Hybrid project management – a meaningless term?

COMMENTARY

By Robert Buttrick

United Kingdom

Challenging ‘hybrid’ as a project management method

There has been a lot of discussion and postings on social media relating to ‘hybrid project management’. Disputes relating to so-called ‘agile project management’ and ‘traditional project management’ are now joined by discussions on so-called ‘hybrid project management’, presumably on the basis that this is a sort of compromise^[1]. Disputes often arise when there is no common understanding between people as to what those terms actually mean. If people are talking about something and have a basic misunderstanding on the core terms being discussed, those conversations are fruitless.  This is hardly surprising as there is no commonly understood definition of ‘agile’, ‘traditional’ or ‘hybrid’ in these contexts.

This article takes the view that there is no such thing as ‘hybrid project management’, ‘agile project management’ nor of ‘traditional project management’. There is simply ‘project management’. It goes on to suggest how the good intentions relating to these often contentious terms have been and can be made a reality.

Delivering successful projects

Fundamentally, what is needed are successful projects, being those that deliver the desired outcomes and realize the expected benefits. Most projects of any worth need a range of different deliverables and outputs to achieve their objectives. For example, in the digital sector this can mean software for a new application, its operating systems and platforms (such as for development, verification and validation, training as well as live operation), buildings and facilities (such as power and ventilation), data transmission, training modules, user facilities and equipment. This could be associated with physical infrastructure, such as for water supply, power supply, rail, air travel and roads. A single project usually needs many distinct deliverables and outputs in order to achieve its objectives.

Project management is the discipline which sets out the practices needed for achieving a successful project. Three sets of practices are needed^[2]:

• planning and control practices, which include topics such as risk management, issues management, change control and reporting.
• solution delivery practices, which are focused on the delivery of the outputs, integrating them and putting them into use; practices such as requirements management, design, development, verification, transition and change management.
• management or integrative practices, which draw information from the solution delivery and planning and control practices to gain insight into progress and actions needed to keep the project on track to achieve its objectives.

These three groups of practices are well documented and can be found in BS 6079, ISO 21502, and in GovS 002 and its supporting guide, The Teal Book^[3]. A project cannot be successful if the basic output is inadequate or poorly put into practice, regardless of how well the project is directed and managed. The management, planning and control practices can be generic for all projects, subject to tailoring. While the solution delivery practices can be generic at a high level, at a practical level of ‘doing the work’, they need to suit to the specific deliverables and outputs being developed and associated risk. For example, the method for designing and building a steel framed structure is different to that used for developing a software module. In both cases, however, the same project management approaches can be used.

More…

To read entire article, click here

How to cite this work: Buttrick, R. (2025).  Hybrid project management – a meaningless term? commentary, PM World Journal, Vol. XIV, Issue IV, April.  Available online at http://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/pmwj151-Apr2025-Buttrick-hybrid-project-management-a-meaningless-term-commentary-2.pdf

About the Author

Robert Buttrick

United Kingdom

Robert Buttrick is an independent advisor on portfolio, programme and project management, specialising in business-driven methods, processes and standards. Recent clients include the UK’s Cabinet Office, Network Rail, and AXELOS. He is a member of the British Standards Institute’s committee MS/2 for project management and is a UK Principal Expert on the equivalent ISO technical committee, TC258 (dealing with international standards on portfolio, programme and project management). He was, until recently, a Visiting Teaching Fellow at the University of Warwick. Robert’s recent work has been as lead author on GovS 002, the government functional standard on project delivery and as a contributing author to the associated Teal Book, which replaces the AXELOS suite as the UK government’s primary guidance on project delivery. He also advises the government on functional standards generally.

As well as being the author of “The Programme and Portfolio Workout” and the “The Project Workout“, Robert gained his experience in one of the world’s most turbulent and challenging industrial sectors, telecommunications, where he has been accountable for creating and running project-based frameworks for managing change, involving the direction of portfolios of over 2500 projects, totalling £4bn spend per year. Before this, Robert was with PA Consulting, where he specialised in business-led project management, advising clients such as TSB Bank, National Rivers Authority, Property Services Agency, Avon Industrial Polymers, National Westminster Bank and RHM.

After graduating from the University of Liverpool with a first-class honours degree, he joined Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners (now Jacobs) who provided consulting, design and management services for infrastructure, working in countries as diverse as Kenya, Mauritius, Yemen, Senegal and Sudan. He has also worked with the World Bank, in Washington DC on investment appraisals for major development projects.

Robert is a Master of Business Administration (Henley Management College), a Member of the Chartered Institute of Marketing, Chartered Engineer and a Member of the Institution of Civil Engineers. In 2010, Robert received a Distinguished Service Certificate from the BSI for services to national and international project management standards, and in 2013 he was made an Honorary Fellow of the Association for Project Management. He can be contacted at robert.buttrick@projectworkout.com

[1] For a discussion on agile project management see Buttrick 2022.
[2] The distinction between the three sets of practices is long-standing and has been apparent in GovS 002 since 2017 and also in BS 6079 since 2019 and ISO 21502 since 2020.
[3] GovS 002 and The Teal Book have a good description of solution delivery practices at a generic level.