Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2018/23(3)

In memoriam - Prof. Petar Jovanović, PhD 1943 - 2018

(Editor-in-chief or the Management journal 1996-2006)

Petar Jovanović, esteemed scientist, university professor, dean, founder and the first editor-in-chief of the
Management journal, i.e., today’s Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management So-
lutions in Emerging Economies, a person whose legacy in numerous fields shall not be forgotten, has left
us. He was a person of awe-inspiring energy, brilliant mind and impressive work ethics.

He was born on September 6, 1943 in Kragujevac where he completed his primary education and gradu-
ated from high school. Between 1965 and 1973 he studied, graduated and earned an MSc at the Faculty of
Mechanical Engineering. His thesis was titled: “Contribution to the Examination of the Development of In-
dustrial Organization”. From 1969 to 1983 he worked in Autosaobraćaj Kragujevac as the GM’s advisor for
technical matters, then at the Institute for Planning and Management Systems; in 1976 he started working
for the Belgrade Chamber of Commerce, as the secretary to the Council for the promotion of science and
research. The year 1977 marks the start of his engagement at the Faculty of Organizational Sciences (FOS),
at the course on Organization and Management of Investments. He became a staff member, as a guest lec-
turer in 1983, and continued into a role of full professor until 2008, when he retired.

He was a distinguished professor at FOS, he headed the Management department during several terms
and was dean twice. During this period, he contributed enormously to the development of organizational sci-
ences, development strategy and modern organization of the Faculty. He was a renowned author in scien-
tific circles, as his books were among the first ones in this region to discuss the phenomena of management
and organization. He wrote numerous books on management, project management, investments, strategic
management, change management, organizational development, etc. that helped generations of students
understand and adopt these disciplines. The list of his scientific papers published in leading domestic and
foreign journals, symposia and congress is much longer still.

His biggest contribution is in the field of the development of various management disciplines, most promi-
nent of which was project management. His book Project management is the most commonly used and
widely known in this country; it has had a significant influence on the development and application of proj-
ect management concept in this region. In addition to this book, he authored or co-authored many other
books, monographs and manuals from the field of project management, among them: Methods and Tech-
niques of Project Management, Program Management, Project Manager, Management and Project
Management, Managing Project Risks, Directions of Project Management Development, etc.

Professor Jovanović also contributed to project management by founding the Faculty for Project and Inno-
vation Management, one of the first institutions in the world to offer project management studies in bache-
lor, master and PhD programmes. Each year more and more students enroll into this faculty.

He was the founder and the first president of the Project Management Association in Yugoslavia – YUDRUP,
and subsequently in the Republic of Serbia – an institution that is a very successful member of the Interna-
tional Project Management Association. By founding the Serbian Project Management Association, he
wanted to promote and support professional activities of its members in order to encourage their work and
improve their expert knowledge in the field of project management. Simultaneously, his leadership at the As-
sociation contributed to the national and international promotion and further development of project man-
agement. The association has been active for the past 32 years and is one of the rare non-profit organizations
that managed to survive and develop, despite all the problems in recent history.

Professor Jovanović provided important scientific and expert contribution in the field of preparation, imple-
mentation and evaluation of investment projects. He introduced an investment management course in un-
dergraduate and postgraduate studies and founded the Centre for investment management and direct
cooperation with the private sector. A book that also presented an important milestone in his scientific and
educational career, and whose impact on the enterprise sector was substantial, was Investment Manage-
ment.

He was the reviewer of Joint Methodology for Evaluating Social and Financial Investments and Effi-
ciency of Investments in SFRY, the first methodology for evaluating industrial investment projects in the
ex-Yugoslavia. He was one of the authors of the Rulebook on contents and scope of the Pre-feasibility
and Feasibility Study as the accompanying bylaw to the Law on Construction from 1999. This rulebook was
the first one to introduce cost-benefit analysis as part of social evaluation of projects.

1
 Petar Jovanović Ivana Berić 2018/23(3)

The contribution of Professor Jovanović transcends the development of individual scientific disciplines and
extends to an entire scientific field. His scientific and expert papers in the field of management and organi-
zation are widely quoted and accepted by scientists, students and entrepreneurs. His books such as Man-
agement – Theory and Practice, Strategic Management, Change Management, Managing the
Development of a Company, Knowledge Management, Contemporary Management, but also his papers
in journals, monographs and his other works, contributed to the development of knowledge from the field of
management which we, according to him, “urgently needed and obviously missed”. He constantly strived to
offer systematized theoretical knowledge from the field of management and relevant practical experiences
necessary for performing managerial roles. A very special place among his works belongs to the Lexicon of
Management, published by the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, where he worked as one of the editors.

In 1996, at the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, he founded the Management journal, accepting the role
of its first editor-in-chief. The goal of this journal has since been to enable the exchange of relevant infor-
mation between scientists, researchers, managers, businessmen and all stakeholders from universities, in-
stitutes, companies and public institutions. Today, the name of the journal is Management: Journal of
Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies. Its local, regional and global
reputation is impeccable, and this was confirmed by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological
Development, that awarded it the highest possible rank to be obtained by a domestic journal.

He founded and was the first editor-in-chief to Serbian Project Management Journal. The first issue was
published in 2011 and numerous authors have published their papers in the journal so far. Over the years,
it has developed and grown beyond the national boundaries; therefore, in 2017, its name changed to the
European Project Management Journal. The journal has international recognition, papers published in it
are quoted in papers published in numerous leading international magazines, while the Ministry of Educa-
tion, Science and Technological Development treats papers published in this journal as papers published
in a renowned national journal.

In addition to the mentioned journals, he was the editor-in-chief of Produktivnost, a long-time member of
editorial staff to the Tehnika journal, as well as many others. He was a member of the Council of Delegates
of the International Project Management Association, lecturer at several national faculties, multiple-time pres-
ident and member of programme board for international symposia and congresses. He led several strate-
gic scientific and research projects in the field of management financed by the Ministry of Education, Science
and Technological Development. At the same time, he was involved in the development of the national busi-
ness environment, as would be expected of a university professor. As an award for his work and contribu-
tions, he was awarded the Plaque of the City of Belgrade as well as multiple other recognitions.

He was the dean of the Faculty of Organizational Sciences during one of the hardest periods for this coun-
try. It is during this time that the faculty adopted some of the best decisions, such as the establishing of the
undergraduate and graduate study programmes in management, issuing of the journal, founding of new cen-
tres, construction of the first amphitheatre, etc.

His rich and successful career was a result of constant work and his need to achieve significant improve-
ments in education, science and management as a profession. We often hear that one’s significance can
be measured by the things they left behind. Professor Petar Jovanović, PhD, has left us with a treasure.

Prof. Dejan Petrović, PhD

2
 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2018/23(3)

Petar Jovanović Ivana Berić*

University EDUCONS, Faculty of Project and Innovation Management, Belgrade

Analysis of the Available

Project Management Methodologies
DOI: 10.7595/management.fon.2018.0027

Research question: This study aims to investigate an available project management methodologies from the standpoint of
their applicability. Motivation: Authors are keen to present the specific characteristics of the nowdays available methodologies
(PMI, IPMA, PRINCE2, YUPMA, APM, HBS, Agile methodoligies etc.) that can ensure a realistic foundation upon which an
adequate methodology for a certain group of similar projects can be defined.The usage of an adequate project management
methodology brings numerous advantages and benefits to the project manager and project team and it shows them the right
route towards project completion. Idea: This paper gives a review of the most highly recognised methodologies, proposed
and implemented in the project management practice. Specific features of these methodologies were analysed bearing in
mind the possibilities of their implementation. Data: The reasearch of project management methodologies was provided using
bibliometrics techniques. Tools: The study provides the meta analysis of the most cited research papers in the filed of project
management methodologies, provides comparative analysis and discuss the trends in project management methodologies
application. Findings: It has been found that general characteristics of traditional methodologies (PMI, IPMA, APM,YUPMA)
make them more adequate to be implemented in larger and more complex projects such as: investment, military,
manufacturing, overhaul, etc. projects. On the other hand, general characteristics of agile methodologies lead to a conclusion
that these methodologies are more suitable to use for IT projects as well as for some smaller and less complex projects, such
as devising various studies, project reports, etc. Contribution: This study presents the meta analysis of the existing
methodologies and provides the synthesis of key features of different applicable methodologies. This paper can be treated as
a bottom line for further research oriented towards defining a specific methodology, adequate for certain groups of projects.

Keywords: project, project management, traditional methodologies, agile methodologies, analysis, implementation
JEL classification: H43, O22, M21

1. Introduction

Numerous complex problems that business and other organisations face on a daily basis require the
implementation of modern management methods and disciplines for a more efficient functioning of these
organizations. Implementation of project management is necessary in an efficient execution of various
projects and enterprises. An expansion in project management implementation is closely linked to the
expansion of knowledge in project management and training of competent project managers. On the other
hand, this knowledge expansion is in turn connected with available procedures and methodologies
proposed and implemented in the project management practice.

The project management theory and practice have provided us with a large number of practically applicable
methodologies for an efficient management of a project. The project management methodology represents
a set of methods, techniques, procedures, best practices, etc., used on a project. It is commonly based on
a specific project management approach, one that defines a set of principles and guidelines which define
the manner in which a project is managed (Spundak, 2014). The best known project management
methodologies are: PMI, IPMA, APM, YUPMA, PRINCE 2, etc. (APM, 2000; IPMA, 2015; Jovanovic, 2015;
Jovanovic&Jovanovic, 2009; OGC, 2009; PMI, 2013). These are mainly process methodologies and they
include certain subprocesses or phases in project management. A major problem with these methodologies
is that they are usually proposed regardless of the type of project. It is evident, however, that differences

*
Corresponding author: Ivana Berić, e-mail: [email protected]

3
 Petar Jovanović Ivana Berić 2018/23(3)

between the structures of certain groups of projects are rather big; hence, the methods of management of
these projects have to differ as well (Besner & Hobbs, 2012). Depending on the particularity and type of
project, management philosophy and culture of the organization that runs the project, a certain methodology
should be chosen (Drob & Zichil, 2013). This implies the need that specific methodologies should be defined
for some groups of similar projects.

This paper is meant to analyse the available methodologies and identify specific characteristics of these
methodologies to serve as a basis for further work on defining acceptable methodologies for groups of
similar projects. It presents only a small portion of an extensive research whose goal is to define and propose
the method or a path to select a methodology suitable to some groups of similar projects.

2. Project Management Methodologies

The theory and practice of project management propose and apply a number of methodologies, with more
or less success. These methodologies are mainly suggested by national or international project management
associations as well as by certain organisations and institutions (Jovanovic, 2017). Some of the best known
methodologies are the following:

a) PMI methodology
b) IPMA methodology
c) PRINCE2 methodology
d) YUPMA methodology
e) APM methodology
f) HBS methodology
g) Agile methodologies and others.

Apart from the above mentioned, there is a large number of other methodologies developed by different
organisations and institutions and implemented in the execution thereof. Here we will mention only some of
them: the Japan Project Management Association methodology, the University of Sydney methodology, the
University of Tasmania methodology, the University of South Carolina methodology, etc. (McHugh & Hogan,
2011).

2.1. PMI methodology

The PMI methodology was developed by a big and powerful association of project managers – the Project
Management Institute (PMI) from the USA and presented in the Project Management Body of Knowledge -
PMBoK handbook (PMI, 2013). This is a process methodology that proposes managing a project along ten
knowledge areas (PMI, 2013):

- project integration management that includes processes and activities to identify, combine, unify
and coordinate the various processes and project management activities within the project
management process groups;
- project scope management – includes processes required to ensure that the project includes all
the work necessary to complete the project successfully;
- time management – includes processes relating to defining the time aspects of the projects and
processes required to manage the timely completion of the project;
- cost management – processes relating to project cost planning, budgeting, funding, controlling in
order to complete the project within the approved budget;
- quality management – includes processes that enable the project to be completed in accordance
with the quality required and to satisfy the needs for which it was undertaken;
- human resource management – processes that organise, manage and lead the project team;
- communication management –deals with collecting and using all information associated with the
project execution;
- negotiation in procurement management – includes processes related to procurement and
purchasing of materials and products necessary for the project execution;
- risk management – includes the processes of conducting risk management planning, identification,
analysis, response planning and controlling risk on a project
- project stakeholder management – processes required to identifiy and analyse stakeholders, their
expectations, as well as to develop appropriate management strategies for effectively engaging
stakeholders in project decisions and execution.

4
Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2018/23(3)

The PMI methodology also proposes five groups of project management processes that, together with the
ten areas of knowledge, form the basic framework of this methodology.

These groups of project management are the following (PMI, 2013):

1. Group of initiation processes;
2. Group of planning processes;
3. Group of execution processes;
4. Group of monitoring and controlling processes;
5. Group of closing processes.
Proposed by the PMI methodology for each of the subprocesses, and in accordance with a unique scheme,
are the input values, methods and techniques to be used, as well as output values. Hence, the PMI
methodology provides only the basic framework to enable the individual subprocesses to be worked out.

The PMI methodology is a unique methodology, suitable to be implemented in any kinds of projects. At the
same time this is the major weakness of the PMI methodology – it does not take into consideration the
specific features of certain types of projects.

2.2. IPMA methodology

The IPMA (International Project Management Association) has no process methodology but rather directs
project management towards building the project manager’s knowledge, skills and competencies thus
empowering him/her to, together with the project team, manage the project in an effective manner. In order
to efficiently manage the project, project managers should have competencies in 3 areas: technical
competencies, behavioural competences and contextual competencies. It is on the basis of these
competencies that the IPMA issues international certifications to project managers, verifying their
competence to manage projects. A detailed elaboration and explanations of the IPMA approach are given
in the handbook titled the IPMA Competence Baseline (IPMA, 2015).

2.3. PRINCE2 methodology

The PRINCE2 methodology was developed in the United Kingom for the purpose of managing
informatics/computer projects. It was later amended and expanded so that it should be used for other
projects as well. Given that it is primarily oriented towards computer projects, this methodology insisted on
good communication and on including clients into the project management process, on dividing the projects
into phases and on the orientation towards the expected project outcomes.

The PRINCE 2 methodology consists of nine basic elements (OGC, 2009): Organisation; Planning; Control;
Phases; Risk management; Quality in project environment; Configuration management; Change control.

The project management process carried out using the PRINCE2 methodology is most frequently observed
over eight basic subprocesses: Project startup; Project initiation; Phase control; Outcome based
management; Phase constraint management; Planning; Project directing and Project closure.

In addition to this broad version a narrower version is proposed and this contains four basic subprocesses:
Project startup; Project initiation; Project implementation and Project closure (OGC, 2009).

Given the complexity of this methodology, its implementation requires a comprehensive knowledge of project
management in order that all basic elements and basic subprocesses should be included.

2.4. YUPMA methodology

The YUPMA methodology was developed by the Serbian Project Management Association – YUPMA and,
in its initial phase, it was defined for investment projects. The methodology is established on the analysis of
three basic components: time, resources and costs as well as three basic subprocesses: planning,
monitoring/tracking and project execution control. Creating models from these three components and three
subprocesses brings us to the basic framework of the YUPMA methodology into which risk management,
project change management, etc. are later incorporated (Jovanovic&Jovanovic, 2009; Jovanovic, 2015).

The YUPMA methodology has been applied and tested in several dozens of projects conducted by the
members of the YUPMA and the PMC (Faculty of Project and Innovation Management) both in the country

5
 Petar Jovanović Ivana Berić 2018/23(3)

and abroad. These were larger investment projects; however, also a number of business and IT projects were
among them. The YUPMA methodology is based on the definition and elaboration of the project cycle which
involves the following global phases or processes: Project definition; Project planning; Project execution
monitoring and control and Project closure.

2.5. APM methodology

The APM methodology is one developed by a UK association (Association of Project Management) and is
presented in the handbook under the title of APM Body of Knowledge (APM, 2000). The APM handbook is
a comprehensive manual that covers a large number of areas and topics important in an effective project
management implementation. The APM handbook covers seven basic chapters related to the areas of
knowledge necessary in an efficient project management: Introduction into the problem of effective project
execution; Strategic issues of the project; Issues of project control; Technical characteristics of the project;
Commercial characteristics; Defining of organisational culture; Personnel /HR issues (APM, 2000).

The APM fund of project management knowledge also includes a detailed elaboration of the above cited
chapters, giving a precise definition of elements to be dealt with within a specific chapter.

2.6. HBS methodology

The HBS methodology is a project management methodology developed by the Harvard Business School
and covers three main phases in the project management process. These are the following phases: Project
definition and organisation; Project planning and Project monitoring and management (HBS, 1997).

Each of the phases covers a set of activities characteristic of it. An accurate definition of project objectives
and project organisation provides a solid basis for a valid project planning thereby affecting the final project
outcomes. Project planning covers the development of the WBS structure, timeline development, resource
analysis and risk management plan creation. These steps enable the manager and the project team to set
the main tasks necessary for the achievement of project objectives, to define the time cycle of each task as
well as their sequence, to define the needs for resources and possible risks in the project. Project monitoring
and management refer to a systematic monitoring of project execution and comparison with the planned
project outcomes. These steps provide the project manager with the information necessary for the correct
project flow, inform the key participants in the project of the project progress and affects the project progress
using lessons learned from the previous projects.

3. Meta Analysis of Specific Features of the Available Project Management Methodologies

To obtain an acceptable project management methodology it is necessary to conduct a detailed analysis of

the existing project management methodologies and their specific features, primarily in view of strengths and
weaknesses when applied to certain projects. It is also necessary to analyse and classify some types of
projects and examine their specific features in view of the possibilities that certain methodologies should be
implemented (Beric, 2013). This paper is meant to investigate only into the specific features of the available
project management methodologies.

A brief analysis shows that all the above described methodologies, with the exception of the IPMA
methodology are process oriented methodologies, i.e., methodologies involving some processes or phases
of managing a certain project. To this group belong all the mentioned methodologies (PMI, APM, HBS,
YUPMA, PRINCE 2). With the exception of the IPMA methodology, they differ only in the manner and the
scope of defining and coverage of certain processes or phases. The IPMA methodology is not a classical
methodology; it is based on strengthening certain competencies any project manager has to have in order
to manage a project in an effective manner.

Apart from the YUPMA methodology, all other classical or traditional methodologies, to which agile
methodologies do not belong, are the so-called uniform methodologies that can be proposed for any types
of projects.This is at the same time the major weakness of these methodologies since they do not take into
consideration the specific features of certain groups of projects.

Traditional methodologies were developed in large military investment projects, hence they are characterised
by this continuous, phase approach, suitable for this type of projects. Consequently, traditional

6
Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2018/23(3)

methodologies have a precise and strict procedure of execution, based on the project structure defined
beforehand and presented in the project documentation, as well as on a precise technology of project
execution (Jovanovic, 2015; Jovanovic&Jovanovic, 2016). Agile approaches were developed as a response
to evident differences among certain kinds of projects, especially to the specificities of the IT projects. Agile
methodologies were developed by a group of experts for the purpose of improving the IT project
management process, especially in case of software development projects. Specific principles of the agile
approach are written in the Agile manifesto (Fowler & Highsmith, 2001) and in the Declaration of
interdependance (Declaration of Interdependance, 2005). The idea of the agile approach is to create a more
flexible approach to the management of IT projects, through an iterative approach and creation and delivery
of the project in sections, with a possibility to easily introduce changes and repeat certain phases in the
project execution. A flexible approach, it allows an analysis of the completed work following every phase,
together with the client, as well as introduce change and amendments in order to meet the client’s desires,
which is very important in software development projects where precise specifications are often missing
and the client cannot be certain what outcome they can expect of the completed project (Fernandez &
Fernandez, 2008; Rasnacis & Berzisa, 2017; Serrador & Pinto, 2015).

Agile methodologies are management methodologies used in software development projects and are based
on the following principles: flexible work, continuous reconsiderations of the completed section or task and
introduced alterations, active role of the client, a specific manner of project team organisation, continuous
communication among all participants, regular meetings of the project team and the project team – client
meetings (Abrahamsson, Salo, Ronkainen,& Warsta, 2002; Jovanovic&Jovanovic, 2016; Kilibarda, Sobajic,
Beric,& Jovanovic,2016; Kostic, 2017; Pichler, 2010).

Further research is related to an analysis of basic characteriestics of the discussed methodologies having
in mind that these are general characteristics, whereas a more precise analysis and identification of strengths
and weaknesses may be possible only if the subject of study is a certain group of similar projects. Having
this in mind, we can say that the major characteristics of traditional methodologies (PMI, APM, YUPMA,
PRINCE2) are as follows (Jovanovic&Jovanovic, 2016; Jovanovic, Jovanovic, Miletic,& Beric, 2016):

1. firm and precise project structure;

2. it is difficult to halt the execution process and take a reverse direction;
3. it is difficult to introduce alterations, especially in the middle or in the end of the project;
4. the clients’ or stakeholders’ impact on project management is minimal;
5. clear management procedures and homogeneous project team.

A similar consideration and analysis in case of agile methodologies have come to the following conclusions:

1. project structure is not firmly defined;

2. it is possible to stop the project and take a reverse direction;
3. it is possible to alter requirements in agreement with the client;
4. alterations are easily introduced;
5. firm relationship and permanent contact with the client (Jovanovic&Jovanovic, 2016;
Jovanovic et al., 2016).

The table 1 (below) lists the basic differences between traditional and agile methodologies.

Table 1. Comparison of traditional and agile methodologies

Traditional methodologies: Agile methodologies:

1. Permanent process 1. Sequential process
2. Firm project structure 2. Project structure subject to change
3. Project documentation is precise and detailed 3. Project documentation is provisional
4. Project execution technology is clearly 4. Project execution technology is subject
defined and most often changing to change
5. Possible changes 5. Permanent changes
6. Rare meetings with the client 6. Regular meetings with the client
7. Multifunctional team 7. Self-organised team
8. High authority of project manager 8. Not so high authority of the manager

7
 Petar Jovanović Ivana Berić 2018/23(3)

A partial analysis of the discussed methodologies shows that traditional methodologies are more suitable
for larger and more complex projects, among which are: investment, military and overhaul projects as well
as projects for manufacturing and installment of complex products. However, in case of IT projects and in
case of smaller scope studies and surveys the use of agile methodologies seem to be more appropriate
(Hobbs & Petit, 2017).

If we consider the projects of construction of a hydroelectric plant, a tunnel, a bridge, a manufacturing facility,
it is obvious that additional changes in such projects are not realistic since they will result in an enormous
delay in meeting deadlines and an increase in project execution costs. In case of such projects it is almost
impossible or unacceptable to take reverse direction, change and improve the project. It is also impossible
to execute and deliver the project in sections, as can be the case in some other projects, e.g., IT projects.
(Elattar, 2009; Fernandez-Sanchez & Rodriguez Lopez, 2010; Semolic, Jovanovic, Kovacev, & Obradovic,
2007).

When analysing the possibility of implementation of agile technologies or agile approach, a conclusion can
be drawn that these methodologies are more suitable to the IT projects. The basic features of the IT projects
and the basic characteristics and benefits offered by agile methodologies point to the realistic possibilities
of agile methodology implementation in this type of projects. Here we should primarily have in mind that agile
methodologies offer a good opportunity for work in phases, reconsideration and change introduction, turning
back to a previous phase, regular meetings and reaching agreements with the client and broader
authorisation and freedom of the project team members, which is consistent with the characteristics of the
IT projects. (Abrahamsson et al., 2002; Hass, 2007; Pichler, 2010; Schwaber, 2004; Sohi, Hertogh, Bosch-
Rekveldt, & Blom, 2016)

A more detailed analysis should be performed to determine the possibilities of the PRINCE2 methodology,
also proposed for IT, as well as for more complex projects such as investment ones. It may be necessary to
analyse the real opportunity for application of this methodology, both in IT projects and in, e.g., investment
projects, given the significant differences in the stuctures and specific features between these two groups
of projects. The analysis can be conducted in two directions. One can be a presentation of the possibility to
use the PRINCE2 in case of larger and more complex projects, having in mind the possibility to use other
traditional methodologies and stressing their advantages and disadvantages. The other direction can deal
with the possibilities to use the PRINCE2 in IT projects and comparison with agile methodologies, where the
advantages and disadvantages of the PRINCE2 and agile technologies have to be emphasized.

Following the review of project management methodologies and the basic features of these methodologies,
further research should be directed towards identification of elementary phases or subprocesses (planning,
monitoring, control, etc.) these methodologies use as well as basic elements (time, resources, costs, etc.)
important for the project, through which the project can be managed.

In case this approach is adopted, it is possible to devise a number of tables that show relations and
connections between phases and elements and enable a detailed analysis of the available methodologies.

Below are presented the shortened versions of tables interesting for further elaboration (Table 2 and Table 3).

Table 2. Methodologies and project phases (a template)

Subprocess
,QLWLDWLQJ 3ODQQLQJ 0RQLWRULQJ &RQWURO &ORVXUH 2WKHU

0HWKRGRORJLHV
30,      
,30$      
$30      
35,1&(      
<830$      

8
Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2018/23(3)

Table 3. Methodologies and project elements (a template)

Elements
7LPH 5HVRXUFHV &RVWV 4XDOLW\ 5LVN 2WKHU

0HWKRGRORJLHV
30,      

,30$      

$30      

35,1&(      

<830$      

The analysis of these and similar tables can help in identifying the most important phases and elements
that most frequently appear in analysed methodologies. This can help in finding a certain foundations for
defining specific methodologies applicable to certain groups of similar projects, or for adapting the already
available methodologies.

For situations requiring the use of two or more methodologies the literature offers hybrid, mixed or
collaborative approaches, i.e., methodologies (Milosevic & Patanakul, 2005; Schwaber, 2004; Spundak,
2014). Such an approach can be used, as explained above, in larger investment projects, where agile
methodologies are used in the first part of the project, whereas the other, remaining part, one that includes
execution, requires the use of traditional methodologies. The hybrid approach in defining a methodology for
a certain group of similar projects is based on the idea that there is no need to develop a new methodology;
rather, the already available methodologies can be adapted and components of these methodologies can
be used to achieve an innovative approach, adjusted to the characteristics of the projects under
consideration (Spundak, 2014; Wells, 2012; Wirkus, 2016).

4. Selection of an Adequate Methodology

The problem of selecting an adequate approach or methodology in management of a project or a group of

similar projects (e.g., software development projects, larger investment projects, etc.) is a topic of numerous
articles listed in literature (Charvat, 2003; Chin&Spowage, 2010; Cockburn, 2000; Jovanovic, 2015; Paulson,
2001; Spundak, 2014). Similarly, a large number of authors analyse the possibilities of adapting the already
existing methodologies for some groups of similar projects. It is certain that the implementation of an
inadequate methodology will not enhance, but will rather lessen the chances for an efficient project
completion. Hence the analyses and surveys oriented towards finding an adequate methodology for a certain
project or a group of similar projects is an important but also a difficult research task.

Why is it really important to use an adequate project management approach or methodology? Primarily
because the use of an adequate methodology brings numerous benefits to the project manager and project
team and it shows them the correct route towards project completion. Is an efficient management possible
without an adequate project management approach or methodology? Numerous authors (Charvat, 2003;
Chin & Spowage, 2010; Cockburn, 2000; Joslin & Muller, 2015; Jovanovic, 2015; Milosevic & Patanakul,
2005; Shenhar, 1996; Spundak, 2014; Wells, 2012) agree that an efficient project management is not possible
without an appropriate methodology. According to Chin & Spowage (2010), the most important advantages
are as follows: More clearly defined project goals; Work processes are more efficient and more effective;
Higher flexibility and adaptation to lessons learned; Increased accuracy in risk management planning, in
challenge and complexity management planning; Ensuring a higher degree of standardisation; Clear
identification of roles and responsibilities; Improved communication; Optimisation of delivery and outputs;
Integration of tools, techniques and knowledge for the purpose of improving the present and the future
projects; Value optimisation through lessons learned (Chin & Spowage, 2010). Additional advantages
include: a better control of project goals and scope, a shorter time of project execution, a more efficient
decision making, a higher client satisfaction, prompt information exchange, improved knowledge
management, etc.

9
 Petar Jovanović Ivana Berić 2018/23(3)

The use of an adequate project management methodology brings the following major advantages:

- An easier and simpler project management;

- An easier project planning and control;
- A more efficient running of the project team;
- Better communication within the project team;
- Better communication with stakeholders;
- A more effective introduction of change;
- A more efficient project risk and project quality management;
- An easier and faster achievement of project outcomes, etc.

Simply having a project methodology and following it does not lead to success. (Kerzner, 2004). We should
bear in mind that the above listed benefits can be achieved only by a proper implementation of the
methodology that is deemed adequate for the type of project under consideration. An incorrect
implementation or implementation of an inadequate methodology may lead to confusion and disorientation
and, consequently, to poor outcomes in the project execution.

Speaking in general about project management methodologies, it needs to be said that numerous definitions
can be found in literature (Charvat, 2003; Chin & Spowage, 2010; Cockburn, 2000).The project management
methodology is most frequently defined as a specific instruction, manual or a guide to help the project
manager and the project team manage the project in a most effective manner and bring it to a desired
completion. According to the PMI, methodology is defined as a set of methods, techniques, procedures,
rules and good practices implemented in the project in order that project requirements should be satisfied.

Chin & Spowage (2010) define the project management methodology as a specific approach to managing
every aspect of the project in the form of general and specific procedures, rules, regulations and standards.
They listed four components of the project management methodology:

1. Project management processes such as initiation, planning, execution and monitoring of the
project progress.
2. Selection of tools and techniques for communication and delivery to stakeholders.
3. Consolidated and aggregate set of appropriate best practices and values of project management.
4. Reference list of terminology as common denominator and language of project management.

When classifying project management methodologies Chin & Spowage (2010) suggest five different levels:

Level one: Best practices, standards and guides;

Level two: Specific sector methodology;
Level three: Specific organisational methodology;
Level four: Specific project methodology;
Level five: Individual methodology.

They explain that each methodology has its own specificities and rank PMI and PRINCE2 methodologies into
level one, while agile methodologies such as SCRUM, RAD, etc., according to them, are specific sector
methodologies (Level two). When defining a methodology for a certain group of similar projects, it is
important to note that numerous authors (Chin & Spowage, 2010; Oellgaard, 2013; Paulson, 2001; Shenhar,
1996; Spundak, 2014) suggest the use of a combination of traditional and agile approaches in order that
advantages of these methodologies should be made a better use of when implemented in different projects.
It was already said that agile methodologies can be used in the first part of investment projects and the
traditional ones are more adequate to use in the execution phase. This basically means that a number of
available methodologies should be used and that adaptations should be made to suit the project
characteristics, environmental constraints and stakeholders’ requirements.

The key word when selecting or creating an acceptable project management methodology should be
adaptation, i.e., adjustment of available methodologies to a certain type of projects, rather than creation of
entirely new methodologies. The company has to be capable of using a number of available methodologies
and to observe a principle of amendment or remake and adjustment of some of the available methodologies
to a certain type of project, or even to a certain individual project (Chin & Spowage, 2010). The development
of a new methodology for every new project in the organisation is not practical; is it more convenient to
adapt some of the available methodologies to a certain project executed in the organisation.

10
 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2018/23(3)

In conclusion, theory and practice offer a large number of project management methodologies and they
can be a basis for innovation and adjustment to a certain type of project. It is obviously expensive and
unnecessary to create an entirely new methodology. The basic methodological principles of project
management are well known. Numerous project management methodologies have already been developed
following this principle. In concrete situations, it is necessary to find out which project management
methodology is the most adequate to implement, then identify the basic features of a certain group of
projects (or a project) and finally adjust the methodology to the requirements, i.e., characteristics of the
given group of projects.

Conclusion

The aim of this paper was to analyse and discuss the possibilities of implementation of already existing project management
methodologies for different kinds of projects as well as to find the way to form groups of similar projects and define
adequate methodologies for them.

Based on bibliometrics techniques, a short review of the methodologies, proposed and implemented in the project
management practice (PMI, IPMA, APM, YUPMA, and others) was provided. The specific features of these methodologies
were analysed bearing in mind the possibilities of their implementation. The results of provided meta analysis showed that
general characteristics of traditional methodologies (PMI,IPMA, APM,YUPMA, PRINCE 2) make them more adequate to be
implemented in larger and more complex projects such as: investment, military, manufacturing, overhaul, etc. projects. On
the other hand, general characteristics of agile methodologies lead to a conclusion that these methodologies are more
suitable to use for IT projects as well as for some smaller and less complex projects, such as devising various studies,
project reports, etc.

This study presents the meta analysis on existing methodologies and provides the synthesis of key features of different
applicable methodologies. The conclusions and the entire paper should be understood primarily as a starting point for
further research oriented towards defining specific methodologies adequate for certain groups of projects.

REFERENCES

[1] Abrahamsson, P., Salo, O., Ronkainen, J., & Warsta, J. (2002). Agile software development methods:
Review and analysis. VTT Publications, 478. Espoo. Finland, 107p.
[2] Fowler, M., & Highsmith, J. (2001). The agile manifesto. Software Development, 9(8), 28-35.
[3] APM (2000). APM Project Management Body of Knowledge. The Association for Project Management.
UK
[4] Beric, I. (2013). The Analysis of the Implementation of Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in the Project
Portfolio Selection and Optimization, PhD thesis, University of Belgrade
[5] Besner, C., & Hobbs, B. (2012). An Empirical Identification of Project Management Toolsets and a
Comparison among Project Types. Project Management Journal, 43(5), 24-46. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.21292
[6] Charvat, J. (2003). Project Management Methodologies: Selecting, Implementing, and Supporting
Methodologies and Processes for Projects. John Wiley & Sons.
[7] Chin, C. M. M., & Spowage, A. C. (2010). Defining & classifying project management methodologies.
PM World Today, 12(5), 1-9.
[8] Cockburn, A. (2000). Selecting a Project’s Methodology. IEEE Software. Volume 17, Issue 4. 64-71.
DOI: 10.1109/52.854070
[9] Declaration of Interdependance. (2005). Retrieved from http://pmdoi.org
[10] Drob, C., & Zichil, V. (2013). Overview regarding the main guidelines, standards and methodologies
used in project management. Journal of Engineering Studies and Research, 19(3), 26.
[11] Elattar, S. M. S. (2009). Towards developing an improved methodology for evaluating performance and
achieving success in construction projects. Scientific Research and Essays, 4(6), 549-554.
[12] Fernandez, D. J., & Fernandez, J. D. (2008). Agile project management—agilism versus traditional
approaches. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 49(2), 10-17.
[13] Fernandez-Sanchez, G., & Rodriguez Lopez, F. (2010). A methodology to identify sustainability
indicators in construction project management: Application to infrastructure projects in Spain.
Ecological Indicators, 10(6), 1193–1201. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.04.009
[14] Hass, K. B. (2007). The blending of traditional and agile project management. PM world today, 9(5), 1-8.
[15] HBS. (1997). Project Management Manual. Harvard Business School
[16] Hobbs, B., & Petit, Y. (2017). Agile Methods on Large Projects in Large Organizations. Project
Management Journal, 48(3), 3-19. DOI: 10.1177/875697281704800301

11
 Petar Jovanović Ivana Berić 2018/23(3)

[17] IPMA. (2015). IPMA Competence baseline, version 4.0. International Project Management Association.
Switzerland
[18] Joslin, R., & Muller, R. (2015). Relationships between a project management methodology and project
success in different project governance contexts. International Journal of Project Management, 33,
1377–1392. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.03.005
[19] Jovanovic, A., Jovanovic, F., Miletic, L., & Beric, I. (2016). Application of agile methodologies in software
development, Tehnika,71(6), 896-900, DOI: 10.5937/tehnika1606896J
[20] Jovanovic, P. (2015). Project management. Faculty of Project and Innovation Management. Belgrade.
Serbia.
[21] Jovanovic, P. (2017). Project management development - contemporary tendencies and methodologies,
YUPMA 2017, Zlatibor
[22] Jovanovic, P., & Jovanovic, F. (2009). YUPMA project management methodology, YUPMA 2009, Zlatibor
[23] Jovanovic, P., & Jovanovic, F. (2016). Management of Software and Investment Projects - Traditional and
Agile Methodologies, Proceedings of the Faculty of Project and Innovation Management, Belgrade
[24] Kerzner, H. (2004). Advanced Project Management: Best Practices on Implementation, John Wiley &
Sons, USA
[25] Kilibarda, G. D., Sobajic, V. M., Beric, I. M., & Jovanovic, P. M. (2016). Software project management.
Tehnika, 71(1), 145-152. DOI: 10.5937/tehnika1601145K
[26] Kostic, M. (2017). Challenges of Agile Practices Implementation in the Medical Device Software
Development Methodologies. European Project Management Journal, 7(2), 36-44
[27] McHugh, O., & Hogan, M. (2011). Investigating the rationale for adopting an internationally-recognised
project management methodology in Ireland: The view of the project manager. International Journal of
Project Management, 29(5), 637-646. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.05.001
[28] Milosevic, D., & Patanakul, P. (2005). Standardized project management may increase development
projects success, International Journal of project Management, 23(3), 181-192. DOI:
10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.11.002
[29] Oellgaard, M. J. (2013). The Performance of a Project Life Cycle Methodology in Practice. Project
Management Journal,44(4), 65–83. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.21357
[30] OGC. (2009), Managing Successful Project with PRINCE2, Office of Government Commerce Norwich,
UK, The Stationary Office
[31] Paulson, L. D. (2001). Adapting methodologies for doing software right. IT Professional, 3(4), 13-15.
[32] Pichler, R. (2010). Agile Project Management with Scrum, Addison-Wesley Professional
[33] PMI (2013). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide). Project
Management Institute. USA
[34] Rasnacis, A., & Berzisa, S. (2017). Method for Adaptation and Implementation of Agile Project
Management Methodology. Procedia Computer Science, 104, 43-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.01.055
[35] Schwaber, K. (2004). Agile Project Management with Scrum, Microsoft Press
[36] Semolic, B., Jovanovic, P., Kovacev, S., & Obradovic, V. (2007). Improving Repair Management of Bucket
Wheel Excavator SRs1200 by Application of Project Management Concept. Strojniski Vestnik. 54. 565-
573.
[37] Serrador, P., & Pinto, J. K. (2015). Does Agile work? — A quantitative analysis of agile project success.
International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1040-1051. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.01.006
[38] Shenhar, A. J. (1996). From theory to practice: Toward a typology of project management styles, IEEE
Transition on Engineering Management, 45 (1). 33 – 48. DOI: 10.1109/17.658659
[39] Sohi, A. J., Hertogh, M., Bosch-Rekveldt, M., & Blom, R. (2016). Does Lean & Agile Project Management
Help Coping with Project Complexity? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 226, 252-259. DOI:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.06.186
[40] Spundak, M. (2014). Mixed agile/traditional project management methodology – reality or illusion?
Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 119. 939 – 948. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.105
[41] Wells, H. (2012). How effective are project management methodologies? An explorative evaluation of
their benefits in practice. Project Management Journal 43 (6). 43-58. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.21302
[42] Wirkus, M. (2016). Adaptive Management Approach to an Infrastructure Project. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 226, 414-422

Received: 2018-07-13
Revisions requested: 2018-09-05
Revised: 2018-10-02
Accepted: 2018-10-30

12
Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2018/23(3)

About the Author

Prof. dr Petar Jovanović, (emeritus)

University EDUCONS, Faculty of Project and Innovation Management, Belgrade
[email protected]

Petar Jovanović, Ph.D., former dean of the Faculty of Organizational Sciences,

and head of the Department of Management at the Faculty of Organizational Sciences
as well as founder and former dean of the Faculty of Project and Innovation
Management. He has been engaged in management and project management for more
than thirty years. In 1986 he established the Yugoslav Project Management Association,
and since then he was the president of this association, that became the Serbian Project
Management Association (YUPMA). He was an individual member of the PMI
(Project Management Institute) from USA, BAM (British Academy of Management),
UK and a delegate of the IPMA (International Project Management Association).
He wrote a large number of papers and books about project management, and
generations of project managers have been trained and learned from his books.
He defined, conducted and realized over 350 trainings and courses
on management and project management, investment management etc.,
wrote over 70 books and 200 papers and also managed a large number of projects.
He was founder and editor in chief in 2 international scientific journals.

Ivana Berić
University EDUCONS, Faculty of Project and Innovation Management, Belgrade
[email protected]

Ivana Berić, PhD, Assistant Professor and Vice dean for Education and International
Cooperation at the Faculty of Project and Innovation Management and Vice President of
the Serbian Project Management Association. She is actively involved in preparation of
trainings, seminars, symposia, corespondence with foreign associations,
and process of certification of project managers. With more than 45 published peer
reviews and conference papers in Management, Project Management,
Strategic management and Project Portfolio Management area, she has also worked on
numerous books, monographs and proceedings and provided more
than 50 trainings and seminars for different target groups.

13