‘Flexible’ Project Management: A Guideline to Forming, Managing and Leading Student Teams for Technical Projects ^†

Abstract

This paper analyzes the creation and management of a robotics student team, introducing a “flexible project management” approach tailored to educational, voluntary and competitive settings. Drawing on the Beyond Robotics team as a case study, it presents adaptable methodologies addressing challenges such as voluntary participation, limited resources, and member turnover. The framework covers recruitment, skill development, communication, creativity, and continuity planning through mentorship and knowledge transfer. By applying agile and lean methods, it identifies best practices to enhance team resilience, innovation, and sustainability, offering educators and student leaders a practical guide for effective organization and long-term success.

1. Introduction

Student teams play a pivotal role in fostering technical innovation [1], teamwork [2], and leadership [3], providing hands-on experience that equips and prepares students for their first roles in the industry. These teams, driven by voluntary participation and constrained by limited resources, face unique challenges in maintaining organizational sustainability, competitive success and operational longevity. Finding balance in a voluntary environment that aspires to emulate a professional one is particularly challenging [4,5]. Globally, project management methodologies have been widely adopted across industries to enhance efficiency, minimize risks, and ensure successful execution of projects. Two major international organizations especially set the standards for project management practices: the Project Management Institute (PMI) in the United States and the International Project Management Association (IPMA) in Europe [6]. These frameworks serve as foundational references for understanding and applying project management principles in diverse settings.

Project management approaches are typically categorized into two primary methodologies: Agile & Waterfall [7]. The latter methodology follows a linear and sequential approach, where project phases are completed one after another. It is best suited for projects with well-defined requirements and minimal anticipated changes. In contrast, Agile project management is an iterative, flexible approach that allows for continuous improvement and adaptation throughout the project lifecycle. Agile is particularly advantageous in dynamic environments where requirements evolve rapidly.

The role of the project manager is central to coordinating and guiding various aspects of the project [8]. A project manager oversees planning, execution, risk management, and resource allocation, ensuring alignment with project goals and team objectives. In larger organizations, a Project Management Office (PMO) provides centralized governance, standardizing processes, improving decision-making, and fostering a results-oriented culture. Such structures help create dynamic and competitive organizations that thrive in complex and evolving environments. In student teams, adopting elements of a PMO framework can significantly enhance efficiency, ensuring structured workflows, clear communication, and accountability among team members.

These practices can help alleviate some of the most common problems, including:

• Member turnover: difficulty to maintain the number of active team members as the years pass by (triggered primarily by student graduation).
• Time constraints: members can’t devote much time due to other priorities (i.e., exams).
• Voluntary nature: higher difficulty to apply processes or maintain chain of command.
• Limited resources: materials, working space, tools, budget resources are scarce.

To explore how student-led technical teams can effectively apply project management principles to address these challenges, we shall examine the use case of Beyond Robotics, to demonstrate real-world implementation of project management in a non-professional, voluntary environment. Beyond Robotics is a student team from Greece, specializing in the development of autonomous robotic systems (rovers) for the European Rover Challenge [9].

This paper outlines strategies for team formation, recruitment, skill development, knowledge transfer, and long-term sustainability. It highlights the critical role of flexibility in meeting situational demands and how altering processes can lead to successful outcomes. It explores strategies contributing to a framework that helps student teams enhance resilience, optimize performance, and sustain long-term success. The aim of this paper is to act as a guideline for other student teams, gathering insights and best practices to improve resilience, operational efficiency, and performance. Finally, it examines how traditional industry project management processes can be adapted to the unique needs of technical teams in educational, often voluntary, environments.

2. Building a Team

Vision & Goals: From the start, a strong vision was set aiming to inspire and motivate people to action—as well as boost recruitment efforts. That vision was to develop a rover from scratch—particularly the 1st rover in Greece to participate in the European Rover Challenge. The first milestone concerned the successful design of the system that leads to qualification in the finals. Subsequently, the team should develop and build it in order to compete in a space simulant mission claiming the best possible position in the world ranking. Since no Greek team had ever accomplished, nor tried to build a rover at a student level, this goal inspired many students and young professionals to join the team.

Legal Entity: For the team to receive funds legally and also operate autonomously without external influence, it was decided by the founders to establish a legal entity in the form of civil non-profit partnership. This would ensure that our team can raise funds to build the rover, maintain a voluntary and non-profit nature.

Organizing Structure: the structure focuses on dividing the team into smaller subteams which would correspond to the subsystems of the rover. These sub-teams would be responsible for all the design and development required to deliver the rover subsystems. The proposed subsystems were:

• Mobility: wheels, suspension, motors and differential bar.
• Structure: rover’s frame and supports.
• Power: energy storage and power distribution systems.
• Computer: control & navigation systems, user interface, and ground command center.
• Telecom: telemetry, wireless communication and rover link.
• Science: soil, environmental and geological analysis to meet scientific hypotheses.
• Mechanisms: robotic arm, carousel sampling, end-effectors and other mechanisms.

Parallel, supporting to the engineering, other sub-teams include: Marketing, Events, Human Resources and R&D. The full team structure is presented in Figure 1.

Leadership: For each subsystem, a leader is assigned (or 2 in some cases), responsible for the overall technical development of the subsystem as well as the management of the subsystem members. Supervising roles were the Project Manager and System Engineer.

The leader’s key duties include:

• Managing sub-system members, assign and monitor tasks (define WBS and work).
• Participating in recruiting efforts for new members (e.g., interviews).
• Communicating with other subsystems for integration and co-dependencies.
• Producing technical reports, coordinating meetings and sub-system communications.
• Leading & organizing development efforts, according to timeline/budget constraints.

Recruiting: Based on subsystems needs, recruiting was executed with the aim of finding people most suitable for the open positions. Focus was on quality rather than quantity. Attracting and selecting the right talent was crucial for project success, as the unknowns, challenges and risks the team faced were enormous at the start of the project. The process starts by the subsystem leaders, who declare their needs and describe the positions in detail (responsibilities, required skills, time dedication etc.). Selecting the right candidate is summarized through the following recruitment process:

• Open positions are promoted online, in social media and through word of mouth.
• Leaders review applications & select promising applicants for the interview stage.
• Interviews are arranged by the HR team, finding suitable date, time for all parties.
• Online interviews are carried out to validate and extend information about the candidate and to provide valuable insight into their motivation and soft skills.
• The leader and Head of HR decide the most suitable person for each position.

For the final selection, some of the criteria set include: motivation (passion for the team’s vision), time availability, and experience (technical ability to conduct their role).

3. Project Management Methodologies

Agile and Lean Integration: Beyond Robotics adopted a hybrid Agile-Lean framework, organizing rover development into iterative sprints using Jira for backlog management and visualization. Daily subsystem stand-ups and weekly planning ensured alignment, while Lean principles guided process refinement. As Agile methods improve success rates [10] and Lean principles reduce inefficiency [11], this combination enabled the team to adapt quickly and prioritize high-value tasks.

Customized Kanban: A digital Kanban board was tailored to the educational workflow, with stages reflecting learning objectives and development phases. Key milestones (e.g., design freeze, integration tests) were visually highlighted to signal deadlines. The board provided clear visibility of individual progress and overall workload, while workin-progress limits prevented overcommitment. This approach aligned with Lean-Agile practices, promoting milestone tracking, transparency, and student accountability [11].

Skill Development through Management: Skills development was formalized through structured mentorship and team activities, where leaders guide members in:

• Technical Skills: Senior members conducted workshops on CAD, embedded systems, and electronics integration. Additionally, pair programming and design reviews facilitated knowledge transfer from experienced peers to novices.
• Soft Skills: Leaders fostered communication and leadership by requiring members to present progress during reviews. Regular peer feedback and retrospectives further encouraged open dialogue, initiative, and personal growth.

This approach ensured that individual members developed both technical capabilities and soft skills needed for projects [12].

Systems Engineering and Requirements Management: The project adopted a systems-engineering approach based on NASA system engineering principles [13] to align all subsystems with overall objectives. A requirements management tool (Valispace v2.2) was used to document specifications. Requirement verification methods were assigned to help later define the testing campaigns. The full requirement management process is showcased in Figure 2. Beyond requirements, the systems team managed risk mitigation, integration (interfaces and assembly), testing, and comprehensive documentation.

Timeline Optimization with Dual-Layer Planning: Project scheduling employed a dual-layer strategy. A macro-schedule defined major milestones, while micro-schedules decomposed work into sprints and weekly tasks. Timeboxing was applied to prevent scope creeping. Post-sprint retrospectives fostered an iterative cycle of planning, execution, and review, ensuring schedule adherence and continuous learning consistent with Agile practices [10,12].

Financial Planning and Funding Strategies: Financial management was embedded in initial project planning via a detailed Bill of Materials (BOM) that guided budgeting and procurement scheduling. The team solicited multiple quotes and synchronized purchases with funding availability from university grants, sponsorships, and crowdfunding. Regular financial reviews allowed scope adjustments, ensuring resource constraints did not hinder technical progress [12].

Communication Infrastructure and Coordination: A robust infrastructure was established to ensure effective coordination. Google Drive served as the central repository for documentation and version control, while a dedicated Discord server facilitated real-time communication through subsystem-specific channels. This setup supported a culture of transparency and continuous communication via two primary modes:

• Synchronous Coordination: Weekly or bi-weekly subsystem meetings to discuss progress and issues, and a full-team meeting monthly to align on overall strategy.
• Asynchronous Coordination: Team members posted updates and questions in chat channels, allowing others to respond to their schedule and ensure visibility for all. Subsystem leaders also maintained brief progress reports and checklists.

This ensured efficient information flow and project-wide awareness [12].

4. Knowledge Transfer and Continuity Planning

Mentorship & Knowledge transfer: are vital to ensure project continuity. Mentoring can shape newcomers into future leaders, by slowly helping them to step into leadership roles. The team targets to pass on expertise and disseminate knowledge from senior members to the entire team, especially younger members. Knowledge sharing occurs in several ways. One method is for seniors to assign hands-on tasks to new members, and proceed to review, leave feedback or demonstrate solutions. These collaborative working sessions create engaging learning environments, turning senior members into mentors, ensuring knowledge retention through direct collaboration and narrowing the expertise gap.

Advisors: typically, a field expert such as a professor or industry professional, who offers guidance when needed. Their involvement is occasional, usually limited to attending meetings or reviewing reports. Although they are not part of daily activities, advisors provide valuable support by addressing complex technical issues or project dead-ends, acting more as strategic consultants than active team members.

Record Keeping: To ensure continuity for current and future members, the team systematically recorded and versioned code, designs, tests, milestones, and other documentation. This tracking is critical both for competition reporting and for quickly onboarding new members. Microsoft 365 tools were primarily used for technical reports and engineering documentation. JIRA supported project management, task allocation, and time tracking, while Discord facilitated meetings, discussions, knowledge sharing. Combined, these tools enable efficient task execution and knowledge transfer, with Word/PDF summaries playing a key role in the handover process by providing well-structured documentation.

Managing Team Turnover: In volunteer-based or project-driven teams, member turnover can disrupt continuity, leading to extra time and resources to onboard, train, and integrate new members. This is one of the greatest challenges student teams face, as severe turnover can threaten the team’s survival. A few actions are taken to mitigate this issue:

• Vision and Objectives: a strong vision that inspires and attracts people
• Knowledge Transfer: handover sessions to ensure smooth transition of responsibility Succession planning: leaders are responsible for recognizing, developing and selecting talents to ensure no gap forms into future leadership roles.
• Mentorship: experienced members actively share their knowledge within the team. Values: create an environment of transparency, cooperation and accountability, while ensuring team members are treated with respect, inclusion, and recognition.

Motivation and Engagement: Member motivation is a key driver for performance in volunteer teams. Engagement is enhanced by allowing freedom to pursue research and learning opportunities, adapting schedules to accommodate personal commitments such as exams, and encouraging hands-on learning through practical contributions. Constructive feedback, clear goal-setting, and recognition of individual achievements foster responsibility and commitment. Social gatherings and informal team-building activities strengthen teamwork, build friendships, and reward contributions through shared enjoyment. Ensuring that members feel valued and involved in decision-making further improves retention and overall satisfaction.

5. From Theory to Practice

Over its 36 months of operation, Beyond Robotics transitioned from theory-based project management to real-world application, successfully taking part in two consecutive European Rover Challenges (ERC 2023 & 2024). This shift revealed the complexity of managing a large, multidisciplinary team under high pressure and tight deadlines. While initial project management frameworks provided useful direction, real-world constraints often required deviations. These were largely driven by four key factors: individual member dynamics, available resources, competition requirements, and managerial decisions. The severity of challenges couldn’t be assessed in advance without insights gained through real operational experience. Success relied less on fixed models and more on the team’s ability to stay flexible, responsive, and collaborative as conditions evolved. In

Table 1. Specific Problems and Solution.

Specific Problem	Solution
1. High fluctuation in student availability due to exams or holidays.	Integrated academic calendar into project timeline; apply lighter workload during critical periods.
2. Time-consuming recruitment cycles and slow onboarding process.	Reduced recruitment frequency (i.e., 1 month/year) and streamlined on-boarding practices.
3. “Quiet quitting” and reduced engagement without clear indicators.	Increased communication, held motivational meetings, recognized contributions publicly.
4. Weak team bonding in early stages affected collaboration.	Introduced structured team-building activities from second year onward.
5. Lack of access to necessary soft- ware/tools or working space.	Used member networks and university partnerships to find equipment and access labs.
6. Lack of funding sources certainty closely to the manufacturing phase.	Decision to rely initially on cheap and easily accessible equipment, used members’ gear and boosted sponsorship’s scouting early on the design stages.
7. Frequent rule changes from the competition late in the timeline.	Created flexible design plans; emphasized rapid iteration and modular platform designs.
8. Management had to handle multiple overlapping crises (technical + personnel + financial).	Developed adaptive management mindset; Creation of a core team with continuous communication and, ready to pivot strategies as needed without over-planning.
9. Inability to characterize risk severity due to overlapping effects.	Prioritized based on timing and project-criticality; avoided rigid hierarchies of risk importance.

, the main problems are presented together with solutions followed.

6. Analysis of Results and Lessons Learned

Beyond Robotics began as a small group of students united by a passion for space robotics and has since evolved into a well-structured organization of nearly 100 members. The team’s growth was steady: starting with ~10 members in its founding (2021), expanding to ~40 after its first major recruitment (2022), which staffed the core subsystems. A second recruitment wave (2023) boosted the team to ~80 members, enabling a peak in activity that culminated in a major milestone, participating and thriving in ERC 2023.

This success attracted more students and young professionals, leading to a third major recruitment in 2024 that brought the team to around 100 members. In 2024, Beyond Robotics once again ranked among the top ten teams at the ERC World Finals in Poland, solidifying its presence in the competition. The results of the team have been documented in papers that have been presented in the 75th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) 2024 in Milan [9] and the Space Resources Week 2025 in Luxembourg [14].

The team’s evolution showcases the importance of resilience, adaptability, and strategic planning. Analyzing successes, setbacks and refining the team’s managerial approach are essential to ensure sustained growth and long-term competitiveness. As a result, it’s important to reflect on both the successes & shortcomings, presented in

Table 2. Key Insights & Best Practice.

What went well (Process Management)

Documentation: Maintained detailed records/reports to track progress & decisions. Vision alignment: Shared clear goals and objectives across the entire team. Task structure: Divided work into smaller, manageable subsystems (WBS method). Design methodology: Applied a top-down approach with problem decomposition based on requirements, following real-world systems engineering practices. Simplicity: Adhered to the KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) principle for design clarity. Decision-making: Conducted analyses & trade-offs before finalizing concepts. Risk management: Integrated proactive risk mitigation as a core design principle. Tooling: Used GitHub effectively for version control and project organization. Flexibility: allow the team to remain responsive to unforeseen changes, adapt processes without compromising progress.

What went well (People Management)

Leadership structure: Clear top-down Organizational Breakdown Structure (OBS) enabled efficient delegation and oversight. Recruitment: Roles were clearly defined, allowing selection of the right individuals for each position. Screening focus on motivation rather than technical expertise. Onboarding: Smooth member integration through structured on-boarding process. Internal communication: use of Discord with multiple organized channels and regular meetings (team-wide and subsystem-specific) to ensure clarity and coordination. Team culture: engaging and fun environment through events, open communication. Community mindset: Emphasized team-building and member motivation over immediate output, fostering long-term engagement.

What didn’t go so well (Process Management)

Timeline management: Project timeline was frequently missed due to unrealistic expectations and overly lenient deadline management. Milestones were repeatedly shifted because of overconfidence in time availability and flexible enforcement. Fundraising: Sponsorship efforts fell short of what was needed, limiting the project’s potential due to budget constraints. Technical communication: Interface information was not effectively shared among all relevant stakeholders, leading to coordination issues, assembly & testing delays.

What didn’t go so well (People Management)

Lab location: Members located outside of Athens had limited access to hands-on experience, reducing their involvement. Distance from the lab reduced practical engagement for some team members. Member availability & turnover: Member availability was often overestimated, leading to inaccurate time and workload planning. Technical debt accumulated due to member turnover without proper handover or replacement. Core leaders experienced overload as they absorbed tasks left by inactive or unavailable members. Inactivity: Some members became inactive (“ghosted”), and the team lacked a system to reengage them or understand the cause. Ownership: No designated product owners for certain code features.

.

7. Conclusions

This paper has shown how adapted project management methodologies can enhance the performance and sustainability of student-led technical teams. Through the case of Beyond Robotics, we demonstrated that incorporating flexible yet structured practices can address challenges such as turnover, limited resources, and organizational continuity. The integration of agile-lean practices, tailored Kanban visualization, systematic engineering processes, and structured communication improved transparency, accountability, and team learning, enabling the group to meet complex technical milestones on tight timelines. The experience also highlighted that clear, consistent communication is foundational to any management framework, as many operational issues stem from miscommunication or limited information exchange. By fostering open dialogue, engaging meetings, and shared understanding, teams can strengthen coordination and long-term resilience. Consequently, this work offers a replicable model for other student-led technical teams managing complexity and accelerating learning.