A contextual understanding of projects--The importance of space and time

Summary This article analyzes the managing of high-tech projects in complex and dynamic settings. Building on recent developments in organization theory and knowledge management, we focus on the importance of understanding the ways in which project-centered activities are shaped in time and space, both in the organization itself and in a wider context embracing customers, consultants and suppliers. A longitudinal case study including semi-structured interviews, observations and secondary data will substantiate our findings. The study offers both theoretical and practical insights suggesting that projects are exposed to a varying degree of complexity and dynamics, calling for different managerial approaches. The analysis shows that boundary spanning has many dimensions that have to be considered in the management of projects in space and time. The article concludes by suggesting seven analytical categories for analyzing and understanding projects in their spatial and temporal contexts.

[1]  Mats Engwall,et al.  Cheetah teams in product development: the most extreme form of temporary organization? ☆ , 2004 .

[2]  Östen Ohlsson,et al.  Separation or integration? A dilemma when organizing development projects , 2007 .

[3]  K. K. Cetina,et al.  The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory , 2001 .

[4]  M. Engwall.  No project is an island: linking projects to history and context , 2003 .

[5]  D. Hodgson,et al.  Making Projects Critical , 2006 .

[6]  Svetlana Cicmil.  Chapter 8 – Reflection, participation and learning in project environments: a multiple perspective agenda , 2005 .

[7]  Eva Maaninen-Olsson,et al.  Deviations, Ambiguity and Uncertainty in a Project-Intensive Organization , 2005 .

[8]  Boaz Golany,et al.  Managing multi-project environments through constant work-in-process , 2003 .

[9]  Christine Räisänen,et al.  Technologizing Discourse to Standardize Projects in Multi-Project Organizations: Hegemony by Consensus? , 2004 .

[10]  S. Newell,et al.  Project-Based Learning and the Role of Learning Boundaries , 2004 .

[11]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[12]  Tomas Müllern,et al.  A Grammar of Organizing , 2007 .

[13]  R Leifer,et al.  Organizational/environmental interchange: a model of boundary spanning activity. , 1978, Academy of management review. Academy of Management.

[14]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[15]  Marianne W. Lewis.  Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide , 2000 .

[16]  Richard Whittington,et al.  The Challenge of Organizing/Strategizing , 2003 .

[17]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

[18]  Fredrik Tell,et al.  Making Sense of Learning Landscapes in Project-Based Organizations , 2005 .

[19]  Terry Williams,et al.  Rethinking Project Management: Researching the actuality of projects , 2006 .

[20]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Managing complex product development projects with design structure matrices and domain mapping matrices , 2007 .

[21]  Jörg Sydow,et al.  Managing projects in network contexts: a structuration perspective , 2006 .

[22]  Christopher J. Hemingway,et al.  The importance of context in programme management: An empirical review of programme practices , 2007 .

[23]  A. Prencipe,et al.  Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms , 2001 .

[24]  Nancy M. Dixon,et al.  Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know , 2000 .

[25]  A. Bryman.  Social Research Methods , 2001 .

[26]  J. Brown,et al.  Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation , 1991 .

[27]  Deborah G. . Ancona,et al.  Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. , 1992 .

[28]  Anders Söderholm,et al.  Project management of unexpected events , 2008 .

[29]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[30]  A. Davies,et al.  Organisational capabilities and learning in complex product systems: towards repeatable solutions , 2000 .

[31]  Sue Newell,et al.  Sharing Knowledge Across Projects , 2006 .

[32]  R. Grant,et al.  Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration , 2022 .

[33]  S. Manning.  Embedding Projects in Multiple Contexts: A Structuration Perspective , 2010 .

[34]  Karlos Artto,et al.  Problems in managing internal development projects in multi-project environments , 2003 .

[35]  E. Larson,et al.  Project Management: The Managerial Process , 2002 .

[36]  Deborah G. Ancona,et al.  X-Teams: How To Build Teams That Lead, Innovate, And Succeed , 2007 .

[37]  Alexander Kaufmann,et al.  Science–industry interaction in the process of innovation: the importance of boundary-crossing between systems , 2001 .

[38]  Frans van den Bosch,et al.  Innovative forms of organizing : international perspectives , 2003 .

[39]  Meliha Handzic,et al.  Knowledge management research & practice: visions and directions , 2003 .

[40]  R. Max Wideman,et al.  Project Portfolio Management: A Practical Guide to Selecting Projects, Managing Portfolios, and Maximizing Benefits , 2005 .

[41]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  The Art of Continuous Change : Linking Complexity Theory and Time-Paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations , 1997 .

[42]  E. Altvater.  Theoretical Deliberations on Time and Space in Post-socialist Transformation , 1998 .

[43]  Sharan B. Merriam,et al.  Case Study Research in Education : A Qualitative Approach , 1991 .

[44]  M. Boisot,et al.  From Fiefs to Clans and Network Capitalism: Explaining China's Emerging Economic Order , 1996 .

[45]  Magnus Mähring,et al.  Balancing Boundaries: Everyday Boundary Work in Information Technology Project Management , 2009 .

[46]  J. Brown,et al.  Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing , 1999, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[47]  Rolf A. Lundin,et al.  Neo-Industrial Organising: Renewal by Action and Knowledge Formation in a Project-intensive Economy , 1999 .

[48]  Beth A. Bechky.  Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[49]  Noel M. Tichy,et al.  Globalizing management : creating and leading the competitive organization , 1992 .

[50]  Andrew Parker,et al.  The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding How Work Really Gets Done in Organizations , 2004 .

[51]  Emmanuelle Vaast,et al.  The Emergence of Boundary Spanning Competence in Practice: Implications for Implementation and Use of Information Systems , 2005, MIS Q..

[52]  J. Turner,et al.  Quantity versus Quality in Project-Based Learning Practices , 2000 .

[53]  Anders Söderholm,et al.  A theory of the temporary organization , 1995 .

[54]  Davide Nicolini,et al.  To Transfer is to Transform: The Circulation of Safety Knowledge , 2000 .

[55]  P. Dawson.  In at the deep end: Conducting processual research on organisational change , 1997 .

[56]  Julien Pollack,et al.  The changing paradigms of project management , 2007 .

[57]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[58]  Mohammed Saad,et al.  Technology transfer projects in developing countries--furthering the Project Management perspectives , 2002 .

[59]  Nigel Wadeson,et al.  Projects as search processes , 2005 .

[60]  Peter E.D. Love,et al.  Management of knowledge in project environments , 2003 .

[61]  A. Pettigrew.  WHAT IS A PROCESSUAL ANALYSIS. , 1997 .

[62]  Manuela Nocker,et al.  The contested object: on projects as emergent space , 2006 .

[63]  Anders Söderholm,et al.  Beyond Project Management: New Perspectives on the temporary – permanent dilemma , 2002 .

[64]  Ikujiro Nonaka,et al.  The knowledge-creating theory revisited: knowledge creation as a synthesizing process , 2003 .