Complex project conceptualization and the linguistic turn; the case of a small Australian construction company

Abstract Conceptualizing complex projects, especially in the face of powerful communities of conflicting stakeholders can be messy. Doing so requires some means of coordinating the different ideas of stakeholders. The pragmatic cultural ethics summarized in the Australian ‘mate-ship’ argues success requires opportunity be given to all. This pragmatic philosophy provides the solution by offering all stakeholders the opportunity to be heard. After briefly reviewing pragmatism, this paper draws on the work of McKenna and Metcalfe and the linguistic turn, published in an earlier version of the International Journal of Project Management. It explains how this method can be used to help project managers conceive projects made complex by powerful communities of conflicting stakeholders. It then uses an Australian based organizational change project as an example of its application. Idea mapping is used to categorize stakeholder statements, revealing underlying linguistic concepts. It is argued that this approach provides a practical, yet philosophical and scientifically sound means of conceptualizing complex projects, and one that takes genuine advantage of the experience and knowledge of a wide range of stakeholders.

[1]  C. van Antwerpen,et al.  An Australian approach to concept development and experimentation: linking strategy to capability , 2012, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[2]  D. Dennett.  The Intentional Stance. , 1987 .

[3]  Mike Metcalfe,et al.  Complex project conceptualisation and argument mapping , 2013 .

[4]  Jackson Lears,et al.  The Metaphysical Club , 2002 .

[5]  Riitta Smeds.  Implementation of business process innovations: an agenda for research and action , 2001, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[6]  N. Humphrey.  Seeing Red: A Study in Consciousness , 2006 .

[7]  R. Rorty.  Contingency, irony, and solidarity: Contents , 1989 .

[8]  Lynda Aiman-Smith,et al.  Implementing New Manufacturing Technology: The Related Effects of Technology Characteristics and User Learning Activities , 2002 .

[9]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Giovanni Gavetti,et al.  Cognition and strategy , 2015 .

[11]  J. Reichertz,et al.  Abduction: The Logic of Discovery of Grounded Theory , 2009 .

[12]  Mike Metcalfe,et al.  Project conceptualization using pragmatic methods , 2009 .

[13]  R. Ward.  The Australian Legend , 1959 .

[14]  H. Dreyfus.  Why Heideggerian AI Failed and How Fixing it Would Require Making it More Heideggerian , 2007 .

[15]  J. Novak,et al.  The theory underlying concept maps , 2016 .

[16]  D. Dennett.  Kinds Of Minds , 1996 .

[17]  J. Bessant.  The lessons of failure: learning to manage new manufacturing technology , 1993 .

[18]  Christopher Alexander.  Notes on the Synthesis of Form , 1964 .

[19]  Sarah Kaplan.  Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future , 2010 .

[20]  F O'Brien,et al.  Corporate visioning: a survey of UK practice , 2000, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[21]  J. Dewey,et al.  How We Think , 2009 .

[22]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[23]  Richard Ormerod,et al.  The history and ideas of pragmatism , 2006, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[24]  J. Sillince,et al.  Strategic intent as a rhetorical device , 2007 .

[25]  John Bessant,et al.  Developing strategic continuous improvement capability , 1999 .

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

[27]  Mike Metcalfe,et al.  Problem Conceptualisation Using Idea Networks , 2007 .

[28]  R. Ackoff.  The Future of Operational Research is Past , 1979 .

[29]  Peter J. Dortmans,et al.  An analytical approach for constructing and measuring concepts , 2006, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[30]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[31]  Richard J. Ormerod.  Putting soft OR methods to work: the case of IS strategy development for the UK Parliament , 2005, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[32]  M. Metcalfe,et al.  The linguistic turn in project conceptualization , 2013 .

[33]  Christopher A. Voss,et al.  Research in production/operations management , 1984 .

[34]  J. Dewey.  Experience and Nature , 1960 .

[35]  H. Dreyfus.  The Return of the Myth of the Mental , 2007 .

[36]  William James.  Some problems of philosophy , 1911 .

[37]  Michael Armstrong,et al.  A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice , 1999 .

[38]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[39]  C. Eden.  ON THE NATURE OF COGNITIVE MAPS , 1992 .

[40]  Rob Duboff,et al.  How Business Schools Lost Their Way , 2005 .

[41]  Maureen Meadows,et al.  Developing a visioning methodology: Visioning Choices for the future of operational research , 2007, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[42]  Sarah Kaplan.  Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[43]  Richard J. Ormerod,et al.  The mangle of OR practice: towards more informative case studies of ‘technical’ projects , 2014, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[44]  William M. K. Trochim,et al.  An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. , 1989 .

[45]  George F. Ray,et al.  Full circle: The diffusion of technology , 1989 .

[46]  Ali A. Yassine,et al.  An optimization-based model for maximizing the benefits of fast-track construction activities , 2013, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[47]  E. Deci,et al.  Handbook of Self-Determination Research , 2002 .

[48]  Israel Rosenfield,et al.  The invention of memory , 1988 .

[49]  R. Hanneman.  Introduction to Social Network Methods , 2001 .

[50]  Kathleen M. Sutcliffe,et al.  Special Issue: Frontiers of Organization Science, Part 1 of 2: Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[51]  R. Rorty.  Consequences of pragmatism , 1982 .