How corporate project managers can learn efficiency from their counterparts managing public funds

Managing a European project requires a structured, transparent, and results-oriented approach. In companies, project management can sometimes suffer from inefficiencies due to organizational culture or misaligned incentives. In European projects, however, a rigorous methodology ensures accountability, collaboration, and compliance with funding regulations.

But what does a project manager actually do in a European project? First, they act as the glue that holds everything together, coordinating partners, funders, and stakeholders. They oversee the various Work Packages (WPs), which are like chapters of the project, each with clearly defined activities and deliverables. They are responsible for risk management, preventing issues before they arise, and ensuring all financial and technical reports comply with EU rules. Finally, they work to maximize the project’s impact, engaging key actors and ensuring that the results are not just theoretical but have real-world applications.

In a corporate setting, however, project management can function quite differently. Imagine a project manager in a large company: decisions often come from the top down without real team input, leading to a disconnect between objectives and operational reality. Documentation and monitoring? Often overlooked in favor of immediate execution. Many businesses prioritize short-term results, neglecting long-term sustainability. And risk management? Many companies react to problems rather than proactively preventing them.

European projects, on the other hand, are designed to be trackable, documented, and compliant with regulations. There is little room for improvisation or a lack of transparency. This means that a corporate project manager stepping into the world of EU-funded projects without adjusting their methods might struggle. So what are some common pitfalls that project managers—both in corporate and European settings—should avoid?

Getting too involved in decision-making instead of empowering teams, some project managers micromanage, slowing down processes and stifling innovation.

Holding too many meetings. Frequent, unfocused meetings consume valuable time and reduce productivity rather than facilitating progress. In many European projects, you cannot overload your partners’ agendas with meetings without a clear focus: each person’s hours are accounted for and budgeted in advance, with a corresponding cost. In the end, these hours are reported and cannot be exceeded, as in many cases, they would not be reimbursed. This follows a logic of efficiency—something that private companies should learn, especially those who evaluate the work of project managers.

Focusing only on quantitative KPIs. Measuring success based solely on numerical outputs (e.g., number of reports produced) rather than the actual impact or outcomes. In European projects, there is an increasing tendency to consider money well spent only if the results are achieved. Institutions sometimes take the liberty of not paying for projects where this cannot be demonstrated. Companies should learn from this.

Ignoring risk management until it’s too late. Many projects fail because risks are not identified and mitigated early enough. Here too, the European contracting authority is smarter: risk analysis is a project planning phase because public money is not gambled with. Private companies should do the same, especially when risks are taken with investors’ money, but the only ones who can push for this are the investors themselves.

Overcomplicating processes implementing excessive bureaucracy that slows down work rather than streamlining operations. In European projects, precisely for the sake of efficient resource use, time is not wasted on inefficient processes. A good methodology is a value that speaks for itself. Bureaucracy does not always go hand in hand with public projects.

Not adapting communication styles and using overly technical or bureaucratic language that makes it hard for stakeholders to engage. And also for teammates.

Underestimating the importance of documentation. Failing to keep proper records leads to compliance issues and difficulties in project audits. In private projects, maintaining thorough documentation of all activities is essential. Completing it in real time, rather than retrospectively, helps strategically identify process gaps and inefficiencies, enabling continuous improvement and better decision-making.

Assuming all partners have the same priorities: misalignment among partners can cause delays and conflicts if not managed properly. If the project manager’s role is to ensure process efficiency, it also includes preventing unnecessary time wasted in alignment meetings that revolve around the week’s gossip, stemming from misalignment between teams and individuals. People’s time has a cost, and their engagement depends on tone and maintaining a clear focus on the project.

Neglecting stakeholder engagement not involving key external actors early enough can result in missed opportunities for impact and sustainability. Just as a European project manager must always stay aligned with the coordination team and various partners, a corporate project manager should work closely with the business side and product managers, as well as with technical and operational teams. The project manager is not merely a task supervisor but a key integrator of vision, commercial strategy, market demands, and execution. Their role is to facilitate communication across all levels, ensuring alignment with the company’s positioning—not just their own perspective.

Failing to create a knowledge-sharing culture because if knowledge remains siloed within individuals instead of being shared, the project suffers from inefficiencies and discontinuity.

European project management requires methodology, precision, and constant attention to compliance. Companies can certainly learn from this structure, but those who enter EU project management without adapting their approach may face challenges. Adopting best practices, on the other hand, can be the difference between a successful project and one that gets lost in bureaucracy. Have you ever had to manage a project with such strict rules?