Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Balancing authority and autonomy in higher education by implementing an agile project management approach

  • Published:
Tertiary Education and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article develops and implements an agile management approach in higher education. Such an approach follows core practices, such as project plans. The project manager has to identify the agility drivers that represent changes and pressures; prioritize agility capabilities to take advantage of changes; identify agility providers to obtain agility capabilities; and make managerial choices to manage the project. The object of the study is a department at a public university; it must follow the institutional framework and laws, and the university and faculty decisions, strategies and policies. The article discusses how agility can be created in such circumstances.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adel, H. M., Tariq, A., & Jafar, A. (2013) Agile software methodologies: Strength and weakness. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 5(3), 455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alleman, G. B. (2003) Agile project management methods for ERP: How to apply agile processes to complex COTS projects and live to tell about it. In Wells D. and Williams L. (Eds.), Extreme Programming and Agile Methods: XP/Agile Universe, 2002 (pp. 70–88). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arif, K. K., Bakkappa, B., Bhimaraya, A., & Metri, S. B. S. (2009) The impact of agile supply chains’ delivery practices on firms’ performance: Cluster analysis and validation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 14, 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, J. (1996). Agility and flexibility: What’s the difference? Cranfield School of Management Working Paper Series 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernardes, Ednilson S., & Hanna, Mark D. (2008) A theoretical review of flexibility, agility and responsiveness in the operations management literature. Toward a conceptual definition of customer responsiveness. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(1), 30–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered priorities of the professoriate. A special report. New York, NY: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, M. (2000) The agile supply chain competing in volatile markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 29, 37–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collyer, S., & Warren, C. M. J. (2009) Project management approaches for dynamic environment. International Journal of Project Management, 27, 355–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conboy, K. (2009) Agility from first principles: Reconstructing the concept of agility in information system development. Information Systems Research, 20, 329–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conforto, E. C., & Amaral, D. C. (2010) Evaluating an agile method for planning and controlling innovative projects. Project Management Journal, 41(2), 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, Dwyer S., & Buckle, J. L. (2009) The space between: On being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(1), 54–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, D. J., & Fernandez, J. D. (2008) Agile project management — Agilism vs. traditional approaches. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 49(2), 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodall, A. H. (2010). Socrates in the boardroom: Why research universities should be led by top scholars. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inman, R. A., Sale, R. S., Green, K. W., & Whitten, D. (2011) Agile manufacturing: Relation to JIT, operational performance and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 29(4), 343–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitzmiller, R., Hunt, E., & Breckenridge, S. (2006) Adopting best practices: ‘Agility’ moves from software development to healthcare project management. Computers Informatics Nursing, 24(2), 75–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, Erik W., & Gray, Clifford F. (2014). Project management: The managerial process.Singapore: McGraw-Hill International edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lendyuk, T., & Rippa, S. (2009). Optimization of resource and qualitative limitations in management of education projects. IEEE International Workshop on Intelligence and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications, Rende (Cosenza), Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C. T., Chiu, H., & Chu, P. Y. (2006) Agility index in the supply chain. International Journal Production Economics, 100, 285–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macheridis, N. (2015) Coordination between governance actors in universities: The role of policy documents. Tertiary Education and Management, 27(3), 173–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macheridis, N., & Paulsson, A. (2016) Governance of higher education — The role of proximity in teaching quality. Tertiary Education and Management, 22(3), 202–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mafakheri, F., Nasiri, F., & Mousavi, M. (2008) Project agility assessment: An integrated decision analysis approach. Production Planning & Control, 19, 567–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAvoy, J., & Butler, T. (2007) The impact of the abilene paradox on double-loop learning in the agile team. Qualitative Software Engineering Research, Information and Software Technology, 49, 552–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, J. R. Jr, & Mantel, S. J. (2012). Project management: A managerial approach. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middlehurst, R. (2004) Changing internal governance: A discussion of leadership roles and man-agement structures in UK universities. Higher Education Quarterly, 58(4), 258–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mukerjee, S. (2014) Agility: A crucial capability for universities in time of disruptive change and innovation. Australian Universities Review, 56(1), 56–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Procter, R., Rouncefield, M., Poschen, M., Lin, Y., & Voss, A. (2011) Agile project management: A case study of a virtual research environment development project. Computer Supported Cooperative work, 20(3), 197–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serrador, P., & Pinto, J. K. (2015) Does agile work? — A quantitative analysis of agile project success. International Journal of Project Management, 33, 1040–1051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., Sarkar, D., & Gupta, D. (2012) Agile processes and methodologies: A conceptual study. International Journal on Computer Science & Engineering, 4(5), 892–898.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp, J. M., Irani, Z., & Desai, S. (1999) Working towards agile manufacturing in the UK industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 62, 155–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherehiy, B., Karwowski, W., & Layer, J. K. A. (2007) Review of enterprise agility: Concepts, frameworks, and attributes. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37(5), 445–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, Y. H., & Lin, C. T. (2011) Enhancing enterprise agility by deploying agile drivers, capabilities and providers. Information Science, 181, 3693–3708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, D., & Shen, J. (2002) Project understanding, planning, flexibility of management action and construction time performance: Two Australian case studies. Construction Management and Economics, 20, 31–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. (2010) Agile software development methodologies and practices. Advances in Computers, 80, 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T (2005) Assessing and moving on from the dominant project management discourse in the light of project overruns. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(4), 497–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yusuf, Y. Y., Adeleye, E. O., & Sivayoganathan, K. (2003) Volume flexibility: The agile manu-facturing conundrum. Management Decision, 41(1), 613–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yusuf, Y. Y, Sarhadi, M., & Gunasekaran, A. (1999) Agile manufacturing: The drivers, concepts and attributes. International Journal of Production Economics, 62, 33–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z., & Sharifi, H. (2007) Towards theory building in agile manufacturing strategy — A taxonomical approach. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 54(2), 351–370. Retrieved 2 September 2017 from https://doi.org/www.lu.se

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikos Macheridis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Macheridis, N. Balancing authority and autonomy in higher education by implementing an agile project management approach. Tert Educ Manag 24, 128–143 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1400092

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1400092

Keywords

Navigation