---
title: "Project Management Frameworks Overview"
source: The Turing Way
source_url: https://github.com/the-turing-way/the-turing-way
licence: CC-BY-4.0
domain: data-and-analysis
subdomain: turing-way
date_added: 2026-04-25
---

(pd-frameworks-overview)=
# Project Management Frameworks Overview
(pd-frameworks-overview-prerequisites)=
## Prerequisites
| Prerequisite | Importance | Skill Level | Notes |
| -------------|----------|------|----|
| None |

## Summary 
Project management methodologies or frameworks are structured approaches to planning, delegating, tracking, managing changes, and evaluating work across different industries, including research. 
They provide clear guidance and direction on how work should be managed effectively, and can support greater collaboration, transparent decision making, and deliberative working. 

Research projects are often characterised by uncertainty, evolving objectives, and a need for flexibility.
As such, they require a framework that can accommodate these dynamics.
Choosing the right project management framework for a research project is crucial, as it can significantly influence your research project's success, efficiency, and potential for collaboration.
As a recent study pointed out, _"a fine balance is needed between implementing management approaches to support the efficient and effective delivery of projects while not compromising accountability, creativity and innovation."_ @santos2022framework

Traditional methodologies, for example Waterfall, offer a structured, linear approach beneficial for projects with well-defined stages and stable requirements, known from the beginning of the project design process.

Agile frameworks, including Scrum and Kanban, are flexible and can adapt to changing research landscapes and iterative discovery processes that are part of many research projects.

There are also a number of other methodologies and philosophies that you can explore: PRINCE2, Lean, Stage/Phase Gate, and many more.

The decision between project management frameworks hinges on the nature of the research, the level of clarity in objectives, and the extent to which the project can accommodate changes in scope or direction.
Some methodologies are better suited for flexible collaboration between distributed teams.
Balancing these factors with team dynamics and stakeholder expectations will guide researchers in selecting a framework that aligns with their project's goals, timeline, and complexity, ensuring a smooth and effective research process.

These pages on The Turing Way are designed to assist you in choosing the right project management framework for you.

## Quick comparison between methodologies/frameworks

| **Methodology / Framework** | **Approach** | **Key Features** | **Flexibility** | **Change Management** | **Suitability** | 
|-------------------|-------------------|--------------------------|-------------------|----------------------|-----------------------------------|
| **Agile** | Iterative and incremental | Flexibility, adaptability | High | Welcomes changes | Complex projects with variable requirements | 
| **Scrum** | Iterative, time-boxed sprints | Roles (Scrum Master, Product Owner), Artifacts, "Ceremonies" | Moderate to High | Adapts to changes in sprints | Projects that benefit from regular reassessment | 
| **Kanban** | Continuous flow | Visual workflow (Kanban board), WIP Limits | High | Adapts easily to changes | Work with varying priorities and volume | 
| **Waterfall** | Linear and sequential | Sequential stages, Documentation-heavy | Low | Resistant to changes | Projects with well-defined requirements | 
| **PRINCE2** | Process-driven, structured | Defined roles, Stage controls, Tailorable | Moderate | Controlled changes | Large, complex projects requiring tight control | 
| **Stage/Gate (Phase Gate)** | Structured, phase-based | Defined stages, Gates for review/decision | Moderate to Low | Controlled at each stage | Projects that need regular reviews and checks | 
| **Agile Stage Gate** | Blend of Agile and Stage Gate | Combination of flexibility and structured decision points | High | Welcomes changes amidst stages, controlled gates | Complex projects requiring regular reassessment | 

-----


| **Methodology / Framework** | **Origin / typically used in** | **Focus** | **Outcomes** | **Use in Research Projects** | **Adaptability** |
|------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
| **Agile** |  Software development, creative projects | Customer satisfaction, team collaboration | Incremental improvements, adaptability to change | Highly suitable due to its iterative nature, allowing for frequent reassessment and adaptation as research findings evolve. | Extremely adaptable, can easily integrate new research directions and findings. |
| **Scrum** |   Software development, product development | Team productivity, Iterative development | Deliverables at the end of each sprint | Suitable for research projects that can be broken down into smaller, iterative cycles, with regular reassessment points. | Adaptable within each sprint cycle, but less so between sprints. |
| **Kanban** |  Operations management, maintenance projects | Workflow efficiency, Limiting work in progress | Continuous delivery, Improved flow efficiency | Suitable for ongoing research projects with continuous tasks and shifting priorities. | Highly adaptable to changing priorities and can handle evolving research needs seamlessly. |
| **Waterfall** |  Construction, manufacturing | Comprehensive planning, Documented process | Predictable results, Detailed documentation | Less suitable for research due to its rigid structure and difficulty in accommodating changes once the process has begun. | Low adaptability, not ideal for research projects where requirements and goals may evolve. |
| **PRINCE2** |   Government, large corporate projects | Project governance, Control mechanisms | Project completion within specified constraints | Moderately suitable, especially for large-scale research projects needing stringent control and structured management. | Moderate adaptability, with some flexibility within its structured framework. |
| **Stage/Gate (Phase Gate)** |  Product development, large-scale engineering projects | Stage completion, Risk management | Go/No-go decisions at each phase, Risk mitigation | Moderately suitable for research projects that are large and complex, requiring systematic review at each phase. | Moderate adaptability; changes are generally feasible at specific stages, but less so mid-phase. |
| **Agile Stage Gate** |  R&D, product development | Agility with structured reviews | Agile flexibility with stage-wise decision making | Highly suitable for research, combining the flexibility of Agile with the structured review process of Stage Gate. | Very adaptable, offering the benefits of Agile’s responsiveness with added decision points for reassessment. |

## How Frameworks Intersect
```{figure} ../../../figures/project-management-diagram.png
---  
height: 390px  
name: project-framework-venn  
alt: Venn diagram illustrating the relationships between different project management frameworks. Three overlapping circles represent Iterative Frameworks (Flexible & Adaptive), Structured Frameworks (Defined & Controlled), and Change-Oriented Frameworks (Easily Adapts to Changes, Even Outside Sprints). Scrum is placed under Iterative Frameworks, Agile/Kanban falls under both Change-Oriented and Iterative, Waterfall & Stage Gate are under Structured, PRINCE2 is positioned under Structured and Change-Oriented, while Agile Stage Gate sits underneath all three categories as a hybrid framework.  
---  
A Project Framework Venn diagram showing the interplay among Iterative (flexible), Structured (controlled), and Change-Oriented (adaptable) project management frameworks. Illustration by Kjirsten Fastabend, used under a CC-BY 4.0 license.
```
