Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Hybrid project management combines traditional and agile approaches for managing complex projects. While its benefits and setups are well studied, how organizations adopt and implement hybrid project management remains unclear. Hence, this study addresses this gap through a multiple-case design, finding that hybrid project management adoption is shaped by organizational context, leadership, and iterative adjustments to evolving needs. It proposes a Hybrid Project Management Adoption Model, featuring a novel distinction between conscious adoption (a deliberate, structured transition) and unconscious adoption (an organic, emergent evolution). The study advances hybrid project management research by theorizing adoption as a dual-path process and explaining how practices evolve under organizational conditions.

Keywords

hybrid project management adoption pathways gradual implementation qualitative research organizational change agile approaches traditional methods

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aaltonen

Derakhshan

Di Maddaloni

Turner

(2024). Stakeholder engagement: Theoretical and methodological directions for project scholarship. International Journal of Project Management, 42(7), 102649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2024.102649

Aaltonen

Turkulainen

. (2022). Institutionalization of a collaborative governance model to deliver large, inter-organizational projects. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 42(8), 1294–1328. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-11-2021-0741

Adelakun

Garcia

Tabaka

Ismail

. (2017). Hybrid project management: Agile with discipline . CONF-IRM 2017 Proceedings, 14. http://aisel.aisnet.org/confirm2017/14

Ahmed

Ali

Naseem

Razzaq

Ahmed

. (2018). A systematic literature review of success factors and barriers of agile software development. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 9(3), 278–291. https://doi.org/10/gs3vd5

Alam

M. P.

Toppur

. (2019). Hybrid agile project management model for new product development in Aerospace. In International Journal of Operations and Quantitative Management (IJOQM) (Vol. 25, Issues 1, (3), pp. 59–73). Internatonal Forum of Management Scholars (INFOMS).

Almeida

Bálint

. (2024). Approaches for hybrid scaling of agile in the IT industry: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Information, 15(10), 592. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15100592

Alqudah

M. K.

Razali

. (2017). Key factors for selecting an agile method: A systematic literature review. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 7(2), 526–537. https://doi.org/10/gs3vfb

Alves

P. R.

Tereso

A. P.

Fernandes

A. G. G.

(2019). Project management system implementation in SMEs: A case study. https://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/

Anderson

D. J.

(2010). Kanban: Successful evolutionary change for your technology business. Blue Hole Press.

10.

Argyris

Schön

D. A

. (1997). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reis, 77/78, 345. https://doi.org/10.2307/40183951

11.

Azmat

Siddiqui

M. A

. (2023). Analyzing project complexity, its dimensions and their impact on project success. Systems, 11(8), 417. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11080417

12.

Bagiu

Avasilcăi

Alexa

. (2020). Exploring the opportunity for a hybrid methodology in project management: A focus group approach. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 898(1), 012045. https://doi.org/10/gs3t96

13.

Barbosa

A. M. C.

Saisse

M. C. P

. (2019). Hybrid project management for sociotechnical digital transformation context. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, 16(2), 316–332. https://doi.org/10/gk866k

14.

Bennett

Buttrick

Stanton

. (2017). Managing successful projects with PRINCE2 (6th edition). TSO.

15.

Bennett

Lemoine

G. J

. (2014). What a difference a word makes: Understanding threats to performance in a VUCA world. Business Horizons, 57(3), 311–317. https://doi.org/10/ggjvsr

16.

Bianchi

M. J.

Amaral

D. C

. (2021). A method to create hybrid models using a morphological matrix. The Journal of Modern Project Management, 9(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.19255/JMPM02604

17.

Blumer

. (1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.2307/2088165

18.

Boehm

Turner

. (2003). Using risk to balance agile and plan-driven methods. Computer, 36(6), 57–66. https://doi.org/10/d4q8c8

19.

Boehm

Turner

Booch

Cockburn

Pyster

. (2003). Balancing agility and discipline: A guide for the perplexed (1st edition). Addison-Wesley/Pearson Education.

20.

Bowen

G. A

. (2006). Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(3), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500304

21.

Bowen

G. A

. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

22.

Braun

Clarke

. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

23.

Brookes

Hickey

Littau

Locatelli

Oliomogbe

. (2015). Using multi-case approaches in project management research: The megaproject experience. Designs, Methods and Practices for Research of Project Management. Routledge.

24.

Brunet

. (2022). On the relevance of theory and practice in project studies. International Journal of Project Management, 40(1), 22–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.11.006

25.

Car-Pušić

Marović

Bulatović

. (2020). Development of a hybrid agile management model in local self-government units. Tehnički Vjesnik, 27(5), 1418–1426.

26.

Ciric

Lalic

Gracanin

Palcic

Zivlak

. (2018). Agile project management in new product development and innovation processes: Challenges and benefits beyond software domain. 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (TEMS-ISIE), Beijing, China, pp. 1–9. doi: 10.1109/TEMS-ISIE.2018.8478461.

27.

Cocchi

Dosi

Vignoli

. (2024). Stage-gate hybridization beyond agile: Conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 6435–6453. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3282269

28.

Conforto

E. C.

Amaral

D. C

. (2016). Agile project management and stage-gate model—A hybrid framework for technology-based companies. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 40, 1–14. https://doi.org/10/gg8v6b

29.

Conforto

E. C.

Salum

Amaral

D. C.

da Silva

S. L.

de Almeida

L. F. M.

(2014). Can agile project management be adopted by industries other than software development? Project Management Journal, 45(3), 21–34. https://doi.org/10/f57cqt

30.

Cooper

R. G.

Sommer

A. F

. (2016). The agile-stage-gate hybrid model: A promising new approach and a new research opportunity. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(5), 513–526. https://doi.org/10/gdcdf5

31.

Cooper

R. G.

Sommer

A. F

. (2018). Agile–stage-gate for manufacturers: Changing the way new products are developed. Research-Technology Management, 61(2), 17–26. https://doi.org/10/gdcdwt

32.

Copola Azenha

Aparecida Reis

Leme Fleury

(2021). The role and characteristics of hybrid approaches to project management in the development of technology-based products and services. Project Management Journal, 52(1), 90–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972820956884

33.

Costantini

Hall

J. G.

Rapanotti

. (2021). Using complexity and volatility characteristics to guide hybrid project management. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 14(5), 1135–1162. https://doi.org/10/gs3vf8

34.

Creswell

J. W

. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed). SAGE.

35.

Denzin

N. K

. (2017). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Routledge.

36.

Dikert

Paasivaara

Lassenius

. (2016). Challenges and success factors for large-scale agile transformations: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software, 119, 87–108. https://doi.org/10/gftrbh

37.

DiMaggio

P. J.

Powell

W. W

. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

38.

Dong

Dacre

Baxter

Ceylan

. (2024). What is agile project management? Developing a new definition following a systematic literature review. Project Management Journal, 55(6), 668–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728241254095

39.

Edwards

Cooper

R. G.

Vedsmand

Nardelli

. (2019). Evaluating the agile-stage-gate hybrid model: Experiences from three SME manufacturing firms. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 16(08), 1950048. https://doi.org/10/gs3vbd

40.

Eisenhardt

K. M

. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. https://doi.org/10/ckwzp9

41.

Eisenhardt

K. M

. (2021). What is the Eisenhardt Method, really? Strategic Organization, 19(1), 147–160. https://doi.org/10/gmvpdd

42.

Eisenhardt

K. M.

Graebner

M. E

. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888

43.

Feldmuller

. (2018). < Usage of agile practices in Mechatronics System Design Potentials, Challenges and Actual Surveys . 2018 19th International Conference on Research and Education in Mechatronics (REM), Delft, The Netherlands pp. 30–35. https://doi.org/10/gs3t97

44.

Fereday

Muir-Cochrane

. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107

45.

Fusch

Ness

(2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2281

46.

Gemino

Horner Reich

Serrador

P. M

. (2021). Agile, traditional, and hybrid approaches to project success: Is hybrid a poor second choice? Project Management Journal, 52(2), 161–175. https://doi.org/10/gj9vmh

47.

Gill

A. Q.

Henderson-Sellers

Niazi

. (2018). Scaling for agility: A reference model for hybrid traditional-agile software development methodologies. Information Systems Frontiers, 20(2), 315–341. https://doi.org/10/ghhk9k

48.

Grey

. (2011). <The development of a hybrid agile project management methodology [Thesis, North-West University]. https://repository.nwu.ac.za/handle/10394/7004

49.

Heimicke

Chen

Albers

. (2020). Agile meets plan-drive–hybrid approaches in product development: A systematic literature review. Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 1, 577–586. https://doi.org/10/gs3t8v

50.

Ika

L. A.

Pinto

J. K

. (2022). The “re-meaning” of project success: Updating and recalibrating for a modern project management. International Journal of Project Management, 40(7), 835–848. https://doi.org/10/gs3t86

51.

Imani

. (2017). Does a hybrid approach of agile and plan-driven methods work better for IT system development projects? International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, 07(03), 39–46. https://doi.org/10/gs3vdz

52.

Jamous

Garttan

Staegemann

Volk

. (2021, August 1). Hybrid project management methods efficiency in IT projects . AMCIS 2021 Proceedings. AMCIS 2021.

53.

Joslin

Müller

. (2015). Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts. International Journal of Project Management, 33(6), 1377–1392. https://doi.org/10/f7hxt8

54.

Jovanovic

. (2019). Management von großprojekten mit scrum [Management of large projects with Scrum]. Projekt Management Aktuell, 5, 56–59.

55.

Kreye

M. E.

Ramirez Hernandez

Eppinger

. (2024). Translating agile management practices into a traditional industry context. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 42(2), 444–467, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12760

56.

Krupa

Hájek

. (2024). Hybrid project management models: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, 16(2), 233–261. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPOM.2024.139253

57.

Krupa

Šimůnek

Hájek

. (2023). Hybrid project management: A literature review . Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference Hradec Economic Days 2023, 13(1), 344–355, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic. https://doi.org/10.36689/uhk/hed/2023-01-034

58.

Kuhrmann

Diebold

Münch

Tell

Garousi

Felderer

Trektere

McCaffery

Linssen

Hanser

Prause

C. R

. (2017). Hybrid software and system development in practice: Waterfall, scrum, and beyond . Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Software and System Process, 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3084100.3084104

59.

Kuhrmann

Diebold

Munch

Tell

Trektere

McCaffery

Garousi

Felderer

Linssen

Hanser

Prause

C. R

. (2019). Hybrid software development approaches in practice: A European perspective. IEEE Software, 36(4), 20–31. https://doi.org/10/gr7x2t

60.

Kuhrmann

Tell

Hebig

Klünder

Münch

Linssen

Pfahl

Felderer

Prause

C. R.

MacDonell

S. G.

Nakatumba-Nabende

Raffo

Beecham

Tüzün

López

Paez

Fontdevila

Licorish

S. A.

Küpper

Richardson

. (2022). What makes agile software development agile? IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 48(9), 3523–3539.

61.

Kuster

Bachmann

Hubmann

Lippmann

Schneider

. (2023). Project management handbook: Agile–traditional–hybrid . Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66211-3

62.

Lalmi

Fernandes

Sassi Boudemagh

(2023). A hybrid project management model for construction projects. In Akotia

Awuzie

B. O.

Egbu

(Eds.), Mixed methods research design for the built environment , 1st edition (pp. 57–70). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003204046-5

63.

Malterud

Siersma

V. D.

Guassora

A. D

. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444

64.

Marinho

Noll

Richardson

Beecham

. (2019). Plan-driven spproaches are alive and kicking in agile global software development. 2019 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 1–11. https://doi.org/10/gs3vbt

65.

Martinsuo

Huemann

. (2021). Designing case study research. International Journal of Project Management, 39(5), 417–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.06.007

66.

Mason

R. B

. (2007). The external environment’s effect on management and strategy: A complexity theory approach. Management Decision, 45(1), 10–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740710718935

67.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M

. (1984). Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: Toward a shared craft. Educational Researcher, 13(5), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X013005020

68.

Mintzberg

. (1987). The strategy concept I: Five Ps for strategy. California Management Review, 30(1), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165263

69.

Mirzaei

Mabin

V. J.

Zwikael

. (2024). Customising hybrid project management methodologies. Production Planning & Control, 36(9), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2024.2349231

70.

Moe

N. B.

Dingsøyr

Dybå

. (2010). A teamwork model for understanding an agile team: A case study of a Scrum project. Information and Software Technology, 52(5), 480–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2009.11.004

71.

Monteiro

Varajão

Santos

. (2024). Project management office typologies, types, and functions: A systematic analysis of the literature and directions for research. Project Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/87569728241297899

72.

Moura

Carneiro

Dias

. (2023). VUCA environment on project success: The effect of project management methods. Brazilian Business Review, 20(3), 236–259. https://doi.org/10.15728/bbr.2023.20.3.1.en

73.

Müller

Locatelli

. (2023). Philosophical stances and theoretical perspectives in submissions to Project Management Journal®. Project Management Journal, 54(2), 111–115. https://doi.org/10/gs3t7p

74.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J

. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 160940691773384. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

75.

Ozorhon

Cardak

Caglayan

. (2022). Investigating the agile hybrid approach in construction. Journal of Management in Engineering, 38(4), 04022022. https://doi.org/10/gr6qw3

76.

Papadakis

Tsironis

. (2020). Towards a hybrid project management framework: A systematic literature review on traditional, agile and hybrid techniques. The Journal of Modern Project Management, 8(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.19255/JMPM02410

77.

Patton

M. Q

. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (Fourth edition). SAGE Publications, Inc.

78.

Pepino

Noleto

Deschamps

Loures

. (2021). Hybrid project management models: A systematic literature review . Proceedings of the International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, 1–7.

79.

Prenner

Unger-Windeler

Schneider

. (2021). Goals and challenges in hybrid software development approaches. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, 33(11), e2382. https://doi.org/10/gs3t9f

80.

Project Management Institute (PMI). (2021). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® guide)—Seventh edition. PMI.

81.

Reiff

Schlegel

. (2022). Hybrid project management—A systematic literature review. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 10(2), 45–63. https://doi.org/10/gs3t9s

82.

Robinson

W. S

. (1951). The logical structure of analytic induction. American Sociological Review, 16(6), 812. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087508

83.

Salvato

J. J.

Laplume

A. O

. (2020). Agile Stage-Gate Management (ASGM) for physical products. R&D Management, 50(5), 631–647. https://doi.org/10/gsvq8g

84.

Saunders

Sim

Kingstone

Baker

Waterfield

Bartlam

Burroughs

Jinks

. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8

85.

Schindler

P. S

. (2019). Business research methods (Thirteen edition). McGraw-Hill Education.

86.

Schoper

Ingason

H. T

. (2024). Projectification of society. In Huemann

Turner

(Eds.), The handbook of project management, 6th edition (pp. 583–592). Routledge.

87.

Schoper

Wald

Ingason

H. T.

Fridgeirsson

T. V

. (2018). Projectification in Western economies: A comparative study of Germany, Norway and Iceland. International Journal of Project Management, 36(1), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.07.008

88.

Schwaber

Sutherland

. (2011). The scrum guide. Scrum Alliance, 21(1), 1–38.

89.

Scranton

. (2014). Projects as a focus for historical analysis: Surveying the landscape. History and Technology, 30(4), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/07341512.2014.1003164

90.

Serrador

Pinto

J. K

. (2015). Does agile work? A quantitative analysis of agile project success. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1040–1051. https://doi.org/10/f7fgrz

91.

Silva

C. S.

Pereira

Magano

. (2023). The value of project management to competitiveness: Key factors from a holistic and practical perspective. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 16(1), 67–91. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-02-2020-0042

92.

Sithambaram

Nasir

M. H. N. B. M.

Ahmad

. (2021). Issues and challenges impacting the successful management of agile-hybrid projects: A grounded theory approach. International Journal of Project Management, 39(5), 474–495. https://doi.org/10/gnz5k8

93.

Špundak

. (2014). Mixed agile/traditional project management methodology—Reality or illusion? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, 939–948. https://doi.org/10/ggt6vb

94.

Stake

R. E

. (2013). Multiple case study analysis. Guilford Press.

95.

Theocharis

Kuhrmann

Münch

Diebold

(2015). Is water-Scrum-fall reality? On the use of agile and traditional development practices. In Abrahamsson

Corral

Oivo

Russo

(Eds.), Product-focused software process improvement (pp. 149–166). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10/gs3vd7

96.

Valadares

F. S.

Moura

N. C. S.

Pereira

T. N. F.

Arantes

M. D. O

. (2024). Identification of the main traditional project management methods through a systematic literature review. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 15(6), 952–960. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2024.0150697

97.

Van Wessel

R. M.

Kroon

De Vries

H. J.

(2022). Scaling agile company-wide: The organizational challenge of combining agile-scaling frameworks and enterprise architecture in service companies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 3489–3502. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2021.3128278

98.

Vecchiato

. (2015). Creating value through foresight: First mover advantages and strategic agility. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 101, 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.08.016

99.

Zasa

F. P.

Patrucco

Pellizzoni

. (2021). Managing the hybrid organization: How can agile and traditional project management coexist? Research-Technology Management, 64(1), 54–63. https://doi.org/10/gs3vgp

100.

Znaniecki

(1934). The method of sociology . Farrar & Rinehart.

Deliberate or Emergent? How Organizations Adopt Hybrid Project Management

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References