In this chapter we present our overall conclusions and our final set of hypotheses. We then analyze these findings and discuss the implications for organizations, projects and people. Next, we suggest an ideal model for HRM in the project-oriented organization. We do not suggest that this reflects reality in any one of the organizations we interviewed or conducted a case study, but it is our construct of how we believe HRM should ideally operate in a project-oriented organization. However, we do not offer this as the final answer, and so the last section suggests where further research might be done.

FINAL HYPOTHESES

The final set of hypotheses in this research project was developed at the end of March 2007, following our fourth and last case study. The hypotheses covered four areas:

1. The nature of the project-oriented organization and HRM in it
2. The new and different HRM practices required by the project-oriented
3. HRM roles in the project-oriented organization
4. Employee well-being and ethical treatment in the project-oriented organization

The Nature of the Project-Oriented Organization and HRM in It

Hypothesis 1A: Project-oriented organizations make the strategic choice to use temporary organizations, such as projects and programs, to undertake their work processes. They need to adopt HRM practices that align vertically with that strategic choice and horizontally to support those work processes.

Hypothesis 1B: Because project-oriented organizations use temporary organizations to undertake their work processes, the HR configuration of the organization changes every time a project starts and finishes. Therefore HRM is more invasive than it is in the classically managed organization.

Hypothesis 1C: Every time a project starts or finishes, the HRM configuration changes. This creates the need for new and different HRM practices in the project-oriented organizations when compared to traditional models proposed for classically managed organizations. This is not widely recognized, but when it is, different practices are adopted.

The New and Different HRM Practices in the Project-Oriented Organization

Hypothesis 2A: The project-oriented organization needs additional HRM practices specific to projects and programs which the temporary organizations use to undertake its work processes. These include assignment to projects, appraisal, development and reward on projects, and dispersement on project completion.

Hypothesis 2B: The project-oriented organization needs to adapt traditional practices in areas such as selection and recruitment into the organization, appraisal, reward and development while working for the organization, and release from the organization:

• To align with the strategic choice of using management by projects
• To compliment the additional practices adopted specific to the projects
• To support the temporary nature of the work processes and dynamic nature of the work environment
• To advocate and protect the well-being of employees in matters pertaining to the employment relationship

HRM Roles in the Project-Oriented Organization

Hypothesis 3A: The role of the HR department continues to be:

• To set policies, standards, rules and guidelines for HRM
• To delegate their operation to those parts of the business where the decisions have the greatest effect (the principal of subsidiarity)
• To provide support in their operation as necessary

But the policies, rules, standards, and guidelines need to reflect the different practices and processes required by the project-oriented organization.

Hypothesis 3B: Line managers, project managers, deployment managers and HR managers all have specific HRM roles they need to fulfill.

Hypothesis 3C: The distribution of those roles and tasks is dependent on the nature of the projects undertaken by the organization, including their size, duration, repetitiveness, and whether single or multi-discipline.

Hypothesis 3D: The different roles of all the players (line managers, project managers, deployment managers, and HR managers), and the processes and practices adopted depend on the maturity of the organization as a project-oriented organization and its HR configuration.

Hypothesis 3E: Some of the global trends in modern HRM can be identified in project-oriented organizations, particularly the devolution of HRM roles to managers at the work interface, including line managers and project managers. More roles need to be devolved to project managers, but some roles also need to be retained in the line.

Employee Well-Being and Ethical Treatment in the Project-Oriented Organization

Hypothesis 4A: In a dynamic environment in which the HR configuration is constantly changing, the challenges of ensuring employee well-being and ethical treatment is important, but it is frequently overlooked.

Hypothesis 4B: When it comes to considering the effects of HRM policies and practices, the organizational/managerial perspective dominates and the needs of individual employees may be marginalized.

Hypothesis 4C: Project personnel by and large enjoy project-based ways of working, but the discipline tends to be self-selecting, with those not attracted to the working environment leaving.

ANALYSIS

We now discuss our concluding interpretation of these hypotheses:

The Nature of the Project-Oriented Organization and HRM in IT

Project-oriented organizations make the strategic decision to adopt temporary work processes, such as projects and programs, in response to the demands from their customers for bespoke products or services, or to implement more flexible work processes. This strategic choice creates a dynamic work environment where the human resource configuration changes each time a project or program starts or finishes. Project-oriented organizations need to adopt HRM practices that align vertically with that strategic choice, which support the temporary work process adopted and are responsive to that dynamic work environment. Because the HRM configuration changes every time a project starts or finishes, these HRM practices need to be more invasive than in a traditionally managed organization.

The New and Different HRM Practices in the Project-Oriented Organization

The HRM practices that need to be adopted by the project-oriented organization are different from those required by a traditional, classically managed organization, typified by a large manufacturing company. First there needs to be new practices, not previously recognized, specific to projects and programs. Projects and programs are temporary organizations and so the practices conducted in the parent organization need to be replicated in projects and programs. Second, practices adopted in the parent organization also need to be different from the traditionally managed organization. The practices in the parent organization need to be able to deal with the temporary nature of the work processes and dynamic nature of the work environment, but also they need to interface with the practices conducted in the projects and programs.

HRM roles in the Project-Oriented Organization

The role of the HRM department in the project-oriented organization reflects modern practice. Its role is to:

• Set policies, standards, rules and guidelines for HRM
• Delegate their operation to those parts of the business where the decisions have the greatest effect (the principal of subsidiarity)
• Provide support in their operation as necessary

The HRM practices specific to the project or program will usually be conducted by the project or program manager, and those in the line will usually be conducted by the line manager. Decisions in the line usually have an impact on a timescale that exceeds the length of time required for the individual project, therefore these decisions are appropriate. However, for the sake of motivating project team members and the cohesiveness of the project team, there should be a strong formal link between the practices in the line and the practices on the project. In practice, our data showed that the link is often neither formal nor strong. In fact, many organizations reduce the significance of the practices on the project to protect the position of the line manager, to the detriment of project motivation and cohesiveness.

Employee Well-Being and Ethical Treatment in the Project-Oriented Organization

The dynamic work environment where the HR configuration changes every time a project starts or finishes can create pressures on employees, which makes it difficult for them to achieve a work/life balance. Two factors can compound this:

1. When client demands peak together
2. If the project manager is task focused

By and large, project-oriented organizations are not good at managing these peaks in workload and the impact on work/life balance. Further, when organizations select HRM policies and practices, the organizational or managerial perspective tends to dominate and the needs of employees are marginalized. However, project management practitioners seem to enjoy their work, although there is evidence that it is self-selecting. That is, those people who do not like the work environment leave within five years.

IMPLICATIONS

These findings have implications for organizations, projects and people.

Implications for Organizations

The management of human resources in project-oriented companies is an endeavor involving many different parties. We identify three sets of HRM practices in the companies we studied. These are HRM organizational practices, HRM line practices and HRM project practices. How best to manage the interactions between project workers and the line managers, project managers and HRM specialists involved in their employment is an issue not yet fully resolved by the companies we have studied. These organizations grapple with the range of roles and responsibilities distributed among line managers, project managers and the HRM function. The dynamism and discontinuity of work processes in project-oriented organizations exacerbates the situation, but also makes it vitally important that it is well-managed. While our interviews suggest that the allocation of people management tasks in project-oriented organizations is largely a result of history and tradition rather than of organizations strategically assigning roles and tasks to the different groups involved, there are benefits to be gained by examining HRM task distribution in light of the by now well-rehearsed challenges of matrix management and the role of both ambiguity and conflict that accompanies it.

HRM organizational practices play a key role in creating and maintaining consistency in order to prevent the emergence of policies and practices that are unevenly implemented or cause instances of procedural and outcome injustice. Practices described in the paper include annual performance reviews carried out by line managers, supported by organizational templates and systems for ensuring that deadlines are met, and sometimes incorporating the input of project managers in 360-degree feedback practices. In this regard, HRM organizational practices and HRM line practices are mutually supportive, while HRM project practices are less developed.

The practices that emerge are often criticized by project managers as obstacles rather than enablers of effective design and management of projects. Project managers frequently perceive the formal HRM function to be out of step with their needs. They want the HRM apparatus in the organizations—HRM organizational practices—to be more responsive, to recognize the unique pressures created by projects, and to be designed for the dynamism of project work. A typical example given in the interviews of the mismatch between HRM organizational practices and project manager's needs for support includes the length and bureaucracy of recruitment procedures.

Implications for Projects

The definition of HRM roles, tasks, and responsibilities in projects is most underdeveloped in the three types of practices we found. For example, the need for development budgets on projects is currently widely acknowledged, and simultaneously the exception in the companies we studied rather than the norm. Reward and appraisal of project work are not currently given the attention they deserve. As projects do not provide careers, career development plans and career counseling services need to be made “project sensitive” if the wealth of experience on projects are to be harnessed.

The room for maneuver to develop, reward, and assess people on projects is described as limited by most of our respondents, compared to opportunities to assess, reward, and develop through the traditional line apparatus supported by HRM organizational practices. As more people spend more of their working lives on projects, this surely needs to be re-evaluated. HRM project practices are less visible and attract fewer resources than those vested in the centralized departments and also those vested in line managers. Topics typically mentioned as important in building strong HRM projects practices are familiar and well-rehearsed in the academic field of organizational behavior and include team building, group dynamics, communication, and leadership. Practices for allocating employees to projects can have a profound effect on how people are allocated project experiences and what happens to their knowledge and experience, as well as their career progression, in the ebb and flow of projects.

Specific HRM practices such as assignment to projects and dispersement from projects are in their infancy in terms not only of what companies are doing, but also in terms of the recognition in the literature of the existence and need for such practice. This means benchmarks for effective practice and conceptualization in the HRM literature is also underdeveloped. The attractiveness of projects as a working form needs to be bolstered by effective HRM project practices inside and outside of the project that ensure efforts are rewarded, development experiences optimized, and ambiguity about responsibilities of different actors in the HRM service chain are minimized. Much work is needed to optimize HRM planning in terms of competencies and project resource allocation. This is not least needed so the organization can prevent project overload and in so doing ensure employee well-being through active measures to promote work life balance which, in a project context, is always likely to be challenging.

Implications for the Individual

Employees in general seem to enjoy project work, and the managers we interviewed said project workers typically had longer tenure in their companies than nonproject personnel. At the same time, respondents report problems in all companies with role conflict, role overload, work/life imbalance and stress. While there are differences in companies depending on their mix of short-term projects and long-term projects (the latter providing more stable development and career structures), more attention is required to manage the negative effects of projects working on individual employees issues which although acknowledged, are still greeted with some complacency. Employees are required to be extremely proactive in managing the relationships with line managers and project managers, with ensuring their work is acknowledged, visible, and rewarded, and with trying to ensure that they meet demands for resource utilization against short-term and fluctuating targets.

IDEALIZED MODEL FOR HRM IN THE PROJECT-ORIENTED ORGANIZATION

We suggest an idealized model for HRM in the project-oriented organization. This is a construct, based on an amalgam of our findings, and our own views of what organizations should do for the good of their projects. It does not reflect what any one of our respondent organizations did. Nor do we suggest that any organization implement this model exactly as described. Every organization must develop HRM practices that are aligned with its strategic choices and support its operational processes. The model is shown in Figures 4-3 and 4-4. The project-oriented organization needs to adopt HRM practices specific to the project and adapt traditional HRM practices to suit its strategic choice to be project oriented.

Practices Specific to the Project

The project is a temporary organization, and, therefore, there are many required HRM practices specific to the project. We have chosen to focus on five which we consider among the most significant:

1. Assignment to the project
2. Appraisal on the project
3. Reward on the project
4. Development on the project
5. Dispersement from the project

Assignment to the Project

Project-oriented organizations should maintain a project assignment process supported by appropriate systems. This process should include three major elements:

1. Resource availability: The first part of the system should give an overview of resource availability. It should list all the people in the organization available to work on projects, their competence, both primary and secondary competence, and their current and forecast assignments. On the point of primary and secondary competence, people will have a primary appointment, but they must also be able to fulfil other roles. Rodney Turner worked with the R&D Department in Heinz in the late 1980s. They employed cooks, chemists, and chemical engineers. Cooks could also work as chemists, chemists as cooks and chemical engineers, and chemical engineers as chemists. Similarly a programmer may be primarily a Java programmer, but may also be able to program in other languages.

2. Project prioritization system: The second element should be a portfolio management system for prioritizing projects (Thiry, 2007). It should contain a list of all the projects the organization is doing and their current and forecast resource requirements. When a new project is proposed the impact on resource availability and requirements should be assessed through the system. Organizations doing internal projects should decide whether they have sufficient resources to do the proposed projects and may decide not to do some. If they want to do the projects, they will need to recruit freelance staff. Contract organizations doing projects for external clients may decide they have to recruit sub-contract staff.

3. Resource assignment: The third part is a system of assigning resources to projects (Turner, 1999). Resource requirements of the projects selected for implementation should be determined and people assigned from the pool. The system should determine current and future requirements and forecast any overloads. Therefore, not only will the system balance the current workload of individuals, it will forecast future potential overloads so steps can be taken to avoid overloads to enable staff to achieve a work/life balance. If unexpected overloads occur, then the system can be used to try to resolve the problem, which may involve the recruitment of freelance staff.

The systems as described should identify suitable personnel to work on projects, both as team members and in project or program management roles. But the assignment process could also be supported by sound selection processes, which may include interviews, or even assessment centers for positions on larger projects (Crawford, 2003). When selecting a project management team, an organization should also aim to achieve a balance of task-focused and people-focused members of the team.

Appraisal on the Project

The main appraisal process should be conducted in the line, as we discuss later, to align it with organizational objectives that have a longer time frame than the project. However formal project appraisals are essential for motivation of project team members and cohesiveness of the team. Project team members must know that their performance on the project is linked to their appraisal, so that they know that good performance on the project will be rewarded in their remuneration and other rewards. Project team members must also believe that the assessment is made in a consistent manner, so that they are all judged and rewarded in the same way, not that some team members will receive higher recognition than others. Many of our respondent organizations conducted informal project appraisals with the line manager asking the project manager his or her opinion. There is a problem here because some line managers may seek the project manager's opinion and some may not, and line managers may treat the project manager's opinion differently. A few of our respondent organizations did conduct formal project appraisal. Formal project appraisal can be in one of two forms:

1. 360-degree feedback: Several of the project stakeholders are formally asked their opinion of the project team member's performance or even project manager's performance. That may include the project manager, other project team members, the client or suppliers. Some organizations support the gathering of this data with computer systems, which ensures that the data is gathered, prompting the line manager and individual until the information is given.

2. Project appraisal: The project manager is required to complete an appraisal of project team members at defined points. The project appraisals may be event driven or calendar driven. One organization required project appraisals on the completion of every project, or once every three months if project lasted longer than three months. (Appraisals in the line were conducted once every six months, so appraisals in the line would be based on at least two project appraisals.) The problem with this approach is often in project-oriented organizations, people are more focused on doing the project that worrying about the “bureaucracy.” But if project managers are concerned about motivation of project team members they should make the effort to conduct the project appraisals.

Reward on the Project

Again for motivation of project team members, project-specific rewards are desirable. Amounts should be built into the project budget for the purpose of rewarding project team members. Nonfinancial rewards can be quite motivating. They can take many forms:

• Social events (dinners, parties, sporting events)
• Souvenirs (badges, T shirts, project stationery)
• Award certificates
• Extra holiday time
• Additional training or development opportunities
• Explicit links to future project opportunities

The rewards must be things people value. Do not assume everybody wants social events; some people prefer souvenirs. Do not assume everybody values extra holiday time; some task-focused and committed project team members do not allow themselves time to use it. It is also possible to set aside small amounts of money to pay financial rewards for successful achievement of project milestones or overall excellent performance on the project. One of our respondents had a reward system called “man” or “woman” of the project. In this system, the person who had made the most significant contribution that year received up to $1,000 USD. (Their projects could last up to 10 years.)

Financial rewards on projects could be developed into formal motivation structures in the form of a “gain share pot” based on project performance (Scott, 2002). The concept of a gain share pot was developed for partnering and alliancing to reward contractors for good project performance. The same concept can be used quite easily on any project to reward project team members. There are two ways of creating and sharing a gain share pot: a vertical or horizontal approach.

1. Vertical approach: The size of the gain share pot is linked to savings on the project. Savings can come from reduction in the cost of work or risk contingency. There needs to be an agreed target cost for the project, equal to the sum of the cost of work and the risk contingency base, which ought to have something like a 60 percent chance of success. This will be less than the sanction value, equal to the target cost plus tolerance or client reserve, which should have something like an 80 percent chance of success. If the out-turn cost is less than the target cost, the difference is the gain share pot. The gain share pot is then shared between the project owner and project team members, including the project manager. On partnering contracts, the contractors will typically be given up to either 40 or 60 percent of the gain share pot. The exact percentage will be determined by performance against several key performance indicators (no more than six), including cost performance but also including:

• Schedule performance
• Safety performance
• Quality performance
• First year production or results of performance tests

2. Horizontal approach: This is a very similar approach, except the size of the gain share pot is set at the beginning of the project as a percentage of the target cost. It is then shared out according to performance against agreed key performance indicators, such as the ones listed above. The bonuses may be given on project completion, or they may be given on the achievement of project milestones. If they are paid against achievement of project milestones, they obviously need to be based on performance against the key performance indicators at that point of the project.

Development on the Project

For reasons we discuss in the following, primary career development, including the development of knowledge, skills, and experiences, needs to be aligned with the line organization. Development objectives should be determined through the appraisal in the line, and funded from there. However, there are at least three reasons for project specific development, and ideally that should be within the control of the project manager and funded by the project, so that it can be aligned with the needs of the project, and take place at a time required by the project. The three reasons are:

1. To develop competencies specifically required to undertake project tasks: These can include language, cultural or legal awareness for working abroad, or learning how to use “new” software, particularly legacy software. With legacy software, for instance, there may be no interest in the line for the individual to develop that competence, because there will be no need for that competence beyond the end of the project. The very aim of the project is to make the skill redundant. With other competencies such as language, cultural or legal awareness, or truly new software, the line may have some interest in the individual's developing those competencies. He or she may have been chosen to work on this project because that is development and project experience the individual needs at the current stage in their career, and it was expected that the project would deliver this. However, the development should be funded from the project because it is specific to the project, and money should be made available in the project budget for it.

2. To be briefed about the project: At assignment, project team members may need to be briefed about the technology to be used on the project, the current state of new technology being developed by the project, old technology to be decommissioned, or the aims, objectives, and plans for the project. It is recognized that as part of project start-up, or upon joining the project team, team members need to be briefed about the aims, objectives, and plans for a project (Turner, 1999). But the project team members also need to be briefed about the current state of technology being used by the project. This will include the state of legacy hardware and software being used and possibly decommissioned by the project. But it may also include new technology, perhaps in research, development, and innovation projects. This briefing must be included in the project start-up or mobilization process.

3. To be able to use new technology developed by the project: It has long been recognized that users may need training in the use of new systems being delivered by the project (Turner, 1999). The technology and management processes associated with the system may be unfamiliar to them, and so they need training in its use. This was a realization that developed during the 1980s, that time and money needs to be set aside in the project plan and budget to pay for this training. However, that may also now be delegated to a training and redeployment subproject controlled from the line or personnel department, but milestones in the subproject must be linked to milestones in the main project to ensure the two are coordinated. What we also observed was the need to train project team members in the use of technology or systems developed at an early stage of the project for use at a later stage. This was particularly the case in research, development and innovation projects to train people from the line in the use of new technology they may use, or to train people seconded onto the project team who are going to test the new technology. You do not want the test to fail through human error, especially if you have only one opportunity to do it.

With the second and third reasons, there is little controversy that the training and development should be paid from the project budget. Even for the training of users in a new system, a project-specific budget should be created. What we found was that line managers want to retain control of competence development linked to career development. Even though the raison d'etre for career development is linked to this project, the individual has been chosen to work on this project to gain that development, the development will specifically take place on this project, and needs to take place in accordance with project timescales, some line managers are unable to delegate to the project manager and insist on retaining control. We encourage line managers to learn to trust project managers and delegate the management of the development to them.

Dispersement from the Project

The practice that is currently least well-developed is dispersement from the project. What happens when the project is over? In traditional project industries, there was either a constant stream of projects and so there was little difficulty in moving people to new projects, or people were hired to work on a single project only and were laid off at the end of the project. With the growing use of project-based ways of working, dispersement is becoming more significant for project-oriented organizations. From our data, we determined that when a project finishes there are several things that can happen to a project team members:

• They are assigned immediately to new projects
• They are held in abeyance for forthcoming projects where their skills are required
• They are held in abeyance for forthcoming projects that will provide them with the development opportunities that both they and the organization want
• They are held in abeyance until new, as yet unknown, project opportunities arise (sitting on the bench)
• They are put onto project development duties, such as a review of the project finishing or to audit another
• They are sent to training
• They are sent on vacation
• They are returned to the line to fulfill functional duties
• They are laid off because they are temporary workers

If the organization has a project assignment system, it should have identified that an individual is about to become available, and if there is a strong stream of projects, it should be possible to plan for their next project assignment. If the organization is undertaking internal development projects, this should be reasonably simple because future projects will be known about in advance. For a contracting organization it will be difficult because future projects will be less predictable. You cannot know which contracts you will win. The new project an individual is assigned to may be one that is about to start immediately, or may be a forthcoming one, where his or her skills will be more useful, or one that will provide him or her with a better development opportunity. If there is not such a project opportunity, then he or she will need to be occupied in some way. He or she may sit idly on the bench, but it is more normal to keep him or her occupied in some way, conducting a review of this or another project or writing project procedures. Or he or she can be sent on training. He or she may do some of those things anyway; since the organization believes that will be a good use of their time. If somebody has been seconded from the line to work on this project, they may be returned to the line. Temporary workers who are no longer required may have their contracts terminated.

There is a cautionary note about people returning to the line after working on a project. Rodney Turner was involved with a major computer project in the late 1980s. People were seconded from the line onto the project team to provide user input during the design stage, which lasted for two years. It was expected that these people would return to their divisions at the end of the design stage to help their divisions with implementation. However, the implementation was phased and so some divisions did not implement until two years later. But the people returning from the project team found that that experience in the line was now two years out-of-date. They had effectively lost two years experience from their career development, but the expertise they had with the new computer system would not be needed for another two years. Many of these people left the organization in frustration. This indicates that people who have been seconded onto a project for a long time may need help being reintroduced into the line.

Practices in the Line Organization

There will also be an extensive range of HRM practices undertaken within the line. Again among the most significant are five which mirror the five we focused on above:

1. Selection and recruitment into the organization
2. Appraisal
3. Development
4. Reward
5. Release from the organization

We do not discuss these practices as they exist within the line but focus for the purposes of this report, in how 1 and 5 need to be adapted to meet the needs of the project-oriented organization, and 2, 3 and 4 need to be adapted to reflect the equivalent practices applied on projects.

Selection and Recruitment into the Organization

As stated previously, we have little to add to the things that were said by Keegan and Turner (2003). Project-oriented organizations cannot use Taylorian HRM selection practices. Under the Taylorian practices, an organization attempts to define the jobs it needs to recruit people to, and then recruit people making go-no-go type decisions; that is it either appoints or it does not. The organization identifies jobs it thinks it needs and writes a job description for that job, including a specification of the competence of the person required to do it. It then tries to identify a range of potential candidates in a number of different ways, including advertising and the use of recruitment agencies, and appoints the candidate who gives the best match to the defined competence profile. If there is not an adequate match, an appointment is not made.

For a project-oriented organization, this selection process does not work; every project is different and it is not possible to write job descriptions. More organic methods of selection and recruitment are necessary. Rather than identifying specific jobs and trying to recruit for those jobs, the project-oriented organization needs to identify people able to work on the types of projects it undertakes. Yes, it may try to identify the competence profile of people able to work on its projects, but it does not necessarily recruit against specific jobs; it almost cannot because it does not know what specific jobs will be required to be done in the near future, just the sorts of projects that will be done. Organic recruitment processes will include scanning techniques to identify potential candidates to work for the organization. These may include:

• Maintaining relationships with educational establishments
• Maintaining contact with other organizations in the same industry, including clients, competitors, and suppliers
• Maintaining contact with recognized experts
• Maintaining contact with people who have previously worked as peripheral workers
• Using the internet, intranet, and extranet

These techniques can be used for recruiting both permanent staff and temporary workers. The use of more traditional techniques may be used to recruit temporary workers to work on a specific project. In that case, the profile of the required people will be more closely defined. Recruitment agencies operate under the Taylorian model, so their recommendations need to be interpreted accordingly.

Keegan and Turner (2003) also report that project-oriented organizations use trial employment as a temporary worker to recruit permanent staff. People work on one project as a temporary worker, and if he or she is a good match for the organization, permanent employment is offered. This illustrates that it is important for the project-oriented organization to find people who work well on the types of projects they implement, not to find people who fit a particular job description. Project-oriented organizations should also try to maintain contact with temporary workers and try to use them again. There are several reasons:

• It is expensive to keep on finding new peripheral workers
• There is less risk of losing the knowledge as the person leaves at the end of the project
• You know the person works well in your organization and on your projects

Appraisal, Reward, and Development in the Line

We have already said that we believe the primary appraisal should be conducted in the line. The reason is that decisions about annual objectives, salary and bonus, and development have a timeframe longer than individual projects. It is the line that brings the appropriate perspective, especially about the type of competencies that the organization needs to develop and how the career of the person being appraised fits into that. But as we have already seen, the appraisal must be based on formal reports on the individual's performance on the projects he or she has been working on. If their appraisals, and subsequent rewards, do not reflect their performance on the projects they have been working on, then they will not be motivated to perform well on projects. The inclusion of project appraisals must be formalized so that the individual can be confident that he or she will be used, and that all project team members are judged in the same way.

Further, the individual's annual bonus must be based on his or her performance on the projects they have worked on. If they are working on smaller projects (less than a year), then some of the projects they have worked on will not have been known about at the time of the previous appraisal. Thus his or her annual objectives must include good performance on as yet unknown projects, and they must be judged accordingly.

The individual's development objectives must be based on their career development needs, and the organization's needs for competency development over the medium term, that is with a time perspective of about five years. This is longer than most projects, even larger ones. We have seen that individual projects cannot offer a career, just learning experiences in a career. Thus in setting an individual's development objectives, he or she and the manager must be thinking about the types of projects he or she needs to work on, and the sort of training that he or she needs to support that development. The development must balance both the individual's needs and the organizations needs, but the organization's needs are likely to dominate.

Release

The key issue with release from the perspective of the project-oriented organization is knowledge capture, especially as temporary workers leave the organization. Temporary workers may come in to work on just one project and gain a lot of experience from working on that project, but they take that experience with them as they leave the organization. Rodney Turner had a student working for a health charity in the Far East. That charity used temporary workers for every project and found its organizational capability never developed. Project-oriented organizations need to develop methods for debriefing temporary workers leaving the organization and capturing their knowledge in a knowledge management system. However, this report is not intended to cover the topic of knowledge management so we will not discuss it further.

HRM Policies and Procedures in the Parent Organization

We have not spoken much about the HRM directorate in the parent organization. However, we have said that organizations need to develop HRM policies and procedures that support their strategic choices and support the operational work processes that they choose to use to undertake their business. Thus HRM directors need to ensure that project-oriented organizations develop policies and procedures that support project-based ways of working. That means they must eschew traditional HRM practices based on the Taylorian model and ensure the organization adopts practices along the lines outlined above. They and the central HRM department must then support both line managers and project managers to work together to operate the practices to the benefit of individuals working in the organizations and for the benefit of the organizations.

FURTHER RESEARCH

We do not think that we have found the definitive answer to HRM in the project-oriented organization. We have looked at just five practices on the project and an equivalent five in the line. We think these are among the most significant, and they have illustrated the differences between HRM in the project-oriented organization and in the large manufacturing organization for which the classical Taylorian models have been developed. However, we believe that additional research on this topic is needed, including:

1. Further research on the practices we have investigated: Further research can be conducted into all the practices we have investigated, but in particular to our understanding of assignment to projects, dispersement from projects and knowledge capture on release from the organization is still in its infancy.

2. Further research on employee well-being: While we have identified potential challenges to employee well-being, future research working from a more deductive perspective should address specific outcomes of project working and examine if these indeed threaten employee well-being. For example, studies examining employee perception of level of work pressure, employee's perceptions of organizational support and employee outcomes in terms of health, specifically levels of stress, would be valuable.

3. Research into additional HRM practices: We have focused on five practices that we believe are fundamental and significant, but work could be conducted in other areas, such as terms, conditions and contracts of employment, and industrial relations. The issue of industrial relations is interesting, because it is easy for unions to hold a project hostage as they fight other battles.

4. Research into projects straddling several companies: We have focused on organizations undertaking projects on their own. It is common for organizations to work on projects with other organizations. Cases can include:

• Two divisions from the same parent company but from different geographies working on the same project—even though they work for the same parent company, they may operate local HRM policies, and people will report to different managements
• Two or more companies forming a joint venture or working on a partnering and alliancing contract (Scott, 2002)—in this latter case, people from the client, main contractor, and sub-contractors can work together on joint teams and then striking consistent ways of working for the duration of the project, but returning people to their original terms on completion of the project, are significant issues
• Global projects involving people from around the world working together

5. Research into HRM practices in virtual teams: Virtual teams are a related issue. People working on virtual teams are likely to come from different organizations, even if that means different divisions of the same company. So there is that issue, but also the issue of remote working.

6. Research into different roles on different projects: We have mentioned that people can have different roles on different projects. Problems can arise if somebody is team leader on their current project, but does not know if they will be a team member or team leader on the next project. It can affect their relationship with the current team members, especially if one of them might be their team leader on the next project. That can inhibit their management style.

7. Research into knowledge capture: Finally, we have seen that knowledge management is critical in the release process. We need to understand more how to capture experience from temporary workers leaving at the end of a project to aid the development of organizational capability.

8. Research into diversity management: We saw that in some companies they see diversity and the management of diversity as a competitive advantage. When it comes to projects, it would be interesting to identify which practices support the diversity in the assignment of people to projects. Further it would be interesting to see the costs and benefits for projects and project-oriented organizations.

9. Research into the role of the HRM department in the project-oriented organization: To respond to all of these issues, the role of the HRM department in the project-oriented organization needs to be different than in the classically managed organization. Further research could be conducted into this different role.

10. Research into leadership in the project-oriented organization: Pervading all the previously mentioned items is the issue of leadership. Research could be conducted into the overlap of leadership with the previously mentioned, and the division of HRM roles between different constituencies as a result of that overlap.