Limitations and Conclusions

Despite the significance of the results, this study also comes with some limitations. These limitations do not fundamentally question the results, but they do impose limits that have to be considered when interpreting the results. Also, naturally, the study has some conceptual limitations that pose opportunities for further research. After discussing the study's limitations we will conclude with potential and fruitful directions for next research steps.

Methodological Limitations of the Study

Some methodological limitations are well-known for the chosen research methodology. It was the goal of this study to develop and empirically test a measurement model that allows the measurement of a project manager's value mindset. The intent was to create a large database. These requirements limited the choice of the research method to a survey-based design with all its specific methodological problems. One problem with this type of research design is that the researchers have limited control over the sampling. In our case, we ended up with a disproportionate sample, that is, successful projects were overrepresented. As demonstrated, the actual study is constrained by the number of failed projects. Nonetheless, it is important to collect data from them, and we asked our contact persons to include and report on failed projects. But due to the voluntary nature of this study there is a bias toward reporting successes and not failures, thus leading to an overrepresentation of successful projects in the sample. Consequently, in the current sample there is not a single failure case that is associated with a project manager who received high values for the PVM. This means that none of the projects failed because a project manager discovered and exploited opportunities that led to situations of uncertainty that could not be successfully managed. One way to analyze those kinds of situations in more depth would be to use a case study design.

A major question we could not address is whether or not the PVM of a project manager remains stable over time, meaning that a specific project manager manages all his or her projects with the same kind of mindset. The question of stability could only be clarified by comparing several projects implemented by the same individual project manager. This would only be possible by analyzing a set of projects within a specific organization, and we were not able to do that.

Another limitation is the question of the nature of value-increasing opportunities that may occur during a project's implementation. The results indicate two different types: TC-related opportunities and value-related opportunities. Further case studies are needed to explore the nature of those opportunities and the conditions under which they occur. This would help to improve the training of potential project managers. This is an exploratory question and case studies are necessary to address this limitation.

Conceptual Limitations of the Study

The goal of this study is to define the concept of a project manager's Value Mindset. It is clear that it is nearly impossible to understand conceptually all potential facets of that mindset in order to explain the specific decision patterns of individual project managers.

We have not controlled for the competency of a project manager. Thus the underlying conceptual question is what is the PVM dependent on? Is it the individual, the environment, chance or a combination of these? Studies in entrepreneurship research have demonstrated that the human capital of entrepreneurs seems to have some influence on the success of new ventures and are supporting the raised question. The main purpose of this study was to develop and test a measurement model for the PVM and not to discuss causes for the PVM of individual project managers. It should be noted that one's intelligence is a component of one's mindset. Intelligence is a universal concept that could be seen as a possible precondition of the PVM.

Intelligence is a topic that is fraught with claims, counter-claims, and new attempts to define or re-define it. The concerns raised range from what the measure actually measures, whether it is a self-measuring tool, that it doesn't address valuable “street smarts,” and that it is a racially biased measure. Robert Sternberg, a prolific researcher on the topic, claims that, unlike the traditional Stanford-Binet tests for intelligence, there are three components to one's intelligence—”analytical,” “creative,” and “practical”—which he labeled the Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence (1977; 1985; 1995). Howard Gardner (1983) noted seven “intelligences”: Linguistic, Logical-mathematical, Musical, Bodily-kinesthetic, Spatial, Interpersonal, and Intrapersonal. A more recent entry into the field is Salovey and Mayer's (1990) and Goleman's, (1995) Emotional Intelligence Test. This latter construct suggests that those who are able to recognize and control their own emotions, and the emotions of others, are far more able to manage and lead. Research indicates that this “intelligence” is not simply a personality trait, and that it is correlated with age. Understandably, not all agree on the number or types of intelligences. Is there only one, based on the cognitive capabilities of the person, or are there many, suggesting that all are “intelligent” in different ways, be it the ability to process numbers, draw a picture, or lead others? The use of IQ tests in the United States is highly restricted, based in part on a belief that the measures are inaccurate and potentially damaging. Further, Linda Gottfredson (2003) challenged the issue of “practical intelligence” as proposed by Robert Sternberg.

We conclude that intelligence has many definitions, and there might be some overlap between one or more of the intelligence constructs and our definition of PVM. It might be fruitful to test whether there is a close relationship between these two concepts.

While we make suggestions, the study offers no direct answers on how to support or train a PVM. It seems that a mindset is too complex to be taught, but it does have to be supported by incentives, performance appraisals, and personnel development processes, and perhaps related to an organization's project culture. The recognition of opportunities is not obvious and requires a positive mindset toward them, as well as a specific project management context supporting these activities. Consequently, the perception of project management as an operational function must also be changed to consider it a strategic competency. The criteria for selecting project managers for specific projects should consider the ability to perceive and exploit opportunities. This selection should be dependent on the specific project situation, because routine projects with low levels of uncertainty will have only a small potential for opportunities, while innovative projects with high levels of uncertainty may offer many opportunities to improve a project's value.

The organizational context, like the existence of a project management standard, or PMO, could also have an influence on the PVM of individual project managers. These contextual situations were not considered in the study. The effect could be bidirectional. It could lower the tendency toward a PVM if specific standards are based on the TC-paradigm and are enforced without reflecting on the specific situation of a project. However, it could encourage the PVM by providing a project manager with the necessary analytics to support entrepreneurial decisions on the project level.

Other situational variables like the characteristics of the project task, etc., could be related to the importance and influence of the PVM, because projects recognized as “routine” are not likely to require the same talents as projects that demand a high degree of creativity.

In sum, the discussed limitations of this study pose fruitful directions for further research.

Conclusions

The study shows that project managers can and do take advantage of opportunities, and these opportunities are often beneficial to the organization. The typical concerns of practitioners include: (1) success – all wish to do well, and (2) no surprises – fear of the unknown, or more accurately unknown-unknowns. This leads many to seek or accept a conservative approach; predictability is a strong desire. However, uncertainty is an intimate companion during the implementation of projects and potential opportunities could be associated with them.

The relationship between uncertainty and opportunity is derived from the theoretical foundations of the entrepreneurship research field. Currently, the entrepreneurship literature is also concerned with defining the construct of opportunities (Dutta & Crossan, 2005; Eckhardt & Shane 2003a, 2003b; Grégoire & Shepherd, 2005; Kaish & Gilad, 1991; McMullen, Plummer & Acs, 2007). Even though the entrepreneurship research field lacks a generally accepted definition and operationalization of the opportunity construct, most take an empirical approach. This study is not concerned with offering a general definition of opportunity; it focuses instead on the recognition and exploitation of opportunities that occur during the process of project implementation. There is also no intention to investigate the issue of project selection as a means to exploit opportunities by investing in particular projects. Within this context we identified two different types of opportunities: TC-related opportunities, and value-related opportunities.

The empirical results show that the exploitation of opportunities under the TC-paradigm significantly reduced a project's budget or schedule, or improved the specs, yet these opportunities are not significantly correlated with project value. In contrast, exploited project value opportunities to improve shareholder and/or stakeholder value are significantly correlated with the created project value, suggesting the necessity and importance of studying value-related opportunities. The results clearly suggest that it is necessary to differentiate between different types of exploited opportunities, hence to better understand their gestalt. Furthermore, it is not clear which contingencies are leading to specific types of opportunities, and if opportunities with specific characteristics are preferred. The latter is also a question with which the literature in innovation management is concerned. Some prescriptive studies demonstrate that managers prefer incremental innovations over radical innovations by misjudging the outcomes. But the selection process and preferences are not known at all for opportunities exploited during a project's implementation.

We can and do educate project managers to plan, anticipate and execute within the constraints of budget, time and specifications, and this makes perfect sense. What we also need to do is train our project managers to seek out and become more acutely aware of opportunities—the unknowns that are deemed beneficial. In this regard, those with leadership and entrepreneurial verve are most likely to fit the bill. It must be recognized, however, that such folk are less inclined to “toe-the-line” or otherwise be conventional in their thoughts and deeds; they are more likely to stand out. This does not mean that only the chosen few warrant training and development, as these individuals are most likely to demonstrate these abilities without overt encouragement. Rather, it means that more care must be taken to ensure that the other (and likely larger) group of “rule-following” project managers are trained and supported to recognize and exploit value opportunities that arise over the course of a project.

We propose that all project managers be trained to work with and lead others, and to seek out and act on opportunities to increase the value of their projects. At the same time, they need to understand the needs, wants and desires of their clients, as the two sides may not be in agreement. We are reminded of the story, apocryphal or otherwise, of the government that awarded the construction bid for a less efficient power plant because it employed more people. The government's interest in keeping people employed was not recognized by many of the vendors. Sometimes (perhaps many times?) the opportunities of projects are not about cost reduction or increased efficiency, but rather about what is valuable.