Background
The integration of project management frameworks into the research processes of PhD candidates is increasingly recognised as a crucial strategy to address high attrition rates and extended time-to-completion in doctoral programs. In this pre-published literature review I examine both traditional and adaptive project management frameworks, evaluating their applicability to the unique challenges of doctoral research. The study aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the best practices for incorporating these frameworks into PhD programs, with the objective of improving completion rates, enhancing candidate satisfaction, and fostering a more supportive and structured research environment.
Methods
A narrative literature review methodology was employed, analysing a broad spectrum of academic papers published in English up to July 2024. The review focused on identifying and evaluating project management frameworks that have been suggested or implemented in academic research, particularly in the context of doctoral studies. Both traditional frameworks, such as the Waterfall model and the PMBOK guidelines, and adaptive frameworks, like Agile and Scrum, were examined. Additionally, hybrid approaches that combine elements of both traditional and adaptive methodologies were explored.
Results
The review identified that traditional project management frameworks, characterised by their structured and sequential processes, offer clear benefits in terms of thorough planning, clear deliverables, and effective scope management. However, their rigidity can be a significant limitation in the dynamic and uncertain environment of doctoral research. Adaptive frameworks, by contrast, emphasise flexibility, iterative processes, and continuous feedback, making them well-suited to managing the complexities of doctoral studies. Hybrid approaches, which integrate the structured management of traditional frameworks with the flexibility of adaptive methods, emerged as a promising solution, offering a balanced approach to managing doctoral research.
Discussion
The integration of project management frameworks into PhD research processes presents several advantages, including improved communication, enhanced productivity, and increased completion rates. However, the review also highlighted challenges, particularly the need for training and development to ensure the successful adoption of these frameworks. The resistance to change within academic institutions, where traditional models of doctoral supervision are deeply entrenched, is another significant barrier. Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of integrating project management principles into doctoral research are substantial, particularly in terms of providing PhD candidates with a structured yet flexible framework to guide their research activities.
Conclusion
This literature review underscores the importance of adopting project management frameworks within PhD programs to improve doctoral outcomes. By balancing the structure of traditional frameworks with the flexibility of adaptive methods, academic institutions can create a more supportive and efficient research environment. The review concludes with a call for further research to evaluate the long-term impact of these frameworks on PhD completion rates and candidate satisfaction, as well as the development of best practices for their implementation in various academic contexts.
