Content area
Full Text
Introduction
The field of project management (PM) as a discipline and area of research had, until the turn of this century, been mainly concerned with an instrumental perspective of journal topics relating to what PM is and what should concern PM teams (Betts and Lansley, 1995; Morris, 2010). Crawford et al. (2006) undertook a meta-analysis of seven studies of the PM literature to determine trends in research topics in papers published from 1960 to 2000. They concluded that:
Synthesis of results revealed that Relationship Management, Resource Management, Time Management, Cost Management and Risk Management all displayed consistent significance throughout the study period. However, by contrast, Finalisation, Scope and Marketing tend to either be ignored by writers on project management or identified as not being of significance. Project Evaluation and Improvement and Strategic Alignment are both increasing in their significance to the field. Evidence also suggests that the significance of Quality Management and Interpersonal Issues has peaked, and that while these issues have previously been of interest to writers in the field, this interest is waning
(Crawford et al., 2006, p. 183).
This situation has changed quite radically since then.
We discuss in this paper how three research interest clusters have influenced PM research publication topics and, more specifically, how this journal’s publication output has been influenced by the three research interest clusters. Legitimacy in a research field occurs through a number of influences. These include individual researchers, small groups of researchers in collaboration and wider networks of researchers. Two examples of these networks include academics and practitioners attending the Project Management Institute (PMI) sponsored research conference or research streams of their regular more practitioner focused conferences and the International Research Network on Organizing by Projects (IRNOP). There is also a range of other research networks with a common PM interest. The tipping point context of change in PM perspectives is discussed in this paper to facilitate a better appreciation of how the PM research agenda has radically shifted. We provide evidence and a rationale for identified changes through content analysis of papers published in the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business (IJMPiB).
This introduction has stated the frame of reference for the paper, the radical change in PM research direction and...