A thoroughly conducted scientific or scholarly research finds answers to hypotheses or propositions. It produces outcomes that have a direct and indirect impact on individuals, institutions, communities and the world at large. In other words, when the researchers conducted a study on sound and transparent, reliable, and valid protocols, the results may stand the test of time. Moreover, to pass the validity and reliability test, a researcher must learn to think critically and avoid the pitfalls in human reasoning. The human capacity to reason is quintessential to scientific research. And when that capacity is blurred and overwhelmed by biases, conflict of interests, conflict of conscience, emotions, irrational thoughts, the outcomes of research can be vulnerable and susceptible to egregious errors such as taking, for instance, correlation for causation, making generalizations about members of a category after having encountered only a restricted subset of that category, looking for evidence that supports a hypothesis without also looking for evidence that would disconfirm such hypothesis and confusing what must logically correct with what seems to be right in the fields of project management.
Culpribility of the PM Fields
Parallelly, the project management fields of study are fraught with misconstrued and misinformed notions. Some practitioners, scholars, and writers, to name a few examples, equate project management to a unique conceptualization or contextualization. This belief is rampant and widely held among IT project management enthusiasts. For them, what occurs in the IT industry reflects on the entire project management industry, and that the success or failure of the PM fields is s primarily measured by the failure or success of information technology projects. There also those whose who focus on methodology as the quintessential solution or panacea to the continuing failure of project management practitioners to deliver projects, particularly complex size projects, without considering inaccurate project cost estimate, schedule delays, budgetary constraints, environmental disasters, and resistance. This misinformation or misconstruction also exacerbate the fragmentation and superficial conduct of qualitative and quantitative research inquiries regarding project management activities.
The Critical Mission of PMSURI
The Project Management University Research Institute intends to fill the knowledge gap between misinformation and fragmented research results with those that meet internal and external validity outcomes by applying the hybrid of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies in its research endeavors. The study internal validity measure the research design and data accuracy and how causal, linear, and correlational relationships be obtained from such data. Generalizability and repeatability of the research outcomes measure external research validity. In other words, other researchers across disciplines will be able to replicate PMSURI researched results or discoveries.