7-IJAEBM-Volume-No-1-Issue-No-1-Research-Project-Management-in-the-United-States-Issues-and-Solution by ISERP ISERP

Karthik Mahesh Varadarajan et al. / (IJAEBM) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Vol No. 1, Issue No. 1, 052 - 057

Research Project Management in the United States â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Issues and Solutions A Pseudo-Psychological Inquiry on Research Personnel Management Karthik Mahesh Varadarajan

EB M

ACIN TU Wien Vienna, Austria kv@acin.tuwien.ac.at

Abstractâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; Management of a research project differs from traditional project management in several ways. Besides the greater amount of uncertainty involved in the outcome of a research project, issues such as level of technical communication and intellectual property rights play a significant role in a research project. Efficient management of a research project involves more than just efficient allocation of tasks and planning to ensure that all tasks are completed in a timely manner. This paper discusses the non-traditional project management challenges that a research project manager needs to be aware of, (largely in the context of research in the United States), in comparison to conventional project management systems and provides analyses and suggestions for efficient research management. The most important aspect of research project management comes from the requirement to manage dynamics of teams involved in the research. The largely unpredictable and unstructured nature of research renders personnel management crucial to the success of a research project. Expectations, work modalities, throughputs and parameters for evaluation of work can vary greatly between researchers causing numerous opportunities for friction. The research project manager holds the key to solving these issues while ensuring that the researchers are able to communicate in a common language of understanding. The various pseudo-psychological facets of individual personnel management that a research project manager needs to deal with are detailed in this paper. Keywords- Project Management; Research and Development; US; SBIR; STTR; DARPA; EU; RPM; Personnel Management

I. INTRODUCTION Management of a research project or Research Project Management (RPM) is in many aspects different from traditional project management. Besides the greater amount of uncertainty involved in the outcome of a research project, issues such as level of technical communication and intellectual property rights play a significant role in a research project. Efficient management of a research project involves more than just efficient allocation of tasks and planning to ensure that all tasks are completed in a timely manner. A number of traditional project management tools and techniques such as Gantt charts, Critical Path Method (CPM), Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT), Critical Chain

ISSN: 2230-7826

Project Management (CCPM), Extreme Project Management (XPM), Event Chain Methodology, PROMPT, PRINCE, PRINCE2, Process Based Management and Agile Management are useful in handling the conventional issues and aspects of research project management. However, the pseudopsychological, non-traditional facets of individual personnel management form the fulcrum of research project management, especially in the United States. This paper discusses these nontraditional project management challenges that a research project manager needs to be aware of, in comparison to conventional project management systems and provides analyses and suggestions for efficient research management.

Prior study in the field of research project management such as [3] and [4] are largely focused on the traditional aspects of RPM with minimal emphasis on the pseudo-psychological facets of individual personnel management. Other traditional parameters of project evaluation, defined from the perspective of research are expounded in [5] and [6]. This paper seeks to concentrate on this specific aspect of RPM. Research in the United States is largely conducted under the auspices of National Research Council (NRC), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), National Science Foundation (NSF), National Institute of Health (NIH), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and affiliated institutes such as the Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics, various Department of Defense (DoD) agencies such as Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Office of Naval Research (ONR), Army Research Laboratories (ARL), Air Force Research Laboratories (AFRL) etc. Other centers of research include private and public universities as well as R & D units of technology companies. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) are common types of grants awarded to independent research companies. In the year 2010, this amounted to $1 billion. In Europe, research is again focused around European Union (EU) agencies, universities and private companies. The majority of the research initiatives or grants awarded to firms and universities are funded for the development of a certain well defined product. Very few research initiatives are solely driven as research for the sake of itself with no foreseeable short-term benefits to the institution or to humanity.

Page 52

Karthik Mahesh Varadarajan et al. / (IJAEBM) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Vol No. 1, Issue No. 1, 052 - 057

The research grants are generally headed by a Principal Investigator (PI) who serves as the research project manager. Alternatively, especially in research firms, a non-technical manager serves the role of the research project manager with a technical lead guiding the technical progress of the project. The next section deals some of the more traditional aspects of RPM. Many of these issues and facets are common to both research as well as other applied areas of project management. II.

TRADITIONAL ASPECTS OF RESEARCH PROJECT MANAGEMENT

C. Planning and Budgeting Research projects in the United States and the European Union typically span multiple years. For the case of Department of Defense SBIR programs the project is normally divided into three phases. The first phase involves a demonstration of the feasibility of the proposed technique or algorithm that is intended to address the requirements of the project solicitation. This phase usually lasts for about six months. This is followed by a project evaluation, which takes the project to the second phase lasting for about two years. The second phase of the program is intended for development of the technology, the feasibility of which had been established in the first phase. It is expected that at the end of the second phase the developed technology is mature enough to be tested and integrated into industrial test-beds or end-products. The actual integration is carried out during this third phase of the project [1, 2]. The project manager needs to develop a time-chart as well as cost and resource budgets within the overall scheme of phases. Scheduling of intra-group and inter sub-group meetings, exchange of resources, information and specifications as well as other allied activities such as algorithm implementation, hardware deployment, testing, documentation, reporting, “productizing” are the responsibility of the project manager.

EB M

A. Goal Definition One of the primal tasks of a research project manager is to understand the goal of the research project initiative and make sure each person or sub-group in the team comprehends it clearly. Typically, most research projects have well established goals defined as part of the solicitation or the contract for the research grant. Though these goals might be altered or scaled higher or lower due to the necessity of changes with time or due to the infeasibility of the initially envisioned system, the overall scope of the goal should be transparent and unambiguous throughout the course of the research project. It is the primal duty of the research project manager to ensure that this happens. The project manager should establish his vision for the project based upon these goals and define various checkpoints required to attain the goal. The project manager should also ensure that the goals are in line with the expectations and vision of the research team members. Achievability of goals is an important part to ensuring that the team members give their best towards attaining the goal as demonstrated in [7] and [8].

or allied non-technical information that is crucial for the successful completion of the project.

B. Team Definition Research project managers often have the luxury of defining their own teams. The team definition is typically laid out during the time of responding to the project solicitation by the submission of a proposal. Project managers need to identify the strengths and weaknesses of their in-house teams and build the proposal based on it. They should be able to identify third party firms, universities or private consultants or subcontractors who can supplement the program and help compensate for the deficiencies of the in-house team. The tasks and roles of each of the project members need to be clearly defined and time-lines drawn for the completion of independent modules en-tasked to project members. In the case of research firms and universities, third-party assistance might be highly essential especially for business development and “productization” of the deliverables developed as part of the project. Teams might also be necessary to identify market sectors that can use the developed technology and to help remodel the product to the needs of the industry. To summarize, the project manager needs to create a multi-lateral team that addresses the research, development, “productization” and marketing needs in a coherent and integrated manner. The project manager also needs to establish frameworks for the interaction of various components of team, either in terms of research goals, specifications and attributes

ISSN: 2230-7826

D. Team Management Research teams are in general highly heterogeneous. Unlike regular project teams, these teams are usually a mix of people with different technical, social, political, economic and cultural backgrounds. Thus, the possibility of conflicts is higher in the case of research project teams as opposed to other teams. The research project manager has the additional task of acting as an interpreter between various sub-groups and individuals. Conflicts between managerial, business and research teams are quite common due to lack of a common language of communication and understanding in terms of expectations, importance of various elements and other aspects of product development. The PM plays the crucial role of acting as a liaison between the various teams. He is also the only person who can effectively communicate the monetary, time and resource needs of the research team with the management, inhouse as well as third party collaboration teams. E. Product Management Besides project management, a research manager should also be concerned with product management. Most research projects are funded by governmental agencies or other companies who would want to see the money invested in research being translated into products that have a market. One common complaint about research firms is the lack of product oriented development. While research businesses give their best towards satisfying the project objectives, they rarely cater to product development. In other words, these firms often fall short of building a viable product out of the research at the end of the research period. While for a university affiliated research institute, this may not be a serious cause for concern, since it is

Page 53

Karthik Mahesh Varadarajan et al. / (IJAEBM) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Vol No. 1, Issue No. 1, 052 - 057

researchers are able to communicate in a common language of understanding. The various pseudo-psychological facets of individual personnel management that a research project manager needs to be aware of are detailed in this section. A. Independence Dependency between team members is important in the case of conventional projects as expounded in [7], [8] and [9]. From the point of view of research projects, scholars suggest that best outputs are obtained through collaboration [10, 11]. On the other hand, researchers, in general, like to function in an individualistic manner. In other words, they like to work independently with complete freedom over the direction of methods, procedures, practices and timelines. Research project managers need to ensure that this freedom expected by researchers is available while ensuring that the overall functioning of the researchers fall within the goal, time and cost frameworks established for the project. Project managers also need to ensure that this independence granted to researchers does not curtail constructive co-operation or create inefficiency, redundancy, incoherency or incompatibility in the system. It is often observed that research project managers, in an effort to ensure that the commitments on time, cost and outcomes set for the project are honored, drive the researchers into strict schedules that destroy the spirit of the research effort resulting sub-optimal outcomes. Often times, they also tend to micro-manage projects pushing team members to think on the lines of their own pre-conceived notions on each module of the project. It is necessary that project managers understand that while they are in the position to make the best decision on the overall goal and major sub-goals of the project, they may not possess the necessary expertise and time to fully appreciate the nuances of each sub-goal of the project.

EB M

expected that the nature of research conducted at universities is more fundamental and less applied. Thus, the reason for the lack of “productizable” state of the outcome of the project can be justified based on the nascent state of the research as well as its market. On the other hand, in a research institute or firm funded by governmental agencies or other firms, this factor is crucial. The success of the project is defined based on the “productizable” state of the deliverables of the project. It is one of the primal tasks of a research project manager to ensure that the project deliverables are in a state ready for deployment in the industry or the society. The project manager needs to work out the time required for this process into the research plan and ensure that these deadlines are adhered to in a strict fashion. For a typical small business research running on a three year project grant, this time period could be as short as six months, but is nevertheless crucial for the successful completion of the project. During this period, it is in the best interests of the firm to have a technology freeze – a state where no further improvements to the established algorithms is carried out. Much of resources can then be diverted to the production of the required product at the required level of quality. This requires testing, hardware deployment and conversion of the product into a form factor suitable for commercialization. Additional resources, if available, may be used for improvement of algorithms which can feature in a later version of the product. SBIR companies like Qualcomm and iRobot have become tech-giants as a result of successful “productization” of their research projects. By building readily marketable end-products such as hardware systems and units that use the algorithms built during the research program, these companies have created niche markets of their own. Research project managers can also work with other divisions of the company, such as marketing and business development to identify readily marketable products and the scope for these products in becoming financial successes. Once these products are identified, research project managers can build pathways to create these products during or after the period of the research grant. This step is especially crucial if the firm is thinking in the long-term for sustainable product development as opposed to surviving only with research grant funding. If the firm also houses product development teams or has business relations to outsource development to third party developers, project managers can work with these units in order to ensure timely development and marketing of the product.

While the above more traditional aspects of project management are important, the success of any research project depends greatly on one important aspect of project management – research personnel management.

III. FACETS OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT IN RPM The most important aspect of research project management comes from the requirement to manage dynamics of teams involved in the research. The largely unpredictable and unstructured nature of research renders personnel management crucial to the success of a research project. Expectations, work modalities, throughputs and parameters for evaluation of work can vary greatly between researchers causing numerous opportunities for friction. The research project manager holds the key to solving these issues while ensuring that the

ISSN: 2230-7826

More often than not, research project managers are hardly technical. Some of them could have been researchers several years earlier but having moved onto the managerial side are no longer able to work with the intricate details of the state of the art in technology in this rapidly progressing age, due to the lack of time and the ability to keep pace with changes. Research project managers need to acknowledge these deficiencies and not cause a hindrance to the active research of fellow team members. At the same time, they can take advantage of their technical and managerial exposure in guiding the overall direction of research and in making sure all sub-systems of the project are in place for a smooth integration. Another common flaw of research project managers, especially those with prior research background is that they tend to push for explanation of even minor technical aspects of research algorithms, assuming that their prior technical expertise would suffice in handling the case, especially when a problem is to be solved. This often results in a fruitless expenditure of time, especially for fellow researchers. Not every researcher is a good teacher and neither is it required to be so for a successful project. Such nitpicking can often be de-motivating, especially for senior researchers. It is often observed that lack of understanding of the technical details of a research project on the part of the research team manager results in wastage of the otherwise productive time of team members, in explaining or convincing the manager of the

Page 54

Karthik Mahesh Varadarajan et al. / (IJAEBM) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Vol No. 1, Issue No. 1, 052 - 057

real research problems and technical challenges during team meetings and other congregations.

B. Cultural Heterogeneity Research institutions in most countries, especially in the United States are highly heterogeneous. These institutions host people with different nationalities, cultures, social and political affiliations. The level to which this condition is true in the United States is as a result of the fact that the United States is seen as an open and free society with the best possible opportunity, in terms of political freedom as well as financial, infrastructural and collaborative benefits. Furthermore, governmental support and the huge diversified native markets encourage development of new products enabling investments in active research. In the other major center of research, namely Europe, the cultural heterogeneity factor is less apparent when viewed from the intra-country cultural diversity perspective. However, since the formation of the European Union and its allied financial and budgeting departments, most research in Europe is being increasingly conducted under the multiuniversity or intra-Europe banner. In other words, research projects are awarded and carried out through collaborative cooperation of multiple universities and industries spread out throughout Europe. As a result, it is necessary to ensure close interaction between communities of different cultural, linguistic, political and social backgrounds to ensure successful working of project. Communication is thus a very important criterion in research and it is duty of the research project manager to ensure that communication and team dynamics are smooth and constructive. The research project manager should serve as an efficient interpreter translating the language of the individual researchers or sub-groups into neutral tone void of its cultural, social affiliations and in a pure and simple format understandable to the majority of the teams. Culturally significant variations such as group oriented operation or individual oriented tasking, tall hierarchies or flat structured protocols, family oriented or individual and competitive business operations are other factors that research project managers should be aware of while dealing with multi-cultural teams.

EB M

Research project leaders should also learn to delegate subtasks and sub-goals to team-members, giving them complete independence over individual modules. Research project managers often have differences in opinion with researchers over the relative importance of technical and non-technical aspects of the research project. While it is necessary that project managers take steps to emphasize the significance of non-technical aspects of the project, such as management of time, cost and goals, marketing, personal relationship management so that the researchers respect and appreciate the constraints on these factors, project managers should also recognize the fact that the ultimate goal of the project is the successful completion of the research work and most thirdparty evaluation of research work, at least ideally, is largely based on the outcome of the research and not on the nontechnical frills attached to it. Hence, project managers should grant researchers complete independence within acceptable frameworks of responsibility and commitment.

better research result coming out of a different team might completely obliterate the need and utility of an active or promising research project or proposal. Hence, bounds on time and performance are important in the light of uncertainty and risks associated with the research. It is the duty of the research program manager to ensure that risks involved in research projects are mitigated through a consistent and regularized system of production of results and corresponding returns. At the same time, the manager should ensure that the research environment is conducive towards taking risks. This balance of risk versus results is one of the key contributions of a research manager.

At the same time, these managers need to establish a framework for co-operation to ensure that the knowledge of the crowd is utilized. It is often seen that solutions to problems are obtained quicker and in a more elegant fashion through interaction with team-members or brainstorming. However, it is best to have such brain-storming sessions only when necessary and only after the individual who has been tasked with the problem has had sufficient time to think about the problem from a multitude of angles. This is necessary to ensure that the individual researcher is not undermined in anyway and also the problem is analyzed in detail from a variety of viewpoints some of which may not be entirely intuitive and might require the aid of tools such as computer software and crossreferencing systems to fully study the problem â&#x20AC;&#x201C; tools that may not be immediately available at the disposal of researchers in a meeting room for a brainstorming session, running the risk of over-simplification or overlooking of crucial problem parameters.

Research program managers need to establish periodic team meetings to ensure there is continuous exchange of information on potential issues so that these are resolved as early as possible, in addition to formal status and progress updates. While seamless integration of individual modules in a research project is not as crucial as in the case of traditional projects, it is indeed important that individual researchers make their modules as compatible as possible with the modules of their fellow researchers in order to have a complete functional system at the end of the project period. Project managers should conduct technical interchange meetings to ensure this.

Furthermore, every research project involves significant risks associated with it. The risk in research projects is especially high when compared to traditional projects due to the uncertainty in expected results and outcomes. Furthermore, in this rapidly growing information age, it is highly likely that similar research targeting similar outcomes is being conducted in a different part of the world. In such a case, the earlier the find, the more significant it is, in terms of its impact to the parties involved and the revenue generated. In certain cases, a

ISSN: 2230-7826

C. Ideological Differences The very nature of research permits a system that awards over-achievers and people who make the impossible a reality. In other words, most successful research systems have a strong emphasis on individualism, laissez faire, meritocracy, objectivism and capitalism inherent in them, as opposed to collectivism and socialism. This emphasis is also mirrored in self-realization philosophies acclaimed by most major religions of the world, notably those of the Orient. Individualistic

Page 55

Karthik Mahesh Varadarajan et al. / (IJAEBM) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Vol No. 1, Issue No. 1, 052 - 057

research in the short term while looking for monetary returns in the long term. In other words, he might prefer acknowledgment in the form of publications and patents in the short term, while making sure these patents or the recognition he earns in the short term can help him secure his financial future in the long term. The same individual might tow a line of contributing to the society without looking for returns, once his work is well recognized and his financial future is secured. Yet there might be others who would want to make quick profits by assuming a greater role in the project and contributing to it accordingly, especially with respect to objective metrics of performance such as efficiency, profitability or other directly measurable qualities of the developed product. A research project is one of the few opportunities in the technological sector that provides an environment for the expression of creativity, intellectual satisfaction and potential reward for going overboard and making the impossible possible. A number of researchers get involved in research project just to be part of such an open environment. Some researchers perform research for its own sake, in other words, they conduct research just because they seek the beauty in the end goal of the research â&#x20AC;&#x201C; be it a mathematical equation, model or a system, with no apparent immediate use for the society, and give their best to create it. Others seek solutions that solve social problems or aid societal well-being. It is necessary for research project managers to understand and appreciate this variety in the needs and aspirations of researchers to keep them motivated for the successful completion of the research project. Above all, it is necessary for the project manager to ensure that each person in the research team receives his due share of credit for his contributions to the project. This is especially true with regard to credit for intellectual property in the form of authorship of publications or patents, which many researchers endear.

EB M

emphasis is appreciated while acknowledging the long-term imbibed benefits to the society, similar to the concept of 'invisible hand' in economics. Research team managers should be capable of identifying such promising members of the team, irrespective of their past record or lack thereof. Managers should motivate and channel the research and creativity potential of these individuals in such a way that it helps in the outcome in the project, while ensuring that such a measure does not affect the morality of others in the team. Managers need to work on building systems to reward these individuals for their successes while creating an environment that supports risk-taking, encourages creativity, motivates and does not penalize for failures that cannot be predicted or controlled. At the same time, managers need to identify the possible guiding role played by senior members of the team and reward appropriately. Since the nature of the work is highly dynamic and goes beyond the rigid definitions of a typical '9 to 5 job', it is necessary for managers to keep a close watch on the progress of the team members. Research teams often tend to be highly heterogeneous- composed of a few high-risk takers, a number of stable players and a few low-risk traditionalists. Managers should keep a look out for innovators and reward them accordingly. They should also keep track of the throughput of each individual and make sure the profits, either monetary or intellectual recognition such as authorship in publications, are shared in proportion to the levels of output of each individual. Another major phenomenon common among researchers, yet easily overlooked by research managers is the disinterest of these individuals towards non-technical aspects of technical projects. A good example is the case of researchers having to present the project work to a non-technical audience for the purpose of marketing, evaluation or prospective collaboration with other firms. While inputs from the researchers are definitely required for these activities, it is often a better idea to have technical marketing officials on the team to perform this role, thus freeing the researchers from this additional burden. Research project managers have a crucial role to play in this regard, leading to an efficient team organization.

D. Motivation, Reward and Recognition Another important component that research project managers need to be aware of is that the variety of reasons which motivate researchers to perform to their maximal potential in a research team, is much diverse and complicated than that of members in a traditional project team. While some researchers are interested in nothing more than a stable source of income, others might see the job as an opportunity that satisfies their intellectual appetite. There might be researchers who are primarily interested in converting their intellectual contributions into monetary returns. There could be others who are less interested in monetary returns but might want to see their work being recognized in the form of highly acknowledged publications or patents. There might also be researchers who contribute solely for their own personal satisfaction without any desire for external acknowledgment or monetary returns. Furthermore, some of these aspirations might be short term while other could be long-term. For e.g., a young researcher might be looking forward to making a mark in his field of

ISSN: 2230-7826

E. Evaluation of Contribution and Payments Methods Unlike traditional jobs wherein people are evaluated on the basis of their efficiency in attaining certain quantifiable targets or goals, researchers often prefer to have their work evaluated in rather vague terms such as creativity, significance of results and sometimes even benefits to society. It is necessary for research project managers to appreciate these differences in perception of individual contribution to projects and help ensure agreeable division of the profits of the project. Even when contributions are measured objectively and profits shared accordingly there might be differences in the preferred form of payments. While some researchers are interested in a traditional system of regular monthly payoffs, others might see themselves as guides or contractors, taking payments on irregular time-scales based on the level of involvement required or offered. The research project manager should anticipate and plan for such arrangements to make sure that the project is completed within the established budget for cost and time. Another important dimension that the project manager should be sensitive to while deciding rewards is related to the hikes, promotions and power delegation. Promotions can be a useful form of reward in most jobs. In the research domain, the structure and hierarchy could vary greatly based on the type of firm, its size and objectives. Not every researcher is well suited as a research manager or a team leader. It is necessary for the project manager to take this fact into consideration while

Page 56

Karthik Mahesh Varadarajan et al. / (IJAEBM) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Vol No. 1, Issue No. 1, 052 - 057

delegating managerial power to subordinates or co-researchers in terms of hiring, project management and design, as part of rewards associated with performance appraisals. It is important that the project manager understands the limitations, capabilities, aspirations of the researchers in placing the researcher at his niche position in the company hierarchy and maximizing the throughput of the firm.

IV.

REFERENCES [1] [2]

DoD Solictations, http://www.dodsbir.net/solicitation/ DoD's SBIR and STTR Programs, Overview, http://www.acq.osd.mil/osbp/sbir/overview/index.htm [3] Ernø-kjølhede, Erik, Project Management Theory and the Management of Research Projects, MPP Working Paper No. 3/2000 [4] Ernø-Kjølhede, Erik, “The Coming of Age of the Danish Research Manager” MPP Working Paper 5/11, Copenhagen Business School, 1999. [5] University of Wisconsin, Research Training Checklist. [6] Guy G. Gable, „Research Project Management – Define and Plan the Project‟ [7] Bennis, Warren and Biederman, Patricia Ward, „Organizing Genius‟, The Secrets of Creative Collaboration, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London, 1997. [8] Fisher, Kimball and Fisher, Mareen Duncan, „The Distributed Mind‟, Achieving High Performance Through the Collective Intelligence of Knowledge Work Teams. Amacom, New York, 1998. [9] Drucker, Peter F., „The Coming of the New Organization‟, In Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, 1998. [10] Jain, R. K. & Triandis, H. C., „Management of Research and Development Organizations‟, Managing the Unmanageble. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 1997. [11] Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P. and Finkelstein, S., „Managing Professional Intellect- Making the Most of the Best‟,. In Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, 1998.

EB M

Besides these intrinsic facets of research personnel management, there are many more factors that come into play in the management of multi-cultural research team. Many of these factors are extrinsic, or in other words, depends on the outside environment, such as the research competition, possibility of third-party influence on the researchers, in addition to other economic, social, political and cultural influences. A research project manager is required to take these various factors into consideration in order to lead the research effort to success.

personnel management that a research project manager needs to deal with in order to lead a project to success. Various pitfalls and issues to look out for and possible solutions to these issues have also been presented, largely in the context of multi-cultural research groups in the United States of America.

CONCLUSION

Management of research projects is one of the most challenging among various types of project management. The largely unpredictable and unstructured nature of research renders personnel management crucial to the success of a research project. Expectations, work modalities, throughputs and parameters for evaluation of work can vary greatly between researchers causing numerous opportunities for friction. The research project manager holds the key to solving these issues while ensuring that the researchers are able to communicate in a common language of understanding. In this paper, an attempt has been made to identify, understand and analyze the various pseudo-psychological facets of individual

ISSN: 2230-7826

Page 57