A research study was conducted by Lecomber  to understand how participants used and adopted the PRINCE2 methodology to workplace projects following a professional training course. The study, over two and a half years, used Case Study  as a method and consisted of both a questionnaire and focus group interviews. The research formulated qualitative answers to the main research question: ‘How are practitioners influenced to apply project management ‘best practice’ (PRINCE2 in this study) in complex and dynamic environments?’
The study workplace consisted of a number of departments, one of which was an IT department. Two IT staff participated in the professional training program which consisted of sixteen staff drawn from the various departments across the organisation. Participants were questioned on what they thought of the training itself, how relevant it was to their own work and whether it would make a difference to their work in the future. The results showed that there were some participants who adopted as much of the PRINCE2 methodology as they were able for their work projects, and actively sought to improve their practice. Another group of participants had knowledge of the methodology but considered the overhead in using it far outweighed the benefit derived from using it.
To analyse these two different forms of adoption, Innovation Translation, informed by Actor-Network Theory (ANT) was used. ANT enables the researcher to think in terms of different translations (or adaptations) and to seek to identify the actors involved and the interactions that formed possible stable networks supporting those translations . Innovation Translation has the advantage of being able to explain examples of partial adoption, and of situations where what is actually adopted differs from what was proposed . This was particularly relevant for this study as it could be said that one group of participants made only a partial adoption.
ANT, also known as the sociology of translation [28, 29], was developed by science and technology scholars Callon and Latour, sociologist Law and others. It is a conceptual framework for exploring collective socio-technical processes and aims to follow the actors in a given network in the process of new network formation . Innovation Translation, informed by ANT, argues that an innovation moves along as a chain of consequence by energy given to it by everyone in the chain whose actions shape the innovation to suit themselves .
Actors in this case include the trainer, trainee (learner), curriculum and the workplace. According to Blomquist et al. , a practice approach on project management requires the study of action, activities and actors within projects. There are actors at play even before Day 1 of the training course. These are AXELOS, the Examination Institute (APMG) and the Accredited Training Organisation (ATO). The ATO provides the training material and the trainer. The ATO obtains the PRINCE2 manual from a bookseller who procures this from AXELOS, whilst APMG dispatches the exam paper. The nature of the outcome of the training experience is a result of the interaction of the human actors (the trainer and the other participants) and non-human actors (training materials, timetable, exam papers, PRINCE2 manual and training venue). After the training, the participant project manager seeks then to adopt the innovation in the workplace. This research study seeks to understand both the interactions that occur during training as well as in the workplace after the training course with respect to the adoption of the PRINCE2 methodology.
Callon  defines four moments (stages) of Innovation Translation: problematisation, interessement, enrolment and mobilization. The four stages, if successful, lock the actors into the network and create a stable translation . This research looked at adoption in the form of two different translations:
Some participants adopted as much of the PRINCE2 methodology as they were able for their projects and actively sought to improve practice. The study named this adoption as the Performing Translation (PT). Those who had adopted PT had a focus on continuous improvement in their practice. Those who adopt the PT are people who keep attempting to apply their learning and hence learn more. In addition, those who adopted the PT conducted their own research into ‘best practice’ outside of work hours.
The other group of participants who had knowledge of the methodology but considered the overhead in using it far outweighed the benefit derived from using it formed the Knowing Translation (KT). A KT sees nothing in the formal structures of PRINCE2 that is so valuable that they would sacrifice early delivery by going through procedures stated in the methodology. Those who had adopted the KT would only apply what they had learned to the workplace if they perceived adoption across the organisation.
In the case of PT participants, as their organisation did not have the supports such as strong leadership for using a methodology and a strong Project Management Office (PMO), some participants who adopted the PT eventually resigned from the organisation. In this research study, the PMO was weak and could not enforce the governance needed to support the use of PRINCE2.
Participants whose form of adoption was the Knowing Translation (KT) had knowledge of the Project Management methodology but considered the overhead in using it far outweighed the benefit derived. The lack of support from the top-down commencing with the Senior Leadership team and the original sponsor of the methodology had a strong influence on those who adopted the KT. A senior leadership team and sponsor must go beyond paying ‘lip-service’ to the methodology and actively comply with the methodology in terms of behaviours, responsibilities and expectations of their role on the project as sponsors and Project Board members.