two different organizations of the same population. The
education programmes’ stability reliability is preserved because curriculum content develops
relatively slowly. The representative reliability is preserved because half of all research
universities are located in the Randstad giving us seven organizations to investigate.
Reliability is improved (Neuman, 2000, p. 166) with a pilot questionnaire and the interviews.
The organization the author works for contains expat project managers who would not be
members of Dutch PM organizations, and the author has contacts with some British university
faculty. These project managers and academics will pilot test the questionnaire and
interviews.
3.7.4 Ethics
The risk of ethical dilemmas in this study is low. The survey questionnaire had no personally
identifiable information which could put respondents at risk, the organizations approached for
the survey were able to vet the questionnaire before hand and the results of this research is
made available to them as quid pro quo. The documentation gathered from the universities’
study guides came from publically available websites, designed for the purpose of informing
interested parties.
40
3.8 Role of the researcher
In quantitative studies the researcher’s role is to be as independent as possible and remove all
subjectivity from the study. Ideally, a quantitative study should be repeatable by others in the
same conditions to yield the same results. In theory the role is non-existent and the researcher
seeks to paint a picture using data from a variety or sources. In practice the researcher’s biases
may still permeate the study through its design.
Qualitative studies treat the researcher as an instrument of data collection, and therefore this
instrument needs to be fully understood in order to see its effects on the data (Denzin &
Lincoln, 2003). Qualitative researchers should be able to describe relevant aspects of
themselves to bring to the open any biases or assumptions which may influence the study, as
well as add any experiences or aspirations which qualify their ability to conduct the research
(Greenbank, 2003).
The researcher of this study is an insider to both cultures under scrutiny: the higher education
industry and project managers, although more of the former than the latter. He has worked in
universities for the past five years, and has been involved with students of project
management for much of it. His role is therefore emic, or not culturally neutral. At the end of
this chapter the topic of avoiding researcher bias and other means of safeguarding
trustworthiness is approached.
This study is a quality initiative in education as defined by Grey and Mitev (1995), and like
these authors we will dispense with the notion that the student is a consumer and the teacher is
a producer. Knowledge can be viewed as a dialectical relationship instead of a commodity and
the task of the intellectual is to expand and not limit the way fellow intellectuals regard the
41
world. It is within the paradigm of critical pedagogy and critical management that we assess
PM education and its reception in the PM community.
3.9 Weaknesses and assumptions
The survey may suffer from the incompleteness of presenting the full spectrum of PM
concepts; this study by no means covers all theories and practices. However, it is not the
intention of the researcher to test all concepts of PM against their inclusion in university
education, but to find out the needs of the PM community. The field of PM and breadth of PM
concepts is so broad that it would be far out of the scope of this study to include everything. It
can already be seen from the results that many concepts are too obscure
As the survey was relatively long there was also a risk of respondents stopping, skipping
questions or rushing through (eventually there was 72% completion, but ). From the answers
which had open spaces to fill in original answers (e.g. Question 20-25) it could be seen that
perhaps not all resonant read the question or answers carefully as some answers were
repeated. This was dealt with by leaving the open space answer out of the analysis, unless a
constant response was found.
A weakness in studying the second population is that the seven universities chosen may not be
accurate results of universities country wide, the study guides which were published did not
have complete information on course content in most cases and course listing may also have
been incomplete. It was found that the search engines in the universities’ study guides were
not optimal, which required a bit of extra investigation into the faculty websites to see if
courses were in the study guide that were no longer given. Additionally, there were many
courses with the word ‘project’ in them which had nothing to do with PM, for example a
Bachelor thesis; this is a result of many courses using study projects to present research or
42
assess students. It is possible that in filtering out these courses some with a PM element may
have been lost. This is not a great concern, as the courses which were aiming to be about PM
were clear and are more suited to answering the research questions. The courses with only
sporadic PM elements were not crucial to the research; only 1 university had a study guide
detailed enough for these to be looked into and was looked at as a representative case.
Finally, the interpretation of the Dutch documentation posed some difficulties to compare the
PM concepts in the survey to what was being taught. This was dealt with by using the
researcher’s own expertise in the subject area and knowledge of the language to assess
common themes.
3.10 Methodology summary
The Dutch PM community was surveyed through questionnaire to discover their educational
needs regarding PM education at university. Randstad universities were surveyed for courses
with PM elements by gathering and studying study guides which contain descriptions of all
courses given at undergraduate and master level from all faculties. The results of these
analyses would be combined to highlight the discrepancies between the needs of the PM
community and what the Dutch universities can offer. The following diagram summarizes this
methodological process of this study.

43
Figure 1: Methodology outline

44
Chapter 4: Presentation of Results

4.1 Results of questionnaire
There were a total of 90 respondents which belong to the first population and were used in the
following results. Respondents not of the population were filtered through Question 2.
4.1.1 Respondent profile
Q1: How would you describe yourself? Senior project manager /

programme manager
3; 3% Projects director / portfolio
manager or higher
8; 8%
Line manager with project
9; 9% responsibilities
Junior project manager
10; 10%
54; 57%
Project resource
13; 13%
Other
Figure 2: Q1 results
NB: In the original data “other” positions were slight variations on what was offered, and
were placed in their proper place. The remaining “other” respondents were made up of project
consultants and trainers.

45
Q2: What is your highest level of education?
8; 9% 6; 7%
Highschool
24; 27% Bachelor degree
Master /
doctorandus degree
52; 57% Doctorate degree
NB: ‘Doctorandus’ is the old master equivalent in the Netherlands.
Q3: What academic discipline do you Humanities / Social

that feel you belong to? sciences (e.g. law,
4; 4% business, psychology,
economics, sociology,
philosphy, etc.)
28; 31%
Natural / Formal
sciences (e.g. physics,
engineering, chemistry,
biology, medicine,
computer science,
mathematics, etc)
Not applicable
58; 65%
NB: Academic discipline can refer to a respondent’s education or the field they operate in.
46
Q5: Are you a member of the following project management

organizations?
70 62
60
50
40
30
20 16
9 9
10 2
0
PMI IPMA BPUG None Other
Nederland
(Prince2)
NB: In this figure, participants may be members of multiple organizations.
Q6: What professional PM certifications do you have?
Other 4,3%
TOCICO (any level) 3,5%
IPMA (any level) 11,6%
Prince2: Professional level 5,8%
Prince2: Practitioner level 27,9%
Prince2: Foundation level 31,4%
PMI: PMP 55,8%
PMI: Other 9,3%
None 20,9%
0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0%
NB: Only significantly represented memberships labelled.
47
Q7: In which industries do you practice PM? (all that apply.)
Other 5,6%
Media, publishing & arts 1,1%
Defense 2,2%
Aerospace 2,2%
Pharmaceuticals 2,2%
Automobile 5,6%
Healthcare 7,9%
Construction & infrastructure 11,2%
Manufacturing 12,4%
Education & training 13,5%
Government & utilities 15,7%
Investment, insurance, & banking 16,9%
Organizational / business change 25,8%
Oil & gas / energy 32,6%
Information technology / telecommunications 55,1%
0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0%
NB: Industries with 0% were removed here.
4.1.2 Perception of PM education in the Netherlands
Q8: What level of project management understanding do you

require university Bachelor graduates
to have in order to perform adequately? No understanding, unless
studying project
4; 5% management as a major.
8; 9%
Basic understanding in
the context of their major
or industry.
Advanced understanding
in the context of their
34; 39% major or industry.
30; 35% Basic understanding in a
generic context.
in a generic context.
10; 12%
48
Q9: What level of project management understanding do you

require university Master graduates
No understanding, unless
to have in order to perform adequately? studying project
management as a major.
3; 3%
Basic understanding in
22; 27% the context of their major
21; 24% or industry.
in the context of their
major or industry.
Basic understanding in a
generic context.
19; 22% Advanced understanding

21; 24% in a generic context.
NB: for figures 8 to 11 context referred to either and industry or academic discipline .
Q10: Do you feel that an industry or major has it's own

unique context of project management?
No; 47; Yes; 40;

46%
54%
Q11: Choose the most accurate Project management

of the following statements: should be taught at
university within the
22; 26% context of a major
Project management
should be taught at
64; 74% university in a generic
context.

49
Q12: Do you feel that the Netherlands has a

unique project management culture?
Yes; 28;
33%
No; 58;
67%
Q13: Choose the most accurate of the following statements:
Unique project
9; 11% management culture
23; 27% should be taught at
university.
Culturally generic
project management
should be taught at
university.
Project management is
not affected by national
53; 62% culture.
NB: In figures 12 and 13 culture specifically refers to national culture, as opposed to
corporate or industry culture.

50
Q14: Universities in the Netherlands provide an adequate project

management education for Bachelor graduates.
38
40
28
30
20 17
10
3
1
0
Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree No opinion
Q15: Universities in the Netherlands provide an adequate project

management education for Master graduates.
50
40
40
29
30
20 14
10
2 2
0
Questions 14 and 15 were alone on the same page in the survey so that respondents would see
them simultaneously and think abut how there answers were related.
51
Q16: Universities in the Netherlands are a good option for

professionals to gain a basic understanding of project management.
50
41
40
30
22
20 15
10 5
1
0
Q17: Universities in the Netherlands are a good option

for project managers to gain advanced knowledge
of project and portfolio management.
40
30
30 25
22
20
10 4 3
0
52
Q18: Universities in the Netherlands are a good option for

professionals to continue lifelong education in project management.
40 36
28
30
20
13
10
1 2
0
Figure 18:Q18 results
Q19: Universities in the Netherlands should aim towards training

students for project management certification.
40 35
30
23
20
13
8
10
1
0
53
Q20: Allocate 100 points across the following three

statements according to their importance.
Project management education should consist of:
39,00
37,00
33,95 34,40
35,00
32,52
33,00
31,00
29,00
27,00
25,00
hard skills, i.e. soft skills, i.e. critical thinking skills, i.e.
application of competencies of abilities to analyze
techniques and leadership, social complexity and develop
methods for completing cohesion, political & new insights.
projects on time, budget corporate cultural
and scope. awareness and
communication.
Q21: Rank the following methods of education to teach

hard skills in project management:
(1 = most suitable, 8 = least suitable)
Real world research 5,28
Case study analysis 4,92
Class discussion, live or through e-learning

4,26
environments
Real experience, class projects and
2,87
mentored internships
Team based simulations (games) 3,83
Software powered simulations 4,51
Classical lectures and examination 2,59
0,00 1,00 2,00 3,00 4,00 5,00 6,00
Question 20 was shows on its own. Questions 21, 23 and 25 had supplementary questions
directly after where the respondent could fill in an extra teaching method if they so chose.
54

soft skills in project management:

3,71
environments
2,40
0,00 1,00 2,00 3,00 4,00 5,00 6,00

critical thinking skills in project management:

3,96
environments
2,96
0,00 1,00 2,00 3,00 4,00 5,00 6,00

55
4.1.3 Project management theory and complexity
Q27: University graduates should understand the theory behind project

management TECHNIQUES they have studied.
45
39
40
35
30 28
25
20
15
10
5 2 1
0
0
Q28: University graduates should understand the theory behind project

management METHODOLOGIES they have studied.
45
40
40
35
30 28
25
20
15
10
5 1 2
0
0
Questions 27 and 28 were shown on the same page so that respondents would recognize the
connection between the topics.

56
Q30: Rate how important it is that university graduates should understand

the theory behind the following project management related domains:
(0 = not important at all, 6 = extremely important)
Culture 4,26
Strategic advantage 3,75
Project management maturity 3,60
Complex adaptive systems 3,44
Emotional intelligence 3,89
Project typologies 3,78
Ethics and values 4,17
Team dynamics 4,33
Information flow 4,09
Systems thinking 4,15
Project life cycles 4,35
Leadership 4,27
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Question 30 was represented on its own page in the survey.
Questions 31 to 33 were all represented on the same page so that respondents understood the
interconnectedness of the topic of complexity.

57
Q31: University graduates who have a grasp of project management

techniques are better suited to deal with project complexity.
60
50
50
40
30
20
11
10 5 4
0
0

methodologies are better suited to deal with project complexity.
50 45
40
30
20
12
9
10 4
0
0

theory are better suited to deal with project complexity.
50 47
40
30
20
12
8
10
0 2
0

58
4.1.4 Project management practices
NB: “No opinion” was an option in the following questions, and respondents were asked to
make that choice if they were not familiar with the practice.
Q29: Rate the importance of the following project management

METHODOLOGIES to be taught at university,
as opposed to training on the job or through professional training:
(0 = not important at all, 6 = extremely important)
Lean project management 3,20

Agile project management 3,15
Event chain methodology 2,73
Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3) 2,97
Benefits realisation management (BRM) 3,17
Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM) 3,16
European risk management methodology (RISKMAN) 3,17
Structures systems analysis & design methodology (SSADM) 2,80
Projects in controlled environments 2 (PRINCE2) 3,05
Projects integrating sustainable methods (PRiSM) 2,97
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Placed here for convenience of the topic, question 39 appeared earlier in the survey to allow
for a better flow.
Q34: Rate the importance of the following project INTEGRATION management

practices to be taught at university, as opposed to training on the job or through
professional training: (0 = not important , 6 = extremely important)
SWOT analysis 4,01
Feasibility study 4,12
Stakeholder analysis 4,41
Project charter 3,84
Project plan 4,06
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50

59
Q35: Rate the importance of the following project SCOPE management

practices to be taught at university, as opposed to training on the job or
through professional training: (0 = not important , 6 = extremely important)
Scope statement update 3,37
WBS update 3,11
Scope bank 3,09
Scope change proposal 3,36
WBS 3,69
Scope statement 4,02
Project deliverables list 3,73
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Q36: Rate the importance of the following project TIME management

Buffer management 3,30

Activity list update 2,92
Activity duration estimates 3,18
Project activities list 3,41
Critical path analysis 4,17
PERT or Gantt chart 3,85
Schedule baseline 3,84
Schedule update 3,45
Project schedule 4,29
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Questions 34 to 37 were represented on the same page as they all represent basic PM
knowledge areas.
60
Q37: Rate the importance of the following project COST management

Time-phased budget plan 3,52

Life-cycle cost analysis 3,68
Cost baseline updates 3,05
Activity cost estimates 3,51
Earned value analysis 3,74
Cost performance reports 3,48
Cost estimate updates 3,29
Cost baseline 4,07
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Q38: Rate the importance of the following project QUALITY management

Quality change proposals 3,08
Quality audit 3,35
Quality metric results 3,23
Quality management plan 3,70
Defined quality metrics 3,60
Quality checklists 3,48
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Questions 38 and 39 were on the same page in the survey as quality and risk are both
considered equally crucial elements in projects.

61
Q39: Rate the importance of the following project RISK management

Status review meetings 3,15
Pre-planned risk response system 2,95
Preliminary hazard analysis (PHA) 2,98
Ops/maintenance risk analysis (OMRA) 2,90
Hazard and operability studies (HAZOP) 3,10
Hazard analysis (HAZAN) 3,22
Failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) 3,33
Probability analysis (PA) 3,58
Root cause analysis (RCA) 3,70
Fault tree analysis (FTA) 3,43
Event tree analysis (ETA) 3,42
Risk register updates 3,18
Quantitative risk analysis 3,82
Risk register 3,49
Contingency plan 3,87
Risk management plan 4,14
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Q40: Rate the importance of the following project RESOURCE management

Resource leveling 3,31
HR change requests 2,66
Team-building events 2,97
Competence & capabilities roster 2,98
Responsibility assignment matrix 3,45
Roles and responsibilities list 3,53
Project staff assignments 3,23
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50

62
Q41: Rate the importance of the following project COMMUNICATION

management practices to be taught at university, as opposed to training on the
job or through professional training: (0 = not important , 6 = extremely important)
Project audit 3,33
Lessons learned documentation 3,43
Communication change request 3,08
Communication requirements analysis 3,63
Information distribution plan 3,21
Info gathering/retrieval system 3,22
Communication management plan 4,08
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30
Q42: Rate the importance of the following project PROCUREMENT

management practices to be taught at university, as opposed to training on the
job or through professional training: (0 = not important , 6 = extremely important)
Procurement management plan 3,34
Supplier evaluation criteria 3,15
Supplier proposal evaluation 3,06
Bid documents 3,08
Contract statement of work 3,47
2,50 2,70 2,90 3,10 3,30 3,50 3,70 3,90 4,10 4,30 4,50
Questions 40 to 42 are considered peripheral knowledge areas in PM so were all shows in
the same page in the survey.
4.2 Results of external secondary data collection
The of seven university study guides that were available, four were found to have only one
course purely about PM in the entire university: Utrecht University (2012), Erasmus
University Rotterdam (2012), Leiden University (2012), and Amsterdam of University
(2012). VU University Amsterdam (2012) had two PM courses (Table 1).

63
University Course Level Faculty PM elements Learning

method
Utrecht Projectized MSc Law, -Public sector PM focus Lectures, role-
University work Economics, -Team creation plays and
Governance -Scoping group work
and -Planning assignments
Organization -Risk analysis
-Stakeholder analysis
-Theory of PM
(definition, structure,
phases, control and
context)
-PMO’s
VU ICT4D: MSc Exact -ICT and international Lectures,
University Information Sciences development PM focus assignments,
Amsterdam and -PM Theory simulation
communication (development support,
technology for planning, basic ICT
Development PM)
- Execution
- Documentation
VU Software MSc Exact -Software development Lectures and
University Project Sciences PM focus individual
Amsterdam Management -Role of project assignments
managers
-Rational Unified
Process (RUP) or agile
methodology
-PM BoK standards
-Lifecycles
-Phases
-Iterations
-Milestones
-Effort estimating
-Resource levelling
-Resource scheduling
-Risk management
-Quality management
-Scope management
-Change management
-Progress control
-People Management
-Intellectual property
rights
-Ethics
-Intercultural issues
Leiden System MSc Mathematics -Software development Group work,
University Development and Sciences PM focus assignments,
and Project -Proposals discussions,
Management -Reporting presentations
-Cost evaluation and
-Progress measurement case study
-Planning
-Effort estimating
-Stepwise project
management method
64
(SPMM)
-Risk management
-Project escalation
-Quality assurance
-Team creation
-People management
-Contract management
Erasmus Innovation MSc Rotterdam -Innovation PM focus Assignments
University Project School of -Team creation and case study
Rotterdam Management Management -Scoping
-Planning
-Risk management
-Control
Amsterdam Project BSc Science, -Software development Lectures and
of Software Mathematics PM focus assignments
University Engineering and -Projectized work
Informatics -‘standard process’ of
PM
Table 1: Non-technical universities with courses dedicated to PM
These universities had a few other courses which had some PM related elements but for the
most part study guides were not detailed enough to look into these programmes in depth with
the exception of VU University. The courses in VU University Amsterdam with PM elements
were investigated as a sample to discover what PM elements were represented in non-PM
courses (Table 2).
Course Level / Faculty Learning Learning methods

core or objectives
elective referring to PM
Project MSc / Earth and Life 1 of 5 Group assignment,
Environmental core Sciences case study
Impact Assessment
Logistics and BSc / Economics and 1 of 6 Lectures,
Operations core Business assignments
Research Administration
Innovation project: BSc / Exact Sciences 1 of 8 Lectures, case study,
medicines elective Group assignment
Introduction to BSc / Exact Sciences 1 of 6 Lectures,
Science, Business core Group work
and Innovation
Innovation project: BSc / Exact Sciences 1 of 8 Lectures, discussion,
Energy elective group work,
simulation
Innovation project: BSc / Exact Sciences 1 of 8 Lectures, workshops,

65
Course Level Faculty PM elements Learning

method
Diagnostics & elective Group work

Health
Orientation on the BSc / Exact Sciences 2 of 8 Discussions, Group

Society Variant elective work
From Gene to BSc / Earth and Life 1 of 8 Lectures, lab work,

Crop core Sciences excursion, Group
work.
Academic & BSc / Earth and Life 1 of 8 Lectures, training,
Professional Skills core Sciences discussions,
assignments
Digital spatial data BSc / Earth and Life 1 of 25 Lectures
elective Sciences
Management and BSc / Earth and Life 2 of 8 Lectures,
policy in the health elective Sciences assignments, group
sciences work
Management and BSc / Earth and Life 2 of 8 Lecture, discussions,
policy in the elective Sciences group work
healthcare
Table 2: VU University Amsterdam, non-PM courses with PM elements
Delft University of Technology (2012) was the only university to have many courses
specifically dedicated to PM. Many more courses had PM elements but the study guide was
not explicit enough to go into detail, nor is it relevant considering the basic level of PM
compared to the following findings (Table 3).

66
Dynamic MSc Civil -Change management (climate, users, regulations, Lectures and
Control of Engineering technology, requirements and financial) Discussion
Projects and -Value, budget, revenues, price and costs variables
Geosciences during the different lifecycle phases can be optimized
through the topics: organization; competition; product
characteristics; knowledge; market approach;
institutions
Project MSc Civil -People management; team management Lectures,
Management, Engineering -Project Organizational Structure tutorials, case
Finance and and -Planning; Control studies and
Appraisal Geosciences -Theory (Analysis of PM Synthesis of PM) computer
-Critical path analysis; PERT charts; Resource simulation
balancing; Decision analysis; Quantitative Assessment
of Risk; Variance analysis, Linear programming;
Simplex method; Process simulation
- Forecasting; Cost estimation; Budget allocation;
Inventory Control
-Optimization of transportation
Quality and MSc External -Quality management ; Risk management; Risk Lectures and
Risk in Projects institute modelling; Feedback control loops; Stakeholder group work
management; Business processes; Process modelling;
Performance assessment; Quality improvement
Project MSc Technology, - Construction PM focus Lectures and
Management Policy and - Foundations of PM; Cost, time, scope and quality in assignments
Management construction
- Various PM tools
- Complexity management
- Phases; Planning; Control
- Project organization; Contracts and procurement;
Communication; Stakeholders management; Leadership
skills
Strategic MSc Technology, - Engineering PM focus Lectures,
Management of Policy and - Process management; Design assignments,
Large Management - Technological complexity; Social complexity; Control simulation
Engineering with asymmetric information ; External legitimating games and
Projects - Planning; Budgeting discussions
Integration: MSc Technology, - scope, cost, time, quality and resources Lectures,
Project Policy and - risk management; knowledge management; process group
Management in Management management; teamwork assignment,
practice - monitoring and control game and
- theoretical insights compared to practice. excursion
- project contexts
Introduction MSc Technology, - Complexity Lecture,
Project Policy and - Prince2, PM-Bok, Ipma-ICB, CPM assignments,
Management Management - Business case design; Problem solving; Project case study,
boundaries; Resource constraints; Scheduling and training
forecasting for costs; Project organization; Risk
management
- PM software; WBS; PERT; Critical path; Network
scheduling; Estimating; Project cost accounting
- International projects.
- Life-cycle (front end); Planning
- Time, cost, quality, and scope
- TQM, six sigma, other techniques.
Project MSc Technology, - Life-cycle (back end); Monitoring and control Lecture,
Execution Policy and - EVA ; Scope change; Progress reports; Closing and case study,
Management handover; Capturing lessons learned ; Change training and
management; PM software assignments
Advanced MSc Technology, - Complexity Lectures,
Project Policy and - Strategic PM; corporate strategy; Programme group work
Management Management management
67
- Internal project structure; organization; external

orientation
- Project management in networks
- Finance and risk; Business models; Management of
innovation
Project MSc Technology, - Systems engineering; Technology-organization- Lectures,
Management Policy and environment framework. discussions,
Management - Scope; project boundaries, WBS assignment,
- Time; resource constraints case study
- Planning; network scheduling, critical path, PERT,
- Control and support; EVA
- Cost and Quality; estimating, project cost accounting,
scheduling and forecasting for costs;
- QM, QC, TQM, Prince2,six sigma, other techniques.
- Organization; pure project organization, matrix
organization, PMO
- PM software
- Qualitative risk management; ATOM and other
methods
- Quantitative risk management; theory and tools
- International projects; teams and coordination;
Stakeholder management; decision making and problem
solving; indicators of success
- Contracting and procurement; contracting strategies,
remuneration schemes for projects. Lump Sum versus
reimbursable contracts, relationship with risk.
- Complexity
Project MSc Mechanical, - contracts, project controls, procurement, construction Lectures,
Engineering Maritime and management, contractual risk management, cost design
Materials estimating and project data management assignment
Engineering
Creating in BSc Industrial - Creating in teams Coaching,
Project Teams Design - Stimulating creativity group work,
Engineering - Managing a project discussions,
- Design in teams experiments,
- Self awareness self-
reflection
Internship BSc Technology, - International development PM focus Lectures,
Project Policy and - Planning assignment
Management Management - Environmental analysis
Preparation
Integrative BSc Technology, - Project consulting Experiential
project for Policy and - Qualitative and quantitative factors for success learning,
management in Management - Reporting group work,
a high-tech - Problem solving coaching,
environment case study,
game
Process BSc Technology, - Complexity Lectures,
Management in Policy and - Risk management group work
a Project Management - Process management
Environment - Standard PM tools
- Integrated goal orientation
- Phases
- Contracts, structures and day-to-day management.
Project BSc Mechanical, - Industrial PM focus Lectures and
Management Maritime and - Phases discussion
Materials - PMBoK Knowledge areas
Engineering
Project BSc Mechanical, - Maritime production PM focus Lectures,
Organization of Maritime and - PM support discussions
Ship Materials - Planning; Budgeting; Risk management ERP, PDM, and group
68
production Engineering - Implementation, resource leveling, execution. work

- Monitoring
- Quality assurance and quantity control
- Organizational structure of maritime and offshore
business
- Lean
Table 3: TU Delft with courses dedicated to PM
Nyenrode Business University (2012) did not have a single course on or relating to PM. The
university was contacted per email and this was confirmed. The names of courses and other
information represented in these tables are translated from Dutch were applicable.
4.3 Conclusion of results
The survey questionnaire delivered a lot of useful data, even with the irregularities in the first
population respondents. The external secondary data collection gave mixed results: there were
less PM relevant courses available than anticipated for the non technical universities, however
enough data was collected to give insight into the situation in universities in general. In the
following chapter this will be analysed.

69
Chapter 5: Data Analysis

5.1 Introduction
In this section the data will be analysed to answer the research questions. Starting with the
survey questionnaire, an interpretation of the overall results will be given and then
correlations between responses will be investigated using cross tabulation. Then the external
secondary data will be interpreted through immersion and an overview of PM education in the
Dutch universities will be given. Finally, the two sets of data will be compared to answer the
final research question.
5.2 Analysis of survey questionnaire data
5.2.1 Respondent identity
Seventy-two percent of the respondents described themselves as senior project managers or
higher (Q1) which indicates that their understanding of PM and it’s educational needs is
legitimate. While self reporting of one’s own authority can create validity issues, the majority
of senior or higher respondents had Master or higher levels of education (Q3) and 79% had at
least one form of certification (Q6), so we can safely assume that they did have a deep
understanding of both PM and education. (Figures 40 & 41)
Sixty-three percent of the respondents were members of the PMI, the first sample of the first
population, and there were a relatively few of respondents from the second sample, the IPMA
(Q6). By posting the survey on the Linked-In discussion pages of these groups it opened the
survey up to non-members and people not related to the first population. It was decided that
the responses of non-members were valid for this study as the people following the Linked-In
discussions did fit the profile of experts required for the study and validity of this was
70
Figure 40: Education of respondents vs. seniority
Figure 41: Certification of respondents vs. seniority

71
preserved through testing in questions 1, 3 and 6. Responses not related to the first population
were not valid for the study and were filtered (Q2) to preserve validity. The industries where
respondents were active had notable concentrations in ICT, energy and organizational change,
but the majority of industries had relevant representation of more than 10% (Figure 7) and
experience in more than one industry was typical.
5.2.2 Perception of PM education in the Netherlands
Seventy-four percent of respondents agreed that Bachelor graduates need only basic
understand of PM; however, opinion was split almost equally between a need for basic or
advanced understanding for Master graduates (Figures 8 & 9). There was also an almost even
split between the need for contextual PM and generic PM education at both levels; the issue
of contextual PM still seems to be a point of contention amongst the PM community,
confirmed by the almost even split in the opinion of whether an industry unique PM context
even exists (Figure 10). In contrast, only a quarter of respondents thought that PM should be
taught within context rather than generic (Figure 11), and interestingly 40% of those wanting
PM to be taught in a generic context did believe that a industry unique PM existed (Figure
42). This leads us to conclude that more value is placed on teaching generic PM rather than
industry unique PM, even though industry unique PM exists and has a place in education. It
can also indicate that while there is a place for PM within the context of an industry, the
context should be provided by the subject major and the PM taught should be pure.
On the subject of whether universities in the Netherlands provide adequate PM education at
Bachelor or Master level, 65% and 67% of respondents with an opinion disagreed
respectively (Figures 14 & 15), although the fact that 40% and 54% all the respondents did
not have an opinion shows either an ignorance of what is currently being taught in Dutch
72
Figure 42: Industry unique PM vs. education within industry context
universities or lacked interesting what universities had to offer. Fifty-five percent of
respondents agreed that universities could provide basic understanding of PM, but 40%
though universities could no provide adequate advanced PM (Figures, 16 & 17). It was felt
that universities in the Netherlands were not a good option for lifelong PM education, and that
they should aim towards training students for certification (a third of whom had no
certification).
There was again a large amount of “no opinion” about advanced (30%) and lifelong education
(35%), showing that respondents may not know what is on offer from universities, yet
relatively low “no opinion” on the question of whether certification should be a goal of
university education. This may indicate that the respondents feel that certification institutions
take on further education needs where universities lead off, or it could also indicate that the
respondents simply do not feel that universities are up to standard when it comes to teaching
73
PM. In any case, the respondents’ views about PM in Dutch universities are generally not
positive.
Respondents thought that hard, soft and critical thinking skills were almost equally important,
within 2% points (Figure 20). The data itself had a wide spread of point allocation between
hard, soft and critical thinking: ranging from 70-25-5 to 15-70-15 to 0-0-100, showing quite a
differing of opinion, but the majority of point allocations were in the 20 to 40 range, showing
that respondents generally thought all these aspects of PM were important enough to warrant
attention in education. There was interestingly no correlation found between the respondents’
disciplines (humanities/social sciences vs. natural/formal sciences) and their opinion on the
importance of hard, soft or critical thinking skills.
Methods of education for hard, soft and critical thinking skills had some commonalities
(Figures 23, 24 & 25). Real world research, case study analysis and software simulations
came out as worst in all cases, scoring over 4 out of 8 (1 being most suitable and 8 being least
suitable). Interestingly, both hard and soft skills had very similar distribution for suitability of
methods; with the exception of software simulations were particularly unsuitable for soft
skills (scoring over 5) and classical lectures being much better suited to hard skills (scoring
under 3). The distribution for critical thinking skills was much flatter than for both hard and
soft skills, but what came the best for all cases was the so called experiential learning
methods: real experience, class projects and mentored internships. In questions 21, 23 and 25
an open space for the respondents to put their own input. This was mostly left blank and as
‘least suitable’, but when filled it was often marked as ‘most suitable’ with ‘coaching’. There
were no other common responses. Coaching can also be attributed to experiential learning
alongside real experience, class project s and mentored internships, making this category even
more relevant.
74
Unsurprisingly given the population surveyed, very few respondents felt that no
understanding of PM was necessary unless PM was the major of the education (Figures 8 &
9), indicating that generally respondents felt some PM is always necessary in university
education. On the aspect of national culture it is felt that even though a third of respondents
acknowledge the existence of a uniquely Dutch PM culture (Figure 12), it has little place in
PM education.
5.2.3 Perception of PM theory and complexity in education
Respondents found almost unanimously that university graduates should understand the
theory behind both techniques and methodology (Figures 24 & 25): only two or one
respondents thought otherwise, respectively. Interestingly, when using this 4 point scale in
other questions (Figures 14 to 19 and 27 to 29) the “Strongly agree” option was rarely used
(never more than 8 respondents), yet here for both techniques and methodologies 28
respondents felt they “strongly agree” that theory was necessary. The rate of no opinion was
also only one or two respectively. This indicates an intensity of belief behind the need for
theoretical understanding which is surprising.
Understanding the theory behind academic domains which impact on PM were all deemed to
be at least moderately important (Figure 26), scoring above 3.3 on a scale of 0 (not at all) to 6
(extremely important). However the theory behind culture (presumably corporate culture
considering Figure 13), team dynamics, life cycles, ethics, information flow, systems thinking
and leadership scored exceptionally high (above 4). With regards to dealing with complexity
in projects, it was felt that grasping techniques, methodologies and theory were all equally
necessary (Figures 27 to 29).

75
5.2.4 Perception of PM practices in education
While there was variation in the importance of teaching some methodologies at university
over others (Figure 30), but none of significance: all scores varied between 2.7 and 3.2 (0
being not important and 6 being extremely important, rounded to 1 decimal point). Lean,
Agile, CCPM and RISKMAN all had a score above 3.1.
All practices of integration management scored especially high (above 3.8; Figure 31), with
stakeholder analysis being the leader at 4.4. Scope management faired moderately important
between 3.1 and 4.0, with a scope statement being the leader at 4.0 (Figure 32). Time
management practice had much more noticeable variance compared to the previous areas:
between 2.9 and 4.3 (Figure 33). Project schedules and critical path analysis were clear
leaders. Cost management practices (Figure 34) have a narrower range, between 3.1 and 4.1,
with a cost baseline being the most important. Quality management practices (Figure 35) had
a very narrow range of 3.1 and 3.5, with a quality management plan in the lead. Risk
management practices (Figure 36) ranged between 2.9 and 4.1, with a risk management plan
in the clear lead. Resource management practices (Figure 37) scored between 2.7 and 3.5,
roles and responsibilities lists being at the forefront. Communication management practices
(Figure 38) ranged between 3.1 and 4.1, with a communication management plan in the lead.
Procurement management practice (Figure 39) ranged between 3.1 to 3.5, with a contract
statement of work being in the lead.
It is important to stress that these results were not a comparison of what practices were most
important in PM (i.e. contribute to project success) but what is most important at university
education, as opposed to professional or on-the-job training. No practices scored on average
lower than 2.9 or more than 4.4, although all practices did have responses in both extremes, 0
being not important at all and 6 being extremely important. While it is not useful to compare
76
the averages of different practice areas, looking at some of the outliers scoring above 4.0 is
relevant. Interestingly, three practice of the integration area scored this high (feasibility study,
stakeholder analyses and project plan), and did those leading practices mentioned above with
the exception of practices in the areas of procurement, resource management and quality
management.
5.2.5 Research question 1.1
education, and why?
Some individual techniques within knowledge areas were deemed more important than full
methodologies as a topic to be taught by universities, however all practices were given some
value. More telling than individual techniques themselves is an obvious need for theoretical
grounding behind the techniques, methodologies and a theory of project management itself to
be taught in order to deal with complexity. Theoretical domains which relate to PM on the
whole are more important than the techniques or methodologies (although interestingly the
one domain designed tackle complexity, complex adaptive systems, scored the lowest of all
domains).
Firstly, the community wants PM to be taught better at universities. That fact is quite obvious
given the negative responses from the community; the amount of “no opinion” responses also
77
shows that Dutch universities do not have enough of a reputation as a place of PM learning
amongst the community.
The PM community want PM taught in a culturally generic manner and for the most part
industry generic as well, although there is room for industry contextualized project
management. PM should be taught at a basic level in Bachelor programmes yet at Master
programmes there is room for both basic and advanced PM. There is an interest in universities
actively training students towards certification; however this should not be seen as the only
goal, or even the MOST important. Certification tend to test for hard skills, scarcely touches
on soft skills and rarely for critical thinking skills, yet the PM community finds all these three
skill sets equally important to be taught at university.
The PM community prefers experiential learning, such as internship, coaching and class
projects. There is space for classical lectures for hard skills, case studies for critical thinking,
and games and discussions in all areas. Real world research is generally frowned upon as a
teaching method.
5.3 Analysis of external secondary data
5.3.1 Non-technical universities
The six courses which were dedicated specifically to PM in five non-technical universities
came from a variety of faculties: from the exact sciences (maths, IT) to social science
(organization, management). While Erasmus University does not have an exact science
faculty, all universities have social science (business) faculties yet only Erasmus University
and Leiden University had PM courses from this discipline. Surprisingly, Utrecht University
has a well known IT faculty yet no PM specific course was found from that discipline. All
courses were at the Master level and covering basic PM (advanced PM being defined as
78
portfolio management, strategic PM) except one Bachelor course with University of
Amsterdam within the IT discipline which covered basic PM. Theory was mentioned twice in
Master courses, but the circumstance they were put in leads one to believe that it was limited
only to PM phases.
Lectures and individual assignments predominated as methods of education in these courses,
with group work and case studies being common. The individual and group assignments
could also have incorporated case studies without this being explicit in the study guides.
There was only one use of a more exotic method of education, the simulation in one of the
VU University Amsterdam courses.
PM elements revolved mostly around the phases of projects and typical activities with those
phases (such as reporting). All courses were taught within the context of their industry,
described in Table 1 as a ‘focus’. Only one course used a certification specific BoK (VU
University Amsterdam) and two used a methodology (agile and SPMM) and taught
knowledge areas broader than the phases of a project, such as ethics, culture and intellectual
property (VU University Amsterdam and Leiden University). This course was one of the two
courses belonging to VU University Amsterdam, also the institution where PM elements were
found in among non-PM specific courses. This indicates that either VU University
Amsterdam has an affinity for PM (which has a well known Earth and Life Sciences faculty),
or that their study guide was simply more detailed and complete.
5.3.2 Non-PM specific courses
VU University Amsterdam has a very detailed study guide allowing for in depth look into
non-PM related courses (Table 2). Twelve courses were found to have PM elements, all but
one being at the Bachelor level, and all dealing with basic PM. The learning objective relating
79
to PM never went further than ‘learning how to do project work’ or ‘learning the project life
cycle.’ Many of these courses were electives, and PM related to only 1 of between 5 and 25
learning objectives. Often the book assigned was a Dutch publication, Grit (2011). Only one
course, a Bachelor level, came from a social science discipline. Learning methods in these
courses were based on lectures, assignments and group work, with only the following single
examples of exotic methods: a simulation, an excursion and a training. This spread of non-
specific PM courses with PM elements may be indicative of other universities as their
curricula were similar, but the study guides were not detailed enough at this level for the
search options on the websites.
5.3.3 Technical university
TU Delft is the only university in the second population sample to have a broad range of PM
specific courses (Table 3). 17 courses in total were found, coming from several engineering
faculties and a management faculty. The six Bachelor level courses all dealt with basic PM
(phases, team work, project tools, etc) except one, which included complexity. Only one of
these Bachelor programmes included a certification specific BoK and only one used a
methodology (Lean). Four of the six were context specific PM.
The eleven Master level courses, of which seven were from the management faculty, had
much more depth than any other courses. Five courses dealt with advanced PM concepts (all
with the management faculty), three of these taught using PM software and two of these
taught explicit methodologies (six sigma, TQM, etc). Only three of all Master courses were
context specific. Only one Master course had certification specific content (but covered many
certifications in contrast to other courses at other universities which only covered the PM
BoK). All Master level programmes had extensive coverage of basic PM tools & techniques
and all Master courses dealt with at least some knowledge areas beyond those limited by
80
traditional project management in phases. Theory was mentioned a three times but in the
context of PM phases; complexity got more attention being linked to more factors and
mentioned in five Master courses.
Methods of education for the Bachelor courses revolved around lectures, group work and
discussion, but two of the 6 had some exotic methods: experiential learning and coaching.
Lecturing, assignments and discussions were also prevalent in Master courses, although there
were single incidences of a software simulation, a game and an excursion.
It can be noted that while TU Delft does not have a MSc in Project Management, the MSc in
Management of Technology (from the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management)
comes closest to dealing with most of the concepts that would be included in such a
programme, even though only one course within that Master is PM specific (Advanced
Project Management). Advanced Project Management required no prerequisites, but students
who had taken one of three other PM courses in the past would only get partial credit for
Advanced Project Management as some of the lectures overlapped.
It can also be assumed that there were non-PM specific courses with PM elements being
taught at TU Delft, but the search function in the study guide could not penetrate that deep
into the course content. Is strange not to see PM courses from the Faculty of Electrical
Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Sciences, given the prevalence of PM in the IT
sector. Other faculties with no PM courses were the Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, the
Faculty of Applied Sciences and the Faculty of Architecture. Non-PM specific course with
PM elements could explain this gap, and/or the fact that many of the Bachelor level courses
were electives which could be taken by students in other faculties. It was also noted the course
81
literature used in TU Delft varied more with internationally known books such as Meredith &
Mantel (2009).
There is a disparity between what the technical university teaches and other universities are
immediately noticeable: the practices taught in non-technical universities remains basic, be it
in a PM specific course or not. These basic practices are usually limited to a traditional
understanding of PM phases and little mention is made of specific PM techniques. Some
knowledge areas on the periphery of basic PM were mentioned, but this was more a result of
the PM being taught in the context of a major rather than cover a holistic view of PM.
Complexity and theory (beyond PM phases) were almost non existent. The prevalence of PM
in these universities is extremely weak; given the amount of disciplines and industries the
universities touch on where PM is active.
Theory was also scarce in TU Delft PM courses, but complexity and advanced concepts were
abundant. TU Delft covered almost every knowledge area of PM in one course or another and
more courses could be said to have a holistic view of PM. Practices in the courses in TU Delft
were much more explicit, pinpointing exact techniques for specific knowledge areas such as
earned value management, Gantt charts, cost accounting and other well known methods.
Methodologies and certification specific BoK’s were scarce in all universities, although TU
Delft did have more certification specific knowledge. It would seem that the universities have
left methodologies and certification based knowledge to the certification institutions.

82
In non-technical universities basic PM is taught mostly at Master level in the context of a
major. At TU Delft there is a spread of Bachelor and Master PM courses which cover both
pure PM and PM in the context of a major, with advance PM at Master level. Lectures,
assignments and group work seem to be the standard fare in Dutch universities, being used in
all settings. More exotic methods of education such as simulation, games and coaching were
limited to less than a handful of courses in the entire study.
5.4. Triangulation
In comparing the analysis of the research questions allows us to approach the main question
from the point of view of both populations under investigation as well as from both qualitative
and quantitative angles. This begins by comparing like with like, what the theories and
practices the PM community deems necessary in education (research question 1.1) and what
the universities have to offer (research question 1.2). Then the question of how the PM
community wants PM to be taught (research question 2.1) is compared to how the universities
teach (research questions 2.2). The final research questions 3.1 will combine what and how to
highlight the gap between the needs of the Dutch PM community and the provision of
universities that serve them and make recommendations to narrow the gap.
Netherlands?
83
In all universities there was a lack of theory going beyond the basic PM phases or typology.
Given the intensity of the responses regarding the importance of theory behind PM,
techniques and methodologies, this is the most glaring gap between the needs of the PM
community and what the universities provide. While no specific theoretical domain stands out
from the community, the lack of theory delivered at the universities gives the impression that
either there is no academic consensus on what theories to teach or that PM education
requirements are technicist and do not need a broad scope of theory. While the former reason
may be the case it is not an excuse not to delve deeper into the subject as the development of
new theory is dependent on the components being taught (Jugdev, 2004). The latter reason is
shown to be an incorrect assumption according to the data: practitioners are not purely
technicists and have a deep yearning for theory. With a technical university may have more to
offer in advanced courses which will more likely cover broader theory, there is still a lack of
PM focus as a discipline in its own right.
A technical university is more likely to also deal with the issue of complexity at Master level,
which is almost absent at non-technical universities. The community find that techniques,
methodologies and theory all are important in dealing with complexity, however there is
almost no methodological use beyond the most traditional PM and the odd use of contextual
methodologies. More important to the community are the coverage of some key techniques,
some of which are represented in the curricula: the importance of the techniques to the
community correspond with it their stature as basic practices (such as a Gantt chart) which are
represented in Bachelor and Master courses in a technical university, it is less clear if these
techniques are represented in the few PM courses at non-technical universities. Certainly,
non-PM specific courses in non-technical universities lack these techniques as they cover PM
in concept only.
84
Most of these techniques fall under the hard skills categories, and soft skills are sometimes
briefly touched upon in adjoining knowledge areas if those areas are being covered as part of
a context. Only soft skill areas of teamwork and leadership are touched upon outside of
context: there is a lack of cultural attention. Theory is essential for the development of critical
thinking skills (Lalonde, Bourgault & Findeli, 2010), and both seem to suffer in non-technical
universities, though less so in a technical university. The development of critical thinking
skills also relies on teaching methods, which is the next topic of discussion.
Methods used universally are the lecture, assignments (which may contain case study) and
group work. While these methods can be used to effectively teach hard skills, critical thought
and soft skills respectively, they are not the most ideal. Experiential methods such as
coaching, mentoring and live projects are much more preferred in all cases, while games and
discussion can find a place for specific application such as soft skills. However it is
understandable that with the resources of a typical university that experiential learning is not
so prevalent.
At a technical university the split between basic and advanced PM along the lines of Master
and Bachelor is for the most part apparent, and in non-technical universities basic PM is
taught at Master level. This generally along the lines of what the community requires,
considering that some practitioners find basic PM sufficient at this level. This is context to the
context in which PM is taught: in non-technical universities PM is typically given within
industry context as an addition to a major but not central. In a technical university it is more
likely that PM is context defined at Bachelor level and less so at Master level. This is not
surprising as advanced PM such as strategic PM or portfolio management is context free and
can be applied to various industries.

85
There is no attention given to culturally Dutch PM or Netherlands specific PM issues, but the
Dutch community does not seem to call for it in university education, even though cultural
issues are recognized. It may be simply that the PM community feels such matter to be dealt
with in a post-university environment. Finally, the community feels that universities should
tailor their courses towards PM certification, which would likely improve the standing of
universities as places of lifelong learning and professional development in the eyes of the
community. While there is a plethora of PM certification to consider and it is out of the scope
of this study to recommend any, it is reasonable to consider that a technical university would
provide this type of education at a Master level and not something that non-technical
universities need consider except perhaps in computer science related departments.

86
Chapter 6: Conclusions
6.1 Key findings
This study found that the PM community desires more in the ways of PM education from
Dutch universities than is on offer, and that universities are not particularly well represented
as institutions of PM learning. This impression is accurate as it was found that universities
indeed lack fundamental areas of PM teaching and teaching methods. A strong need for
theoretical grounding is lacking, as is a more diverse spread of PM specific courses to be
available in all relevant faculties so that all majors can benefit from contextual PM. Context
free, advanced PM should be available at Master level in both technical faculties but also
business faculties. Universities give weight mostly to hard skills, soft skills are tangentially
available and critical thinking skill development suffer due to the lack of theory. The link
between university education and PM certification is also very tenuous, and the Dutch PM
community would like that link to be more explicit even though certification does not cover
all the requirements that a holistic PM education would entail in the communities eyes.
6.2 Limitations and future research
Two limitations have constrained this study: the accessibility and depth of university study
guides made it difficult to get a good understanding on all the PM courses available, and the
inconsistency of learning objectives descriptions made comparison difficult, but it did
underscore a lack of consistent pedagogical framework for PM in universities. To fully
outline the depth of PM understanding in Dutch universities further research can be done
through interviews and auditing classes. However, as courses change from year to year
(hopefully as a result of this research) such research may not be as pertinent as further
development into a PM theory which can form a solid grounding for a PM pedagogy.
87
Further research can also be done in the area of what is necessary for an effective PM
education. This descriptive study has laid the groundwork for hypothesis to be tested on
regarding the need for theory, the importance of understanding complexity and how
techniques, methodology and different types of skills influence weigh into the development of
a holistically education and personally fulfilled project manager.
A final limitation in this study entails corporate culture. While national culture was a topic of
discussion, there was little attention to corporate culture besides the affirmation that it exists,
is a domain of relevance and cultural management has tangential relation to soft skills. Some
respondents form the pilot survey and the survey proper brought the subject up and rightly so
as corporate culture is such an integral part of organizational success, and therefore project
success. Further research into the possibility of educating for corporate culture and it’s role
within projects should be pursued.

88
References
Achterkamp, M. C. & Vos, J. F. J. (2008) ‘Investigating the use of the stakeholder notion in
project management literature, a meta-analysis’, International Journal of Project
Management, 26(7), pp. 749-757, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.10.001
(Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Alam, M., Gale, A., Brown, M. & Kidd, C. (2008) ‘The development and delivery of an
industry led project management professional development programme: a case study in
project management education and success management’, International Journal of Project
Management, 26(3), pp. 223–237, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.12.005
Archibald, R.D. (1989) ‘Project management education and training in the USA’,
International Journal of Project Management, 7(4), pp.199-200, Elsevier [Online]. DOI:
10.1016/0263-7863(89)90003-3 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Ashleigh, M., Ojiako, U., Chipulu, M. & Wang, J.K. (2012) ‘Critical learning themes in
project management education: Implications for blended learning’, International Journal
of Project Management, 30(2), pp. 153–161, Elsevier [Online]. DOI:
10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.05.002 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Barros, M. O., Dantas, A. R., Veronese, G. O. & Werner, C. M. L. (2006) ‘Model-driven
game development: experience and model enhancements in software project management
education’, Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 11(4), pp. 411–421, Wiley
Online Library [Online]. DOI: 10.1002/spip.279 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).

89
Bartoška, J., Flégl, M. & Jarkovská, M. (2012) “IPMA Standard Competence Scope in Project
Management Education,” International Education Studies, 5(6), p. p167.
Berggren, C. & Söderlund, J. (2008) ‘Rethinking project management education: social twists
and knowledge co-production’, International Journal of Project Management, 26(3), pp.
286–296, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.01.004 (Accessed: 26 July
2012).
Bourne, L. & Walker, D.H.T. (2004) ‘Advancing project management in learning
organizations’, The Learning Organization, 11(3), pp. 226-243, Emerald Group Publishing
Limited [Online]. DOI: 10.1108/09696470410532996 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Bredillet, C., Yatim, F. & Ruiz, P. (2010) ‘Project management deployment: The role of
cultural factors,’ International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier, 28(2), pp. 183–
193.
Brent, C. (2011) ‘How much time are respondents willing to spend on your survey?’,
SurveyMonkyBlog, 14 February. Available at:
http://blog.surveymonkey.com/blog/2011/02/14/survey_completion_times/ (Accessed: 26
July 2012).
Buckle, P. and Thomas, J. (2003) ‘Deconstructing project management: a gender analysis of
project management guidelines,’ International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier,
21(6), pp. 433–441.

90
Carbone, T. A. (2006) ‘Developing project and program managers: a blended learning
approach’, 17th IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, 22-24
May, Boston, Massachusetts, New York: SEMI/IEEE, pp. 353–357, IEEE Xplore [Online].
DOI: 10.1109/ASMC.2006.1638782 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Chipulu, M., Ojiako, U., Ashleigh, M. & Maguire, S. (2011) ‘An analysis of interrelationships
between project management and student-experience constructs’, Project Management
Journal, 42(3), pp. 91–101, Wiley Online Library [Online]. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.20225
Clarke, N. (2010) ‘Emotional intelligence and its relationship to transformational leadership
and key project manager competences’, Project Management Journal, 41(2), pp. 5–20,
Wiley Online Library [Online]. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.20162 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A. (1990) ‘Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning
and innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), pp. 128-152, JSTOR [Online].
Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2393553 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Cooke-Davies, T.J. & Arzymanow, A. (2003) ‘The maturity of project management in
different industries: an investigation into variations between project management models’,
International Journal of Project Management, 21(6), pp. 471-478, Elsevier [Online]. DOI:
10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00084-4.
Córdoba, J. R. & Piki, A. (2011) ‘Facilitating project management education through groups
as systems’, International Journal of Project Management, 30(1), pp. 83-93, Elsevier
[Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.02.011 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).

91
Crawford, L. (2005) ‘Senior management perceptions of project management competence’,
International Journal of Project Management, 23(1), pp. 7–16, Elsevier [Online]. DOI:
Crawford, L., Morris, P., Thomas, J. & Winter, M. (2006) ‘Practitioner development: from
trained technicians to reflective practitioners’, International Journal of Project
Management, 24(8), pp. 722–733, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.09.010
Crawford L. & Pollack J. (2004) ‘Hard and soft projects: a framework for analysis’,
Crawford, L. & Pollack, J. (2007) ‘How generic are project management knowledge and
practice?’, Project Management Journal, 38(1), pp.87-96, Business Source Premier
[Online]. Available at:
http://ehis.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&hid=1&sid=0041fe63-8919-
4156-a4e9-134d1f7a3276%40sessionmgr13 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Dantas, A. R., Barros, M. O. & Werner, C. M. L. (2004) ‘A simulation-based game for project
management experiential learning’, 16th International Conference on Software Engineering
and Knowledge Engineering, 22-24 June, Banff, Canada. Singapore: World Scientific
Publishing Co., pp. 19–24. [Online] Available at:
http://reuse.cos.ufrj.br/prometeus/publicacoes/SEKE04-AlexDantas.pdf (Accessed: 26 July
2012).
92
de Bakker, K., Boonstra, A. & Wortmann, H. (2010) ‘Does risk management contribute to IT
project success? A meta-analysis of empirical evidence’, International Journal of Project
de Bony, J. (2010) ‘Project management and national culture: a Dutch–French case’,
Delft University of Technology (2012) Study guide. http://www.studiegids.tudelft.nl
(Accessed: 24 April 2013)
Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y. (eds.) (2003) The landscape of qualitative research: theories and
issues. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Dixon, G. (2011) ‘Service learning and integrated, collaborative project management’,
Project Management Journal, 42(1), pp. 42–58, Wiley Online Library [Online]. DOI:
10.1002/pmj.20206 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Du, S. M., Johnson, R.D. & Keil, M. (2004) ‘Project management courses in IS graduate
programs: what is being taught?’, Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(2), pp.
181-188, JISE [Online]. Available at: http://jise.org/Volume15/15-2/Contents-15-2.htm

93
Edelenbos, J. & Teisman, G. R. (2008) ‘Public – private partnership: on the edge of project
and process management. Insights from Dutch practice: the Sijtwende spatial development
project’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 26(3), pp. 614–626, Pion
Ltd [Online]. DOI: 10.1068/c66m (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Erasmus University Rotterdam (2012) Study guide. http://rsm.sin-
online.nl/studiegids/?action2=show_course&course=BKM06MI (Accessed: 24 April 2013)
Filippov, S., Mooi, H. & van der Weg, R. (2010) ‘The strategic role of project portfolio
management: evidence from the Netherlands’, Proceedings of the 7th International
Conference on Innovation & Management, 4-5 December, Wuhan, China, ICIM, pp. 648-
659 [Online]. Available at: http://www.pucsp.br/icim/ingles/proceedings/papers_2010.html
(Accessed: 26 July 2012)
Gale, A. & Brown, M. (2003) ‘Project management professional development: an industry led
programme’, Journal of Management Development, 22(5), pp. 410–425, Emerald Group
Publishing Limited [Online]. DOI: 10.1108/02621710310474769 (Accessed: 26 July
2012).
Glasbergen, P. & Driessen, P. P. J. (2005) ‘Interactive planning of infrastructure: the changing
role of Dutch project management’, Environment and Planning C: Government and
Policy, 23(2), pp. 263 – 277, Pion Ltd [Online]. DOI: 10.1068/c0441 (Accessed: 26 July
2012).
94
Greenbank, P. (2003) ‘The role of values in educational research: the case for reflexivity’,
British Educational Research Journal, 29(6), pp. 791-801, Taylor & Francis [Online].
DOI: 10.1080/0141192032000137303 (Accessed: 26 July 2012)
Grey, C. & Mitev, N. (1995) “Management Education,” Management Learning, Sage
Publications, 26(1), pp. 73–90.
Grit, R.. Projectmanagement, 6th ed., Groningen, Noordhoff Uitgevers B.V.
Hicks, R. E. (1996) ‘Experiential learning in a postgraduate project management programme’,
Education+ Training, 38(3), pp. 28–38, Emerald Group Publishing Limited [Online]. DOI:
10.1108/00400919610117399 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Hodgson, D. (2002) ‘Disciplining the professional: the case of project management’, Journal
of Management Studies, 39(6), pp. 803–821, Wiley Online Library [Online]. DOI:
10.1111/1467-6486.00312 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Hofstede, G. (1983) ‘Cultural dimensions for project management’, International Journal of
Project Management, 1(1), pp. 41-48, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/0263-
7863(83)90038-8 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Holzmann, V., (2012) ‘A meta-analysis of brokering knowledge in project management’,
International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier [Online].
DOI:10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.05.002 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).

95
Hutcheson, J. (1984) ‘Educating project managers for the construction industry in Australia’,
International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier, 2(4), pp. 220–224.
Illeris, K. (1991) ‘Project education in Denmark’, International Journal of Project
Management, 9(1), pp. 45-48, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/0263-7863(91)90055-Z
I amsterdam (2012) Majority of multinationals have Dutch offices. Available at:
http://www.iamsterdam.com/tax%20haven (Accessed: 11 November 2012)
IPMA-NL (2012) Laatste Nieuws. Available at: http://www.ipma-nl.nl/home (Accessed: 26
July 2012).
Jaafar, M. & Aziz, A. R. A. (2008) ‘Entrepreneurship education in developing country:
exploration on its necessity in the construction programme’, Journal of Engineering,
Design and Technology, 6(2), pp. 178–189, Emerald Group Publishing Limited [Online].
DOI: 10.1108/17260530810891306 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Jugdev, K. (2004) ‘Through the looking glass: examining theory development in project
management with the resource-based view lens’, Project Management Journal, 35(3),
pp.15-26, Business Source Premier [Online]. Available at:
http://ehis.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&hid=6&sid=e632c0ba-8e6c-
4c24-88ee-aacb4753228b%40sessionmgr10 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Koppenjan, J., Veeneman, W., van der Voort, H, ten Heuvelhof, E. & Leijten, M. (2011)
‘Competing management approaches in large engineering projects: the Dutch

96
RandstadRail project’, International Journal of Project Management, 29(6), pp. 740-750,
Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.07.003 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Koskela, L. & Howell, G. (2002) ‘The underlying theory of project management is obsolete,’
Proceedings of the PMI Research Conference, pp. 293–302.
Koskela, L.J. & Howell, G. (2008) ‘The underlying theory of project management is
obsolete,’ Engineering Management Review, 36(2), pp. 22-34, IEEE Xplore [Online]. DOI:
10.1109/EMR.2008.4534317 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Knoepfel, H. (1989) ‘Project management education at a Swiss technical university’,
10.1016/0263-7863(89)90006-9 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Lalonde, P. L., Bourgault, M. and Findeli, A. (2010) ‘Building pragmatist theories of PM
practice: Theorizing the act of project management,’ Project Management Journal, Wiley
Online Library, 41(5), pp. 21–36.
Leiden University (2012) Study guide.
https://studiegids.leidenuniv.nl/en/courses/show/34133/system_development_project_man
agement (Accessed: 24 April 2013)
Martin, A. (2000) ‘A simulation engine for custom project management education,’
International Journal of Project Management, Elsevier, 18(3), pp. 201–213.

97
Mengel, T. (2008) “Outcome-based project management education for emerging leaders-A
case study of teaching and learning project management,’ International Journal of Project
Management, Elsevier, 26(3), pp. 275–285.
Meredith J.R. & Mantel, S.J. (2009) Project management: a managerial approach. 7th ed.
Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ
Morris, P.W.G. (1994) The Management of Projects, London: Thomas Telford.
Morris, P. W. G. (2000) ‘Researching the unanswered questions of project management’, PMI
Research Conference, June 21-24, Paris, France. Sylva: Project Management Institute.
[Online]. Available at:
http://www.indeco.co.uk/filestore/ResearchingtheUnansweredQuestionsofProjectManagem
ent.pdf (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Neuman, W.L. (2000) Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. 4th
ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
NVAO (n.d.) NVAO-databank geaccrediteerde bachelor- en masteropleidingen. Available at:
http://www.nvao.net/home.html (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Nyenrode Business University (2012) Programme finder.
http://www.nyenrode.nl/Education/Pages/Program-Finder.aspx (Accessed: 24 April
2013)
98
Oerlemans, L., Bakker, R., Knoben, J. & De Vries, N. (2011) ‘The Nature and Prevalence of
Inter-Organizational Project Ventures: Evidence from a large scale Field Study in the
Netherlands 2006-2009,’ International Journal of Project Management, 29(6), 781-794
Elsevier
Ojiako, U., Ashleigh, M., Chipulu, M. & Maguire, S. (2011a) ‘Learning and teaching
challenges in project management’, International Journal of Project Management, 29(3),
pp. 268-278, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.03.008 (Accessed: 26 July
2012).
Ojiako, U., Ashleigh, M., Wang, J. K. & Chipulu, M. (2011b) ‘The criticality of transferable
skills development and virtual learning environments used in the teaching of project
management’, Project Management Journal, 42(4), pp. 76-86, Wiley Online Library
[Online]. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.20240 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Pant, I. & Baroudi, B. (2008) ‘Project management education: the human skills imperative’,
Papke-Shields, K.E, Beise, C. & Quan, J. (2010) ‘Do project managers practice what they
preach, and does it matter to project success?’, International Journal of Project
Pfahl, D., Laitenberger, O., Ruhe, G., Dorsch, J. & Krivobokova, T. (2004) ‘Evaluating the
learning effectiveness of using simulations in software project management education:

99
results from a twice replicated experiment,’ Information and Software Technology,
Elsevier, 46(2), pp. 127–147.
PMI Netherlands Chapter (2011) Chapter News. Available at: http://www.pmi-netherlands-
chapter.org/index.php/news/chapter-news (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
PMI Netherlands Summit. (2012) Available at: http://www.pmi-netherlands-summit.com/
Reijniers, J. J. A. M. (1994) ‘Organization of public-private partnership projects: the timely
prevention of pitfalls’, International Journal of Project Management, 12(3), pp. 137-142,
Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/0263-7863(94)90028-0 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Reynolds, M. (1998) ‘Reflection and critical reflection in management learning,’
Management Learning, 29(2), Sage Publications, pp. 183–200.
Rezaee, Z., Szendi, J. Z. & Elmore, R. C. (1997) ‘International accounting education: insights
from academicians and practitioners’, The International Journal of Accounting, 32(1), pp.
99–117, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/S0020-7063(97)90007-8 (Accessed: 26 July
2012).
Robson, C. (2002) Real world research, a resource for social scientists and practitioner-
researchers. 2nd ed. Malden: Blackwell Publishing

100
Saukkonen, S. (1992) ‘Software project management education —experiences of training full-
time professionals’, Annual Review in Automatic Programming, 16(2), pp. 139-142,
Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/0066-4138(92)90022-H (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Sheffield, J., Sankaran, S. & Haslett, T. (2012) ‘Systems thinking: taming complexity in
project management’, On the Horizon, 20(2), pp. 126–136, Emerald Group Publishing
Limited [Online]. DOI: 10.1108/10748121211235787 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Shenhar, A. J. and Dvir, D. (1996) ‘Toward a typological theory of project management,’
Research Policy, 25(4), Elsevier, pp. 607–632.
Sherman, W.R. (1987) ‘Internationalizing the accounting curriculum’, Journal of Accounting
Education, 5(2), pp. 259–275, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/0748-5751(87)90022-4
Snider, K. F. & Nissen, M. E. (2003) ‘Beyond the body of knowledge: a knowledge-flow
approach to project management theory and practice’, Project Management Journal, 34(2),
pp. 4–12, Emerald Group Publishing Limited [Online]. Available at:
http://links.emeraldinsight.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/ref/32AP837 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Sokolewicza, M., Louters, T & Otten, A. (2011) ‘Modern integrated river flood management
for climate change in the Netherlands: the IJssel Delta project’, International Journal of
River Basin Management, 9(2), pp. 141-149, Taylor & Francis [Online]. DOI:
10.1080/15715124.2011.607824 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).

101
Špundak, M., & Fertalj, K. & Damir, K. (2008) ‘Is Critical Chain Project Management Really
a Novel Technique?’, in Proceedings of the 19th Central European Conference on
Information and Intelligent Systems, pp. 227-234
Starkweather, J. A. & Stevenson, D. H. (2011) ‘PMP® certification as a core competency:
necessary but not sufficient’, Project Management Journal, 42(1), pp. 31–41, Wiley
Online Library [Online]. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.20174 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Stevenson, D.H., & Starkweather, J.A. (2010) ‘PM critical competency index: IT execs prefer
soft skills’, International Journal of Project Management, 28(7), pp. 663-671, Elsevier
[Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.11.008 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Stoyan, R. (2008) ‘PM for all™ – intensive small group teaching in leadership and PM, for
many students at low cost’, International Journal of Project Management, 26(3), pp. 297-
303, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.02.006 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Thomas, J. & Mengel, T. (2008) ‘Preparing project managers to deal with complexity:
advanced project management education’, International Journal of Project Management,
26(3), pp. 304–315, Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.01.001 (Accessed:
26 July 2012).
Todhunter, B.J. (2003) ’The search for a pedagogy for postgraduate education in the emerging
profession of project management’, 1st International Conference on Pedagogies and
Learning: New Meanings for a New Millennium, 1-4 October, Toowoomba, Australia,
USQ [Online]. Available at: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/6636/ (Accessed: 26 July 2012).

102
Tsang, E. W. K. (1997) ‘Organizational learning and the learning organization: a dichotomy
between descriptive and prescriptive research’, Human Relations, 50(1), pp. 73–89,
Springer [Online]. DOI: 10.1023/A:1016905516867 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
University of Amsterdam (2012) Study guide.
http://studiegids.uva.nl/web/uva/sgs/nl/c/10110.html (Accessed: 24 April 2013)
Utrecht University (2012) Study guide. Available at:
https://www.osiris.universiteitutrecht.nl/osistu_ospr/OnderwijsCatalogus.do (Accessed: 24
April 2013)
VU University Amsterdam (2012) Study guide. http://www.vu.nl/nl/studiegids/2012-
2013/index.asp (Accessed: 24 April 2013)
Walta, H. (1995) ‘Dutch project-management body-of-knowledge policy’, International
Journal of Project Management, 13(2), pp. 101-108, Elsevier [Online]. DOI:
10.1016/0263-7863(95)00002-8 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Wirth, I. (1992) ‘Project-management education: current issues and future trends’,
10.1016/0263-7863(92)90074-J (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
White, D. & Fortune, J. (2002) ‘Current practice in project management - an empirical study’,
10.1016/S0263-7863(00)00029-6
103
Woodward, J.F. (1983) ‘Project management education — levels of understanding and
misunderstanding’, International Journal of Project Management, 1(3), pp. 173-178,
Elsevier [Online]. DOI: 10.1016/0263-7863(83)90024-8 (Accessed: 26 July 2012).
Zwikael, O. & Gonen, A. (2007) ‘Project execution game (PEG): training towards managing
unexpected events’, Journal of European Industrial Training, 31(6), pp. 495–512, Emerald
Group Publishing Limited [Online]. DOI: 10.1108/03090590710772668 (Accessed: 26
July 2012).
104
Appendices
Appendix 1: First population survey questionnaire
(Page breaks in the survey denoted by the separation bar.)

105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
Appendix 2: Participation Information Statement
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION STATEMENT
(1) What is the study about?
You are invited to participate in a study of the educational needs of the

Dutch PM community and the ability of Dutch universities to provide for
those needs.
(2) Who is carrying out the study?
The study is being conducted by Fabio A.J. Luelmo and will form the basis
for the degree of MSc Project Management at The University of Liverpool
under the supervision of Dissertation Advisor Lee Nordgren.
(3) What does the study involve?
The study involves answering a survey questionnaire about your affinity

with project management, perception of project management education in
the Netherlands and vies on what is important in project management
education.
(4) How much time will the study take?
This study will approximately take 15 to 20 minutes to complete.
(5) Can I withdraw from the study?
Being in this study is completely voluntary - you are not under any
obligation to consent and - if you do consent - you can withdraw at any
time without affecting your relationship with The University of Liverpool
Being in this study is completely voluntary and you are not under any
obligation to consent to complete the survey. Submitting a completed
survey is an indication of your consent to participate in the study. You can
withdraw any time prior to submitting your completed survey. Once you
have submitted your questionnaire/survey anonymously, your responses
cannot be withdrawn.
(6) Will anyone else know the results?
Input of the study will be strictly confidential and only the researchers will
have access to the information. No personably identifiable information is
asked in this survey. The dissertation report including the results of the
study and will be accessible to the public through the University of
Liverpool’s dissertation archives for interested parties to access.
119
(7) Will the study benefit me?
Participants of the survey will be able to request a link to the dissertation

report at the end of the study which will enable them to form a greater
understanding of project management education in the Netherlands and of
the project management community. Additionally, participants can be
content with the knowledge that they helped in a small way the furthering
of the science of project management and the education of the researcher.
(8) Can I tell other people about the study?
Yes, please.
(9) What if I require further information about the study or my

involvement in it?
Please feel free to contact the researcher Fabio A.J. Luelmo:

pm.edu.nl@gmail.com
(10) What if I have a complaint or any concerns?
Any person with concerns or complaints about the conduct of a research

study can contact Research Governance Officer, Legal Risk and
Compliance, University of Liverpool: ethics@liv.ac.uk, +44 (0)151 794
2000
This information sheet is for you to keep

How The Dutch Project Management Communi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

How The Dutch Project Management Communi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

i

How the Dutch Project Management Community’s

Needs Can Be Met Through University Education

Fabio A.J. Luelmo

The University of Liverpool

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of:

Master of Science in Project Management

How the Dutch Project Management Community’s

Needs Can Be Met Through University Education

Fabio A.J. Luelmo

Science in Project Management.

Dissertation Advisor Date

the language, ideas, expressions or writings of another.

Fabio Luelmo Date

Tilburg, my manager, who had to put up with me throughout my entire Masters.

thought I would not make it, but hope springs eternal.

quality of PM education, and PM community leaders, certification institutions and trainers

who wish to understand the role of universities in PM.

needs and perceptions from the survey.

managers as places of project management learning, lacking in advanced concepts and

management education was not significant enough in non-technical universities to have

representation in relevant faculties were project management is of importance, such as

business and IT faculties.

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. vii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ ix

CHAPTER 1: AIMS OF THE DISSERTATION ...............................................................1

1.1 Background .....................................................................................................................1

1.3 Objectives and research questions .................................................................................3

1.4 Structure of the dissertation ...........................................................................................5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................7

2.1 Pedagogical issues in project management ....................................................................7

2.2 Project management education components ...............................................................15

2.3 Project management education methods .....................................................................18

2.4 Project management in the Netherlands ......................................................................22

2.5 Summary of literature review ......................................................................................25

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................26

3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................26

3.2 Participants ...................................................................................................................26

3.3 Data gathering ..............................................................................................................29

3.3.1 First population: survey questionnaire ......................................................................29

3.4 Data management .........................................................................................................31

3.5 Operational definitions and variables ..........................................................................31

3.6 Data analysis .................................................................................................................35

3.7 Trustworthiness ............................................................................................................37

3.8 Role of the researcher ...................................................................................................40

3.9 Weaknesses and assumptions .......................................................................................41

3.10 Methodology summary ...............................................................................................42

CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS ..............................................................44

4.1 Results of questionnaire................................................................................................44

4.2 Results of external secondary data collection ..............................................................62

4.3 Conclusion of results .....................................................................................................68

CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS......................................................................................69

5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................69

5.2 Analysis of survey questionnaire data .........................................................................69

5.3 Analysis of external secondary data .............................................................................77

5.3.2 Non-PM specific courses .........................................................................................78

5.4. Triangulation ...............................................................................................................82

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................86

6.1 Key findings ..................................................................................................................86

6.2 Limitations and future research...................................................................................86

APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 104

Appendix 1: First population survey questionnaire ........................................................ 104

Appendix 2: Participation Information Statement ......................................................... 118