Paradigms in project management research: examples from 15 years of IRNOP conferences

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 82-104

  Biedenbach, Thomas ^a   Müller, Ralf ^b  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b BI NORWEGIAN BUSINESS SCHOOL   (Norway)

Author keywords

Epistemology; Philosophical concepts; Project management; Research work

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865382282     PISSN: 17538378     EISSN: 17538386     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/17538371111096908     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Aguinis, H., Pierce, C.A., Bosco, F.A. and Muslin, I.S. (2009), “First decade of organizational research methods: trends in design, measurement, and data-analysis topics”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 12 No. 69, pp. 69-112.
2. Bhaskar, R. (1975), A Realist Theory of Science, Harvester Press, Hassocks.
3. Bredillet, C.N. (2008), “Learning and acting in project situations through a meta-method (MAP) a case study: contextual and situational approach for project management governance in management education”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 238-50.
4. Bredillet, C.N., Turner, J.R. and Anbari, F.T. (2007a), “Exploring research in project management: nine schools of project management research (Part 1)”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 3-4.
5. Bredillet, C.N., Turner, J.R. and Anbari, F.T. (2007b), “Exploring research in project management: nine schools of project management research (Part 2)”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 3-5.
6. Bredillet, C.N., Turner, J.R. and Anbari, F.T. (2007c), “Exploring research in project management: nine schools of project management research (Part 3)”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 2-4.
7. Bredillet, C.N., Turner, J.R. and Anbari, F.T. (2008a), “Exploring research in project management: nine schools of project management research (Part 4)”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 2-6.
8. Bredillet, C.N., Turner, J.R. and Anbari, F.T. (2008b), “Exploring research in project management: nine schools of project management research (Part 5)”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 2-4.
9. Bredillet, C.N., Turner, J.R. and Anbari, F.T. (2008c), “Exploring research in project management: nine schools of project management research (Part 6)”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 2-5.
10. Bryman, A. (2007), “Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research”, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 8-22.
11. Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2007), Business Research Methods, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
12. Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979), Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis, Heinemann, London.
13. Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2009), Business Research, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
14. Colquitt, J.A. and Zapata-Phelan, C.P. (2007), “Trends in theory building and theory testing: a five decade study on the Academy of Management Journal”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 1281-303.
15. Edmondson, A.C. and McManus, S.E. (2007), “Methodological fit in management field research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 1155-79.
16. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001), Making Social Science Matter, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
17. Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. (1994), “Competing paradigms in qualitative research”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, London, pp. 105-17.
18. Howe, K.R. (1988), “Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 10-16.
19. Jackson, N. and Carter, P. (1993), “’Paradigm Wars’: a response to Hugh Willmott”, Organization Studies, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 721-5.
20. Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J. and Turner, L.A. (2007), “Toward a definition of mixed methods research”, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 112-33.
21. Kloppenberg, T. and Opfer, W.A. (2002), “The current state of project management research: trends, interpretations and predictions”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 5-19.
22. Kuhn, T.S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
23. Kuhn, T.S. (1970a), “Logic of discovery or psychology of research?”, in Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (Eds), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, London, pp. 1-23.
24. Kuhn, T.S. (1970b), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed., University of Chicago Press, London.
25. Kwak, Y.H. and Anbari, F.T. (2009), “Analyzing project management research: perspectives from top management journals”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 435-46.
26. Maanen, J., van, Sørensen, J.B. and Mitchell, T.R. (2007), “The interplay between theory and method”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 1145-54.
27. Morgan, D.L. (2007), “Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods”, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 48-76.
28. Müller, R. (2008), “Research paradigm of the success school”, paper presented at Special EDEN Doctoral Seminar on the Nine Schools of Project Management, available at: www.eden-pm.org (accessed April 1, 2009).
29. Sale, J.E.M., Lohfeld, L.H. and Brazil, K. (2002), “Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: implications for mixed-methods research”, Quality & Quantity, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 43-53.
30. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007), Research Methods for Business Students, 4th ed., Pearson Education, Harlow.
31. Sechrest, L. and Sidani, S. (1995), “Quantitative and qualitative methods: is there an alternative?”, Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 77-87.
32. Smyth, H.J. and Morris, P.W.G. (2007), “An epistemological evaluation of research into projects and their management: methodological issues”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 423-36.
33. Söderlund, J. (2002), “On the development of project management research: schools of thought and critique”, International Project Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 20-31.
34. Söderlund, J. (2004), “Building theories of project management: past research, questions for the future”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 183-91.
35. Teddlie, C. and Tashakkori, A. (2009), Foundations of Mixed Methods Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
36. Themistocleous, G. and Waerne, S.H. (2000), “Project management topic coverage in journals”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 7-11.
37. Weaver, G.R. and Gioia, D.A. (1994), “Paradigms lost: incommensurability vs structurationist inquiry”, Organization Studies, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 565-90.
38. Willmott, H. (1993), “Breaking the paradigm mentality”, Organization Studies, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 681-719.
39. Denzin, N.K. (1978), The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
40. Greene, J.C., Caracelli, V.J. and Graham, W.F. (1989), “Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 255-74.
41. Jick, T.D. (1979), “Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 602-11.
42. Johnson, R.B. and Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004), “Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 33 No. 7, pp. 14-26.
43. Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (2003), “Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), The Landscape of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 253-91.
44. Mingers, J. (2006), “A critique of statistical modeling in management science from a critical realist perspective: its role within multimethodology”, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 202-19.
45. Onwuegbuzie, A.J. and Leech, N.L. (2005a), “On becoming a pragmatic researcher: the importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 375-87.
46. Onwuegbuzie, A.J. and Leech, N.L. (2005b), “Taking the ‘q’ out of research: teaching research methodology courses without the divide between quantitative and qualitative paradigms”, Quality & Quantity, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 267-96.
47. Patton, M.Q. (1987), How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
48. Popper, K. (1970), “Normal science and its dangers”, in Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (Eds), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, London, pp. 51-8.