From Books to the Field: Why Project Management Theory and Practice Don’t Always Match

Project management theory Vs Practice

Introduction

Project management is often presented in textbooks and classrooms as a structured, step-by-step process. Theories, frameworks, and methodologies such as the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) or PRINCE2 outline clear stages: initiation, planning, execution, monitoring, and closure. In theory, projects are predictable; timelines, budgets, and resources are carefully mapped, and risks are neatly managed with contingency plans.

In practice, however, project management rarely unfolds so neatly. Once theory meets reality, several factors complicate the process. The statement "Development can only be practiced perfectly in the books, or in the classroom" reflects a common critique of the gap between theory and practice. While development theories and models can be clearly structured and idealized in academic settings, real-world implementation often encounters complex challenges such as political interference, limited resources, cultural dynamics, and institutional weaknesses that make “perfect” application nearly impossible.

However, this doesn't mean development can't be effectively practiced outside the classroom; it just means that real-world development requires adaptability, pragmatism, and responsiveness to context, which are qualities not always captured in textbooks or lecture presentations.

Why Theory Breaks Down in Practice.

Internal politics within developing countries often shape development priorities, not necessarily based on what works best for the people, but on power dynamics, patronage, or short-term gains. At the same time, the influence of developed nations and their organizations, whether through aid conditionalities, policy prescriptions, or control over multilateral institutions, can distort development agendas to align with their own economic or geopolitical interests. This creates a situation where “development” becomes more about managing external expectations than addressing local needs. The result? Development becomes a negotiated space, not a neutral or purely technical process, far from the structured, linear models taught in classrooms. To change this for the better, development practice must shift from being externally driven and theoretically rigid to being locally led, politically smart, and contextually grounded. The real challenge is whether development can move from theory to practice in a way that puts people, not politics, at its core, hence the question: can development ever truly escape external interests and become genuinely people-centered?

• Ofori, D.F., 2013. Project management practices and critical success factors-A developing country perspective. International journal of business and management, 8(21), p.14.

• Project Management Institute (PMI). (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), 7th Edition. Newtown Square, PA: PMI.

• Kerzner, Harold. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons, 2025.

• Crawford, L., Morris, P., Thomas, J., & Winter, M. (2006). Practitioner development: From trained technicians to reflective practitioners. International Journal of Project Management, 24(8), 722–733.

• Raghu S. (2024) From Plan to Execution: Navigating the Disconnect Between Project Management Theory and Practice, LinkedIn Article, available at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/from-plan-execution-navigating-disconnect-between-project-sharma-5zmle/