Managing Research Projects in the Context of the Knowledge Economy: Success Factors and Challenges

Regardless of the type of project, assessing its success is more complex than simply evaluating the time and costs involved in its implementation (Castro et al., 2019). Defining the success of a project depends on many factors, including the nature of the project, its complexity and size. For this reason, we need a flexible approach to measuring success (Westerveld, 2003). Several dimensions are considered when judging the success of a project, reflecting the diverse perspectives of the stakeholders. Hence, the project success has evolved from the simplistic concept of a triple constraint, known as the iron triangle (Atkinson, 1999) (time, scope/quality and cost) to a more elaborate approach combining efficiency and impact. This approach considers both the short-term project management efficiency and the longer-term achievement of project results. The success framework of Freeman and Beale (1992) emphasizes these two dimensions (Freeman & Beale, 1992) and serves as the foundation for the development of several project success models. For example, Joslin (2019) proposes a model that includes project execution effectiveness, managerial and organizational implications, manufacturability, personal growth and business performance (project impact) and stakeholder satisfaction (Joslin, 2019). Other researchers (Shenhar et al., 2001) have identified four major dimensions of success in their analysis: project effectiveness, customer impact, direct commercial and organizational success, and future readiness. The importance of each dimension varies according to the phases of the project and the level of technological uncertainty.

The scope and performance criterion mean that the product is produced according to technical specifications and meets all the functionalities required by users. The impact on the customer is measured through customer satisfaction: the customer is satisfied when the product perfectly meets their needs and solves their specific problems. In addition, the positive appreciation of the team members means that they were happy during the project, but also happy with the results of the project (Castro et al., 2019). Future potential refers to the project’s prospects and the improvement of organizational capabilities, by creating a new market, product and technology.

R&D projects primarily aim to produce knowledge that can be applied in different ways (Klaus-Rosińska & Pliński, 2023; Wingate, 2015). In addition to the general success criteria that apply to all projects, there are additional criteria specific to academic research projects. These relate to the ability to develop new knowledge by integrating the work of research team members. Success in this context is reflected in the number of publications and patents, the development of start-ups, the enhancement of the department’s reputation and the facilitation of new sources of funding (Capaldo et al., 2021).

Regarding publications, the three main mechanisms used by universities to assess the quality of their staff’s research outputs are: the number of publications, peer review, and bibliometric indicators (Huong Nguyen & Lynn Meek, 2015). According to Taylor (2006), these success factors represent the key performance indicators used in research universities. In the case of research projects, the project’s potential can be expressed through scientific reputation and enhanced innovation capabilities. This is linked in particular to the generation of tacit and implicit knowledge (Mahboobeh & Farokhad, 2019).

It is important to make a distinction between success criteria, in other words, the measures by which the success or failure of a project will be judged, and success factors, that is to say, the elements of the management system that lead directly or indirectly to project success (Prabhakar, 2008). Project success criteria are therefore dependent variables that measure the successful outcome of a project, while project success factors facilitate the achievement of this success (Lamprou & Vagiona, 2018). Consequently, critical success factors reflect key organizational areas that support project success.

Critical factors influencing the success of a project are commonly associated with the following four areas. The project itself (e.g., clear objectives, realistic timetable, adequate funds, resources, size, complexity), the project manager (leadership, effective conflict resolution, communication), the project team members (competence, profile), the organization (top management support, authority, management style) and the external environment (customer, technological and socio-political environment) (Lamprou & Vagiona, 2018). Thus, effective execution is linked to the following factors: clear objectives, a realistic timetable, management support, and adequate funds/resources (Fortune et al., 2011). The success of research projects, therefore, depends not only on the technical and scientific aspects of the project but also on the overall conditions in which the research activity takes place. In fact, a supportive work environment, characterized by the availability of resources and administrative and logistical support, is necessary for effective project implementation. The main critical success factors identified in the literature are summarised in Table 1.

Despite their specific nature, the main characteristics of R&D projects must be fully respected. The lifecycle of R&D projects must be analyzed as a multi-phase process, as is the case for the majority of projects (Vicente-Oliva et al., 2015; Wingate, 2015). Research and teaching institutions generally use a traditional management approach (Ivetić & Ilić, 2020; Zornitsa Yordanova, 2020) which comprises five phases: initiation, planning, execution, monitoring and control, and project closure (Fernandes et al., 2020) (see Table 1).

These factors apply to most projects, regardless of their nature. Nevertheless, in the context of research projects, some specific elements must be considered to address the particularities of productive research activities. Table 2 presents the structural and human characteristics of an environment conducive to high-performance scientific research.

Universities, as primary sources of knowledge and innovation, require a supportive administrative framework that enables researchers to produce high-quality research outcomes (Ayandibu, 2023). In this regard, participative governance and decentralised organisation are examples of organisational factors that contribute to the success of research projects. Together, these factors enhance stakeholder engagement, foster innovation by providing greater autonomy to individuals, and promote efficient information flow (Bland & Ruffin, 1992).

Furthermore, to stimulate innovation within research projects, researchers must be able to work efficiently without being hindered by bureaucratic constraints (Taylor, 2006). Consequently, research-oriented universities tend to decentralise decision-making structures and empower researchers (Huong Nguyen & Lynn Meek, 2015). To promote innovation, university managers should offer more autonomy, ensure adequate resources, and reduce administrative constraints to facilitate free exchanges among researchers (Jin & Sun, 2010).

A favourable environment is a prerequisite for research, but ultimately, it is the researchers who drive the research forward. Therefore, it is essential to focus on selecting competent researchers, motivating them, and developing their scientific performance. Autonomy and recognition are crucial managerial practices that influence performance (Edgar & Geare, 2013). It is important to emphasise that, beyond these administrative and managerial aspects, additional preconditions are necessary, particularly financial and material resources (Bazeley, 2010). The availability of resources includes access to appropriate equipment, adequate workspace, and funding aligned with the objectives of research projects (Jyoti et al., 2010).

It is worth mentioning that the importance of these factors varies according to the stage of the project. In the initiation stage, priority is given to defining the research problems and to the selection of team members (Kulatunga et al., 2009). In the conceptualization stage, the emphasis is placed on the project feasibility study, the determination of tasks and responsibilities and the setting of clear objectives (Sun & Wing, 2005). In the project implementation stage, the focus is on facilitating teamwork (management support is essential), motivating and empowering people, and fostering communication and collaboration (Hanif et al., 2021).

Examining the success factors of research projects means addressing the conditions under which they are conducted and the critical dimensions of project implementation, which encompass the general climate in which research projects take place. It also involves understanding the difficulties encountered in the field and the obstacles faced on a day-to-day basis.

A key dimension in the project implementation is the availability of resources. This includes access to equipment, basic infrastructure and funding. These elements are considered basic conditions for carrying out research projects. While the Algerian government has provided a great deal of resources in this area, field challenges have compromised their mobilization, highlighting shortcomings in the day-to-day research management system. One of the project managers commented: “We are in the presence of an official discourse that advocates research, but which is hampered by practices in the field; unfortunately, there is a tendency towards more centralization”.

A concrete example of this paralysing bureaucracy was provided by a researcher: “It's an entire bureaucratic process that holds you back. For example, when you request equipment, you have to go through a procurement procedure. The procedure has to be prepared by a specific department, you see!! Sometimes it's not done properly, there are mistakes, and it needs to be corrected. That takes a lot of time, and sometimes, it just stops there”.

Another example that reflects these operational difficulties relates to optimizing resource use. The researchers highlighted a failure in the system for monitoring and maintaining equipment. In this regard, one manager pointed out: “We had a scanning microscope that had broken down, so after many years we brought a gentleman in to repair it. He informed us that after all these years, it was no longer operational, even though it had cost 10 million Dinars”.

The availability of resources is consistently presented as an obstacle; in this regard, a laboratory head shared the following observation with us: “The issue does not lie in a lack of ideas or skills — those are certainly present. The real challenge is the lack of resources. I am faced with hundreds of requests for access to basic equipment, simply to conduct routine experiments that should otherwise be easily achievable”.

Although funding is available, there is still a problem with its management, resulting in poor administrative management of available budgets. Funding-related problems are recurrent, notably the lack of clarity in funding processes and the limited periodicity of calls for projects.

Administrative constraints and delays linked to regulations and bureaucracy appear to be major obstacles. These difficulties slow down projects and complicate their day-to-day management, reinforcing the researcher’s dependence on the administration. One manager noted: “We are in front of a research system that operates with an administration that serves civil servants rather than researchers. A management system that does not reflect the specific nature of research activity”.

Researchers are often faced with multiple delays in file approval or problems related to importing equipment, which hampers their efficiency. As a result, administrative constraints have become a major source of frustration. Despite the availability of researchers and their ability to organize their work efficiently. Administrative and logistical constraints hinder their work. “Administrative tasks overshadow scientific ones - lost in administrative paperwork, with delays and wasted effort and energy”, one manager indicated.

Once these basic conditions are guaranteed, the project gets underway, shedding light on other organizational issues within the research team. At this level of analysis, the human dimension of the project is highlighted. Table 5 summarises the main obstacles encountered during project implementation.

The analysis identified the factors contributing to the success of research projects. The factors identified as determinants of project success are detailed in Table 6.

This analysis reveals that project success depends on a combination of administrative, organizational and material factors. Institutional support, particularly in the form of administrative support and guidance, is revealed as an important lever for project success. The administration must create a flexible and favorable environment for the implementation of research projects, enabling the rapid resolution of any problems: “The problem of wanting too much supervision is annoying, you have to find the right balance between supervision and allowing flexibility for the researcher, you can't leave people unsupervised, but too much supervision kills the work”. One manager emphasized.

In terms of organizational factors, the importance of management and leadership can be seen in the different roles played by the leader. Between negotiation, coordination and motivation, the leader in the Algerian research context is the pivot on which much of the project’s success depends. Collaboration and cooperation are also central to this success, with teamwork based on complementary skills and harmonious coordination.

The issue of leadership and the mobilisation of the research team is therefore central to the success of projects. In this regard, a project leader shared with us the following perspective on the role of the team leader: “Here, I give you an example of laboratory leadership. The leader plays a crucial role in addressing issues in real-time and focusing on the work. There needs to be frequent communication, involving people in laboratory decisions so they feel responsible and have a stake in the final decisions”.

Beyond the need to secure the necessary funding for the project and to effectively manage project activities, it is also essential to master the project’s relationship with its external environment. In this sense, partnership with the socio-economic sector is necessary to align research projects with the real needs of the economic sector, to respond to practical and current issues, and to strengthen interactions with players in this environment, enabling the university to integrate into the innovation ecosystem (Matt et al., 2021; Schaeffer et al., 2018).

While the availability of resources and financing is a fundamental requirement for starting up and maintaining a project (Lamprou & Vagiona, 2018), effective project implementation and success in the Algerian research context are determined by critical factors associated with institutional and organizational dimensions. From this perspective, two factors appear to play an important role in the success of research projects: institutional support and team leadership. These factors contribute synergistically to the overall success of research projects. Institutional support, in the form of a flexible administrative environment, should enable researchers to deal with unexpected challenges that frequently arise in research projects.

Institutional support is reflected in a research-conducive work environment across the entire research institution. This was confirmed by the following statement expressed by one of the project leaders: “There must be a supportive environment for research. Some people want to work, and it is essential to make their tasks easier, both administratively and bureaucratically. Every person in the research center must contribute to facilitating the research process”. This would enable the adoption of a more flexible management system, thereby facilitating the daily work of research, as mentioned by one of the researchers: “When talking about perspectives, there needs to be faster and more flexible project management methods. The acquisition and procurement procedures must be simplified. Even if you provide funding, if I face difficulties in spending it, it won’t be meaningful”.

Studies have confirmed that a work environment facilitating cutting-edge research and significant flexibility for teams to manage the resources allocated to them are two organizational aspects that play a decisive role in the success of a research project (Dieng, 2021). In this respect, it’s important to achieve the right balance between excessive supervision and lack of control. In addition, institutional support takes the form of the administration’s ability to support the researcher’s work through proactive management. Otherwise, long response times and unnecessary administrative hurdles are often encountered.

Moreover, institutional support involves facilitating the project’s relations with its environment to guarantee its impact. In this respect, it should be remembered that one of the key criteria for the success of a research project is its impact and the satisfaction of its partners (Shenhar et al., 2001). Hence, the relevance of scientific research relies on an administrative framework conducive to innovation, one that encourages researchers to take initiative and fosters interaction with socio-economic stakeholders. This implies the existence of a supportive ecosystem for the co-production and exchange of knowledge within the innovation system (Kozirog et al., 2022; Reichert, 2019). At this level of analysis, the innovation ecosystem is characterized by complex interactions among actors, all oriented toward fostering innovation (Matt et al., 2021; Schaeffer et al., 2018). The challenge lies in setting up a management system and an institutional framework capable of consolidating relations and facilitating exchanges with partners from the socio-economic world, particularly in the context of collaborative research (Nahla, 2023). Hence, universities and industries in Algeria have different cultures, preventing a mutual understanding of the expectations and priority needs of both parties (Benbouzid & Dahmani, 2020). This situation is exacerbated by administrative rigidity, which limits the flexibility required to cooperate with partners.

The implementation of decentralized methods of promoting research and innovation seems to be the only alternative for breaking the deadlock in the learning process between universities and the socio-economic world, and creating new knowledge (Amdaoud, 2016). The success of research projects depends on the establishment of a management system that promotes knowledge sharing, collaboration, and initiative. Consequently, the internal managerial dynamics of the research institution must also be reflected in the adoption of flexible and open organizational structures and management approaches that place researchers and human capital at the core of the strategic vision. Both internal and external collaboration networks should be actively encouraged and facilitated.

It is also worth pointing out that the importance of success factors varies across the different stages of the project. Institutional support in the form of flexibility and guidance seems to be a determining factor at all these stages. In fact, at each stage of the project, the researcher needs simple procedures and appropriate support mechanisms in order to work properly. Furthermore, leadership and the ability to motivate teams are more decisive in the project implementation phase (Hanif et al., 2021). During this phase, regular meetings, internal communication and the development of horizontal and vertical collaboration help to maintain a positive work dynamic and a high level of member involvement. It is therefore important to ensure that the success factors are mobilized at all stages of the project. The research project is a unique process, and any failure to mobilize resources at one stage will impact the smooth running of the whole project. At this stage, the project manager's job is to identify the importance of these factors throughout the various stages of the project.