Denicol, Juliano (2019) Designing client organisations and supply chain strategies to deliver megaprojects. PhD thesis, University College London, UK.
Abstract
Considering the global infrastructure pipeline forecasted for the next decades, this research explores the formation of megaproject client organisations, which are new, dedicated and often temporary entities created to deliver the project on behalf of the sponsor. The research is novel as it investigates three megaprojects in real time and adopts a supply chain management lens to conceptualise the formation and evolution of inter-organisational relationships. It contributes to two literatures, construction supply chain management and project delivery models, by exploring the megaproject client organisation as the focal firm and its strategies to design the supply chain architecture. It builds upon previous research by exploring a different challenge to manage the supply chain in one-off settings, exploring the concurrent formation of a new entity and its supply chain strategies. Six megaprojects that currently represent a combined investment of £93.93 bn have been analysed in the United Kingdom: High Speed 1, Heathrow Airport Terminal 5, London 2012 Olympics, Crossrail, Thames Tideway Tunnel and High Speed 2. The empirical data were collected through 210 semi-structured interviews with senior project leaders. Key research findings include: (i) a conceptual framework, the Project System Organisation (PSO), that sheds light onto the megaproject multi-layer and multi-level organisational structure, identifying multiple organisational roles and responsibilities; (ii) understanding of the terminologies of owners, sponsors, clients and operators in megaprojects, as well as the dynamics of its non-static and evolutionary nature throughout the project life-cycle, unpacking who does what, when, how and why; (iii) the process of the formation of temporary client organisations and the dimensions of the rationale behind the strategic decisions over time, in light of the plurality of potential integration methods between client and delivery partners; (iv) the importance of a clearly defined governance structure and recommendations to organise the inter-organisational relationships between sponsors, clients, delivery partners and the supply chain.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | airport; architect; client; governance; infrastructure; integration; interview; investment; organisational structure; roles; supply chain management; United Kingdom |
| Index terms: | evolution, integration, megaproject, conceptual framework, organizational structure, tunnel, interview, client organization, United Kingdom, strategy, architect, construction supply chain, real time, dynamics, London, project delivery, dimension, governance, pipeline, owner |
| Subjects: | client relations, environmental science, strategic project management, theoretical framing, Geography, data collection methods, profession, business, construction logistics, project delivery, health monitoring assessment and metrics, management, organizational analysis, project controls, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Time Control, Organizational Design, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Governance, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Supply Chain Management, Procurement, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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