SIMPROJET: AN INNOVATIVE SIMULATION PLATFORM

FOR EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Dominique Jaccard and Stefano Riboni

Haute Ecole d’Ingénierie et de Gestion du Canton de Vaud (HEIG-VD)

Western Switzerland University of Applied Sciences, Avenue des Sports 20, CH-1401 Yverdon-les-Bains, Switzerland

Keywords: Project management, Experiential learning, Simulation, Educational concept, Customizable scenarios.

Abstract: Considering the variety of formal and human skills implied in effective project management practice, and

the difficulties at building proper educational programs, this paper describes the innovative concept devel-

oped by HEIG-VD, built around a web-based project management simulation platform. After motivating

the need for newly built educational programs in project management, we point out the requirements for

such a platform, and present our achievements, concluding with future developments opportunities and fur-

ther research areas of interest.

1 INTRODUCTION

The development of the service industry, the reduc-

tion of products’ life cycles and the increased speed

of innovation, in almost all economical sectors has

brought to a continuous and fast growth of project

management, and to its rising importance as a top

management concern. An increasing number of in-

stitutions are moving from traditional divisional

structures to project-based organizations (Whitley,

2006). The demand for skilled project managers is

therefore dramatically increasing. Project manage-

ment becomes an essential part of any higher educa-

tion syllabus in management as well as in engineer-

ing, from undergraduate to executive master pro-

grams. To quickly cope with this increasing need for

project management professionals, companies are

more and more demanding for project management

training courses for their employees, who are re-

quested to manage projects but only have a technical

or administrative educational background.

But current mainstream project management edu-

cation is often seen as inadequate for today's com-

plex projects (Crawford et al., 2006). Programs are

often limited to the transmission of the conceptual

Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)

edited by the Project Management Institute (PMI)

(Project Management Institute, 2009). A recent in-

itiative ran in the UK called “Rethinking Project

Management” (Winter et al., 2006) (Crawford et al.,

2006) pointed out that “the current conceptual base

of project management continuous to attract criti-

cism for its lack of relevance to practice” (Winter et

al., 2006, pp 638), and argued project management

educators to move away from the delivery of stan-

dard solutions and techniques-oriented pedagogy.

Project management training and education there-

fore needs new pedagogical support materials and

methodologies to be effective and provide project

managers with both the hard and the soft skills

needed to face the complexity of today’s projects.

In this context, the trend for experiential learning

(or learning-by-doing) seems very interesting. Simu-

lations, by creating virtual situations, can provide

the project manager with an environment where this

combination of hard and soft skills can be practiced,

tested, and acquired.

In order to provide project management educators

with an innovative tool to support their training pro-

grams, the HEIG-VD has developed a flexible, web-

based simulation platform called “SimProjet”. Based

on a pluri-annual experience in project management

education in various environments (undergraduate

and master levels, technical and managerial sylla-

buses, academic and professional institutions) Sim-

Projet has been designed and developed with a par-

ticular focus on the scenario-definition capabilities,

allowing educators to customize the simulation to

the learning objectives and to the teaching environ-

ment.

471

Jaccard D. and Riboni S. (2010).

SIMPROJET: AN INNOVATIVE SIMULATION PLATFORM FOR EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT .

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Supported Education, pages 471-477

DOI: 10.5220/0002858004710477

 SciTePress

In use since 2008, SimProjet has demonstrated its

value, but also shown some limitations and evolu-

tion potentials. Its usage opens for further reflection

and research topics in project management educa-

tion and computer-based business simulation tools.

2 PARTICULARITIES OF

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Project management is a particular area of business

management where variety is the only constant rule:

variety in projects' size (budget, number of persons

involved or duration), variety in projects’ complexi-

ty (technical, social and relational, level of uncer-

tainty and risks) or variety in projects’ nature and

objectives (delivering a product or a service, product

innovation, theoretical research or experimentation).

That is certainly what makes project management so

unique and particular in the field of business man-

agement.

Skills needed for the project manager results from

the specificity of the project management area. Both

1996 Wirth’s (Wirth, 1996) and 2003 Zika-

Viktorsson, Hovmark and Nordqvist’s (Zika-

Viktorsson et al., 2003) research show evidence that,

except in some industries where project’s object is

very clearly defined and designed (like construction

or industrial equipment/machinery), the psychoso-

cial aspects are key to the project’s success. The

more complexity and uncertainty in the project, the

more soft skills are required: communication, lea-

dership, motivation, coordination, conflict-

resolution, problem-solving, team building, flexibili-

ty, creativity or trustworthiness. So, on one hand, the

set of methods and tools specific to project man-

agement is well known and quite limited (WBS,

PERT, Gantt, EVM), but, on the other hand, manag-

ing projects successfully is less dependent on the

knowledge of these tools than on the capacity of

applying the right tools, mixed with the project

manager's soft skills (Pant et al., 2008). These find-

ings highlight the inadequacy of current project

management education programs based on

PMBOK-type knowledge, whereas these references

are recognized as providing theoretical knowledge

but not a real practical application of the theory.

Therefore, a new way of thinking project man-

agement education is necessary to broaden existing

approaches. Meaning education and training pro-

grams should combine classic lectures with practical

activities giving the learner the opportunity to expe-

riment real project management situations. In this

way, experiential learning, where one learns through

reflection on doing, seems to be a very interesting

approach. The interest of experiential learning has

been proven in various other domains where tech-

nical skills are essential, but not sufficient to suc-

ceed if not completed by particular psychological

and behavioural capabilities (medical, aeronautics or

organizational) (Aldrich, 2005).

In the professional environment, experiential

learning can be done by putting junior project man-

ager directly on the job, with some senior coaching,

and completing the education with classical training

about the formal aspects and tools of project man-

agement. But real projects rarely give the opportuni-

ty to the learner to individually experiment and

make mistakes (risk and cost of such mistakes might

be too high to be acceptable). Actually, the coach is

most of the times telling in advance to the learner

how to act, moving away from real experiential

learning, and therefore limiting the knowledge ac-

quisition, avoiding the junior professional to really

understand the reason for acting in a certain way.

This confirms the need, in both academic and

professional environments, for giving project man-

agement learners experiential environments where to

freely act, being really in charge of the given tasks,

with no supervision or coaching, feeling free to

make their choices and their mistakes. This can be

done through creating virtually realistic project

management situations, where to facilitate learning

according to Rogers’ recommendations (Rogers,

1969): “(1) the student participates completely in the

learning process and has control over its nature and

direction, (2) it is primarily based upon direct con-

frontation with practical, social, personal or research

problems, and (3) self-evaluation is the principal

method for assessing progress or success.”

Project management simulations are the ideal

educational way to complete classical teaching, con-

fronting learners to real situations adapted to the

pedagogical objectives. Simulations (if sufficiently

customizable) can reproduce a wide variety of

project management issues and situations. They of-

fer instantaneous and asynchronous feedback to the

learner on the consequences of his decisions and

actions. And feedback is essential in a “learning-by-

mistake” process, which is the best (if not the only)

way to acquire psychological, behavioural and so-

cial capabilities.

CSEDU 2010 - 2nd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

472

3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

SIMULATION PLATFORM

REQUIREMENTS

There are different ways to build simulations: (1)

board games, (2) role plays and (3) computer-based

simulations, each of them presenting advantages and

limitations. The latter is certainly nowadays very

effective, allowing:

- realism, as most of today's business tasks are ac-

tually achieved using computers (e-mail, chat or

video-conferencing communication, data and infor-

mation access);

- adaptability, as scenarios development allows to

adapt these to the situation we want to simulate, and

to the pedagogical objectives of the educational pro-

gram;

- accessibility, as software can easily be diffused,

and in case of web-based simulations, instanta-

neously accessible with no distance or time limita-

tion.

Having chosen this latter option (computerized web-

based project management simulation), we had to

identify the key requirements for having it corres-

ponding to what we considered was missing in tradi-

tional project management education programs.

First of all, the simulation needs to be in line with

the defined pedagogical objectives.

- Technical knowledge (hard skills): planning using

PERT and Gantt, evaluating financial outcome using

net present value and internal rate of return, control-

ling using earned value management, ...

- Psychosocial knowledge (soft skills): building and

managing a team, and a variety of relationship with

other stakeholders, communicating, motivating, tak-

ing decisions, solving problems, handling conflicts,

...

Therefore, the simulation should not be limited to

learner-computer interactions, but also imply colla-

borative team work, making learners experiment

interpersonal issues, through some role-play aspects.

Second, the simulation has to be adaptable to dif-

ferent contexts of use: academic (undergraduate,

postgraduate and executive programs levels) as well

as professional environments. The original idea was

to use it in an undergraduate project management

course, taking 16 sessioons of classroom presence

spread over several months. But we considered from

the beginning the need to have it designed to fit also

shorter, more intensive 2 or 3 days long training

programs. The simulation should also allow teachers

to have it running a complete project, from initiation

to conclusion, or to have it focusing more on one or

the other project phase (initiation, planning, execu-

tion, closing).

Third, the simulation should be based on project-

types where the learners could feel in an unders-

tandable environment, in line with their technical

knowledge domain. IT students will feel more com-

fortable working on a software development project,

mechanical engineers working on a manufacturing

project, and future architects working on a construc-

tion project. We therefore considered essential to the

simulation software to be able to handle any kind of

freely definable projects’ scenarios.

Fourth, the simulation should allow to define dif-

ferent types and levels of complexity in the projects’

scenarios. The scenario definition tool should allow

a combination of deterministic branching stories

(Aldrich, 2004), as well as probabilistic actions and

behaviours. Many authors have shown that neither

the complexity nor the realism of a simulation is a

factor of successful learning of the participants (Hall

and Cox, 1994) (Frazer, 1980). Our experience tend

to confirm this point: participants facing too much

complexity and too much variables at the same time

often take a "try to click and look the result" ap-

proach, observing how the simulator reacts, instead

of trying to analyze all the data and understand the

links between them. Moreover, increase in simula-

tion complexity also increases the time and cost of

development, as well as the time needed for the par-

ticipant to understand how to use the simulation. On

the other hand, if the simulation gives a simplified

image of the reality, it makes it understandable for

participants, gives them the possibility to analyze

available data, and leads to more thoughtful deci-

sions. Globally, the main simulation development

challenge is to find the appropriate complexity level

to create a sufficiently realistic environment (partic-

ipants can believe in the simulation), but unders-

tandable enough (participants are not overwhelmed

by the complexity and can understand what happens

in the simulation).

4 SIMPROJET CONCEPT AND

PLATFORM DESCRIPTION

4.1 SimProjet Concept and Principles

of Usage

SimProjet has been designed to support project

management education programs, creating a virtual

environment for experiential learning. Considering

the above-mentioned criticality of interpersonal as-

SIMPROJET: AN INNOVATIVE SIMULATION PLATFORM FOR EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING IN PROJECT

MANAGEMENT

473

pects of project management, SimProjet is not in-

tended to be used individually, but as a support to

team work, with ideally 3 to 4 learners per team.

SimProjet is not an exclusively computer-based si-

mulation, but requires “off-the-PC” activities like

producing and delivering documents, as well as giv-

ing oral presentations. Thus, the whole concept of

SimProjet combines team work, computer-based

simulation and role play. More than a computer-

based platform, SimProjet is a complete project

management educational concept.

Whatever the context (academic or professional

education), the SimProjet educational program is

fundamentally the same. The course is divided in 4

stages, corresponding to the 4 phases of any

project’s life cycle: initiation, planning, execution

and closing. Each stage follows the same process:

- Teacher introduces the phase and teams are re-

quested to reach an objective and produce delive-

rables,

- Teams work in order to produce the requested

documents or oral presentations,

- Teacher gives a feedback to the teams.

Phase 1 – Project Initiation: Teacher introduces

the course explaining that participants, by teams,

will have to conduct a project, in a simulated/virtual

organisation. Information about the organization and

the project, as well as interactions with it (communi-

cation with management and colleagues, decisions,

actions, news) are available and made through the

SimProjet web-based platform. Each team plays the

role of a project manager in charge of proposing,

planning and then conducting a project. The project

initiation phase starts with an idea (product innova-

tion, problem-solving, ...) being submitted to the

team. The team must develop the idea and trans-

formed it in a project proposal. To do that, each

team will find on the platform decisions to be taken

(amongst proposed options), and will also be pro-

posed to make optional actions. Decisions and ac-

tions may give the team the needed information to

establish the project proposal (project goals and ob-

jectives, tasks, duration, costs, constraints, risks,

financial outcome). The platform provides team

with indicators of both organization’s management

and project’s stakeholders satisfaction, which evolve

according to the decisions taken and conducted ac-

tions. Teams dispose of limited time, restricting the

possible number of decisions and actions to be tak-

en. Each team must end up the initiation phase with

delivering a written project proposal, and an oral

presentation to the projects’ selection committee,

played by the teacher, who then gives a feedback to

each team about how they performed.

Phase 2 – Project Planning: Assuming the project

proposal has been approved, teams will be requested

to establish a detailed planning of the project. The

platform will provide them the list of project’s tasks,

the potential human resources, as well as decisions

options and potential actions. Teams will have to

produce a written project planning report (contain-

ing WBS, PERT and Gantt diagrams, and a budget

estimation for the project). On the platform, they

will also have to confirm the planning of the

project’s tasks (in a Gantt visual), to book the cho-

sen resources, and to sequentially assign them the

project’s tasks. Teacher will provide feedback

through a formal project planning report review.

Phase 3 – Project Execution and Control: The ex-

ecution phase takes place mainly through the simu-

lation platform. Time's progress will generate de-

terministic or probabilistic events affecting the

project (change request, extra costs, unexpected re-

source absence, ...). Tasks’ execution rhythm de-

pends on the number, availability, motivation and

competence level of the assigned resources. Period

per period, teams are informed of the work’s

progress, and of the evolution of costs, time and

quality indicators. Twice during the execution,

teams are requested to present a project status report

to the steering committee, played by the teacher.

Phase 4 – Project Closing: During this phase,

learners are requested to step back and conceptualize

the learnings from their concrete experience at man-

aging the project. In order to formalize knowledge

and capabilities acquired during the simulation, a

project closing report may be requested.

All along the simulation process, teacher has the

choice of when and how to provide theoretical ele-

ments of knowledge or reflection. The goal being to

achieve effective experiential learning cycle, all

along the four phases of the simulation.

Thus, SimProjet allows to implement Kolb's Ex-

periential learning cycle.

(1) Concrete experience is made by taking deci-

sions, making actions, and establishing the requested

deliverables according to the available information.

(2) Individual and team reflection is based on the

observation of the reaction of the simulation plat-

form to the choices made and actions taken. (3)

From what they observed, teams try to extract con-

ceptual learning, through self-evaluation of their

actions and decisions consequences. Inputs from the

educator will help this step of the learning process.

(4) Teams will then try to experiment the knowledge

newly acquired in the next stages of the simulation.

This educational method, combining “learning-

by-doing”, “learning-by-mistake”, team work, role

CSEDU 2010 - 2nd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

474

Figure 1: The Experiential Learning Cycle, according to

Kolb (Gibbons et al., 1994).

play and simulation, added with classical teachers’

lectures, should generate a virtuous cycle allowing

acquisition of a variety of hard and soft skills.

4.2 SimProjet Platform Description

The SimProjet simulation platform is structured in

three different users’ profiles interfaces: Scriptwri-

ter, Moderator and Player.

Figure 2: The SimProjet Simulation Platform Structure.

1 – Scriptwriter Interface: Authorized Scriptwri-

ter can here access Basic Scenarios (non-editable

scripts, provided by HEIG-VD), Shared Scenarios

(editable, written and shared by SimProjet platform

users), and Private Scenarios (editable, not shared,

specific to a particular user). Scenarios can be co-

pied, modified, or created from scratch. Scriptwriter

can define project’s phases names and duration,

project’s tasks and sequence, available resources

with their characteristics and different performance

indicators. The most powerful part of the scenario

editor is the possibility to freely define decisions and

actions the players will have to take or perform dur-

ing the various phases of the simulation. Decisions

will propose different possible options the players

will have to choose from. Every option will generate

an answer to the player, and might influence the

indicators. Players can also made some optional

actions that will also generate feedback and might

influence indicators. The sophistication of the whole

"scriptwriter module" lies in the possibility to define

triggers that can generate events on a deterministic

or probabilistic basis. They can be linked to a deci-

sion or action (testing if decision A = 1 and decision

B =2, then impact = X, whereas if decision B = 3,

then impact = Y), or just to particular situations of

the game (if period > 3 and < 8, then impact re-

source 1 = 1 week unavailability, with probability =

15%), generating events that may impact tasks, re-

sources, decisions, actions and/or indicators. The

scriptwriter interface provides also an automatic

logical checking engine, verifying that all the

branching story events are logically linked (no

closed loops or missing sequences). All of these

tools allow to define customized projects’ scenarios

with the desired degree of details and realism.

2 – Moderator Interface: Teacher can manage

games from this module, by creating new games,

based on available scenarios, and assigning teams to

games. He can follow the teams by seeing their

choices, actions and indicators. The teacher can also

communicate with teams (edit news, send e-mails)

and influence the simulation by generating events

affecting one team or another.

3 – Player Interface: The player’s screens allow

teams to access all the needed information (project

description, tasks, resources, news and mails), to

take decisions upon the proposed choices, to act

upon other proposed initiatives, to plan tasks, book

and assign resources, and to access to the history of

the project and their actions. Through this interface

teams can concretely experience project manage-

ment, and observe impacts of their decisions and

behaviour.

5 EXPERIENCED BENEFITS

AND LIMITATIONS IN USING

SIMPROJET

Experiences were made in quite different contexts:

bachelor, master and executive courses, as well as

in-house training programs for business profession-

als. Participants with various project management

experiences (from no experience in bachelor to more

than 10 years in executive courses) found that the

simulation was a good pedagogical tools. It was

used in courses of different length, from 4 to 16 ses-

sions of 4 hours, and also in 2 to 4 days seminars.

SIMPROJET: AN INNOVATIVE SIMULATION PLATFORM FOR EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING IN PROJECT

MANAGEMENT

475

Figure 3: Screenshots of the Player’s Interface: Decisions, Resources Planning and EVM Reporting (clockwise).

In academic usage, SimProjet has given very pos-

itive results, with increased interest and participation

of students. Even if not formally measured, the feel-

ing is that it allowed learners to much better under-

stand the value and limitations of formal project

management tools and techniques such as PERT,

Gantt and EVM. It surely increased students aware-

ness of the complexity of relational issues affecting

a project, therefore making them acquire some abili-

ty in approaching the kind of situation they will

meet in their future careers as projects workers. Ex-

perience seems to indicate that the theoretical know-

ledge level at the end of the course is the same that

with the former course without the simulation (the

results at the theoretical exams are similar). But it

seems that the ability to apply the acquired know-

ledge has significantly improved. The limitations we

saw so far stand in the deep motivation of each indi-

vidual: the gap in knowledge acquisition between

motivated and less-motivated students is probably

even larger than in classical teaching methods.

In professional environment usage, the flexibility

in custom scenarios definition proved to be a great

asset. It allows to very finely adapt the training pro-

gram to the aimed learning objectives, through tai-

lored situations where trainees can focus on the

wished issues. Several corporations who tested the

SimProjet concept are studying the possibility of

creating their own scenario, with their specific tasks,

events and difficulties. One of the difficulties has

sometimes been to convince that a "gaming ap-

proach" is not just a game, but would result in ac-

quisition of knowledge and competencies. We found

convenient to speak about "project management

simulation" instead of "project management game".

We also observed that in today's world, it is difficult

to get people for a 3 or 4 days course. It is necessary

to convince that knowledge and capabilities ac-

quired through experiential learning are much more

deeply integrated and therefore long-lasting than in

a half a day seminary. When convinced, organiza-

tions that have tested the concept of SimProjet were

satisfied and decided to continue to use it.

Independently from the environment of use, one

of the very positive aspects of the SimProjet concept

stands in the absence of judgment from the simula-

tion itself. Learners have to estimate by themselves

if the impacts of their actions and choices were posi-

tive or not, and conceptualize on their own the na-

ture of knowledge that could be picked-up from the

experience. They therefore not only acquire know-

ledge, but go further, learning to learn, which is the

ultimate goal of experiential learning, according to

Rogers (Rogers, 1969).

Due to its technical nature (computerized web-based

simulation), the SimProjet concept imposes some

limiting constraints: the time needed to learn how to

use the simulation platform and interface (1 to 2

hours), the material requirement (good internet

access, appropriate internet navigator, screen defini-

tion), the limitation of the number of participants

(experience with 36 participants in 9 teams show to

be a maximum) to allow the trainer to give valuable

feedback to all teams.

CSEDU 2010 - 2nd International Conference on Computer Supported Education

476

6 CONCLUSION:

PERSPECTIVES OF FUTURE

DEVELOPMENTS AND

RESEARCH

SimProjet future developments are already planned:

(1) enrich the player’s interface with the possibility

to dynamically draw a PERT diagram of the project,

(2) provide the educator additional reporting and

monitoring information about the teams playing a

game, (3) try to establish historical statistics about

behaviours over several games played using the

same scenario, and (4) redesign the scriptwriter in-

terface to make it more visual to design branching

stories (the sequence of tasks, events, decisions, ...),

with flow-chart-like drawing capabilities. We work

on a multilingual interface (including English and

German, in addition to French existing one). We are

also building new scenarios, as the real strength of

the platform and concept is this openness and flex-

ibility in designing appropriate storylines according

to the educational context and pedagogical objec-

tives. Some other enhancements are still in discus-

sion within the development team: would it be use-

ful to have an automatic advancement scheduler ?

would it be worth having a more animated player

interface (with characters, sound, ...) ?

Globally, for both the platform development and

scenarios writing, we implemented only functionali-

ties that either (1) were necessary to support a par-

ticular pedagogical objective, or (2) were needed to

provide the necessary level of realism to have play-

ers stick to the story. We will try to keep this philos-

ophy in future enhancements.

Further research will be made on the impact of

the SimProjet teaching concept on learners, and on

the best way to balance experiential learning with

classical lectures. A comparative study could proba-

bly be made to assess knowledge acquisition by

different populations of learners as undergraduate,

graduate and professionals.

REFERENCES

Whitley R.: Project-based firms: new organizational form

or variations on a theme. Oxford Industrial and Corpo-

rate Change Journal 15 (2006) 77–99.

Winter M., Smith C., Morris P., Cicmil S.: Directions for

future research in project management: the main find-

ings of a UK government-funded research network.

International Journal of Project Management 24

(2006) 638-649.

Project Management Institute: A Guide to the Project

Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK Guide.

New-York, Project Management Institute, 4

Edition,

2009.

Crawford L., Morris P., Thomas J., Winter M.: Practitio-

ner development: from trained technicians to reflec-

tive practitioners. International Journal of Project

Management 24 (2006) 722–733.

Wirth I.: How generic and how industry specific is the

project management profession ? International Journal

of Project Management 14 (1996) 7-11.

Zika-Viktorsson A., Hovmark S., Nordqvist S.: Psychoso-

cial asects of project work: a comparison between

product development and construction projects. Inter-

national Journal of Project Management 21 (2003)

563-569.

Pant I., Baroudi B.: Project management education: The

human skills imperative. International Journal of Pro-

ject Management 26 (2008) 124-128.

Aldrich C.: Learning by Doing: a comprehensive guide to

simulations, computer games and pedagogy in e-

learning and other educational experiences. San Fran-

cisco, Pfeiffer, 2005.

Rogers C.R.: Freedom to Learn. Columbus, Merrill, 1969.

Aldrich C.: Simulations and the Future of Learning. San

Francisco, Pfeiffer, 2004.

Hall J., Cox B.: Complexity: is it really that simple. De-

velopments in Business Simulation & Experiential

Exercises, Vol. 21, (1994) 30-34

Frazer R.: Some issues on game design. Experiential

Learning Enters the 80s. 7, (1980) 184-186.

Kolb D.A.: Experiential Learning: experience as the

source of learning and development. New Jersey,

Prentice-Hall, 1984.

Gibbons M., Limoges C., Nowotny H., Schartzman S.,

Scott P., Trow M.: The new production of knowledge:

the dynamics of science and research in contemporary

societies. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1994.

Berggren C., Söderlund J.: Rethinking project manage-

ment education: Social twist and knowledge co-

production. International Journal of Project Manage-

ment 26 (2008) 286-296.

SIMPROJET: AN INNOVATIVE SIMULATION PLATFORM FOR EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING IN PROJECT

MANAGEMENT

477