Hero's journey as a framework to study a project manager
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is to explore which insights the hero’s journey framework provides to the micro-level perspective of the process a project manager goes through in a project. Design/methodology/approach The study design involves a longitudinal qualitative case study in which we follow a project manager over the course of two projects. In Canada, the project manager undertook the world’s first hotel rooftop honeybee garden project. Later, he implemented a rooftop honeybee garden at the Waldorf Astoria New York. The stages and archetypes within the hero’s journey framework are used as an analytical grid for analysis. Findings Our research reveals how the hero’s journey framework can be utilized as a lens to understand the process of a project from the viewpoint of the project manager. The research shows that projects can have comprehensive stages and transform the project managers themselves. Research limitations/implications The research investigates small-scale projects that are peripheral to the core business of the case organizations. A limitation is that the findings may not be applicable for bigger, more complex and core business projects. Another limitation is that the research relies on secondary data only. Two managerial implications: For a project manager to start out on a hero’s journey, triggers that make the project manager respond to “a calling” need to be present. The project manager must be able to deal with different archetypes, whether helpful or harmful, along the process. Originality/value The research extends existing knowledge on a project manager’s decisions, obstacles, opportunities, thoughts, emotions and actions through the project process by showing how the hero’s journey framework can be used as a supplement to the well-known metaphor of a project as a temporary organization. Further on, the research demonstrates how an analytical framework can enhance the understanding of the process of a project manager from a micro-level perspective. In addition, the research deals with corporate social responsibility (CSR) related projects that are of high relevance in the contemporary society.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".