Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 248

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Current State of Project Management Research: Trends, Interpretations, and Predictions

Kloppenborg, Timothy J., Opfer, Warren A.·2002·Project Management Journal

Abstract

This paper describes the methodology and results of a research effort that identified the project management research published in English since 1960. An annotated bibliography was created of 3,554 articles, papers, dissertations, and government research reports. Trends were identified in each of the nine A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) knowledge areas. A workshop was conducted with experienced practitioners to help interpret the identified trends and to predict future directions for project management research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/875697280203300203

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 248

Metadata

Authors
Kloppenborg, T. J., & Opfer, W. A.
Venue
Project Management Journal
Published
2002-06
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
5-18
ISSN
  • 1938-9507 (ISSN-L)
  • 8756-9728
OpenAlex
W2809937232
Cited by
248
References
0
FWCI
3.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Current State of Project Management Research: Trends, Interpretations, and Predictions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/875697280203300203
The paper
Kloppenborg, T. J., & Opfer, W. A. (2002). The Current State of Project Management Research: Trends, Interpretations, and Predictions. Project Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/875697280203300203

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.