Paradoxical organizational tensions between control and flexibility when managing large infrastructure projects

Szentes, H and Eriksson, P E (2016) Paradoxical organizational tensions between control and flexibility when managing large infrastructure projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(4): 05015017, ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Recent socioeconomic changes have created and intensified paradoxical organizational tensions that companies in numerous industries, including the construction sector, need to address when organizing and managing their activities. The nature of these tensions has not been sufficiently explored in the existing construction management literature. Thus, this study analyzes tensions between control and flexibility at different organizational interfaces, as perceived by the managers of three large infrastructure projects that were parts of two different megaprojects in Sweden. The empirical findings highlight several tensions within three types of interfaces, that is, external, intraorganizational, and interorganizational tensions, that are important for both project managers and project owners to understand. This paper contributes to the project and construction management literature by illustrating the importance of a systemic paradox perspective, which is obtained by combining the paradox literature and principal-agent theory. A systemic paradox perspective is required to understand how tensions between control and flexibility are interpreted by different parties and how tensions in different organizational interfaces are interrelated and may be addressed to avoid suboptimization.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction management; megaprojects; paradoxical tensions; principal-agent relationships; project management
Index terms: manager, large infrastructure project, agent, construction sector, megaproject, paradox, project manager, interorganizational, owner, Sweden, project management
Subjects: project management theory and practice, infrastructure engineering, Geography, industry analysis, sociology, practitioner, business, profession, strategic project management, social theory and frameworks
Topics: Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here