challenges of project based learning

Article3.pdf

Home >Engineering homework help >challenges of project based learning

ScienceDirect

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510

1877-0509 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the CENTERIS - International Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN - International Conference on Project MANagement / HCist - International Conference on Health and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies. 10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.067

10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.067

© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the CENTERIS - International Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN - International Conference on Project MANagement / HCist - International Conference on Health and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies.

1877-0509

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

CENTERIS - International Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN - International Conference on Project MANagement / HCist - International Conference on Health

and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies, CENTERIS / ProjMAN / HCist 2017, 8-10 November 2017, Barcelona, Spain

Rethinking Project Management Education: A Humanistic Approach based on Design Thinking

Natalie Ewina*, Jo Luckb, Ritesh Chughc, Jacqueline Jarvisa aSchool of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Brisbane 4017, Australia

bSchool of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton 4701, Australia cSchool of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Melbourne 3000, Australia

Abstract

This paper intends to provide an insight into the importance of design thinking as a novel concept in project management education. While design thinking itself is not new, the role it can play in shaping future project managers can be vital. This narrative literature review paper paints a picture of the increase in project failures and its reasons, andragogic considerations in project management education, and how design thinking can help. Subsequent discussion highlights the need for design thinking in project education. The paper’s conclusion is that it is indeed time to rethink project management education, especially through the incorporation of design thinking to produce better project managers and reduce project failures in the future. © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the CENTERIS - International Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN - International Conference on Project MANagement / HCist - International Conference on Health and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies.

Keywords: Soft skills; design thinking; project failure; project management; education

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +61-07-3023-4250. E-mail address: [email protected]

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

CENTERIS - International Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN - International Conference on Project MANagement / HCist - International Conference on Health

and Social Care Information Systems and Technologies, CENTERIS / ProjMAN / HCist 2017, 8-10 November 2017, Barcelona, Spain

Rethinking Project Management Education: A Humanistic Approach based on Design Thinking

Natalie Ewina*, Jo Luckb, Ritesh Chughc, Jacqueline Jarvisa aSchool of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Brisbane 4017, Australia

bSchool of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton 4701, Australia cSchool of Engineering and Technology, Central Queensland University, Melbourne 3000, Australia

Abstract

Keywords: Soft skills; design thinking; project failure; project management; education

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +61-07-3023-4250. E-mail address: [email protected]

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.067&domain=pdf

504 Natalie Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510 Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 2

1. Introduction

Traditionally, project failures have been attributed to human aspects of projects. Two of these humanistic issues occur either at the beginning of the project life cycle, where the project is designed or at the end where the project is transitioned into the business. There is a significant body of work that has examined the issues of transition and the need for change management. When projects fail it has been commonly understood as project management failure, however a number of forces may influence failure. It appears that traditional project management education does little to prepare project managers for the reality of projects, particularly in equipping them with soft-skills1. One aspect is the ability to engage with customers and users, to ensure that the project deliverables will address the customers’ real needs. This means the project manager must in many cases question what the customer originally states as requirements. The project manager, or those they employ to analyze the business need, must dig deeper, regardless of whether they have a personal understanding of the users’ needs or not. Project management has borrowed from other disciplines, such as business management, manufacturing, accountancy, and human resource management, to form the modern body of knowledge. In this trend, project managers can borrow from design disciplines, in particular design thinking, to improve the capacity of project managers to engage effectively with users; and ensure they are addressing the key problem as defined by the user.

The purpose of this literature review paper is multifaceted, firstly, it highlights gaps in the project management

literature. It does not propose to provide a historical overview of project management. However, it does refer to the historical issue of project failure that has yet to be resolved, and that contemporary literature suggests is increasing. The primary purpose is to propose an argument in terms of how filling these gaps could potentially drive research into methods to improve the likelihood of project managers achieving successful project outcomes. The review identified a lack of literature discussing the use of design thinking in project management, with one of the first significant additions by Ben Mahmoud-Jouini, Midler, and Silberzahn2. The literature review will argue that design thinking should be utilized as a hybrid imaginative method for developing soft skills in project management students. Introducing another process, such as design thinking, into the project management curriculum is thought provoking and may be controversial in traditional project management circles. This stimulation of scholarly discussion is an intended consequence of the narrative literature review3.

The paper is structured as follows. Section two outlines the research method adopted for this paper. The ensuing

literature review is subdivided into sections that cascade together to take the reader through the literature analyzing the concepts of project failure, project management education and design thinking. These concepts flow in a narrative which forms the basis for the proposed arguments and applied research. The significance of project failure in industry is initially highlighted in section three. This leads to section four which argues the need to change the way project management is taught with an emphasis being placed on a greater need for soft skills. Design thinking is proposed as the mechanism to develop soft skills within project management curriculum in section five. A discussion of project failure, project management education and design thinking is in section six. The final section concludes with an argument to support further research into the effective inclusion of soft skills development via design thinking in project management curriculum.

2. Research Method

Literature reviews can have multiple purposes, including provision of historical perspectives of a topic4. This literature review considers important extant literature exploring the intersection between project management education and design thinking and soft skills. The analysis of the literature reviewed in this paper is narrative in style and is not meant as a systematic review. Narrative analysis enables the meaningful convergence of evidence across diverse methodologies utilized in the existing literature5. Narrative reviews consist of critical analysis of the literature6, are mainly descriptive and studies are chosen based on availability or author selection7. As is common with narrative reviews, this paper does not seek to highlight the ways that literature selection may have influenced the findings.

Natalie Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510 505 Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 2

1. Introduction

The purpose of this literature review paper is multifaceted, firstly, it highlights gaps in the project management

The paper is structured as follows. Section two outlines the research method adopted for this paper. The ensuing

2. Research Method

Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 3

3. Project Failure

Despite improvements in project management tools and processes, project failure remains an eminent issue8 and appears to be rising9-11. Sage, Dainty, and Brookes12 qualitatively examined the United Kingdom’s construction industry through four orientations, the positivist, structural Marxist critique, interpretative narrative analysis and actor- network theory. Project management tools developed for construction were found to be based on a positivist- functionalist epistemology and these are developed to control the unpredictability of projects12. Providing a framework to consider project failures more widely than the managerial positivist approach and beyond the hegemonic masculine approach could bring to light differing constructs of project failure.

The proposition that failure is not always related to managerial issues which would be seen primarily in the

execution phase is supported by a study that examined the lessons learnt from an Information Technology company in Israel over a twelve-month period13. It found that the majority, 51%, of lessons learned were situated in the planning phase of the project with responsibilities, communication and resource planning and control being the most common codes of lessons learned throughout the entire lifecycle 13. It is interesting to note that no lessons were identified from the closing phase of the life cycle. Failures associated with the front and back ends of projects can in many cases be traced back to issues relating to or stemming from people such as poor relationships between the project team and key stakeholders14. At the front end, this may be attributed to gathering of requirements without empathetic inquiry, without deep questioning to really understand the needs of the customer and users15. At the back end of the project, which the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) terms the closing phase16, the people factor is again a significant reason for project failure. This back end failure may culminate from an optimism bias that the change related to the project output will not significantly impact users.

Another lens through which project failure can be viewed is from the domain perspective. Besner and Hobbs 17

highlight the similarities and differences inherent in project management across domains and this is the basis of project domain characterization. There is not a common set of agreed project domains in the project management industry. Given the diversity of categorizations, research on the failures of projects is just as diverse, both in the paradigms and methods used. When reviewing the literature, it can be difficult to compare findings of failure across the domains. Al- Ahmad et al.18 reviewed the literature on project failure, highlighting common and sub-domain specific root causes. By looking across the common sub-domains of information systems, web-based projects and healthcare informatics, a taxonomy of six IT project failure root causes (project management, top management, technology, organizational, complexity/size and process factors) was developed. This taxonomy was based on IT project failure and the subdomains within IT. However, this taxonomy could prove valuable in terms of characterizing other project domains’ root causes of failure.

In construction, rework has been identified as a key cause of increases to costs and delays on projects19. Design

related changes are recognized as one of the significant root causes of rework which lead to increased cost and delays characteristic of project failure20, 21. Design discrepancies was one of the top ten leading factors of project failure in construction infrastructure projects22. In research and development (R&D) project failures, Link and Wright23 reported that utilizing females as the principal for the project led to a decreased likelihood of failure. This demographic finding, although prima facie, supports the assumption that the feminine traits reflected in effective soft skills and creativity assists with project success. The limitation of this finding is that the study did not investigate the nature of this correlation. The study did not investigate whether or not the female participants possessed the soft skills that are espoused as feminine characteristics or whether other factors or a combination of factors were influencing the success.

In examining failure through the lens of project lifecycle or domain, the ambiguity of failure remains.

Differentiating between project management failure and project failure can be used as means to address this ambiguity. Project management success has been described as the traditional practice of referencing project performance against the constraints of cost, time, scope and quality 24-26. The preference of this view is likely due to the ease with defining contractual performance against these criteria and the ability to obtain measures throughout and immediately at the close of the project. By contrast, project success moves past the delivery of the project output to the client or business. It describes whether the use of the project output has achieved the outcome the sponsor originally intended,

506 Natalie Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510 Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 4

measurement of which is more complicated and usually longitudinal. This is highlighted by the considerable issues experienced with outcomes based funding models27. Projects should be conceptualized to achieve an outcome not simply developing an output, thus focus on project success. However, project management education traditionally focuses on project management success as opposed to project success.

4. Project Management Education

In 1999, the International Project Management Association (IPMA) initiated a number of Global Working Parties, one of which was dedicated to Project Management education. The outcome of which highlighted the need to change the way project management was taught. A criticism of the Global Working Party was that it did not provide direction about how to improve the education, it simply stated the issues. Major issue categories identified were: commonality and difference (in the use of terms and application of methodology), structure of the education process, practical relevance of the education and training process, support of top management and other stakeholders and new trends in project management education28. This acknowledgement of the inadequacy to prepare prospective project managers through the traditional project management education has been shared in similar disciplines of science education and engineering and technology education. Medical education has also struggled to keep pace with the changing environment of the profession29. Attempts have been made in these disciplines to address the concern of traditional educational methods and these may provide a framework for rethinking project management education.

When examining project failure and the need to change the curriculum of project management education, one of

the first considerations would be to review common texts used. Ewin30 suggested a large proportion of the reasons for the success of the Queensland State Government Department of Communities in achieving extremely high independently rated maturity rankings against the Portfolio, Program and Project Management Maturity Matrix (P3M3) framework was due largely to factors not found in the textbooks. When comparing project management in theory and the real world, it was found that project managers apply methodologies learnt from their previous projects’ experience31. These findings raise the concept of industry preparedness not sufficiently being covered by current project management texts, but more by engaging in the lived experience of project management work.

Since the 1999 IPMA’s Global Working Party, the literature has recognized a need to incorporate soft skills into

project management education1 and executives now prioritize soft skills as key competencies required of project managers32. Yet with this need for soft skills, project management, literature, textbooks and repositories continue to focus on hard skills at the expense of information on soft skills33, 34. There are two leading international project management guides, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge16 and Managing Successful Projects with Prince235 which is generally referred to as Prince2 which is an acronym for ‘Projects in Controlled Environments’. Prince2 was the third iteration of a text developed by the United Kingdom Government to address common causes of project failures36. This text is used widely to teach project management yet it excludes soft skills, refer to Table 135.

Table 1: Adaptation of Table 19.3 Comparison between PRINCE2 and a Body of Knowledge35, p.230 PRINCE2 Body of Knowledge A project management method A broad collection of ‘good practices’ for project

management Prescriptive Non-prescriptive An integrated set of processes and themes (they are not isolated silos that can be selectively applied)

Each topic area can be referred to in isolation from others

Covers all project management roles Targeted at Project Managers Does not cover interpersonal skills Covers interpersonal skills References techniques Describes techniques

The Prince2 text is only one of the myriad of texts utilized for teaching project management and use of Prince2 as

a text example, will need to be supported by a wider sampling of current texts to further support the suggestion that texts are lacking in providing adequate knowledge to support a humanistic approach to project management education. This text supports a critique of the current state of project management education and the need to include other means of improving soft skills for project management students.

Natalie Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510 507 Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 4

4. Project Management Education

When examining project failure and the need to change the curriculum of project management education, one of

Since the 1999 IPMA’s Global Working Party, the literature has recognized a need to incorporate soft skills into

management Prescriptive Non-prescriptive An integrated set of processes and themes (they are not isolated silos that can be selectively applied)

Each topic area can be referred to in isolation from others

Covers all project management roles Targeted at Project Managers Does not cover interpersonal skills Covers interpersonal skills References techniques Describes techniques

The Prince2 text is only one of the myriad of texts utilized for teaching project management and use of Prince2 as

Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 5

The second text considered was ‘A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge’16 provides guidance on

project management concepts and their application. The fifth edition highlights the need for effective project managers to have a balance of technical, interpersonal and conceptual skills. The guide is 598 pages in length with approximately three pages of information on interpersonal skills, which is spaced in small paragraphs throughout the text15. Similarly to Prince2, PMBOK supported the critique that the current state of project management education, was too focused on hard skills and requires more emphasis on the development of soft skills. This was supported by Pant and Baroudi 1 who explored the need for project managers to have both hard and soft skills and how traditional project management education was lacking in developing soft skills. The lack of coverage of soft skills in PMBOK was highlighted and tertiary education in project management critiqued, with emotional intelligence being discussed as an essential soft skill not being developed.

5. Design Thinking

Design thinking allows “interactive understandings that are both analytic and experiential”37, p. 294. People engaging in design thinking, demonstrate a number of common attributes including framing, which encompasses the ability to relate new situations to past experience, leveraging both convergent and divergent thinking, and iteration38. The feminine attributes of imagination and intuition are attributed to divergent thinking, the purpose of which is to open the problem space to new considerations39. Convergent thinking takes on the masculine attributes of logical and rational thought and is used in the narrowing of solution options39. Table 2 highlights the three attributes of design thinking which have been identified as empathy, invention and iteration supported by three fundamental design principles.40, pp.16-18.

Table 2: Attributes and principles of design thinking. Adapted from Liedtka and Ogilvie40, pp. 16-18 Attribute Principle Empathy Aim of developing a deep connection with those you serve. Invention Do not let preconceived limitations dictate your possibilities. Iteration Pursue opportunities not perfection

The importance of utilizing the attributes and principles of design thinking is especially relevant to project

managers who are faced with clients that are trying to solve ill-defined or wicked problems. “The past model of societal governance based on increasingly specific and numerous silos of deep expertise no longer appears fit for its purpose.”37, p.6. Teal37 highlighted that critical thinking skills in students tend to be developed in highly structured ways, similar to the hegemonic masculine nature of science education described by Hildebrand41. Teal37 further highlights that this structured skill development does not reflect real world problems that are usually ill-defined37. Renard38 suggests that developing design thinking in higher education students can enable these students to enter their chosen professions with the mental agility to work comfortably in undefined problem spaces and bring about meaningful change. Students’ experience in utilising the Hong Kong Design Institute’s 3EM framework in design thinking projects enabled a shift in self-reported empathy. The 3EMs framework emphasises empathy, embrace and empowerment as catalysts for humanistic change. “This project opened up our minds and was the first time we had looked at design from a user’s point of view” 42. A limitation of Lam and Sin Suen42 however, was the limited reporting of results and the homogeneity of the student cohort and teachers, mainly from design and visual arts departments.

Teaching design can be framed in two ways, firstly from the perspective of attaining specialist design skills, such

as graphic design and secondly the generic application to non-design contexts43. Design thinking, embodies the generic skills44 and moves away from traditional andragogic approaches associated with project management education towards a more hybrid imaginative approach, which may be uncomfortable for students24. Providing structure to design thinking, both in terms of resources and delivery can assist students to be more comfortable with this andragogic shift and engage with the new concepts and practices. Multiple options to incorporate design thinking into the curriculum exist, from including infographics into lectures slides for an introduction to the concept, short workshops or online courses, to a full semester design thinking course. Incremental addition of high level understanding of design thinking to already existing units can garner what level of interest, uptake and support there

508 Natalie Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510 Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 6

is for offering training and for implementing concepts and strategies into curriculum. This could include incorporating infographics in course material, an introduction as a single week topic in a semester course and short introductory videos as viable options to raise awareness of design.

The Stanford University design school (d.school) has the Virtual Crash Course that takes participants through design thinking in ninety minutes45. The d.school describes the design thinking in five steps: empathise, define, ideate, prototype and test45. Students gain experience with aspects of design thinking such as gaining an understanding of the customers need through empathetic enquiry and prototyping. For tertiary education institutions, this course provides the opportunity for collaboration or at least a starting point to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of participatory introduction sessions to design thinking. Tertiary offerings usually form part of a larger program of study however more are being offered as standalone. Resources that can support longer units of study in design thinking should provide the structure appropriate for the associated level of qualification and also ease of use both from the student and the instructional designers’ perspective. Liedtka and Ogilvie40 define design thinking, why it is important and provide a design thinking toolkit to assist application which can be incorporated into courseware offering. The framework consists of four questions, what is, what if, what wows, and what works, which drive the design thinking process. The process is supported by ten tools; visualisation, journey mapping, value chain analysis, mind mapping, brainstorming, concept development, assumption testing, rapid prototyping, customer co-creation, and learning launch.

Project management students and professionals do not need to perform full design thinking cycles in projects to

gain value from design thinking training. It is more likely that value will be gained from reflecting on the concepts and principles incorporated in the design process and how they could be utilised to improve outcomes in their specific work context. Whether it be empathy, iteration, showing work early, being more comfortable with negative feedback and so forth, there are many such concepts that can provide potential opportunities for improvement.

6. Discussion

There is a consensus in the research of the systemic failure of projects and that there is a need to change how prospective project managers are educated. What changes to the teaching practices are required is not clear. However, there is agreement that there needs to be more emphasis placed on soft skills. This has been addressed somewhat by offering cross disciplinary elective subjects such as communication. However, most of the project management curriculum and supporting texts are based in the hegemonic tradition. Leading texts such as PMBOK only provide a glancing reference to soft skills whereas others such as Prince2 explicitly exclude the topic.

The literature discussing design thinking within educational contexts emphasizes soft skills, particularly empathy,

collaboration, creativity, and non-linear problem solving46.Students found this emphasis on soft skills uncomfortable46, however repeated exposure was shown to minimise this47. Design thinking moves away from the hegemonic tradition embraced by project management to a more hybrid imaginative approach. As project management has borrowed from disciplines of management and organizational development, so it can from design. It has been suggested that design thinking can contribute to innovation in projects, improving exploration, stakeholder involvement and strategy formation2. Although advocating the use of design thinking for innovation projects2, and highlighting the process emphasis on soft skills, there remains a gap in the literature considering such a discipline as a mechanism for teaching soft skills to project management students.

With project failure reported as increasing and a recognition of the need to change project management education,

further research is needed to examine how to more effectively include soft skills into the project management curriculum.

7. Conclusion

The premise that an increased emphasis on soft skills is required to improve the success of projects is recognized in the literature. However, there is a lack of evidence of how to best develop soft skills within the context of project

Natalie Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510 509 Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 6

Project management students and professionals do not need to perform full design thinking cycles in projects to

6. Discussion

The literature discussing design thinking within educational contexts emphasizes soft skills, particularly empathy,

With project failure reported as increasing and a recognition of the need to change project management education,

further research is needed to examine how to more effectively include soft skills into the project management curriculum.

7. Conclusion

Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 7

management education. The design thinking process highlights the importance of soft skills with the development of creative solutions to problems or opportunities. Project management looks to design, develop and implement solutions, yet projects fail and this trend is increasing. A number of reasons for project failure have been linked to poor relationships between the project team and key stakeholders. Design thinking may be able to address the poor relational issues that have been reported as significant in project failure, through developing soft skills in project management practitioners and particularly by embedding it in project management curriculum.

A limitation of this literature review is that it is narrative and does not purport to review all the literature on the

concepts discussed. The purpose of the review is to look at the intersection of these concepts, identify gaps in the literature and suggest future research. A further limitation is the focus on a single mechanism for developing empathy, being Design Thinking. Future studies can look at the role of empathetic skills to reduce project failure.

References

1. Pant, I. and B. Baroudi, Project management education: The human skills imperative. International Journal of Project Management, 2008. 26: p. 124-128.

2. Ben Mahmoud‐Jouini, S., C. Midler, and P. Silberzahn, Contributions of Design Thinking to Project Management in an Innovation Context. Project Management Journal, 2016. 47(2): p. 144-156.

3. Green, B.N., C.D. Johnson, and A. Adams, Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 2006. 5(3): p. 101-117.

4. Ridley, D., The Literature Review A Step-by-step Guide for Students. 2008, London: London : Sage Publications Ltd. 5. Baumeister, R.F. and M.R. Leary, Writing Narrative Literature Reviews. Review of General Psychology, 1997. 1(3): p. 311-320. 6. Rother, E.T., Revisão sistemática X revisão narrativa Revisión sistemática X revisión narrativa Systematic literature review X narrative

review. Acta Paulista de Enfermagem, 2007. 20(2): p. v-vi. 7. Uman, L.S., Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2011. 20(1): p.

57-59. 8. Mir, F.A. and A.H. Pinnington, Exploring the value of project management: Linking Project Management Performance and Project Success.

International Journal of Project Management, 2014. 32: p. 202-217. 9. Barlow, G., et al., Project Management Survey 2013, KPMG. p. 34. 10. Project Management Institute, The High Cost of Low Performance: How will you improve business results? PMI’s Pulse of the Profession,

8th Global Project Management Survey. 2016. p. 32. 11. Sjostrom, M. and P. Braun, Project and Programme Management Survey. 2015, KPMG: Sweden. p. 32. 12. Sage, D., A. Dainty, and N. Brookes, A critical argument in favor of theoretical pluralism: Project failure and the many and varied

limitations of project management. International Journal of Project Management, 2014. 32(4): p. 544-555. 13. Holzmann, V. Analyzing lessons learnt to identify potential risks in new product development projects. in European Conference on

Information Management & Evaluation. 2012. Como, Italy. 14. Bryde, D.J. and L. Robinson, Client versus contractor perspectives on project success criteria. International Journal of Project Management,

2005. 23(8): p. 622-629. 15. Lane, S., P. O’Raghallaigh, and D. Sammon, Requirements gathering: the journey. Journal of Decision Systems, 2016. 25: p. 302-312. 16. Project Management Institute, A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® guide). 5th ed. 2013, Newtown Square,

Pennsylvania: Newtown Square, Pennsylvania : Project Management Institute, Inc. 17. Besner, C. and B. Hobbs, Project management practice, generic or contextual: A reality check. Project Management Journal, 2008. 39(1): p.

16-33. 18. Al-Ahmad, W., et al., A Taxonomy of an IT Project Failure: Root Causes. International Management Review, 2009. 5(1): p. 93-104,106. 19. Love, P., Influence of Project Type and Procurement Method on Rework Costs in Building Construction Projects. Journal of Construction

Engineering & Management, 2002. 128(1): p. 18. 20. Ibbs, C.W., Quantitative impacts of project change: Size issues. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1997. 123(3): p. 308-

311. 21. Love, P. and D. Edwards, Forensic project management: The underlying causes of rework in construction projects. Civil Engineering &

Environmental Systems, 2004. 21(3): p. 207-228. 22. Ikediashi, D.I., S.O. Ogunlana, and A. Alotaibi, Analysis of project failure factors for infrastructure projects in Saudi Arabia: A multivariate

approach. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 2014. 19(1): p. 35-52. 23. Link, A.N. and M. Wright, On the Failure of R&D Projects. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 2015. 62(4): p. 442-448. 24. Rolstadås, A., et al., Understanding project success through analysis of project management apporach. International journal of managing

projects in business, 2014. 7(4): p. 638-660. 25. de Wit, A., Measurement of project success. International Journal of Project Management, 1988. 6(3): p. 164-170. 26. Cooke-Davies, T., The “real” success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2002. 20(3): p. 185-190. 27. Heinrich, C., Outcomes-based performance management in the public sector: implications for government accountability and effectiveness.

Public administration review, 2002. 62(6): p. 712-725. 28. Turner, J.R. and M. Huemann, Current and future trends in the education in project managers. Project Management. Vol, 2000. 6: p. 20-26. 29. van de Grift, T.C. and R. Kroeze, Design Thinking as a Tool for Interdisciplinary Education in Health Care. Academic Medicine, 2016.

91(9): p. 1234-1238.

510 Natalie Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017) 503–510 Ewin et al. / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2017) 000–000 8

30. Ewin, N., Department of Communities, Portfolio, Program and Project Management Maturity Journey, in Australian Institute of Project Management National Conference. 2014: Brisbane, QLD.

31. Chugh, R., Analysis of Project Management in Theory and Real World: An Information System Case, in IEEE International Conference on Information Management and Engineering (ICIME2011). 2011: Zhengzhou, China. p. 1-11.

32. Stevenson, D.H. and J.A. Starkweather, PM critical competency index: IT execs prefer soft skills. International Journal of Project Management, 2010. 28(7): p. 663-671.

33. Petter, S. and A.B. Randolph, Developing soft skills to manage user expectations in IT projects: Knowledge reuse among IT project managers. Project Management Journal, 2009. 40(4): p. 45-59.

34. Pollack, J., The changing paradigms of project management. International Journal of Project Management, 2007. 25(3): p. 266-274. 35. Office of Government Commerce, U.K., Managing successful projects with PRINCE2. 5th ed. London : TSO. 36. Haughey, D. The History of Prince2. Available from: https://www.projectsmart.co.uk/history-of-prince2.php. 37. Teal, R., Developing a (Non-linear) Practice of Design Thinking. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 2010. 29(3): p. 294-

302. 38. Renard, H., Cultivating Design Thinking in Students through Material Inquiry. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher

Education, 2014. 26(3): p. 11. 39. Schön, D.A., The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action. 2003, Aldershot: Aldershot : Ashgate. 40. Liedtka, J. and T. Ogilvie, Designing for Growth - A Design Thinking Toolkit for Managers. 2011: New York; Chichester: Columbia

University Press. 41. Hildebrand, G.M., Disrupting Hegemonic Writing Practices in School Science: Contesting the Right Way To Write. Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 1998. 35(4): p. 345-62. 42. Lam, Y.Y. and B.Y. Sin Suen, Experiencing empathy in design education through community engagement. International Journal of

Continuing Education & Lifelong Learning, 2015. 7(2): p. 53-69. 43. Lloyd, P., Embedded creativity: teaching design thinking via distance education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education,

2013. 23(3): p. 749-765. 44. Vredenburg, K., Design vs Design Thinking Explained, in On design, technology, and optimizing the human experience. 2016. 45. Stanford University Institute of Design. Welcome to the Virtual Crash Course in Design Thinking. 2016; Available from:

http://dschool.stanford.edu/dgift/. 46. Glen, R., et al., Teaching design thinking in business schools. The International Journal of Management Education, 2015. 13(2): p. 182-192. 47. Welsh, M.A. and G.E. Dehler, Combining Critical Reflection and Design Thinking to Develop Integrative Learners. Journal of Management

Education, 2013. 37(6): p. 771-802.