Almadhoob, Huda Mohamed Ali Hasan Husain (2020) Self-organising networks in complex infrastructure projects: the case of London Bank Station Capacity Upgrade Project. PhD thesis, University College London, UK.
Abstract
Managing large infrastructure projects remains a thorny issue in theory and practice. This is mainly due to their increasingly interconnected, interdependent, multilateral, nonlinear, unpredictable, uncontrollable, and rapidly changing nature. This study is an attempt to demystify the key issues to the management of large construction projects, arguing that these projects are delivered through networks that evolve in ways that we do not sufficiently understand as yet. The theoretical framework of this study is grounded in Complexity Theory; a theory resulted in a paradigm shift when it was first introduced to project management post-2000 but is yet to be unpacked in its full potential. The original contribution of the study is predicated on perceiving large construction projects as evolving complex systems that involves a high degree of self?organisation. This is a process that transitions contractually static prescribed roles to dynamic network roles, comprising individuals exchanging information. Furthermore, by placing great emphasis upon informal communications, this study demonstrates how self-organising networks can be married with Complexity Theory. This approach has the potential to make bedfellows around the concept of managing networks within a context of managing projects; a concept that is not always recognised, especially in project management. With the help of social network analysis, two snapshots from Bank Station Capacity Upgrade Project Network were analysed as a case study. Findings suggest that relationships and hence network structures in large construction projects exhibit small-world topology, underlined by a high degree of sparseness and clustering. These are distinct structural properties of self-organising networks. Evidence challenges the theorisation about self-organisation which largely assumes positive outcomes and suggests that self-organising could open up opportunities yet also create constraints. This helps to provide further insights into complexity and the treatment of uncertainty in large projects. The study concludes with detailed recommendations for research and practice.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; communication; complexity; construction project; infrastructure project; network analysis; project management; roles; social network analysis; uncertainty |
| Index terms: | social network analysis, large infrastructure project, project network, large construction project, complexity, topology, self-organization, evidence, construction project, complex system, case study, network analysis, project management, infrastructure project, clustering, self-organizing, paradigm, placing, London |
| Subjects: | education and knowledge transfer, concrete and cementitious materials, project management theory and practice, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering, data collection methods, data science, data analysis and analytics, geometry and topology, research methods, production management, organizational theory, Geography, infrastructure engineering, evaluation and assessment methods, project planning |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Digital Applications, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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