Purpose. The article substantiates the role of project management tools as a driver for innovative development of SMEs during the transition to a knowledge economy. The research develops an integration matrix for scientific capital and analyzes SME access mechanisms via innovation ecosystems. It conceptualizes project management software (PMS) as an infrastructural component of organizational scientific capital enabling knowledge transformation into intellectual assets.
Design/methodology/approach. The methodology is based on theoretical analysis and synthesis. Key methods include: content analysis of PMBOK editions (1–8) to identify the paradigmatic shift from process orientation to value-based principles; comparative statistical analysis of PMS markets in Ukraine and the EU (2015–2025) using Grand View Research and industry data; modeling for the author’s conceptual model; and synthesis of international (L. Archer's science capital) and domestic (institutional R&D) approaches.
Findings. The study defines scientific capital as a multi-level system integrating individual (literacy, professional networks), organizational (R&D capital, team competencies), and institutional (science parks, academic infrastructure) levels. A conceptual model (Fig. 1) positions it as a ‘bridge’ between material forms and socio-intellectual assets. Analysis of PMBOK evolution revealed a shift from the process model (ed. 1–6) to the principles-and-value model (ed. 7–8), confirming the hypothesis of scientific capital as an integrative core. Investigation of the PMS market showed significant dynamics: from local dominance in 2015 (MS Project in EU, Bitrix24 in Ukraine) to cloud SaaS dominance by 2025 (reaching 74 % market share). Structural differences were identified: Ukraine's market is dominated by Bitrix24 due to CRM-integration, whereas the EU market is diversified (Jira, Trello, Asana, Monday.com) with advanced AI integrations.
Practical implications. The developed matrices and model can be used to assess science park effectiveness and form R&D partnership strategies for SMEs seeking to enhance their innovation capacity. Comparative PMS analysis provides Ukrainian SMEs with practical insights for selecting appropriate digital tools (Monday.com, Jira, Asana) as material embodiments of organizational knowledge. The research offers recommendations for integrating cloud-based project management solutions into SME operations, particularly relevant for enterprises undergoing digital transformation in challenging economic conditions.
Originality/value. The research synthesizes L. Archer’s science capital concept with institutional R&D approaches, creating an original theoretical framework for understanding SME innovation mechanisms. It conceptualizes PMS for the first time as an infrastructural component of scientific capital, bridging individual competencies with organizational knowledge assets. The model provides a practical toolkit for assessing capital needs based on project types and outlines future research directions on AI integration (Jira Align, Monday AI) in knowledge capitalization processes.
Archer, L., Dawson, E., DeWitt, J., Seakins, A., & Wong, B. (2015). "Science Capital": A Conceptual, Methodological, and Empirical Argument for Extending Bourdieusian Notions of Capital Beyond the Arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922-948. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21227
Becker, G. S. (1993). Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226041223.001.0001
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Homo Academicus. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit [in English]
Capterra. (2024). SME Project Management Software Comparison Report 2024. Retrieved February 3, 2026, from https://www.capterra.com/project-management-software/ [in English]
Dahmer, L. J. N. (2024). Navigating project management in the digital transformation era. International Seven Multidisciplinary Journal, 3(5), 1423-1427. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.56238/isevmjv3n5-008
Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why Do Some Universities Generate More Start-ups Than Others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209-227. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00097-5
Eurofound and Cedefop. (2025). SME digitalisation in the EU: Trends, policies and impacts. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union [in English]
Eurostat. (2024). Cloud computing - statistics on the use by enterprises. European Commission. Retrieved February 3, 2026, from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Cloud_compu... [in English]
Gartner. (2024). Market Share Analysis: Project and Portfolio Management Software, Worldwide, 2023. Gartner Research [in English]
Grand View Research. (2024). Project Management Software Market Size Report, 2030. Retrieved February 3, 2026, from https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/project-management-s... [in English]
Hasan, S., Klaiber, H. A., & Sheldon, I. (2020). The impact of science parks on small- and medium-sized enterprises' productivity distributions: the case of Taiwan and South Korea. Small Business Economics, 51, 981- 1001. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0083-8
Hawken, P., Lovins, A., & Lovins, L. H. (1999). Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution. New York: Little, Brown and Company [in English]
Interreg Europe. (2020). University-Industry Collaboration: Policy Brief. Interreg Europe Policy Learning Platform on Research and Innovation [in English]
Kontkanen, S., Koskela, T., Kanerva, O., et al. (2024). Science capital as a lens for studying science aspirations - a systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 60(1), 89-115. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2024.2388931
Marr, B., Gray, D., & Neely, A. (2003). Why do firms measure their intellectual capital? Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(4), 441-464. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930310504509
Milhem, M., Ayyash, M. M., Ateeq, A., et al. (2025). An integrated adoption model of cloud computing- based human resource management by SMEs in developing countries: evidence from Bahrain. Frontiers in Sustainability, 6, Article 1503423. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2025.1503423
Mordor Intelligence. (2025). Project Management Software Systems Market Size Report, 2031. Retrieved February 3, 2026, from https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/project-management-s... market [in English]
Project Management Institute. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)(6th ed.). Newtown Square, PA: PMI [in English]
Project Management Institute. (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)(7th ed.). Newtown Square, PA: PMI [in English]
Project Management Institute. (2025). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)(8th ed.). Newtown Square, PA: PMI [in English]
Ragnedda, M. (2017). The Third Digital Divide: A Weberian Approach to Digital Inequalities. London: Routledge [in English]
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315606002
Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. N. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27-48. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00196-2
Statista. (2024). Most popular project management software in Europe as of 2024. Statista Technology & Media. Retrieved February 3, 2026, from https://www.statista.com/outlook/tmo/software/enterprise-software/project- management-software/europe
Stewart, T. A. (1997). Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York: Currency Doubleday.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Xu, J., & Liu, F. (2020). The Impact of Intellectual Capital on Firm Performance: A Modified and Extended VAIC Model. Journal of Competitiveness, 12(1), 161-176.
https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2010.01.10
Zhang, J. (2009). The performance of university spin-offs: an exploratory analysis using venture capital data. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 255-285. [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-008-9088-9
Dovhan, L. Ye., Mokhonko, H. A., & Malyk, I. P. (2017). Upravlinnia proiektamy [Project management]. Kyiv: Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute [in Ukrainian]
Edvinsson, L. (2002). Korporatyvna dovhovichnist: Intelektualnyi kapital yak oriientyr [Corporate longevity: Intellectual capital as a navigator]. Menedzhment ta biznes [Management and Business], (1), 15-24 [in Ukrainian]
Krasnokutska, N. S., & Osetrova, T. O. (2018). Evoliutsiia rozvytku ta suchasni trendy v upravlinni proiektamy [Evolution and modern trends in project management]. Ekonomichnyi analiz [Economic Analysis], 28(1), 236-242 [in Ukrainian]
https://doi.org/10.35774/econa2018.01.236
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [in English]
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press [in English]
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt7s8r7
Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell [in English]
https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00043218
Schumpeter, J. A. (1911). The Theory of Economic Development. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot [in English]
Yurchyshena, L. V. (2024). Vytraty na doslidzhennia i rozробки та reitynh Ukrainy v Hlobalnomu indeksi innovatsii [R&D expenditures and Ukraine's ranking in the Global Innovation Index]. Ekonomika ta derzhava[Economy and State], (10), 16-28..[in Ukrainian]
https://doi.org/10.32987/2617-8532-2024-3-16-28