The Competencies and Characteristics Required of an Effective Project Manager: A Web-Based Delphi Study

  • Jennifer M. BrillEmail author
  • M. J. Bishop
  • Andrew E. Walker


In this study, we explore the competencies required for a project manager to be effective in the workplace. We used a Web-based Delphi method to lead experienced project managers through an anonymous consensus-building process consisting of two rounds of surveys. The Round I analysis of 147 respondents, all with 20 or more years of project management experience, yielded 117 project management success factors, 78 of which were identified as trainable competencies. The Round II analysis confirmed 42 of the 78 competencies (53.8%) as very important to extremely important to project manager success. Important contributions of this study include: (a) reporting on project manager competencies that can inform the literature and guide the development of educational programs for instructional designers and other professionals, and (b) demonstrating the Web-based Delphi technique to be an efficient methodology for conducting afront-end analysis, a core process of instructional design (ID) work.


project management instructional design front-end analysis Delphi technique 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Addison, T. (2003). E-commerce project development risks: Evidence from a Delphi survey. International Journal of Information Management, 23(1), 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, B. S., & Erickson, D. M. (1986). Training interactive videodisc designers. Journal of Instructional Development, 9(2), 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (2001). Accreditation standards for programs in educational communications and instructional technology. Retrieved September 28, 2004, from
  4. Australian Institute of Project Management. (2004). National competency standards for project management. Retrieved February 1, 2005, from
  5. Blackburn, S. (2002). The project manager and the project-network. International Journal of Project Management, 20(3), 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bogdan, R. E., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  7. Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1979). Educational research: An introduction (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  8. Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The competent manager: A model for effective performance. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Brill, J. M., Kim, D., & Branch, R. M. (2000). Visual literacy defined: The results of a Delphi study: Can IVLA (operationally) define visual literacy? Paper presented at the International Visual Literacy Association, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, J. L. (1978). Management checklists for instructional designers. NSPI Journal, 17(7), 3–5,15,37.Google Scholar
  11. Cleland, D. I. (1995). Leadership and the project management body of knowledge. International Journal of Project Management, 13(2), 83–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cochran, S. W. (1983). The Delphi method: Formulating and refining group judgments. Journal of Human Sciences, 2(2), 111–117.Google Scholar
  13. Cox, S., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (2003). How do instructional design professionals spend their time? TechTrends, 47(3), 45–47,29.Google Scholar
  14. Crawford, L. (2004). Senior management perceptions of project management competence. International Journal of Project Management, 23(1), 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1962–63). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science (9), 458–467.Google Scholar
  16. Dannels, D. P. (2000). Learning to be professional: Technical classroom discourse, practice, and professional identity construction. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 14(1), 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Delberg, A. L., Van de Ven, A. H., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group techniques for program planning. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
  18. Dillman, D. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Dixon, M. (2000). Association for project management (APM) body of knowledge (4th ed.). Peterborough, England: Association for Project Management.Google Scholar
  20. El-Sabaa, S. (2001). The skills and career path of an effective project manager. International Journal of Project Management, 19(1), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ford, D., & Sterman, J. (1998). Expert knowledge elicitation for improving mental and formal models. System Dynamics Review, 14(4), 309–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Geier, J. D. (1995). The Delphi survey methodology: An approach to determine training needs. Lecture notes in computer science, 895, 389–402.Google Scholar
  23. Gentry, C. G. (1994). Introduction to instructional development: Process and technique. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  24. Global performance based standards for project management personnel. (2003). Working paper no. 1: Report from working session 24–26 February. Retrieved February 1, 2005, from
  25. Graves, W. H. (1997). Free trade in higher education. Retrieved January 30, 2003, from
  26. Greer, M. (1992). ID project management: Tools and techniques for instructional designers and developers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Gustafson, K. L. (2002). Instructional design tools: A critique and projections for the future. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(4), 59–66.Google Scholar
  28. Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2002). Survey of instructional development models (4th ed.). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology.Google Scholar
  29. Kaufman, R., Rojas, A. M., & Hanna, M. (1993). Needs assessment: A user's guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Kerzner, H. (2001). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (7th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  31. Klein, J. T. (1999). Mapping interdisciplinary studies. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
  32. Lampel, J. (2001). The core competencies of effective project execution: The challenge of diversity. International Journal of Project Management, 19, 471–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (Eds.). (1975). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  34. Long, H. (1991). Continuing higher education research futures: A Delphi study of professors of adult education. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 39(2), 29–35.Google Scholar
  35. Maznevski, M. L., & Distefano, J. J. (2000). Global leaders are team players: Developing global leaders through membership on global teams. Human Resource Management, 39(2–3), 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McDaniel, K., & Liu, M. (1996). A study of project management techniques for developing interactive multimedia programs: A practitioner's perspective. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 29(1), 29–48.Google Scholar
  37. Meister, J. C. (2001). The brave new world of corporate education. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 47(22).Google Scholar
  38. Melpignano, M., & Collins, M. E. (2003). Infusing youth development principles in child welfare practice: Use of a Delphi survey to inform training. Child and Youth Care Forum, 32(3), 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Miller, R. (1990). Introduction. In R. E. Bergman & T. M. Moore (Eds.), Managing interactive video/multimedia projects. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  41. Morris, P. W. G. (2001). Updating the project management bodies of knowledge. Project Management Journal, 32(3), 21–30.Google Scholar
  42. Morris, P. W. G. (2003). The validity of knowledge in project management and the challenge of learning and competency development. Retrieved February 6, 2005, from
  43. Morris, P. W. G., Patel, M. B., & Wearne, S. H. (2000). Research into revising the APM project management body of knowledge. International Journal of Project Management, 18(3), 155–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Murray, J. W., & Hammons, J. O. (1995). Delphi: A versatile methodology for conducting qualitative research. The Review of Higher Education, 18(4), 423–436.Google Scholar
  45. Phillips, R. (2001). A case study of the development and project management of a Web/CD hybrid application. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(2–3), 229–247.Google Scholar
  46. Project Management Institute. (2004). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (3rd ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Author.Google Scholar
  47. Raskin, M. S. (1994). The Delphi study in field instruction revisited: Expert consensus on issues and research priorities. Journal of Social Work Education, 30(1), 75–89.Google Scholar
  48. Richey, R. C., Fields, D. C., & Foxon, M. (2001). Instructional design competencies: The standards (No. IR-111). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology.Google Scholar
  49. Ritchie, D., & Earnest, J. (1999). The future of instructional design: Results of a Delphi study. Educational Technology, 39(1), 35–42.Google Scholar
  50. Rossett, A. (1987). Training needs assessment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.Google Scholar
  51. Rossett, A. (1999). Analysis for human performance technology. In H. J. Stolovitch & E. Keeps, J. (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology (2nd ed., pp. 139–162). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
  52. Ruuska, I., & Vartiainen, M. (2003). Critical project competencies: A case study. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 307–312.Google Scholar
  53. Smith, M. A. (1997). Perceptions of quality in journalism and communications education: A Delphi study. Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 1, 32–50.Google Scholar
  54. Smith, P. (2003). Workplace learning and flexible delivery. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 53–88.Google Scholar
  55. Sotiriou, D., & Wittmer, D. (2001). Influence methods of project managers: Perceptions of team members and project managers. Project Management Journal, 32(3), 12–20.Google Scholar
  56. Spencer, L. M. J., & Spencer, S. M. (1993). Competence at work: Models for superior performance. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  57. Thach, E. C., & Murphy, K. L. (1995). Competencies for distance education professionals. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 57–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tinnirello, P. C. (Ed.). (2000). Project management. New York: Auerbach.Google Scholar
  59. Walker, A., Brill, J. M., & Bishop, M. J. (2004). Delphi surveys: An alternative approach to needs assessment. Paper presented at the International Society for Performance Improvement, Tampa, FL.Google Scholar
  60. Whitman, N. I. (1990). The committee meeting alternative: Using the Delphi technique. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 51(1), 57–68.Google Scholar
  61. Yang, C.-S., et al. (1995). Managing courseware production: An instructional design model with a software engineering approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(4), 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zhang, Y. (2000). Using the Internet for survey research: A case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(1), 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zimmerer, T. W., & Yasin, M. M. (1998). A leadership profile of American project managers. Project Management Journal, 29(1), 31–38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jennifer M. Brill
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. J. Bishop
    • 2
  • Andrew E. Walker
    • 3
  1. 1.Instructional Design and Technology in the School of EducationVirginia Polytechnic a Institute and State UniversityBlacksburg
  2. 2.Educational TechnologyLehigh UniversityBethlehem
  3. 3.Instructional TechnologyUtah State UniversityLogan

Personalised recommendations