Ensuring project success through collective competence and creative conflict in public–private partnerships – A case study of Bygga Villa, a Swedish triple helix e-government initiative

Abstract This paper presents a study of one public–private partnership in e-government in Sweden, Bygga Villa, that involved 16 organizations from academia, government, and industry to develop an innovative internet portal for the private construction industry. Our research purpose was to answer (1) What are the challenges to developing collective competence in public–private partnerships? and (2) How can these challenges be overcome to achieve project success? We found that the potential for conflict due to differing goals, resource scarcity, and interdependence of tasks was the greatest challenge for Bygga Villa’s ability to develop collective competence while the partnership overcame this challenge through (1) co-developing a clear project charter, (2) recruiting a project leader with strong knowledge broker skills, (3) conducting joint problem-solving tasks using boundary objects, and (4) ensuring an understanding of the “big picture” through continuous open and balanced communication. Moreover, the project was successful due to members’ ability to embrace conflict and turn it into creative conflict through dialogue while ensuring a high level of project satisfaction by the partnership’s individual members.

[1]  J. Davidson Frame,et al.  Managing Projects in Organizations: How to Make the Best Use of Time, Techniques, and People , 1995 .

[2]  Jörgen Sandberg.  Understanding Human Competence at Work: An Interpretative Approach , 2000 .

[3]  E. Mishler.  Research Interviewing: Context and Narrative , 1986 .

[4]  A. Kadefors.  Trust in project relationships-inside the black box , 2004 .

[5]  Robin Teigland,et al.  Seeing Eye-to-eye: How do Public and Private Sector Views of a Biotech Cluster and its Cluster Initiative Differ? , 2007 .

[6]  Francis Harvey,et al.  Boundary Objects and the Social Construction of GIS Technology , 1998 .

[7]  S. Linder.  Coming to Terms With the Public-Private Partnership , 1999 .

[8]  Lin Lerpold.  Reputation by association : exploring alliance formation and organizational identity adaptation , 2003 .

[9]  Martha L. Maznevski,et al.  Understanding Our Differences: Performance in Decision-Making Groups with Diverse Members , 1994 .

[10]  S. Kvale.  Interviews : an introduction to qualitative research interviewing , 1996 .

[11]  M. Tushman,et al.  External Communication and Project Performance: An Investigation Into the Role of Gatekeepers , 2011 .

[12]  Chris Ivory,et al.  Partnering in major contracts: Paradox and metaphor , 2007 .

[13]  Mike Bresnen,et al.  Deconstructing partnering in project-based organisation: Seven pillars, seven paradoxes and seven deadly sins , 2007 .

[14]  P. Woods,et al.  At the hard edge of change: views from secondary head teachers on a public‐private partnership , 2005 .

[15]  David Boddy,et al.  The expertise of the change agent: Public performance and backstage activity , 1992 .

[16]  R. Widdus.  Public-private partnerships: an overview. , 2005, Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.

[17]  Erik-Hans Klijn,et al.  Institutional and Strategic Barriers to Public-Private Partnership: , 2007 .

[18]  Amarjit Singh,et al.  Conflict Management Diagnosis at Project Management Organizations , 1998 .

[19]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[20]  Sai On Cheung,et al.  Behavioral aspects in construction partnering , 2003 .

[21]  R. M. Blakar,et al.  Communication: A Social Perspective on Clinical Issues , 1984 .

[22]  P. Atkinson,et al.  Making sense of qualitative data , 1996 .

[23]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[24]  Shamil Naoum.  An overview into the concept of partnering , 2003 .

[25]  H.J. Thamhain,et al.  Team Leadership Effectiveness in Technology-Based Project Environments , 2004, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[26]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[27]  Amarjit Singh,et al.  PEER-REVIEWED PAPER: Conflict Management Diagnosis at Project Management Organizations , 1998 .

[28]  Edgar H. Schein,et al.  On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning , 1993 .

[29]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  A Triple Helix of University—Industry—Government Relations , 1998, Scientometrics.

[30]  Marshall W. Meyer,et al.  Power in Organizations. , 1982 .

[31]  Jörgen Sandberg,et al.  Human competence at work : an interpretative approach , 1994 .

[32]  David Baccarini,et al.  The Logical Framework Method for Defining Project Success , 1999 .

[33]  Liz Lee-Kelley,et al.  Locus of control and attitudes to working in virtual teams , 2006 .

[34]  Lars-Erik Gadde,et al.  Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research , 2002 .

[35]  C. Hardy,et al.  Discourse and Collaboration: The Role of Conversations and Collective Identity , 2005 .

[36]  S. D. N. Cook,et al.  Culture and Organizational Learning , 1993 .

[37]  Inkeri Ruuska,et al.  Social structures as communities for knowledge sharing in project-based environments , 2005 .

[38]  James A. Holstein,et al.  Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method , 2001 .