Project and processes: a convenient but simplistic dichotomy

• Published in: International journal of operations & production management Vol. 38; no. 6; pp. 1289 - 1311
• Main Authors: Harvey, Jean, Aubry, Monique
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Bradford Emerald Publishing Limited 21-05-2018; Emerald Group Publishing Limited
• Subjects: Business process reengineering; Classification; Continuous improvement; Critical path; Design of experiments; Model testing; Operations management; Operations research; Organizational change; Organizational learning; Portfolio management; Process controls; Process management; Product development; Production management; Project management; Resource management; Task forces; Learning; Process design; Operations management; Project management; Complex processes; Flexibility; Complexity; Process management
• ISSN: 0144-3577; 1758-6593
• DOI: 10.1108/IJOPM-01-2017-0010

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore commonalities and differences between projects and processes, and between project management (PjM) and process management (PcM), with a view to challenge this dichotomic typology, clarify the gray areas in between and propose better ways to classify and manage different endeavors.
Design/methodology/approach
The research compares different tools and techniques used in both fields, explores the respective literatures and uses various examples to bring out similarities and differences.
Findings
The current paradigms engender a number of organizational endeavors, which are actually complex processes being managed as projects, using the PjM body of knowledge. Because each instantiation takes a somewhat different form, it is treated as a one-of-a-kind undertaking; whereby many of the opportunities for learning and continuous improvement associated with PcM are lost. A reframing and typology is proposed to clarify the central notions involved.
Research limitations/implications
The proposed model has not been tested empirically and the authors could not agree on all aspects of the paper, though existing differences are more about degrees, nuances and wording than about the basic findings of the paper.
Practical implications
The research makes the case that two research and practice communities that are evolving independently have much to gain by adopting a unified model and integrating their respective bodies of knowledge. Practitioners would thus access resources that are better adapted to the management challenges they are facing and gain a sustainable source of strategic advantage.
Originality/value
The paper challenges long-established paradigms between two distinct research streams. A new typology and classification criteria are proposed.