Project Management Knowledge Areas

Project management can be regarded as a discipline comprising of wide ranges of various fields of knowledge. Important areas of project management comprise of quality schedule, communication, stakeholders, project risks, project scope, resources etc. In accordance to the opinion of Turner (2014), project management methodologies assist in augmenting efficiency of a project manager in order to successfully managing a project. In this regard, it can be stated that project methodologies are considered to be heterogeneous in its configuration and portions of a methodology playing a role in supporting of a project in its lifecycle so as to attain the stated objectives of a project. According to the opinion of Burkey (2013), project methodologies have been developed to address low success rates of project.

According to Pollack (2007), project management can be defined as a management philosophy that is regarded to include functionalities of business processes. It is considered as an emerging discipline and included in different professions such as consulting, construction, pharmaceuticals, government agencies, information systems, and others. Prominent areas of applicability of project management are considered to be integral in project scopes and risks accessibility, quality and schedule of budgets etc. (Balaji and Murugaiyan, 2012). The knowledge areas of project management offer to define project scope to be integral in project management activities involving risk management. Contrary to the above-mentioned definition, Pant and Baroudi (2008) states that knowledge areas of project management are developed through practicing of relationship skills that complements effectiveness in technical and soft or communication skills. In this regard, the scholars have further stated with instance taken from university educators pertinent to develop the soft and hard skills among the students of project management.

According to Blomquist, e al. (2010), tactic knowledge in project management is considered to be a domain of experiential, cognitive and subjective learning. On the other hand, explicit knowledge is considered to be a domain enhancing the well-documented and accessible technical knowledge. As per the opinion of Pant and Baroudi (2008), often companies overlook assets existent within it housed under tactic knowledge. Tactic knowledge under project management are intangible assets such as hunches, intuition, insights, images, analogies, values etc. Ika (2009) stated project scope management can be regarded as a knowledge area involving in documenting and determining list of project tasks, deliverables, functions, features, costs etc. Thus, it can be considered as project management objectives to be achieved and deliver the projects in a timely manner. The other knowledge area of project management is considered to be project time management that achieves to control, and monitor spent within a project (Balaji and Murugaiyan, 2012). Thus, this area of knowledge in project management aims to record times in a project, resolve any issues etc.

Project time management comprises of planning schedule, define activities and subsequently sequence them, estimate activity resources, duration and development of schedules. According to the opinion of K. Kerzner and H.R. Kerzner (2017), project integration management can be considered as a branch of knowledge that includes a collection procedure required to ensure varied elements in the project to be properly coordinated (Kerzner and Kerzner, 2017). Such a knowledge area in project management requires involvement of trade-offs among available alternatives, objectives so as to exceed or meet stakeholders’ expectations and needs. Meredithand Mantel (2011) have also stated that project human resource management is inclusive of organization, leading managing a team of project managers (Meredith and Mantel Jr, 2011). Project team comprises of people with assigned responsibilities and roles for completion of a project. Project team member possess various skill sets, having full-time and part-time access to project management. The knowledge area of project management in the sphere of project management includes plan human resource management. According to K. Kerzner and H.R. Kerzner (2017), the process is inclusive of documentation and identification of roles and responsibilities, reporting relationships, required skills and creation of a plan for staff management.

Project Management Methodologies

In accordance to the opinion of De Bakker, Boonstra and Wortmann (2010), project risk management is another area of project management that initiates with identification of risks with the help of team brainstorming, examination and systematic methodologies (De Bakker, Boonstra and Wortmann, 2010). Identified risks includes technical, programmatic, corporate etc. in nature. The second stage of risk management processes in project management is considered to evaluation of identified risks into quantitative and qualitative ones and subsequently prioritizing them in accordance to its significant implications on the project (Cobb, 2011). The third step of project management is plan risk response process and subsequently monitors the risks in a systematic regime and schedules. According to Dybå, Dingsøyr and Moe (2014), one of the integral steps of project risk management is communication with stakeholders on the risks associated with the project and the associated quality or costs as well as exposures response plans in details.

In accordance to the opinion of Burke (2013), project management methodologies assist in enhancing ability of project managers to successful manage a project. There exist varied project management methodologies defining adaptive as well as predictive methodologies existent in varied manners. Reflective PMMS can successfully contribute towards a project’s success. Adaptive methodology, on the other hand, consists of ad-hoe modified in accordance to changed project situations. As per adaptive and predictive methodologies, the scholar has further stated that predictive project management set is inclusive of a pre-defined range of protocols, methods, procedures along with including definite step (Castro-Lacouture, et al., 2009). In this concern, it can be additionally stated that some of the project management methodologies are Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBoK), Waterfall Model, PRINCE2 and Agile Methodology for Project Management.

According to the opinion of Rose (2013), PMBoK (Project Management Body of Knowledge) stands or a standard set of knowledge where terminology for guidelines are given for project management (Rose, 2013). In this regard, it can be further stated that skills and competencies of project managers such as instructional design professionals and others initiate methodology in the project execution as documented in PMBOK. The set of knowledge as depicted under PMBOK sets guide for project management inclusive of initiation, planning, controlling, monitoring, and executing. This kind of project management methodology denotes an entire theory of quantity encompassing learning and practices in project management inclusive of formal written structures of practice (Wysocki, 2012). This methodology further offers path to project management success by denoting guides such as WBS or work breakdown structure and determination of critical path.

The other management disciples defining the path of PMBOK in attaining success in project management can be considered to be budgeting, planning methods, financial forecasting, management science and organizational behavior. With regard to the opinion of Bryde, Broquetas, and Volm (2013), it can be stated that building information modelling or BIM in case of construction of a building can be considered be an integral part of building’s performance. From this instance, the scholar wanted to convey that in implementation process of BIM time savings influence overall project duration and also has positive impacts on the schedule’s critical path, increasing the time in the way. In this context, it can be stated that proper determination of critical path under a project management can help in successful attaining of modelling time to convert drawing in the paper into reality. Castro-Lacouture et al. (2009) in this context have expressed their opinion on CPM or critical path method can be considered a technique which is used in project management in construction industry. Project managers often use software for commercial projects such as Microsoft Project, Primavera Project Planner (P3) etc. to outline the critical path for a project. Thus, it can be stated that the role of critical path outline in the success of project management is far-fetched.

PMBoK

Castro-Lacouture et al. (2009) have further stated that labour productivity has increased in exponential manner when resources were properly allocated and managed as per CPM under PMBOK methodology¹¹. In this regard, the scholars have additionally stated that conceptualization of projects fails to stimulate reality if proper incorporation of data in the project management software is not done accordingly. The scholars have further added that the significance of CPM in success of undertaken project is considered to be doubtful due to various complications in the process such as delays with regard to project completion, material shortages, early initiation time, crash costs, and increment in normal costs. O’Connor and Laporte (2012) have stated that WBS and its associated components delivers concrete and precise deliverables so that the project manager is well aware of what it is required to be attained. The scholars have additionally stated that WBS cannot be utilized to replace a project’s schedule or plan as it is a simple breakdown of deliverables. Furthermore, change control is utmost necessity in case of WBS control and to understand its scope of success in project management.

In tunes of the above-mentioned opinion, Marchewka (2014) have stated that work breakdown structure enables managers to work effectively and attain success in project management. As a project is considered to be adorned by time-limited activities, hence WBS offers to consistently execute the projects. The fundamental purpose of WBS is the reduction of complicated activities for a collection of tasks. The project management becomes important when oversees activities is considered to be complex and thus WBS assist measuring specific costs related to such activities. WBS is considered as a success measurement tool and track progress of the project schedule. The scope of WBS as a project management methodology lies in tracking progress of a project schedule having clearly defined limits (Wells, 2012).

Joslin and Müller (2015) have stated that PMM or Project Management Methodology denotes enhancement of project effectiveness and increasing the prospects of success. Hence, PMMs can be considered to be supporting project managers in attaining more predictable success rates in projects. Impact of PMMs and its qualification standard depicts project success in project management. Internationally recognized PMMs that has contributed fruitfully in defining the success of project management are SDLC or System Development Life Cycle, PMI, PMBOK, ERICKSON’S props and others (Wysocki, 2012). The scholar has further stated that PMMs can be divided into customized and standardized PMMs. A combination of the above-mentioned PMMs can also be implemented in a project that will enhance the prospect of attaining success in a fruitful manner by the project manager. In this context, the scholar has further stated that comprehensiveness of PMMs is also considered as a success factor. If PMMs of any organization is not complete or is missing in its project management elements, then the success of the project might be impacted due to lack of project effectiveness and quality.

The scholars have also forwarded the limitation of applicability of PMMs in the aspects of its tools, techniques, processes and methods. PMMs vary in appropriateness and completeness from one organization to another. All PMMs are not applicable in certain kinds of projects and hence it is not feasible to look at a certain kind of practice under it. PMMs is considered to bring standardization, quality and customization in the project management activities which ultimately constitutes as a component of success in project management (Wysocki, 2012). As customization under PMMs offer variations, thus, project managers often report that better results can be obtained when the processes are tailored in accordance to the stated objectives. In this context, the scholars have forwarded the fact that the organization or industry that are aligned with context factors. The scholars have also stated that ‘owners’ of practices related to project management often perceive to achieve corporate objectives and thus follow the way of corporate control and subsequent standardization (Lianying, Jing and Xinxing, 2012). PMOs or Project management offices are focused on standardizing of organizational PMM per project. Combination of both customization and standardization leads to decline in impact of different components and consequently attain success in varied contexts.

Waterfall Model

According to Heagney (2016), the overall lifecycle of PMBoK comprises of four stages initiating, planning, executing & controlling and closing. The first stage known as initiating comprises of developing a charter for the project followed by identification of stakeholders so as to ensure the successful accomplishment of the project objectives. Furthermore, the planning process takes into consideration development of a suitable plan for the purpose of ensuring effective management of the overall project activities within the scope of operation thereby identified. Harrison and Lock (2017) stated that the planning process comprises of many sub processes like WBS, scheduling, cost estimation, quality management, budgets as well as identification of human resources required for the purpose of accomplishing the widespread activities. It also takes into consideration identifying and analyzing risks followed by identification of suitable resources for successfully overcoming the uncertainty situation. In the execution, monitoring and controlling process, the process encompasses validation and controlling each and every aspect associated with costs, quality, risks, stakeholder engagement as well as communication all throughout the process (Harrison and Dennis Lock, 2017). Finally, in the closing process, each and every activity associated with the individual project phases and their respective procurements are closed down to declare final completion of the entire project taken into consideration. The following figure provides a detailed illustration of the various processes associated with PMBoK. 

The waterfall project management methodology comprises of a large number of stages, successfully accomplishment of which step by step seems to provide high degree of operational effectiveness (Alshamrani and Bahattab, 2015). According to Balaji and Sundararajan (2012), the operational aspect of waterfall methodology seems to provide linear and rigid project development phases, with no room for making any change or modification to the processes. Waterfall model has been identified to be one of the notable aspects of software development used in the modern environmental circumstances. However, the model fails considerably in dealing with the changes in requirement that are likely to take place in relation to operational and technological changes (Špundak, 2014). A complete and detailed description of the various steps followed by waterfall model is as follows: 

The above diagram has provided a detailed overview of the processes that needs to be accomplished in relation to developing software, in accordance with the project management initiative of an organization. In the requirement stage, the organizations primarily focus on analyzing in great detail the overall needs of the software development process followed by documenting the processes that needs to be done (Heagney, 2016). According to Munassar and Govardhan (2010), the design stage encompasses the processes associated with identifying the technology to be implemented followed by developing a suitable work flowchart that needs to be followed. The subsequent stages emphasize on developing suitable codes to solve the particular problem of focus followed by testing it to identify any form of errors, bug or discrepancy. Bassil (2012) stated that it also takes into consideration providing adequate degree of help and assistance to largely accomplish by its objective of ensuring significant maintenance level.

PRINCE2

As opined by Munassar and Govardhan (2010), One of the significant aspects associated with the use of waterfall model in relation to project management is that project managers finds it to be simplest and convenient method that can be employed in relation to developing a software. Furthermore, Alshamrani and Bahattab (2015) stated that the high degree of rigidity offered by the model seems to be highly significant in relation to ensuring successful accomplishment of the project objectives. It is mainly due to the assurance associated with successfully complying with the specific deliverables in each of the stages and reviewing of the degree of effectiveness accomplished (Špundak, 2014). However, the method seems to be highly difficult in case of rectifying any mistake made in the previous stages. The rigid step by step process does not allow project managers to go back to the previous stage once it has been successfully accomplished (Ghosh, et al., 2012).

Project in Controlled Environment (PRINCE2) is one of the leading project management methodologies that tend to take into consideration a de factor process mode of operation (Ghosh, et al., 2012). The method is of immense significance on focusing the overall justification associated with the existence of an organization followed by development of a suitable structure in relation to formulate an effective team. The PRINCE2 method largely takes into consideration a product-based approach in relation to developing an effective plan to the process of project management. According to Lianying, Jing and Xinxing (2012), the PRINCE2 methodology of project management significantly takes into consideration segregating the overall project scope into several stages. Each of the stages signifies the one that can be easily managed and controlled in comparison to others. Furthermore, the method allows enforcing high degree of flexibility to each and every stage that has been identified in relation to a project taken into consideration.

As per the research of Ghosh et al. (2012), he stated that PRINCE2 is known to have possessed immense capability in relation to providing greater access and control to the resources that are likely to be used in future as a part of developing a project. It also ensures high degree of effectiveness in managing the overall aspect of business operations through the successful management of risks and uncertainty. The project managers are identified to have greater access to the operational scope underlying the project management operational activity of an organization thereby considered. The following figure provides the overall working procedure of a PRINCE2 method of project management: 

the aspects that an organization needs to consider for the successful accomplishment of the project objectives. Each of the processes underlying PRINCE2 seems to strike an effective balance in relation to considering the overall business cope, organizational competency, change adaptation, risk management and adherence to high quality standards. According to Marchewka (2014), the method is largely capable of providing high degree of consistency in relation to accomplishment of the project objectives right from the initial stage to the final delivery of the product thus considered. Furthermore, the PRINCE2 method provides effective control to each of the three stages of product development, start, midway and final completion. As opined by Špundak (2014), it also encompasses the process associated with exhibiting adequate efforts on monitoring and reviewing the overall progress made in relation to the project work thereby considered in accordance to the plan developed and implemented initially. Wells (2012) stated that the most significant aspect of the process is that it tends to provide high degree of assurance in terms of handling risks and quality management.

Agile Methodology

According to Bentley (2012), the agile project methodology is looked forward to as processes that take into consideration a series of iterative processes for the purpose of successfully delivery each and every requirement of a project. Each of the process in an agile methodology experiences incremental throughput right from the initial planning stage to the successful accomplishment of the project objectives. Tore, Dingsøyr, and Moe (2014) stated that the core operational objective of agile project management methodology largely focuses on exhibiting high degree of trust, flexibility, communication, coordination, collaboration and empowerment. The agile methodology is largely looked forward to as the process that tends to help organizations successfully accomplish their strategic business objective associated with incorporation and management of changes effectively within the organizational context (Conforto, et al., 2014). Therefore, an organization looking forward to adopting an agile methodology provides the very first instance of a widespread change management in the near future. As per the study conducted by Cervone (2011), an agile methodology is known to develop significant influence on the traditional culture of an organization and its overall operational aspect in relation to successful accomplishment of a project. The introduction of an entirely new process in accordance with the agile methodology often results in project managers to experience adequate degree of agitation and resistance from the workforce and even the stakeholders (Lee and Hwan-Seung Yong, 2010).

The agile methodology mainly comprises of two sub methods that are being enforced for the purpose of accomplishing the objectives of a project work. According to Wysocki (2011), agile method of project development provides project managers with the option to select from the two methods, scrum and lean. The selection of the sub methods tends to take into consideration detailed scope and objective of the product development project thus considered. Conforto et al. (2014) stated that the project managers in relation to define the characteristic of an agile work tend to highlight the capability associated with successful completion of works in shorter time bursts followed by its successful delivery. Furthermore, the processes are repeated so as to ensure high degree of refinement and thereby ensure complying to the desired level of quality as demanded by the clients (Špundak, 2014). The following figure provides a diagrammatic representation of the step by step process followed in relation to agile methodology: 

According to Lee and Young (2010), project managers in an organizational context looks forward to considering an agile framework to possess immense capability associated with developing high degree of empowerment, accountability and encouragement among the people involved in the process. Furthermore, it takes into consideration developing a healthy and cordial relationship in between the user engagement level and the organizational goals. This is mainly due to the fact that the development takes place in successive iterations, thereby making it easy to gain customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction in level (Špundak, 2014). The regular interaction between the two parties is largely looked forward to as the most significant and crucial advantage associated with agile project management methodology. However, one significant drawback associated with the agile method that has been identified to be highly significant is the incapability associated with assessing, identifying and determining the risks at each and every aspect of project management, development and successful delivery. Furthermore, Turley (2018) stated that agile method seems to be failing considerably in making effective use of the organizational resources due to the uncertainty associated with the use among the people. However, each of these disadvantages are largely overshadowed with the effectiveness of agile framework in terms to flexible work operations and rapid adaptability to change management. This is mainly due to the widespread changes in the demand of the clients which are likely to arouse due to the advancements taking place in the organizational context.

The primary objective underlying the operational scope of each and every project management methodology is to ensure successful accomplishment of each and every need and demand of the clients in relation to delivery of the final product (Balaji and Murugaiyan, 2012). Likewise, PMBoK, PRINCE2, Waterfall and Agile methodology also helps managers to develop effective planning in relation to a project. Meredith and Mantel Jr (2011) stated that the project management methodologies primarily focus on documenting, reviewing and processing of the overall aspect in which the project is likely to be developed and the resources thereby required for the purpose. However, the detailed process followed by each of the four project management methodologies thereby taken into consideration varies significantly and widely. The following section thereby looks forward to providing a comparative analysis of each of the four methods. It has primarily highlighted the areas and the operational aspects on which the methods differ significantly.

Each of the stages associated with the project management initiative as highlighted by PMBoK, initiation, planning, execution, control and closure forms the overall backbone of the entire process. On the other hand, the PRINCE2 model operational activities rely on the use of seven key themes that has identified in relation to accomplishing its operational activity (Pant and Baroudi, 2008). Furthermore, the waterfall model provides a step by step approach to each of the processes associated with requirement, design, implementation, verification and maintenance in relation to managing project. However, the agile methodology seems to be completely different since it does not take into consideration developing a step by steam approach. The agile methodology thereby goes ahead with developing very small sprints of work process which has largely been identified in relation to the present organizational demands in relation to product development (Pant and Baroudi, 2008).

The PMBoK project management and development method tends to provide a substantial framework in relation to effective management of the project scope and contract along with several other factors (Balaji and Murugaiyan, 2012). However, each of the processes associated with scope and contract management seems to be practically less robust and effective in relation to a project looking forward to considering PRINCE2. Furthermore, Balaji and Murugaiyan (2012) stated that how the waterfall model provides a step by step approach along with detailed specification of the requirement set for accomplishing a project. On the other hand, the agile methodology is found to be completely different and distinct from all other methods. According to Wysocki (2011), agile methodology is found to be much more flexible than all other methods along with immense capability to produce highly satisfactory deliverables without making as such important changes or subsequent reworks. The high degree of flexibility and adaptability offered by the agile model seems to be highly significant in this regard.

The waterfall model of project management emphasizes on developing an effective and detailed plan in relation to go ahead with the project work (De Bakker, Boonstra and Wortmann, 2010). It also takes into consideration identification as well as determination of the requirements for each and every step thus identified for developing the product right in the initial stage followed by adhering to it word by word without any failure. However, agile methodology encompasses a completely different outlook and perspective in relation to go ahead with the project work. As per the opinion of Cervone (2011), agile methodology results in project managers to develop a rough estimation of the activities and work to be done along with the requirements that are likely to be needed. Furthermore, it largely takes into consideration developing at least a very small portion of the project thus undertaken within the very first few days or weeks of initiation (De Bakker, Boonstra and Wortmann, 2010). In doing so, the agile methodology thereby results in the project managers thereby clarify the overall project management scope and the direction considered towards product development, by taking into consideration the negligible amount of work successfully accomplished. The agile methodology of developing project is a strict contradiction to the PMBoK method too. The PMBoK method like waterfall model too goes ahead with the process of developing an effective plan in relation to ensuring successful accomplishment of the project thus considered. The project planning process under PMBoK thereby takes into consideration initiation, planning, controlling, monitoring, and executing. Each of these processes are further exaggerated and modified in accordance to the theoretical concepts and processes underlying the project development scope of an organization. The operational aspect under this method primarily encompasses the development of a suitable WBS followed by identification of critical paths, so as to enjoy high degree of effectiveness.

According to Wells (2012), the waterfall and agile methods of project development differs significantly in relation to the factors associated with dealing with customers, interaction, change adaptation and response as well as prototyping. The waterfall model is known to consider the scope identified in relation to a project as a primary driver used for the purpose of calculating the consequential cost required for accomplishing the project objectives. On the other hand, Špundak (2014) stated that an agile method takes into consideration committing set resources over a certain period of time with the primary aim of ensuring successful delivery of the products that have been developed in successive time period. Furthermore, the waterfall model is found to be highly beneficial when the project managers have a detailed knowhow on the requirements that needs to be accomplished for successfully delivering the product thereby taken into consideration (Munassar, Ali, and Govardhan, 2010). However, Cobb (2011) highlighted that agile methodology is suitable for projects that do not have stringent requirement specifications and there exists adequate scope for unexpected changes to take place within the project life cycle. Therefore, it can be largely said that an agile methodology of project development seems to be highly significant for projects that are exposed to high degree of change susceptibility over traditional waterfall method.

Conclusion

From the above literature review it can be stated that proper selection of project management methodology, the project manager or sponsor should detect the significant factors to enhance chances of attaining among those success criteria. Thus, this literature review provided a critical evaluation on the project management knowledge areas leading to attainment of project success, types of project management methodologies and compare as well contrast them accordingly. The four processes comprising of PMBoK, PRINCE2, Waterfall Model and Agile Model largely help project managers to have a completely overview of which one to be selected. The primary objective of each of the methodologies is to ease the overall process associated with successfully accomplishing the project through the development of an effective plan as well as the steps that needs to be accomplished throughout the period. Each of the four methods seems to be highly significant in their own individual ways of dealing with project development followed by successful accomplishment in the long run. The agile method has been identified to be slightly different to that of other three methods. However, one significant drawback associated with the agile method that has been identified to be highly significant is the incapability associated with assessing, identifying and determining the risks at each and every aspect of project management, development and successful delivery. It is highly flexible and well adapted to the present changing environment, thereby helping the process of accomplishing the overall aspect of project management with high degree of effectiveness. 

References

Alshamrani, Adel, and Abdullah Bahattab. “A comparison between three SDLC models waterfall model, spiral model, and Incremental/Iterative model.” International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI) 12, no. 1 (2015): 106.

Balaji, S., and M. Sundararajan Murugaiyan. “Waterfall vs. V-Model vs. Agile: A comparative study on SDLC.” International Journal of Information Technology and Business Management2, no. 1 (2012): 26-30.

Bassil, Youssef. “A simulation model for the waterfall software development life cycle.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1205.6904(2012).

Bentley, Colin. Prince2: a practical handbook. Abingdon: Routledge, 2012.

Blomquist, Tomas, Markus Hällgren, Andreas Nilsson, and Anders Söderholm. “Project?as?practice: In search of project management research that matters.” Project Management Journal 41, no. 1 (2010): 5-16.

Bryde, David, Martí Broquetas, and Jürgen Marc Volm. “The project benefits of building information modelling (BIM).” International journal of project management 31, no. 7 (2013): 971-980.

Burke, Rory. “Project management: planning and control techniques.” New Jersey, USA (2013).

Castro-Lacouture, Daniel, Gürsel A. Süer, Julian Gonzalez-Joaqui, and J. K. Yates. “Construction project scheduling with time, cost, and material restrictions using fuzzy mathematical models and critical path method.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135, no. 10 (2009): 1096-1104.

Cervone, H. Frank. “Understanding agile project management methods using Scrum.” OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives 27, no. 1 (2011): 18-22.

Cobb, Charles G. Making sense of agile project management: Balancing control and agility. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2011.

Conforto, Edivandro C., Fabian Salum, Daniel C. Amaral, Sérgio Luis da Silva, and Luís Fernando Magnanini de Almeida. “Can agile project management be adopted by industries other than software development?.” Project Management Journal 45, no. 3 (2014): 21-34.

De Bakker, Karel, Albert Boonstra, and Hans Wortmann. “Does risk management contribute to IT project success? A meta-analysis of empirical evidence.” International Journal of Project Management 28, no. 5 (2010): 493-503.

Dybå, Tore, TorgeirDingsøyr, and Nils Brede Moe. “Agile project management.” In Software project management in a changing world, pp. 277-300. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014.

Ghosh, Sam, Danny Forrest, Thomas DiNetta, Brian Wolfe, and Danielle C. Lambert. “Enhance PMBOK® by comparing it with P2M, ICB, PRINCE2, APM and Scrum project management standards.” PM World Today 14, no. 1 (2012): 1-77.

Harrison, Frederick, and Dennis Lock. Advanced project management: a structured approach. Routledge, 2017.

Heagney, Joseph. Fundamentals of project management. Amacom, 2016.

Ika, Lavagnon A. “Project success as a topic in project management journals.” Project Management Journal 40, no. 4 (2009): 6-19.

Joslin, Robert, and Ralf Müller. “Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts.” International Journal of Project Management 33, no. 6 (2015): 1377-1392.

Kerzner, Harold, and Harold R. Kerzner. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2017.

Lee, Seiyoung, and Hwan-Seung Yong. “Distributed agile: project management in a global environment.” Empirical Software Engineering 15, no. 2 (2010): 204-217.

Lianying, Zhang, He Jing, and Zhang Xinxing. “The project management maturity model and application based on PRINCE2.” Procedia Engineering 29 (2012): 3691-3697.

Marchewka, Jack T. Information technology project management. John Wiley & Sons, 2014.

Meredith, Jack R., and Samuel J. Mantel Jr. Project management: a managerial approach. John

Munassar, Nabil Mohammed Ali, and A. Govardhan. “A comparison between five models of software engineering.” International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI) 7, no. 5 (2010): 94.

O’Connor, Rory V., and Claude Y. Laporte. “Software project management in very small entities with ISO/IEC 29110.” In European Conference on Software Process Improvement, pp. 330-341. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012.

Pant, Ira, and Bassam Baroudi. “Project management education: The human skills imperative.” International journal of project management 26, no. 2 (2008): 124-128.

Pollack, Julien. “The changing paradigms of project management.” International journal of project management25, no. 3 (2007): 266-274.

Rose, Kenn/eth H. “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)—Fifth Edition.” Project management journal 44, no. 3 (2013): e1-e1.

Špundak, Mario. “Mixed agile/traditional project management methodology–reality or illusion?.” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 119 (2014): 939-948.

Turley, Frank. PRINCE2® Foundation Training Manual. Van Haren, 2018.

Turner, J. Rodney. Handbook of project-based management. Vol. 92. New York, NY: McGraw-hill, 2014.

Wells, Hany. “How effective are project management methodologies? An explorative evaluation of their benefits in practice.” Project Management Journal 43, no. 6 (2012): 43-58.

Wysocki, Robert K. Effective project management: traditional, agile, extreme. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2011.