Project-based networks in the delivery of infrastructure projects and programmes

Vinci, F (2022) Project-based networks in the delivery of infrastructure projects and programmes. PhD thesis, University College London, UK.

Abstract

Methods of delivering complex projects and programmes are changing, and collaborative arrangements are becoming more common. Project scholars emphasise the advantage of inter-organisational cooperation as a strategic vehicle to combine various capabilities that may not reside within the boundaries of a single firm. Large and complex projects are increasingly organised through long-term programmes or pipelines for which multiple organisations (owners, contractors, suppliers, consultants, etc.) are brought together to collaborate under an enduring coalition or framework. This way, the dispersion of critical capabilities is prevented, actors’ competitive interests caused by their ever-changing roles are reduced, and cooperation for achieving shared benefits and common goals is incentivised. This thesis considers these emerging project-based delivery settings as a distinct organisational form and frames them as project-based networks (PBNs), theoretically and empirically elaborating their features. PBNs are typically arranged by clients who bring together delivery partners and other organisations for an extended period of time to deliver various projects, often organised through long-term programmes or pipelines. PBNs integrate diverse specialised capabilities and collaborative high-performing teams with a bespoke skill set to deliver better outcomes. Yet, collaborative PBNs are relatively new forms of organising, therefore, partners are often required to adapt to a new way of delivering projects and programmes. That is, a long-term vision, based on robust collaborative rules and guidelines, is vital. Through an inductive, qualitative approach, built on three single case studies and one multiple case study, the research explains four key dynamics that occur and characterise PBNs: coopetition, tensions, strategic positioning and owner collaborative capabilities. Sixty-one interviews were conducted within three major collaborative arrangements formed in the UK infrastructure industry. The findings suggest (i) four mechanisms for achieving and maintaining sustainable coopetition, (ii) four areas of tensions that can emerge and challenge the performance of PBNs, (iii) a strategic model based on three steps through which organisations use collaborative PBNs for strategic positioning, and (iv) a framework of owner collaborative capabilities. This thesis contributes to project studies by defining PBNs as a distinct organisational form and bringing less explored theoretical conversations into existing project debates. It also contributes to practice by elaborating a new collaborative form of project organisation that is expanding in the infrastructure sector and providing a strategic guide with key recommendations for successful and effective collaborative project and programme delivery.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Uncontrolled Keywords: pipeline; infrastructure project; project organisation; client; consultant; owner; supplier; UK; case study; interview
Index terms: boundaries, cooperation, infrastructure sector, project organization, programme, interview, complex project, infrastructure project, collaborative project, dynamics, qualitative approach, owner, case study, becoming, pipeline
Subjects: philosophical process, research methods, organizational theory, psychology, property law, contractual arrangements, strategic project management, project controls, sociology, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering, data collection methods
Topics: Engineering Principles, Project Management, Procurement, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Organizational Design, Time Control
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