Faculty
Kjell Tryggestad, Associate professor, Sandrine Sabatier Hvidkjaer, Research fellow/Phd student.

Course Coordinator
Chris Mathieu

Academic prerequisites: It is advantageous, but no prerequisite, to have some basic social science knowledge, especially in organization theory, sociology and managerial economics.

Students enrolled at BA-Information management programme are not allowed to take the elective due to overlap.

The course consists of three interrelated building bricks. The first brick consists of theories that enable us to analyse and answer the question of what the project is and what it can do. Here we also focus on the link between the project and its main constituencies, such as the client and ‘mother’ organization. The second brick consists of particular project-related topics such as the role and tasks of project management, project management tools, and project evaluation. The third brick consists of analysis and discussions of cases based on the course reading.

Students will be introduced to the project and its particular organizational form. What are the important project management tasks? What does the project require in terms of managerial actions and dispositions? What are the ‘tools of the trade’? These are some of the relevant questions that this course will address. Students will also be introduced to different project management tools and trained in evaluating their assumptions and practical relevance. Lat but not least, the important question of evaluating project success (and failures) will be addressed.

The method of teaching will be a combination of class lectures, analysis and discussions of cases based on the theme of the day, and exercises in using project management tools. In addition to class lecturing, each teaching session will include student presentations. Two groups of 4-5 students will be appointed to prepare a power point presentation based on supplied questions. The presentation last no longer than 10 min. per group, and our aspiration should be that each student should at least have participated in one group presentation, when reaching the end of the course.

Students will be trained in collaborating to solve group assignments and make presentations.

At the end of the course the student should be able to:

· Use analytical tools to examine the challenges of managing projects under high uncertainty.

· Account for required course reading and to illustrate points from the literature with examples from the case.

· Understand theoretical-empirical relationship, i.e. demonstrate an ability to establish an explanatory relationship between theory and the case. I.e. using theories to generate and explain issues concerning significant aspects of the case and using the case to discuss fundamental assumptions, possibilities, and limitations in the applied theories.

· Carry out critical assessments of the scope of alternative theories and compare their relevance to the case.

4 hour written open book.

Exam aids: All obligatory readings, lecture notes and slides. Assessment is based on the following three criteria: 1) Ability to account for course reading; 2) Ability to establish an explanatory relation between course readings and exam case; 3) Ability to carry out critical assessments of the scope of alternative theories and compare their relevance to the exam case.

Gardiner, Paul D. (2005): “Project Management. A Strategic Planning Approach”. Palgrave/Macmilan, all pages (xi-321).

Compendium of articles: “ Project Management HE82” sold from Samfundslitteratur at Solbjerg Plads 3. The collection of articles includes research based texts.:

1. PMI (2004): A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. PMBOK Guide. 2004 Edition. Project Management Institute. pp. 3-10

2. Thomas, Janice (2006): Problematising Project Management. In: Hodgson, Damian & Cicmil, Svetlana (2006): Making Projects Critical. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 90-107

3. Egwall, Mats (2002): The futile dream of the perfect goal. In: Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin & Söderholm, Anders (2002): Beyond project management. New perspectives on the temporary - permanent dilemma. Liber, Anstrakt, CBS Press. pp. 261-277.

4. Kreiner, Kristian (1995): In search of relevance: Project management in drifting environments. Scandinavian Journal of Management. Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 335-346

5. Rickards, Tudor & Moger, Susan (2000): Creative Leadership Processes in Project Team Development: An Alternative to Tuckman's Stage Model. British Journal of Management. Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 273-283

6. Enberg, C., Lindkvist, L. & Tell, F. (2006), Exploring the Dynamics of Knowledge Integration. Acting and Interacting in Project Teams. Management Learning, Vol. 37:2 (Pp. 143-165).

7. Lundin, Rolf A. & Söderholm, Anders (1995): A Theory of the Temporary Organization.Scandinavian Journal of Management. Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 437-455

8. Cook, R (2007/2008). How to spot a failing project. In: CIO ( http://www.cio.com/article/124309 ), pp.1-5).

9. Atkinson, Roger, Crawford, Lynn & Ward, Stephen (2006): Fundamental uncertainties in projects and the scope of project management. International Journal of Project Management. Vol. 24, pp. 687-698

10. Newcombe, Robert (2003): From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach. Construction Management & Economics. Vol. 21, No. 8, pp. 841 – 848

11. Bourne, Lynda & Walker, Derek H.T. (2005): Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence. Management Decision. Vol. 43, No. 5, pp. 649-660

12. Atkinson, Roger (1999): Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria. International Journal of Project Management. Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 337-342

13. Schindler, Martin & Eppler, Martin J. (2003): Harvesting project knowledge: a review of project learning methods and success factors. International Journal of Project Management. Vol. 21, pp. 219-228